By Samuel Ajayi | Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a pivotal force that is shaping and transforming lives, industries and economies around the world. AI has come a long way from the early days of the conceptual and visionary work of Alan Turing, who laid the groundwork for the field with his pioneering ideas.

By Ayobami Ayorinde | On Monday, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) in collaboration with the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (FMAS) and other key stakeholders released the National Agricultural Sample Census (NASC) for 2022. This is the first census report detailing the state of agriculture in the country since the last one released in 1993.

By Babajide Fowowe | Last week, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) released the first of a series of new reports, titled the Cost of a Healthy Diet (CoHD). The NBS defines the cost of a healthy diet as “the cost per day of the least expensive combination of foods that meets the daily requirements for a healthy diet for an adult”¹. Thus, the CoHD represents the minimum daily requirements for an adult to obtain a healthy meal. The healthy diet basket consists of 11 food items: three items of vegetables, two items of starchy staples, two items of fruits, two items of animal source foods, one item of oils and fats, and one item of legumes, nuts and seeds².

As would be expected in a diverse country such as ours, there are disparities in the cost of a healthy diet across rural and urban areas, states, geo-political zones, and over time. For example, in December 2023, the daily cost of a healthy diet was lowest in Katsina State with N594; while it was highest in Ekiti State with N1,052. This means that in order to maintain a healthy diet, the average adult in Ekiti State would have to spend almost double what the average adult in Katsina State would spend.

The availability of regular and consistent data on the cost of a healthy diet is very useful for a number of reasons. First, a healthy diet is critical for maintaining good health, which is a precursor to better standards of living. Second, knowledge about how costly a healthy diet is will be helpful in shaping policies around ensuring affordability of food. Third, the CoHD can help to track prices and highlight areas, states or zones where essential food prices are high, and inform efforts to tackle such high prices.

In what follows, we present six key insights from the CoHD reports recently released by NBS.

Insight 1: The National Average of the Cost of a Healthy Diet Increased by 68.3% between January 2023 and December 2023

The national average of the CoHD increased from N467 in January 2023 to N786 in December 2023³ (Figure 1). This implies an increase of 68.3%. The average CoHD was below N500 from January till April, but increased to N503 in May. It increased to N515 in June and these increases continued until December. The steepest increase occurred between June and July when the COHD increased from N515 to N590 (14.6%), while the lowest increase occurred in March, with CoHD increasing from N478 to N480 (0.42%).

It is particularly insightful that the CoHD increased for each successive month throughout the year. One would have expected food prices to change with the seasons. In particular, it would have been expected that prices would be lower during the rainy season. However, costs increased by larger percentages during the rainy season. This suggests that some extraneous factors are affecting food prices. The second half of the year had the largest increases, perhaps reflecting the effects of the removal of petroleum subsidies and foreign exchange reforms.

Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS): The Cost of a Healthy Diet (CoHD)

Insight 2: The Cost of a Healthy Diet is Lower in Northern Nigeria than Southern Nigeria

Between October and December 2023, the average cost of a healthy diet was lowest in the North East at N633, followed by N644 in the North West, and N665 in the North Central Figure 2). For the same period, the average CoHD was highest in the South East at N919, followed by the South West at N872, and South South at N788. Thus, it costs more to buy a healthy food that constitutes a healthy diet in the southern part of the country than in the northern part.

Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS): The Cost of a Healthy Diet (CoHD)

Examination of the data for individual states reveals the same picture. All the northern states had CoHD below the national average, while Cross River was the only southern state with CoHD below the national average (Figure 3). Thus, interestingly, the national average seems to act like a dividing line between the northern and southern parts of the country. This is not particularly surprising, as the northern part of the country has historically produced more food than the south.

Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS): The Cost of a Healthy Diet (CoHD)

Insight 3: The Cost of a Healthy Diet is Lower in Rural Areas than Urban Areas

Between October and December 2023, the cost of a healthy diet was cheaper in rural areas than urban areas in 32 states (including the FCT), while CoHD was cheaper in the urban areas than rural areas in five states (Kebbi, Katsina, Kwara, Taraba, and Kaduna). There is wide disparity in the magnitude of these differences (Figure 4). The CoHD in the urban areas was higher than the rural areas by more than N100 in four states (Adamawa, Gombe, FCT, Bauchi). The difference was between N50 and N99 in six states (Nasarawa, Rivers, Imo, Niger, Anambra, Plateau). For the remaining states, the difference was lower than N50.

Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS): The Cost of a Healthy Diet (CoHD)

Insight 4: Animal Source Foods Account for the Largest Share (38%) of the Cost of a Healthy Diet while Legumes, Nuts and Seeds Account for the Lowest Share (6%)

Between October and December 2023, the average cost of animal source foods in the healthy diet was N285 (Figure 5). This represents 38% of the total average CoHD of N744 for these months (Figure 5). Starchy staples had the second highest daily cost of N160 (22%), followed by vegetables with a daily cost of N100 (13%). Fruits had a daily average cost of N88 (12), oils and fats cost N65 (9%), and legumes, nuts and seeds on average cost N45 (6%).

For the share of total calories, starchy staples accounted for the highest share (50%) (Figure 5). This is followed by oils and fats (13%), animal source foods (13%), and legumes nuts and seeds (13%), fruits (7%) and vegetables (5%). It is interesting that while animal source foods make up only 13% of the total daily calories, they account for the largest share (38%) of total daily CoHD.

Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS): The Cost of a Healthy Diet (CoHD)

Insight 5: The Cost of a Healthy Diet for Children is Missing

Interestingly, the cost of a healthy diet for children is omitted from the report. Considering the fact that the Multidimensional Poverty Indicators for 2022 showed that there are more poor children than poor adults, it is important to know the CoHD for children. Severe undernutrition is a serious issue, with 30.5% of children under 5 living in a household in which at least one child under5 is severely stunted or severely underweight⁴. 36.8% of children under 5 suffer from malnutrition as evidenced by stunting⁵. These figures show the severity of child malnutrition in the country. It is thus essential to understand how much it would cost for children to get the minimum daily requirements for a healthy diet.

Insight 6: For Many States, Workers on the Minimum Wage will Struggle to Fund Other Expenditure after Buying Food

The NBS noted that the figures provided for CoHD represent the minimum cost, and do not include transportation and preparation costs. When transportation and preparation costs are included, the CoHD will rise. This brings into stark reality the high costs of healthy diets, especially for low income earners. Using the December 2023 figures, the average national daily cost of a healthy diet was N786. Simply multiplying this by the 31 days in the month gives a value of N24,369. There is wide disparity when this monthly total is computed for all states (Figure 6). States like Ekiti, Osun, Ondo, Lagos and Ogun have monthly total monthly costs above the minimum wage of N30,000 (Figure 6). Nine states had monthly totals below N21,000: Katsina, Niger, Adamawa, Borno, Zamfara, Kaduna, Benue, Jigawa, and Kano. These monthly total figures will increase when transportation and preparation costs are added. For workers on the minimum wage of N30,000 per month residing in states with monthly totals above the national average of N24,369, after buying food, there will be very little left to feed and care for children, and fund other critical expenditure.

Source: National Bureau of Statistics (NBS): The Cost of a Healthy Diet (CoHD)

Conclusion

This short note has presented six key insights from the new Cost of a Healthy Diet reports released by the NBS. We note that these reports are important, because the availability of regular and consistent data on the cost of a healthy diet is very useful for policy. It is hoped that the NBS will continue to release these reports to further provide information, strengthen dialogue and engagement, and ultimately lead to better food policies in the country.

 Footnotes

1. https://nigerianstat.gov.ng/elibrary/read/1241452

2. Ibid.

3. The data for the whole year was only available for the national average, but disaggregated data for states was not available for the whole year

4. https://nigerianstat.gov.ng/elibrary/read/1241254

5. https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2021-22

By Ifetayo Idowu and Faridha Salihu-Lukman | Last Wednesday, 22 November 2023, Agora Policy and partners convened a policy conversation in Abuja to explore the intersection between climate change, energy transition, and the green economy in Nigeria. The event also featured the public presentation of Agora Policy's latest report, entitled "Climate Change and Social-Economic Development in Nigeria," produced with the support of MacArthur Foundation, also the sponsor of the policy conversation.

