Prof.
Samson R. AKINOLA[1],
Professor
of Urban and Regional Planning,
(Polycentric
Planner and Problem-Solving Entrepreneur)
(Development
Planner, Community Developer, Environmentalist,
Policy/Institutional
Analyst, Governance/Poverty Reduction Expert)
Provost,
College of Science, Engineering and Technology
Osun
State University, Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria
e-mail:srakinola@yahoo.com;
samson.akinola@uniosun.edu.ng
Mobile:
+234-803-407-5110; +234-815-275-8280
ABSTRACT
Events within the last two or three years,
especially inability of most states to pay salary of their workers confirm the
degree of herculean tasks before Nigerian leaders. As a result, discussions in
the media on the way forward resonate around: (i) The non-viability of most of
the 36 states that could not generate adequate internal revenue, (ii) The 70%
of our budget goes for recurrent mainly for payment of salary, (iii) Lifestyles
and consumption habits of Nigerians, and (iv) Lack of transparency and accountability.
Consequently, this article
designs programmes and strategies that can implement institutional mechanisms
to practically connect key stakeholders to operate in synergy and make our 36
States and 774 Local Governments to be active agents and centres of change in
the production of goods and services using locally available resources to harness
food security and employment potentials. Polycentric privatization planning will
help in reversing the present trends of independent accumulation of wealth by
few people that perpetuates mass poverty among the workers through equitable redistribution
of wealth using polycentric privatization mechanism.
Using
polycentric privatization planning, Polycentric Public-Private Partnership
(PPPP) will be established at the state and local government levels across
Nigeria using entrepreneurial capabilities for food production, local
industrialisation and employment generation through effective linkage,
partnership and collaboration between governments, higher institutions,
industries and local communities. This will result in translating innovative
ideas from higher institutions into machines that are capable of enhancing agricultural
productivity. Consequently, local economic ventures will be created, local resources will be fully utilized, different
local industries will be developed, economic and revenue base will be
diversified, employment will be generated for the local people and revenues for
Local Governments (LGs) will
increase. Further, using polycentric privatization planning, shareholding
in, and joint ownership of local industries by the local people will empower
the people economically, LGs will assume entrepreneurial roles, revenue base of
LGs will be widened, oil/aid dependency syndrome will be broken, and state and
LGs will be economically self-reliant and sustainable.
‘It is ideas
that rule the world.’
Prof. Samson R.
AKINOLA,
Professor of Urban and
Regional Planning,
(Polycentric Planner
and Problem-Solving Entrepreneur)
(Development Planner,
Community Developer, Environmentalist,
Policy/Institutional
Analyst, Governance/Poverty Reduction Expert)
Provost, College of
Science, Engineering and Technology
Osun State University,
Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria
e-mail:srakinola@yahoo.com;
samson.akinola@uniosun.edu.ng
Mobile:
+234-803-407-5110; +234-815-275-8280
EASING
NIGERIA’S DEBT BURDEN THROUGH POLYCENTRIC PRIVATISATION PLANNING
INTRODUCTION
…no two communities are
ever the same and people always bear some marks of their origin. Circumstances
of birth and growth affect all the rest of
their careers (Tocqueville 1966:31). The
fact that a model worked in the West does not automatically suggest its
workability elsewhere (Akinola 2008p:174).
Recent events, especially
inability of most states to pay salary of their workers confirm the need to design
institutional mechanisms that will enable 36 States and 774 Local Governments to
look inward and innovate on how to apply home grown models for tapping the
potentials of the second and third tiers of government for engineering economic
growth and equitably distributing the benefits of the growth among the
citizenry.
Recent statistics confirms that
the high debt of N22.7 Trillion
is killing the already pauperised Nigerian masses because, with the high level
of corruption, the country is still borrowing (The
Nigerian Tribune, Tuesday, 4 December, 2018, p. 13 - Editorial), while “money walks away.” (Berkman, 2009).
According
to Bossard
(2009), case studies from Nigeria
and Gambia confirmed that not one of the more than 100 projects surveyed ‘did
not reek of corruption’, estimating that depending on the country, 15-40% of
the World Bank’s disbursements for any given project are lost to corruption. That
was why World
Bank President James
Wolfensohn in 1996 identified corruption as the ‘cancer’ of development (see
also Berkman, 2009). Berkman
(2009) shows how Nigerian officials
charged $2,200 for 18 cups of tea and snacks at a roadside stall under a World
Bank loan (and got away with it). Expenses for television and video sets was at
N249,999 apiece – more than ten times the
equipment’s street value.
