By Arekpitan Ikhenaode
Two months ago, the Social Development Secretariat of the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) expressed worry about the rising influx of beggars into Abuja, Nigeria’s capital city. In a statement that described the situation as “overwhelming”, the Secretariat’s Director demanded that the government provide “succour” for these beggars and criminalise begging. Apart from this proposed move being an inhumane approach to dealing with poverty, it also fails to address why people are poor in the first place.
Nigeria has been the world’s poverty capital since 2018 and was only recently surpassed by India in March 2022. The last three years have seen over 7 million Nigerians descend into poverty, with the World Bank predicting an additional 6 million joining those ranks by the end of 2022. Historically, the government has attempted various initiatives addressing poverty, each new attempt borne off the failure of the last. Last year, the current administration alleged it had lifted over 10 million people out of poverty with several handout programs focused on farmers, artisans, and small-scale traders. However, barely days after, the World Bank released a report stating inflation had plunged 7 million more Nigerians into poverty. The facts of the President’s claim remain unclear, but apparently, his handouts have done nothing but throw money at the problem.
Between 2015 and 2021, Nigeria spent at least $5bn on poverty programs. Apart from being excessively expensive, welfare programs almost always fall short of their lofty expectations. They usually only provide the indigent with bare minimum living standards, trapping them in a cycle of dependence that perpetuates their poverty.
The overall situation begs the question: why do poverty alleviation plans fail? Well, it starts with defining poverty as a cause rather than an effect. Usually influenced by socio-cultural factors like ethnicity, education, gender, and even climatic conditions, poverty is not directly synonymous with lack. Hence, in curbing national poverty, it is crucial to ask “why” before “how”.
Of all the factors that influence Nigerian poverty, the most prominent is geographical distribution. According to the World Bank, 87 percent of Nigeria’s poor live in the North. This may appear to be a highly disproportionate reality. Still, however, it is less shocking when you consider the following statistics: the literacy rate in the north is just over 37 per cent, girl child enrollment is at 45 per cent, and over 2 million people have been displaced by terrorism and insurgency in the last decade. Also, only 30 percent of Northerners have access to clean water, and the average drought frequency has been above 80 per cent in the last two decades. All of these factors have been established as poverty catalysts.
But poverty in Nigeria is not entirely a Northern problem. In the South, states like Ebonyi and Enugu have poverty rates upwards of 50 percent; though popularised as high-income states, Lagos, Rivers, and Akwa Ibom are notorious for underemployment and high-income inequality.
Firstly, the minimum wage needs to be increased. However, any increment would be ineffective without proper enforcement of labour laws, as underemployment has persisted despite earlier increments.
Currently, over 52 percent of Nigerians living in rural areas are poor. The comparative rate is just over 18 percent in urban areas. Another viable step would be attracting foreign direct investment to other states besides economic hubs like Lagos and Port-Harcourt. Projects like the Onitsha River Port and the Second Niger Bridge have the potential to rapidly urbanise Nigeria’s South by bringing along with them opportunities for business, much-needed jobs, and the incentive for foreign investment.
Similar to our poverty alleviation approach, Nigeria has tried to curb insurgency in the North by drastically spending more on military gear and personnel, but research has shown that our rising defence bill has only simultaneously risen our body count. A better strategy would understand that this war did not begin with the nozzle of a gun, and it would not end in one. The insurgent’s greatest weapon is its cause — and its uncanny ability to rally disgruntled citizens to it. Therefore, addressing socio-economic problems in Northern Nigeria would undermine terrorist activities in Nigeria.
Summarily, there is a need for the government to address infrastructure deficits and flaws in the system, in laws and policies, and focus on annihilating societal practices that perpetuate poverty. Criminalising poverty and throwing money into welfare programs would not give the indigent marketable skills, end underage marriage or the insurgency that displaces Nigerians daily. It is becoming less likely that Nigeria will meet the Sustainable Development Goal of eradicating poverty before 2030. However, taking systematic steps against the causative factors will help close our widening poverty gap.
Arekpitan Ikhenaode is a writing fellow at the African Liberty.