From the remarks, goodwill messages, panel discussion, special interventions and the question-and-answer session, many ideas were offered and discussed about the state of climate change awareness and interventions in Nigeria and what the country needs to do to minimise the risks and maximise the opportunities of the global transition to cleaner energy.

Below are five of the key insights from the deliberation.

• Denial and defiance define national attitude to climate change in Nigeria
  There was a clear consensus among the speakers that evidence abounds that climate change negatively impacts Nigeria through different channels and that it  increases Nigeria’s exposure to hunger, poverty, diseases, and conflicts. There was also an agreement that the toll of climate change on the country will get worse if urgent action is not taken. However, that sense of urgency is hardly seen even within official circles in the country. Mr. Waziri Adio, the Executive Director of Agora Policy, said the national attitude on climate change “oscillates between denial and indifference.” According to Mr. Tayo Aduloju, the CEO-designate of the Nigeria Economic Summit Group (NESG), there is another dimension: defiance. "This defiance comes from perspective that climate change is not Africa's fault, not Nigeria's fault. Therefore, ignore it.”There was an agreement that these attitudes are not useful and need to change for the country to adequately adapt to climatic changes and appropriately position itself to benefit from energy transition.

• Climate change is a major, not marginal, challenge for Nigeria
  In his presentation, Professor Chukwumerije Okereke emphasized that it is wrong to see climate change only from the lens of the environment. He submitted that it is more useful to see climate change as the key development challenge of the country. He stated: "Climate change is not a marginal environmental problem out there. But it is a major, perhaps the defining, socio-economic, geopolitical, demographic challenge facing Nigeria today." Other speakers echoed the same sentiment, calling for more urgent and bolder actions, and the need to mainstream climate change into national development plans.

• The poor and the vulnerable could be further disadvantaged
  Various speakers argued that climate change imposes a disproportionate burden on the poor, the vulnerable and the marginalised and could further deepen inequality in terms of energy access and income in the country. Dr. Kole Shettima of MacArthur Foundation, Mrs. Funke Baruwa of Ford Foundation and Ms. Tengi George-Ikoli all made this point in various ways, and they all urged that climate policies be designed and implemented in an inclusive and collaborative manner, with special attention paid to ensuring that policies and actions bridge and not widen inequality in society.

• Showing benefits critical to optimising gains of the green economy
  Climate change is not all bad news as the transition to cleaner energy offers Nigeria and others opportunities for improving energy access, creating jobs and increasing economic growth. According to the World Bank Country Director, Dr. Shubham Chaudhuri, Nigeria needs to strike a delicate but necessary balance between improving energy access and aligning with the shift towards a low-carbon world. For Mr. Abubakar Suleiman, it is important to demonstrate to various stakeholders that embracing renewable energy will help to save cost, increase profits, create job and grow the economy. “One language that every understands is their bottom-line,” he said, emphasising the need for government to stimulate demand for renewables and to invest in the alternative energy eco-system so that Nigeria can benefit from every part of the value-chain. For example, he argued, Nigeria should not just be interested in using solar panels but also in making them too. Ms. George-Ikoli reinforced this point by advocating that Nigeria should be keen on processing its green minerals, rather than just exporting them raw.

• Simplification should be an article of faith
  Awareness about climate change is very low in Nigeria. Some of the speakers reckon that this is because the language adopted in communicating the issue is too technical for most people. There was a call to simplify the language and frame climate change in a way many Nigerians can understand and relate with. “We need to find a different nomenclature for the world climate change maybe then it will make more sense to policymakers and to the ordinary people," said Mrs. Baruwa. Dr. Shettima put it this way: "When you talk to Nigerians about climate change, most people don’t know what it is. But when you talk to Nigerians about flooding, they know what flooding is. When you talk to Nigerians about drought, they know what that means." Having a clear understanding of the meaning, impacts and opportunities of climate change will be critical to achieving an all-of-society and a coordinated approach that most speakers agreed is needed to move the needle on climate action in Nigeria.