This article focuses on how to
address Nigeria’s debt burden using innovative strategies. Discussions so far in
the media on how to address Nigeria’s debt burden resonate around five issues:
(1) Looking inward on taxation is considered problematic by some analysts as
there is a limit to which people can be taxed, (2) 36 states are too many for
Nigeria on the ground that most of the states, except Lagos could not generate
adequate internal revenue, (3) 70% of our budget goes for recurrent mainly for
payment of salary, (4) Lifestyles and consumption habits of Nigerians, etc. constitute
a hindrance to our GDP growth, and (5) Transparency and accountability among public officials are
very weak. The analysis displayed in most of the
discussions did not go down to indentifying the root causes of Nigerian
challenges and problems; hence the solution proffered deviate from reality.
Two critical problems that are
affecting Nigerian economy are: (a) There
are persistent gaps between policies (leadership) and realities (the people),
and (b) There are wide gaps between knowledge generated by scholars and welfare
of citizens (Akinola, 2007f). Unlike in Europe, America and Asia, where
Knowledge Management (KM) tools and techniques have been deployed to generate
development by distributing essential information and know-how in public and
private sectors for efficiency, productivity and information (DBSA, 2006:ix),
Nigerian governments have not fully realized the potentials and capabilities of
KM and endogenous knowledge in particular (World Bank (2009). These missing
links or disconnects in Nigeria have accounted for the failure of the series of
theories, reforms, strategies, models and development programmes implemented in
the country to resolve developmental and security challenges, especially in the
areas of graduate unemployment and mass poverty (Akinola, 2007f, 2008p, 2010i,
2011a, Akinola, et. al., 2014a).
This article uses the
Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework in tandem with Knowledge
Management (KM) tools, Political Economy Approach (PEA) and Robert Owen’s
Principles on Industrialisation (ROPI) to demonstrate principles and practices
needed to make Polycentric Planning and Poverty Reduction Strategy (PPPRS)
resolve existing crises in Nigeria by addressing exclusion, marginalization, non-viability
of states, debt crisis, food insecurity, unemployment, poverty, insecurity,
etc.
Looking inward and innovation
are the best strategies that should be adopted now. Equating ‘looking inward
and innovation’ to increased taxation as believed by analysts is erroneous and
misleading. ‘Looking inward and innovation’ is not synonymous to taxation; they
are two different issues. ‘Looking inward and innovation’ refers to endogenous
development that prioritises utilisation of endogenous knowledge management
tools. Endogenous knowledge/development is inward-looking; prioritises full use
of local resources, respects the local environment, encourages microbusinesses
and co-operatives, provides a system of collective ownership of the means of
production and incorporates excluded populations, generates dignified local employment,
promotes our uniqueness, culture, style of life and of consumption and condemns
the traditional economic model that focuses on independent accumulation of
wealth and mass poverty (World Prout Assembly, 2005). In this wise, an African Endogenous
Knowledge Development Model (AKEDEM) can be adopted for generating self-reliant
development in Nigeria (Akinola, 2011h).
The 36 states are not too many
for Nigeria. Those states that are considered non-viable are potentially viable
if they look inward using endogenous knowledge management tools in utilising
locally available resources to increase their GDP and generate employment for
youth. This can be achieved through restructuring the public sphere and political
economy and domesticating democracy. Models that can be applied include: (1) African Polycentric Youth Mainstreaming and
Empowerment Model for mainstreaming youth’s needs and legitimate aspirations
into socio-economic and techno-political decisions, thereby empowering them and
preparing them for effective and true leadership position in the
nearest future (Akinola, 2014m). (2) African Retirement and Economic
Empowerment Model (AREEM) for synergizing the efforts of retirees such that
their retirement benefits are pooled as seed money for investment in their
locality. AREEM deviates from state-based model that is fraught with pillage,
plundering and looting of pension funds with the consequence of abandonment of
pensioners by government (Akinola, 2013l).
