Remi Aiyede | Nigeria stands at a critical juncture. The economic reforms currently underway, initiated at the dawn of the current administration, were born from a necessity that few can deny. For decades, the country’s economy operated under a fragile illusion of stability, propped up by a costly petrol subsidy that bled public finances and an artificially fixed exchange rate that enriched rent-seekers while stifling investment. When President Bola Tinubu announced during his inauguration that “subsidy is gone,” it signalled a definitive break from the past. This bold move, coupled with the devaluation of the Naira, was intended to chart a path toward fiscal sanity and long-term prosperity.
Yet, as the dust settles, it has become painfully clear that the road to economic salvation cannot be paved with good intentions alone. The initial announcement sent immediate ripples across the petroleum sector. Petrol pump prices skyrocketed overnight. The devaluation of the Naira barely two weeks after compounded the crisis, acting as a one-two punch to most citizens. The result was a perfect storm: inflation surged, the purchasing power of ordinary Nigerians evaporated, and millions were pushed further into poverty. The resultant cost-of-living crisis naturally erupted into public outcry. While the government later introduced palliatives, social investment programmes and cash transfers meant to soften the blow, the damage to public trust had already been done. The “harm” was not merely economic. It was a fracture in the social contract, casting a long shadow over the very reforms meant to secure the nation’s future.
At the heart of the controversy surrounding these reforms lies a critical issue: sequencing. While the necessity of reform is rarely disputed, the order, timing, and coordination of policy measures have been the subject of intense debate. Economic theory often assumes ideal conditions, rational actors, efficient markets, and well-functioning institutions. Nigeria’s socio-economic landscape is far more complex, shaped by insecurity, infrastructural deficits, and deep inequalities. By implementing multiple high-impact reforms simultaneously, policymakers exposed an already vulnerable population to compounded shocks. A more humane approach, one that prioritises dialogue, accountability, and strategic communication, might have differentiated between the inevitable winners and losers of such a tectonic shift. Instead, the abruptness of the changes created a vacuum quickly filled by speculators and saboteurs, individuals who exploit volatility for personal gain. This further alienated the citizenry from the government’s objectives.
Reform, particularly of this magnitude, cannot succeed without public understanding and support. Yet the government’s engagement strategy has largely fallen short. Citizens have been told what is happening, but not sufficiently why it is necessary or how it will benefit them in tangible terms. This communication gap has created fertile ground for misinformation, speculation, and opportunistic behaviour. In the absence of clear and consistent messaging, some market actors have exploited uncertainty, exacerbated price volatility and deepened public anxiety. Effective reform requires more than policy announcements. It demands sustained dialogue, transparency, and a willingness to listen as well as to explain.
To restore credibility and sustain momentum, the government must shift from a narrow focus on implementation to a broader strategy of mobilisation. Public buy-in is not automatic. It must be actively cultivated. This involves not only articulating the long-term vision of reform but also demonstrating, in concrete ways, that progress is being made. Transparent reporting on fiscal savings, investment allocations, and developmental outcomes can help bridge the trust deficit. Citizens need to see evidence that the sacrifices they are making are yielding results, whether in improved infrastructure, better public services, or enhanced economic opportunities. Citizens need to understand not just the what and the how, but the why. This requires a level of transparency that has so far been lacking. It demands that the government should design robust mechanisms for monitoring progress and sharing data. Accountability must be built into the framework from the ground up.
Beyond technical adjustments, there is a need to reimagine governance as a more inclusive and participatory process. Citizen engagement should not be an afterthought but a central pillar of reform. This can take multiple forms: regular town hall meetings, public consultations on major policy decisions, and the strategic use of digital platforms to gather feedback and disseminate information. Universities, research institutions, and civil society organisations also have a critical role to play in providing evidence-based analysis and facilitating dialogue. By incorporating diverse perspectives into the policymaking process, the government can design reforms that are not only economically sound but also socially responsive.
A particularly urgent area for improvement is the design and management of social protection programmes. The palliatives introduced to mitigate the impact of reforms should not be treated as temporary add-ons but as integral components of the reform strategy. Ideally, these measures should have been established and fully operational before the removal of subsidies and the liberalisation of the exchange rate. Going forward, these measures must be strengthened through better targeting, rigorous monitoring, and continuous updating. A dynamic and credible social register is essential to ensure that assistance reaches those who need it most. Moreover, mechanisms must be put in place to prevent leakages and political capture, especially when funds are disbursed through multiple layers of government. Without robust oversight, these programmes risk reinforcing public cynicism rather than alleviating hardship.
Ultimately, the sustainability of Nigeria’s economic reforms will depend on their legitimacy in the eyes of the people. Citizens are being asked to endure significant short-term pain in exchange for the promise of long-term gain. This is a difficult proposition under any circumstances, but especially so in a context where trust in public institutions is already fragile. To maintain public support, the government must demonstrate that the burdens of adjustment are being shared fairly and that the benefits are not being captured by a privileged few. Equity, transparency, and accountability must therefore be at the core of the reform agenda.
Nigeria’s current trajectory underscores a fundamental truth: sound policies alone are not enough. The success or failure of reform ultimately hinges on the process by which it is implemented and the extent to which it resonates with the lived realities of citizens. Shock therapy may achieve rapid change, but it often does so at a high social and political cost. A more inclusive approach—one that balances urgency with empathy and technical rigour with democratic engagement—offers a more sustainable path forward.
Nigeria’s reforms are necessary, but they do not have to be brutal. The stakes could not be higher. Nigeria’s economic future depends not only on correcting past distortions but also on building a new foundation of trust between the state and its people. This requires a commitment to dialogue, a willingness to adapt, and a recognition that reform is as much a political and social process as it is an economic one. The window for recalibration is still open, but it is narrowing. If the government can align its policies with the needs and expectations of its citizens, these reforms may yet achieve their transformative potential. If not, they risk becoming another chapter in a long history of well-intentioned but ultimately unsuccessful interventions.
*Aiyede is a professor of political institutions, governance and public policy at the University of Ibadan and an extraordinary professor at the University of Pretoria.