Let’s start with the obvious: climate change still does not enjoy the prominence that it deserves in Nigeria. Yes, there are some individuals, organisations and government agencies that are making a strong case for, and designing and implementing, consequential climate interventions in the country. We salute them. We thank them.

But the sad, inconvenient truth is that climate change still does not rank very high on our policy agenda and in our popular imagination. Both in official circles and among the populace, climate issues are not seen as really important and urgent. Our national attitude oscillates between denial and indifference.

Most of our people, including highly-placed government officials, see climate change as other people’s problems or an issue that is only for tree-huggers and environmentalists, or something that should bother only those who have the luxury of not wrestling with hunger and other existential matters—as we say in Pidgin, “somtin for pipu wey don belleful.”

And because we are a people of fantastic faith, we simply think and believe that the negative impacts of climate change will never be our portion.

But the burdens of shifts in climatic conditions are already our portion. They are all around us. The rise in temperature, the irregular raining patterns, the near perennial flooding across the country, the increasing threats of desertification and gully and coastal erosions, and others already have deep, negative impacts on food production, food security and food inflation, and on water, on health and productivity, on energy and infrastructure, and on the conflicts that continue to multiply partly on account of vanishing natural resources.

Whether we want to accept it or not, whether we think it is other people’s or our own headache or not, whether we think it is our portion or not—climate change is already exerting a big toll on the things we consider critical and urgent. It is already here and now, not a matter of the hereafter. It is not what we can simply wish away by faith.

And because of its multi-dimensional, ramifying nature and multiplier effects, climate change is the most existential threat that we face already. And it is projected to get significantly worse within a few years. This silent crisis of today is likely to escalate into a catastrophic one soon—unless we act urgently, intentionally, and boldly.

There are additional reasons for greater urgency. We are a resource-intensive but ironically energy-poor country. The global transition away from fossil fuels poses grave threats to government revenue at all levels and to our capacity to provide the much-needed power for homes and industries.

Our capacity to fight poverty and achieve the SDGs and to increase national productivity and competitiveness may be further compromised. The transition away from fossil fuels may appear paused for now in the aftermath of Russia-Ukraine. But it won’t be paused for long.

In a related but significant vein, the energy transition is creating a new economy, an intense scramble for critical minerals already spurning instability around us, and a strategic positioning by countries to ensure that their interests are well served in the emerging economic order.

Where are we as a country in all of this? That’s a question for all of us to answer.

But let’s get this straight: we cannot afford to be a bit player in the emerging order except we are content with holding the short end of the stick or happy to be further consigned to the margins of existence.

We therefore need to see climate change as the central development challenge for our country, not in the future, but today.

And we need more than a conversation or the commitment of the converted. We need an all-of-society approach. From political authorisers to policy wonks to the ordinary persons on the streets and in the homes, we all have roles to play, and we all need to act differently.

*Excerpt from the welcome address by Waziri Adio, Founder/Executive Director of Agora Policy, at the policy conversation held on 22 November 2023 in Abuja.

Climate change is increasing hunger, poverty, disease-burden, migration, conflict and insecurity in Nigeria. It is damaging infrastructure, changing Nigeria’s coastlines, fuelling desertification, producing water scarcity, facilitating erosion and resulting in the loss of revenue for states and the national government. The total economic cost of climate change to Nigeria was estimated at $100 billionby 2020 and is projected to rise to $460 billion by 2050. Climate change may also cause Nigeria to lose trillions of dollars in stranded assets.

With these far-reaching negative effects on Nigeria’s human and natural systems, climate change has the potential to jeopardise the country’s economic development and alter its geographical, social, and political trajectory for decades or centuries. Some of the repercussions of climate change on the nation may be irreversible. Therefore, it should be evident that climate change is not a marginal or peripheral issue that the government and the people of Nigeria can take lightly.

Even though climate change poses significant threats to Nigeria’s economic development, it also presents an opportunity to further diversify the economy, expand the country’s energy portfolio, address energy security concerns, and increase global economic competitiveness. To transform climate change from a significant threat into an opportunity requires deliberate planning supported by immediate, bold and courageous action.