The 70% of our budget that goes
for recurrent expenditure can be ‘reconfigured’ through restructuring. When we
restructure the public sphere and political economy and domesticate democracy,
the efforts and operations of workers will be synergised, reconfigured and diversified
into economic ventures through polycentric privatisation planning. Meaning that
there is neither the need of merging states nor retrenching workers. The only
condition is that workers must be ready for change. The situation where workers
spend 5 days in offices per week will change. Schedules for workers in all
ministries must be redesigned such that workers will be at the field where
projects are located. Models that can be applied include: (1) African Public
Sphere Restructuring Model (APSRM) for restructuring the public sphere in order
to resolve political crisis in Africa, and then linking this to how people can
work together, from community level, to address diverse challenges (Akinola
2009b, 2010a:73-78, 2011a:40-47). (2) African Development Institutional
Mechanism (ADIM) for connecting all the stakeholders in development at various
levels of decision making (Akinola 2007f:230-233, 2008p:188); (3) African Food Security
Model (AFSM) for securing food for the citizens (Akinola 2008f,p:193-195, 2011g); (4) African Employment Generation Model (AGEM) for generating employment opportunities (Akinola
2008f,p:193-195, 2009d); (5) African Local Economic Development Strategy
(ALEDS) for enhancing economic growth through local industrialization and
sustaining development (2007f:233; 2008d,f,p:190-191); (6) African Polycentric
Privatization Model (APPM) for distributing the benefits of economic growth
among the citizenry (Akinola 2007f:233).
Lifestyles and consumption
habits of Nigerians, etc. can only be re-orientated when we restructure the
public sphere and political economy and domesticating democracy by applying models
such as: (i) African Food Security Model (AFSM) for securing food for the citizens (Akinola 2008f,p:193-195, 2011g); (ii) African Employment Generation Model (AGEM) for generating employment
opportunities (Akinola 2008f,p:193-195, 2009d); (iii) African Local Economic
Development Strategy (ALEDS) for enhancing economic growth through local
industrialization and sustaining development (2007f:233; 2008d,f,p:190-191);
(iv) African Polycentric Privatization Model (APPM) for distributing the
benefits of economic growth among the citizenry (Akinola 2007f:233). When
citizens work in industries that produce food and they have shares in the
industries, it is practically impossible for them to be spending their money on
imported food items.
Transparency
and accountability are products of restructuring and democracy domestication simply because accountability is the
outcome of one of the 21 elements of federalism - taxation. It is illogical for citizens not to demand for
accountability from their leaders when they pay tax and are, in fact,
joint-owners of the local industries. It needs to be pointed
out that without restructuring (through
polycentric planning) that could enable all the diverse
interests to operate as colleagues with equal standing such that benefits of
growth are shared equitably,
governmental efforts and ‘developmental’ programmes in
bringing about change will be tantamount to a waste of resources and a cycle of
heightened and reinforced poverty (see for details Akinola 2010a, 2011a).
THE
PROBLEMATICS
The inability of post-independence
Nigerian leaders to design and entrench inclusive governance structure that
could eliminate and obliterate colonially engineered divide-and-rule system has
given room for a nation of inequalities
where the few elite dominate the majority non-elite
(70.0%) (FRN, 2004:14). The inherited colonial governance structure/system which
is lopsided, and dysfunctional transfers and keeps wealth within the hands of a
few wealthy elite who perpetrates a system of economic tyranny, youth unemployment
and poverty among the masses (Akinola, 2012o). In the political economy sphere in Nigeria, the political and economy societies collude to oppress the masses of the people since they have
access to resources to perpetrate divide and rule tactics (Akinola, 2010a,
2011a). For example, wealth distribution in Nigeria attests to the fact
that kleptocratic capitalist bourgeoisies concentrate wealth in the hands few people
at the corridor of power at the detriment of the majority of the citizenry. The
top 20% of the population in Nigeria owns 94.6% of the wealth in the country, the
middle 20% shares 1.9%, while the bottom 60% owns 3.5% (Nigerian National
Living Standard Survey, 2006). Nigeria is among the thirty most unequal
countries in the world with respect to income distribution, the poorest half of
the population holds only 10% of national income (Adegoke, 2013:26).
How can one explain the
situation of graduates in riding Okada
(motorcycle) as commercial taxi in order to survive economically? Evidence
abounds of graduates of higher institutions that work as labourers in building
industry – carrying blocks, water and cement. What a wasteful destiny and country
that de-prioritizes scholarship and knowledge! For example, the high
youth unemployment rate has angered the population against Tunisian government,
due to the fact that about two or three unemployed graduates became burden to
parents who had sacrificed to pay fees (UWN, 2011). This
calls for a rethink of development strategy as well as solution-driven
curriculum in Nigerian/African higher institutions.