There is evidence that successive Nigerian governments recognise the enormous threat of climate change and the necessity for action, as indicated by a plethora of policy declarations, documents, and a national climate change law. However, actual action is still behind schedule. The government has not yet established a clear roadmap for the effective and comprehensive implementation of key policies and commitments, and there are no clear budgetary provisions for their implementation.

Transitioning to a green economy is a complex endeavour that requires meticulous planning, stakeholder participation, and a dedication to sustainable development. Leveraging climate action to pursue economic development in Nigeria is not only a viable but essential strategy. Incorporating climate considerations into economic development strategies can result in more inclusive and sustainable growth.

Such a move can provide Nigeria with excellent opportunities to construct a climate-resilient economy that not only promotes growth and reduces poverty, but also creates good green jobs and contributes to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and environmental sustainability. By proactively addressing the issue of stranded assets, Nigeria will also be able to position itself for a more resilient and prosperous future.

The emphasis should be on finding methods to industrialise and transition without substantially increasing the country’s emission profile. To accomplish this, Nigeria will need to implement mitigation and adaptation strategies that considerably enhance its macroeconomic stability, economic transformation and job creation, while minimising the negative impacts of climate change on development.

The global transition from a high-carbon economy to a low-carbon economy is already well underway through a multitude of international and national initiatives many of which are led by high-polluting industrialised nations that are keen to transform their economies and position their countries as net beneficiaries of the new global green economy. These strategies and investments will inevitably alter the global political, economic and geopolitical landscape, producing winners and losers across the world.

Whether Nigeria will swim or sink in the face of climate change and the global green growth transition will depend on its willingness to take urgent action now and re-align its national development strategies towards a low-carbon economic future.

*Excerpted from the latest Agora Policy report titled “Climate Change and Socio-Economic Development in Nigeria,” authored by Professor Chukwumerije Okereke, Professor Emmanuel Oladipo, Ms. Ifeoma Malo and Dr. Fola Aina.

By Ifetayo Idowu | Corruption has for long been a pervasive issue in Nigeria. It has had devastating consequences for the country’s economy, security and social relations. Also, the scourge of corruption has reinforced negative patterns of poverty and inequality in both public and private sectors.

Over time, several measures have been implemented by different administrations to combat corruption in the country. While some of these measures have made some dent, most have not had the desired impact. The problem persists. Nigeria is still perceived as one of the most corrupt countries in the world, ranking 150 out of 180 countries in the 2022 Corruption Perception Index of Transparency International (TI).

Last week, Agora Policy released a report titled “Imperative of Strengthening Nigeria’s Transparency and Accountability Measures”ⁱ. Produced with the support of MacArthur Foundation, the report x-rays 16 anticorruption measures in the country and advocates for sustaining and strengthening Nigeria’s transparency and accountability measures. It concludes with this evocative line: “whether now or in the future, Nigeria needs more transparency and accountability, not less.”

This intervention builds on and fleshes out one of the recommendations of the timely report: the need to deploy insights from behavioural science to effectively tackle the values, attitudes and narratives that enable corruption in the country. In short, the need to nudge Nigerians away from the costly and destructive practice of corruption.

The Unbearable, Multidimensional Costs of Corruption

To begin with, we need to establish that the economic and social costs of corruption in Nigeria are extensive. According to PwCⁱⁱ, the cost of corruption in Nigeria is estimated to reach nearly $2,000 per person in 2023. The organisation also estimated that, if not properly dealt with, corruption could cost Nigeria up to 37% of GDP by 2030.

It was also reported that between 2009 and 2020ⁱⁱⁱ, Nigeria lost 619.7 million barrels of crude oil valued at N16.25 trillion to theft and sabotage, which are forms of corruption. In contrast, the combined allocation for healthcare and education was N6.79 trillion less than the amount lost to these forms of corruption for the same period.

The social cost of corruption can be seen in how corruption perpetuates inequalities and poverty^iv. It has a disproportionate impact on the poor and the most vulnerable members of society. It reduces the amount of money available for job creation, relief activities and government’s poverty alleviation programmes.