The condition in Africa is
worrisome as the rich are getting richer and the poor becoming poorer. At
present, developed democracies are also worrying about the traditional economic
model that focuses on independent accumulation of wealth and mass poverty. As a
result, concerns on tackling rising inequality have increased after a study found
that the richest 1% would own more than 50% of the world’s wealth by 2016
(Elliott & Pilkington, 2015).
The message is that rising inequality is dangerous.
It’s bad for growth and it’s bad for governance. We see a concentration of
wealth capturing power and leaving ordinary people voiceless and their
interests uncared for (Elliott & Pilkington, 2015).
In 2014, a study shows
that the 85 richest people on the planet have the same wealth as the poorest
50% (3.5 billion people). In 2015, 80 people owning the same amount of wealth
as more than 3.5 billion people, down from 388 people in 2010 (Elliott & Pilkington, 2015).
We
can recall that in January 2015, the UN and IMF at a joint conference raised an
alarm over the increasing inequalities in the world. In 2010, 388 richest people on the planet have the
same wealth as the poorest 50% (3.5 billion people). In 2014, the figure
reduced to 85 people; in 2015, 80 people; in 2016, 62 richest persons, while
the figure has been reduced to 8 persons in 2017 (Elliott,
2017). Available statistics on Africa
shows that the GINI coefficients in Africa increased from 44% in
2001 to 57% in 2008, confirming increasing inequality whereby fewer people are
controlling larger resources and vice versa (Wikipedia, 2011).
Scavenging
and hawking are predominant in Nigerian cities, conditions that clearly
demonstrate heightened poverty. Currently, the World Bank has indicated a high level of deprivation being experienced by Nigerians as
confirmed by the current World Poverty Clock indicating that Nigeria has over
87 million people living in poverty with six Nigerians fall into poverty every
minute as extreme poverty is growing (Adejokun, 2018). This is in spite of
abundant resources, 58 years of independence, about 180 million people and about
160 universities. Where is the impact of all knowledge generated by Nigerian
scholars over the years?
According
to the Charted Institute of Personnel Management of
Nigeria (CIPM), 80% of Nigerian graduates are unemployed[2] as at April 16, 2013, while Nigeria produces an average 2 million graduates
per annum with 50% of them having
no jobs; 2.1 million Nigerians
became jobless in 2016 (NBS, 2017), the number
increased to 4.07 million in 2017 (NBS, 2017; Bolaji, 2017); World Poverty Clock is
ticking 6 Nigerians into poverty every minute and the country becomes the
capital of world poverty by 2030 and beyond.
Consequently,
recent development indicates a high rate of crimes, cultism, kidnaping, etc
among Nigerian youth as revealed by the Lagos Commissioner of Police when he
showed that “60% of youth in Lagos are cultists” (Jude Egbas, Guardian, Pulse,
10/11/2018). The effect
of inequalities in terms of unemployment, hunger and poverty being responsible for Africans/Nigerians
searching for greener pastures by engaging in deadly migration to Europe, with
more than 150,000[3]
people making the crossing in each of the past three years (2015-2017). For
example, it was reported that 36,000 Nigerians flee to Europe by Sea (The Punch, Friday, Oct.20, 2017, p.10). This
explains why about 10,000 people were drowned while trying to cross the
Mediterranean from Africa (Akinsola, 2007:51; Popham, 2007:9). The crisis
probably peaked in April, 2015 when the figure of deaths recorded 1,700 between
January and April 2015, while about 280,000 deaths occurred since 2000 (BBC
News, 23/04/2015, 7.00pm). Recent statistics shows that deadly migration led to
the death of about 521 Africans – Nigerians, Ivorians, Guineans, Senegalese and
Gambians in the Mediterranean Sea between January and February, 2017
(International Organisation for Migration – IOM) (The Punch, Tuesday, March 14,
2017, p. 11). Currently, the situation is getting out of hands with the
emergence of modern slave trade in Libya, where Africans are being bought and
sold in public for as little as $400 in Libya slave markets. Others in the continent have become restive and
engage themselves in violence, fraud, robbery and hooliganism that constitute a
breach to peace and insecurity in the global world.
How
can one explain the situation of graduates in some parts of Africa riding
motorcycle (Okada in Nigeria and Boda-boda in Kenya) as commercial taxi
in order to survive economically? Evidence abounds of
graduates of higher institutions that work as labourers in building industry –
carrying blocks, water and cement. What a wasteful destiny and continent that
de-prioritizes scholarship and knowledge! The consequent frustrations
constituted a high cost to the Nigeria’s economy as an example. Nigeria lost
$100 billion (about N200 billion) in 2016 to militancy (ChannelsTV, Wednesday 15, February 217, 2.00pm).
This
is instructive for Africa to begin to conceptualise how to engage polycentric
planning to engineer local economic development and build a nation that
responds to the yearning and aspirations of the citizenry. As an alternative to
the present dysfunctional political economy and development dilemma, endogenous
development, or internally directed development focuses on people-centered
development, which incorporates humanistic values into the economic system and
provides a democratic distribution of wealth.
The Federal
Government should draw some lessons from the current crisis in the North Africa
where high youth unemployment rate has angered the population and provoked
bitterness against the governments thus leading to revolution without solution.
WAY
FORWARD ON ECONOMIC REVIVAL IN NIGERIA
Central to the adoption and
application of above named models are: (a) African Polycentric Development
Planning Model (APDPM) for operationalising African Development Brain-Box (ADBB) in generating, adapting and
disseminating innovative ideas through experimental stations on pilot scales to
community-end-users (Akinola 2008p:186-187, 2010i:47-58); (b) African
Polycentric Information Networking (APIN) for creating networks between the
leaders and the people for effective information sharing and communication to
resolving the problems of information asymmetry and prisoners’ dilemma that
strengthening tragedy of the commons among public officials (Akinola 2008p:188-189);
(c) African Development Institutional Mechanism (ADIM) (Akinola, 2007f); (d)
African Polycentric Security Model (APSM) for ensuring security of lives and
property (Akinola 2009a); (e) African Conflict Prevention and Peace Building
(ACPPB) for detecting and preventing conflict as well as building peace
(Akinola 2008p:189, 2009b:96); and (f) African Public Sphere Restructuring
Model (APSRM) for restructuring the public sphere in order to resolve political
crisis, and then linking this to how people can work together, from community
level, to address diverse challenges (Akinola 2009b, 2010a:73-78, 2011a:40-47).
States with overpopulated
capitals – Lagos, Rivers (Port-Harcourt), Oyo (Ibadan), Kano, etc should begin
to embark on New Towns Development for depopulating such cities through
de-urbanisation, de-migration and re-migration using local economic development
strategy and polycentric privatization planning as major tools and incentives
for rallying the people around the new towns. The essence of the new towns is
to enable affected states to utilise endogenous knowledge management tools in
generating endogenous economy by harnessing
environmental resources for generating employment, reducing poverty, creating
wealth, securing food, protecting environment, etc.
For the proposed new towns, African
Polycentric Public Private New Town Development Model (APPPNTDM) is suggested. APPPNTDM
has its roots in existing cities where problems of urbanization have chocked
good things of life out of existence. Such problems include: gross inadequate
housing supply, congestion and over-crowdedness, deteriorated social services -
epileptic power supply, lack of pipe borne water, etc., bad road conditions,
traffic paralysis, poor environment, absent and diminishing open spaces, degreening,
unemployment, poverty, hunger and diseases, high level of insecurity, etc. More
prominent among these challenges now are: youth unemployment, poverty, hunger,
high cost of living, pensioners/retirees’ crisis, criminality and kidnapping.
APPPNTDM conceptualizes new
town as an organic community where knowledge management tools are used to
generate endogenous economy capable of harnessing
endogenous
knowledge towards the utilisation of
environmental resources in addressing the needs, aspirations and yearnings of
citizens. Following the principles of Robert Owen’s Industrial village
(1799), this paper addresses the current crises in overpopulated state capitals
– Lagos, Port-Harcourt, Ibadan, Kano, etc. by applying models and practical
strategies that are implementable and measurable for harnessing the potentials
of informal/endogenous sector and utilisation of resources towards inclusive
governance, investment drives, economic empowerment, food security and
employment generation (Akinola, 2015e).
The overall development of the
New Towns will be determined by Polycentric Development Planning, which is the
process of conceptualizing, initiating, executing and monitoring people-centred
and community oriented development. It is within the broader tradition of
political economy. Polycentric development planning conceptualizes development
based on synergetic interactions of key development actors within development
arenas. It deviates from centralized and state-centred development planning
that characterizes African state.
In
order for APDP to be effective, this paper adopts African Development Brain-Box
(ADBB) (Akinola 2008p) that can serve as a control unit for the key development
players. For the New Town, ADBB is adapted as Nigerian Development Brain-Box (NDBB) which is conceived as
an intellectual center where innovations and new ideas generated by Nigerian
scholars are adapted through experimental stations on a pilot scale
and then send its output to the New Towns where they will benefit the people.