It also increases the cost of social services, including health and education, and reduces access of vulnerable members of society to these services. This reflects in unbuilt, poorly-built and poorly-equipped schools, ill-equipped and understaffed hospitals, and poorly-built roads which increase transaction costs and accidents and reduce human welfare. Corruption also creates a system where justice and safety are not prioritised leading to safety laws and due process being ignored and leading to unavoidable deaths.

Corruption has also led to a breakdown of social capital in Nigeria. Social capital allows a group of people to work together effectively to achieve a common purpose. Without it, society experiences a decline in social cohesion and an increase in crime, among many other things. This is bad for nation building.

In summary, corruption is not a cost-free or a victimless crime.

The Nudge Approach to Anticorruption

The gravity and the cost of corruption make it imperative for Nigeria to constantly look for more effective ways of taming the scourge. One relatively new approach that can be engaged in the fight against corruption in Nigeria is nudging, an approach popularised by Cass Sunstein, a Harvard University professor, and Richard Taler, a University of Chicago professor.

Nudging involves using insights from behavioural science to design and drive campaigns for changes in norms, values, attitudes and behaviours to achieve desirable outcomes. It can be an effective tool in the fight against corruption. Even though the act of nudging itself is not a new thing, using it as an anti-corruption tool is relatively new^v.

Nudging can be used as a tool to change the context in which decisions are made. It can be used to influence the way people act, without constraining their choices. In this way, it can be used as a supplementary tool in fighting corruption. Nudging is a subtle and non-coercive method that influences people’s behaviour in a positive way. It involves using indirect suggestions to influence people’s behaviour and decision making.^vi

Nudging can be used in many ways to fight corruption. One way nudging can be used in Nigeria is to fight prevalent mentality such as “public money is everybody’s money” which Nigerians use to justify taking and misallocating public money; “where you work is where you eat” which people use to justify treating their employers unjustly. These sayings help people reinforce bad behaviours. In the same way, anti-corruption slogans can be employed as a tool to help shape people’s opinions about corruption, sayings things such as “keep nothing under the table, except your shoes” or “Fight corruption. Bring progression” can be employed. The first expression reinforces the message that anything that cannot be done in everyone's view is corrupt and the other talks about the damaging effects of corruption. Nudging can be used to influence mindset.

Similarly, nudging can be used as a tool reminding people to act honestly. Like telling a child “thank you” for doing something they haven’t done as a reminder, people need to be reminded to act honestly. This can be done either directly by reminding people to do the right thing because their actions have consequences before meetings start, or by using more subtle means like making financial decisions during certain periods of prosperity, like after payday.

Directly reminding people of the consequences of their actions or inactions is another way of nudging. One way this can be done in Nigeria is by humanising corruption, drawing a direct line between a father’s poor level of education and his poverty or the connection between an amputee and poor state of infrastructure and not-upholding safety measures. Nudging can be used to promote more positive choices.

Nudging can also be used as a tool that incentivises the preferred behaviour. Public workers can be awarded certain benefits for being transparent. The Agora Policy report stated that in Nigeria’s history only eight public officials have publicly declared their assets. Even though this act promotes transparency, no applause or recognition was given to these individuals. There is nothing to distinguish them from the people who act otherwise. In using nudging as a tool to incentivise the preferred behaviour, wrong and bad behaviour must also be punished. This is because when people see their peers getting away with violations, they are likely to join the bandwagon. Nudging can be used as a tool that informs and empowers people.

In conclusion, nudging presents a promising approach to tackling corruption in Nigeria.  It offers a psychological approach in that it deals with the root and behavioural causes of corruption and promotes a culture of transparency and accountability. By complementing traditional anti-corruption measures with nudging, Nigeria can effectively reduce the costs of corruption on its development and on its citizens. This will ultimately lead to a more equitable and prosperous country.

*Ifetayo is a policy and data analyst at Agora Policy

Footnotes

[i]Agora Policy No.4 (2023) Imperative of Strengthening Nigeria's Transparency and Accountability Measures. Available at: https://agorapolicy.org/report/

[ii]PWC (2016) “Impact of Corruption on Nigeria's Economy.”  PricewaterhouseCoopers Limited. Available at: https://www.pwc.com/ng/en/publications/impact-of-corruption-on-nigerias-economy.html.

[iii]Aduloju, Bunmi (2022) “NEITI: Nigeria Lost N16.25trn to Oil Theft, Sabotage in 12 Years.” The Cable, December 15. Available at:https://www.thecable.ng/neiti-nigeria-lost-n16-25trn-to-oil-theft-sabotage-in-12-years

[iv]World Bank (no date) Combating Corruption, The World Bank. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/governance/brief/anti-corruption

[v]Slota, A. (2018) The subtle science of nudging anti-corruption, Palladium. Palladium. Available at: https://thepalladiumgroup.com/news/The-subtle-science-of-nudging-anti-corruption

[vi]Mullet, T. (2022) “What are the advantages and disadvantages of nudging?” Warwick Business School, 14 February. Available at: https://www.wbs.ac.uk/news/what-are-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-nudging/

By David Nwachukwu and Faith Adeniyi | Transparency and accountability are crucial for reducing opportunities for corruption in the public sector. This fact is not lost on various administrations in Nigeria, which have established various measures over the time to mitigate corruption and promote accountability and transparency. There has been a surge in the adoption and implementation of these sunshine measures since Nigeria returned to civil rule in 1999. But the result has been mixed. While some of these measures have been very successful, most have not made the expected impact. This forms the backdrop of the fourth policy report by Agora Policy, titled: ‘Imperative of Strengthening Nigeria’s Transparency and Accountability Measures’.

The report assessed 16 distinct transparency and accountability measures in the country within four clusters: Norms & Values, Public Financial Management, Open Disclosure, and Sanctions/Enforcement. It looks at the rationales, histories, challenges and records of these measures and makes recommendations for strengthening them. As the country gets ready for transition to a new administration, the report submits that “Nigeria needs more transparency and accountability, not less.”

Below are some of the key messages from the report:

Assets declared by public officials should be made public

The report contends that asset declaration by public officials is criticalto checkmating corruption in the public sector, if implemented effectively. The report claims that the potential of this measure is yet to be fully optimised largely due to lack of publication and verification of assets declared and limited capacity and resourcing of the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), the government agency charged with the implementation of the law. First, the calls for the amendment of Paragraph 3(c) of the Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. This provision empowers the CCB to make assets declared by public officials available to any citizen of Nigeria “only on terms and conditions as the National Assembly may prescribe”. According to the report, the refusal of the National Assembly to stipulate the condition for public disclosure has undermined the transparency and accountability utility of asset declaration, hence the recommendation for constitutional amendment.

The report also advocates for the verification of assets disclosed to CCB. It is believed that the disclosure and verification of the assets would prevent false declarations, deepen transparency and also increase trust in the government. However, at present, the CCB is undermined by limited budgetary allocations compared to other anticorruption agencies. This hampers the capacity of CCB and the Code of Conduct Tribunal (its sister agency) to adequately discharge their weighty responsibility of verifying assets declared by public servants across the three tiers of government and successfully prosecute those who err.

President Buhari should sign the new audit bill

The routine audit and legislative oversight of public accounts is a policy believed to regulate Government MDA’s expenditure and accounting to minimise incidences of corruption through internal and external audit processes overseen by the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation (OAuGF). Despite the potential of this mechanism in promoting accountability and mitigating corruption in public service, many Ministries Departments and Agencies (MDAs) default in compliance, with the expected annual submission of their financial statements to the OAuGF and their counterparts in the states. The report states that without the power to sanction the Auditor-General is a ‘toothless bulldog’ and that Nigeria’s subsisting audit law is outmoded. Hence, the report recommends that President Muhammadu Buhari should sign the Federal Audit Service Bill into law before leaving office. It states: “the bill, which was passed by the National Assembly on 29 March 2023, repeals the Audit Ordinance of 1956. The bill strengthens the operations and independence of the Office of the Auditor General of the Federation (AuGF).”

Integrity checks needed on heads and staff of agencies with anticorruption mandates

Beyond corrupt practices found in various public offices, the report spotlights how the abuse of power by anticorruption agencies and public accounts committees have allowed corruption to thrive. In addition to bribe collection, “some civil servants have been reported to award multiple bids to contractors for some negotiated returns, while some even award contracts to their personal companies in violation of regulations against conflicts of interest.” All these acts are not in line with stipulated processes and should attract sanctions.