Consequently,
New Town Innovation Centre (NTIC) is designed for
developing home-grown technology by scholars and local entrepreneurs, craftsmen
and artisans with potentials in diverse areas. This will help in utilizing the new towns’ potentials – natural,
human, institutional and entrepreneurial resources – to build the economy of
the new towns by turning natural resources to products and thereby generating
employment, reducing poverty, creating wealth, securing food, protecting
environment, etc. The adoption of innovations would enhance higher
productivity in various sectors of the economy by transforming environmental
and local resources into semi-finished and/or finished products. This would
reduce wastages, enhance economic capacity of citizens and thus, enhance higher
productivity in specific economic activities.
In the proposed New Towns, people-oriented
institutions and public officials (politicians and bureaucrats) must sit
together and discuss the nitty gritty on development dilemma, unemployment,
poverty, etc. The two groups should of necessity start from constitutional
level through collective choice level to operational level.
The
proposed the New Towns will provide the platform for actualizing democratization
which is the colossal restructuring of mentality through several models such as
(a) African Justice-Peace Achievement and Prosperity Model (AJPAPM) for
entrenching justice, peace and prosperity for the citizenry and countries in
Africa through a deliberate effort and a process for redressing injustice at
various levels and layers of human interactions at interpersonal,
intercommunity, organisational and governmental levels (Akinola, 2014m). (b) African Polycentric Democracy Domestication Model
(APDDM) for domesticating democracy in Africa by adapting
features of American federalism to African realities through appropriate
institutional arrangements that are self-organising and self-governing within
rule-ruler-ruled configuration in Africa (Akinola, 2014k); (c) African Polycentric Corruption Annihilation Model (APCAM) for
stopping corruption, pillage and bribery through collective efforts/actions of
Nigerian citizens such that public resources are equitably shared to meeting
the needs and aspirations of the people. By adopting Yoruba vocabulary, the
model engages government activities, projects, programmes and contracts at the Self-Governing Community Corruption Annihilation
Assembly (SGCCAA) at three levels of tasks
(Constitutional, Collective Choice and Operational) and four administrative
levels (Federal, State, Local, and Ward/Community) (Akinola, 2014h); (d) African Polycentric Constitutional
Crafting Model (APCCM) for crafting constitution that emanates from synergy of
both the elite and non-elite through formulation of microconstitutions by all
the interest groups at the community level and thereby serves as a proxy for
people-oriented political economy, which reflects economic, social and cultural
rights of the citizenry (Akinola 2014i).
POLYCENTRIC PRIVATIZATION PLANNING
Polycentric
Privatization Planning is the process of reversing the present trends of independent
accumulation of wealth from economic growth that perpetuates mass poverty among
the workers through redistribution of wealth using polycentric privatization
mechanism. Consequently, African Polycentric Privatization Model (APPM) is
designed for distributing the benefits of economic growth among the citizenry
(Akinola 2007f:233, 2009d). APPM stems from the problems that emanate from
centralized political economy which breeds exclusion and marginalization of the
citizenry from economic empowerment, wealth and prosperity. There are many ways in which the distribution of wealth
can be analysed. One example is to compare the wealth of the richest ten
percent with the wealth of the poorest ten percent. In many societies, the
richest ten percent control more than half of the total wealth. Mathematically,
a Pareto distribution has often been used to
quantify the distribution of wealth, since it models an unequal distribution.
Using the example of the USA,
data suggest that wealth is concentrated in the hands of a small number of
families. The wealthiest 1 percent of families owns roughly 34.3% of the
nation’s net worth, the top 10% of families owns over 71%, the middle 30% owns
25%, and the bottom 40% of the population owns (0.2%) less than 1% (The bottom
60% of the population owns 4%) (see Table 1).
Table 1:
Population-Wealth Distribution in USA, Nigeria and the World
|
SN
|
Country/World
|
Top
|
Middle
|
Bottom
|
|
Population (Wealth)
|
Population (Wealth)
|
Population (Wealth)
|
||
|
1
|
USA
|
10% P (71%W)
20% P (84.7%W)
|
30% P (25%W)
|
60% P (4%W)
|
|
2
|
Brazil
|
10% P (75%W)
|
|
|
|
3
|
Nigeria
|
20% P (94.6%W)
|
20% P (1.9%W)
|
60% P (3.5%W)
|
|
4
|
World
|
10% P (85%W)
|
40% P (14%W)
|
50% P (1%W)
|
NB: P = Population; W = Wealth.