To address this gap, the report recommends integrity checks on the boards, leadership and staff of institutions with anti-corruption mandates and institute adequate safeguards on the exercise of oversight powers. The report states that, “these measures are needed to ensure that there is a symmetry between the mandates of these critical institutions and the values of those who work in and lead them, that there are measures for ‘watching the watchdogs’, and that the anti-corruption institutions are not undermined by the same ills that they were set up to tackle.”

Many MDAs don’t comply with government policies and without consequences

The report highlights how non-compliance across various MDAs has affected the successful implementation of anti-corruption measures. For instance, many MDAs default in compliance with the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act. Some MDAs also default in compliance with the expected annual submission of their audited financial statements to the OauGF. In 2020, the OAuGF reported that “65 MDAs had not submitted their financial statements for audit since January 12, 2017.” Similarly, not all public officials faithfully fill their assets declaration forms as required by law: on assumption of office, every four years, and when they exit. The report recommends strict enforcement of existing policies and adequate consequence management.

Need for a robust value/attitude re-orientation campaign

The report observes that most of the anticorruption measures are not delivering the desired impact because of a distorted and dysfunctional value system not just in the public service but also in the larger populace.  To address this gap, the report advocatesfor a national re-orientation programme to instill anti-corruption values. The report advises the Federal Government to “launch a comprehensive and well-thought-out national value reorientation programme that creatively seeks to change the dysfunctional values, attitudes, and narratives that wittingly and unwittingly enable public corruption. The impact of the current emphasis on systems and sanctions will be limited without changes in societal values.”

Investments in technology and capacity could be game-changers

The report considers technology the greatest enabler of transparency and accountability. It thus highlights the need for continuous investment in technology and training for anticorruption agencies. The report points out that, “technology can be leveraged to enhance transparency across the diverse Public Financial Management (PFM) and open disclosure clusters where e-payment and electronic collection and dissemination of information have become a huge issue of concern.” While advocating for the adoption of technology in other areas of the anticorruption work, the reports encourages government to stick to and improve existing technology platforms. The reports states: “Thus, rather than contemplate the idea of going back on technology-driven platforms such as GIFMIS, IPPIS and the rest, the focus should be on how to improve their deliveries and build capacity for more effective use to strengthen transparency and accountability.

In related vein, the report advocates for more investment in capacity building for the staff of anticorruption agencies. According to the report: “capacity building to bridge gaps in technical knowledge and skills will go a long way to enhance the effectiveness of the relevant personnel in these institutions and, ultimately, strengthen transparency and accountability.”

The Whistleblower and other policies need legal backing

Introduced in 2016, the whistleblowing policy is an accountability and transparency mechanism designed to encourage confidential and voluntary reporting of suspected corrupt practices. Since its introduction, the policy has recorded notable milestones. For instance, the Presidential Advisory Committee against Corruption (PACAC) reported that “N594.09 billion was recovered in three years between 2017 and 2020 through the implementation of the whistleblower policy.”

With notable results as such, the report recommends the need for legal backing in order to make the policy more effective and most importantly, ensure its sustainability beyond the current administration. Subsequently, the report also calls for the protection of whistleblowers and employees of the relevant investigative agencies given the accompanying risk arising from the absence of adequate protection.

Amidst the positives of the policy, the report also makes the case for some adjustments. According to the report, “.... whistleblowing must be reviewed in order to checkmate abuses, victimisation and false accusations.” This argument is not far-fetched given some of the perverse incentives that could come with whistleblowing, including the monetary reward for whistle-blowers.

The report also recommends legal backing for the Open Treasury Portal (OTP), an initiative which potential for checkmating corruption launched by this administration.

*Nwachukwu is communication officer while Adeniyi is programme officer at Agora Policy

Nigeria’s impressive array of transparency and accountability measures has not made the desired dent on governance and development in the country because of subsisting gaps in legislation, capacity, values and resourcing, says a new report by Agora Policy, an Abuja-based think tank.