Data in Table 1 shows the high
level of inequality in wealth distribution in the world – the top 10% of the
population owns 85% of wealth, while the bottom 50% owns 1%. The figures in USA
reflect the same pattern as shown in the table. If the situation in democratic
America is so gloomy for the majority (60%) that shares 4% of wealth, one can
easily imagine the condition in Africa where leaders loot public resources with
impunity. Because of the difficulty of sourcing information on African
countries, data on Nigeria is considered for Africa. As calculated from the
Nigerian National Living Standard Survey, 2006, the top 20% of the population
in Nigeria owns 94.6% of the wealth in the country, while the bottom 60% owns
3.5%.
The above analysis confirms
that the middle class is vast disappearing in developing countries, especially
in Africa. The Nigeria experience confirms this as shown in Table 1 where the
middle 20% of the people owns 1.9% of wealth as compared with the USA where 30%
owns 25% of wealth. Similarly, the share of the world wealth by the 40% middle
class is also small (14%).
If it is true that economic
capability determines the purchase of shares in companies, it then follows that
the minority that owns the lion-share of wealth owns and controls majority of
companies and corporations. Conversely, the majority of the population in
Africa is economically impotent to purchase shares in companies and
corporations, hence they remain in perpetual poverty.
Mechanisms
and Factors that Undergird Inequality of Wealth
Mechanisms and factors that
undergird inequality of wealth among the population are demonstrated in Fig. 1
below.
TOP
Capital
Huge
Profit
Raw Materials’ Suppliers Labour Poor Wages for Labour
Low Prices of Raw Materials
BOTTOM
Figure 1:
Input-Output Mechanisms that Undergird Inequality of Wealth Distribution in
Human Society.
Figure 1 shows that the present
economic system is centralized and monopolized by the very few with capital as
input. In this system, the majority of citizens supply raw materials and labour
(as input) but they are not properly rewarded – poor wages, low prices on their
goods, especially the farmers. At the same time, the output of the
entrepreneurial process (profit) is captured by entrepreneurs and few
stakeholders. Considering the economic status of the labourers and suppliers of
raw materials, they are automatically excluded in shareholding of the
development enterprises.
The consequent of this
arrangement is that there is economic growth that does not translate into an improvement in the welfare
of the people – “jobless growth and paper growth” – rising economic growth is
inconsistent with rising poverty[4]
and rising unemployment (CDD, 2013). Except there is a deliberate public
intervention through responsive policies and pragmatic steps to re-order the
present centralized economic system, poverty and human misery will continue to
loom large in Nigeria/Africa. In order to break this poverty trap in Nigeria/Africa,
African Polycentric Privatisation Model (APPM) is developed. APPM is
conceptualized as a mechanism designed to reversing the present centralized
privatisation programme that perpetuates inequality among the peoples of
Africa. In order to avoid a situation whereby the masses of Africa would end up
as the private estate of the few bourgeoisies, polycentric privatization should
be adopted.
Polycentric
planning emphasises citizens’ involvement in governance of community affairs on
daily basis through associational life: elegbe
jegbe (among the Yoruba), Ndi otu (among
the Ibo) and Kungya (among the Hausa).
It needs to be pointed out that associationalism permeates Nigerian public landscape as exemplified by economic susuism. Esusu[5] (among the Yoruba), Isusu (among the Ibo) and Adachi/Asusu
(among the Hausa/Fulani). These structures of collective actions are
similar to American system of collective action. The underlying principle of susuism is trust, which is based on the law of reciprocity
described as ‘do to me and I do to you’: Se
fun mi kin se fun o – (Yoruba); inye
mu nye gi – (Ibo) Bani nbaka/Nkemu Zama – (Hausa/Fulani). It is this primordial associationalism that Nigerians
can adopt now in resolving our challenges and problems through Africentric restructuring federalism. This is the time for us to engage in retrospection
towards resolving our differences and build a strong nation.
One
important feature of polycentric planning is that it helps in filling the gaps
(problem-solving) between existing realities and expected
goal. In view of the above, this paper designs restructuring mechanism to
institutionalize community initiatives for the setting up of Self-Governing Community Assembly (SGCA)
for the application of African Polycentric Democracy Domestication Model
(APDDM) for domesticating democracy in Nigeria by adapting features of Africentric
federalism to institutional arrangements that are self-organising and
self-governing within rule-ruler-ruled configurations (Akinola, 2016c).
APDDM encapsulates sixteen (16)
African problem-solving models for: (1) synergising the efforts of the Nigerian
state and that of the people through polycentric planning and error correcting
potentials (Akinola 2009b,
2010a:73-78, 2011a:40-47); (2) restructuring economic
space through Economic ‘Susuism’ for
generating self-reliant development through inward-looking, priority for full
use of local resources, a system of collective ownership of the means of
production and incorporation of excluded populations (Akinola, 2011h,l); (3) for securing food for the citizens, generating employment
opportunities and distributing the benefits of economic growth among the
citizenry (Akinola 2008f,p:193-195, 2011g);
(4) for according women their rightful position, empowering, integrating and
mainstreaming them into formal decision making; etc.
Application of African
Polycentric Privatization Planning Model for 36 States and 774 Local Governments
in Nigeria
The major aim of this article is to use
food security and employment generation implement innovative ideas and
strategies on Knowledge Management and restructuring the public sphere and
political economy. Consequently, this article designs programmes and strategies
that can implement institutional mechanisms to practically connect key food
security stakeholders to operate in synergy and harness food security and
employment potentials in Nigerian 36 states. Each State Government would initiate
community-based food security programmes and at the same time, initiate and
implement community-based investment projects to generate employment
opportunities for citizens across the Local Governments and communities in the
state. The specific objectives of the programme are:
1. To
establish Polycentric Public-Private Partnership (PPPP) at the state and local
government levels in order to kick start food security and employment
generation programmes;
2. To
combine factors of production (land, labour and capital) using entrepreneurial
capability for food production and employment generation;
3. To
design effective linkage, partnership and collaboration between the State
Government, higher institutions, industries and local communities in their
present day realities through economic polycentricity;
4. To
establish university/polytechnic/industry partnerships in translating
innovative ideas into machines that are capable of enhancing agricultural
productivity in each state;
5. To
create local economic ventures that will be owned by the local people in
specific LGs and communities in each state;
6.
To
diversify economic and revenue base by developing different local industries
that can fully utilize local resources and thereby generating employment for
the local people and revenues for Local Government in each state;
7. To
empower the grassroots economically through shareholding in, and joint
ownership of local industries (polycentric privatization) in the state;
8. To
make the LGs in each state assume entrepreneurial roles and thereby break the
oil/aid dependency syndrome in the state; and
9. To
widen revenue base of LGs in each state as products from local industries would
be exported outside to other states and abroad.
African Polycentric
Privatisation Model (APPM) operates at two levels. At the first level,
ownership of public enterprises should be re-distributed such that elite and
bourgeoisies do not dominate the ownership arenas. A new structure that would
allow public and private employees to own shares is designed. At the second
level, by applying part of the principles that undergird African Food Security
Model, new economic enterprises should be established at various economic
centres sharing ownership among the people. The outcome of this would be
equitable distribution of the benefits of economic growth among citizens
(Akinola 2007f:233).
APPM is designed to
redistribute the outcome of economic growth by reversing the present trends
using polycentric privatization mechanism. APP mechanism is an institutional
arrangement that restructures the relationship between the inputs – capital,
labour, raw materials and skills – in terms of ownership.
In this circumstance, the equation of
production becomes:
C + L + M + S = IP
------- Equation I
Where,
C represents Capital
L represents Labour
M represents Raw Materials
S represents Skills
IP represents Input
In order to alter the pattern of expected output (profit)
ownership, the input pattern must of necessity be adjusted. In this wise, APPM
converts certain percentages of labour, raw materials and skills into capital
so that other members of the society can share in the ownership of enterprises.
In this wise, what the capitalist bourgeoisies is contributing is reduced,
denoted by ‘c’. Similarly, labour becomes Time-Naira (tn), raw materials become
Material-Naira (mn), and skills become Skill-Naira (sn) (See Akinola 2007f)
(Naira for Nigeria, Cedis and Shillings in Ghana and Kenya respectively).
Invariably, capital is expressed as:
C = c + tn + mn + sn ------- Equation II
Substituting
for C in equation I, we have:
c + tn + mn + sn + L + M + S = IP ------- Equation III
This is applicable to existing and new enterprises but with
different methodologies (see details elsewhere in the list of 38 models by
Akinola 2015).
Fig.
2: Illustration of the working mechanism of ALEDS towards Polycentric
Privatisation.
Implementation
Strategy is highlighted under the following 15
stages.
|
The whole system and process of
Polycentric Privatisation should be subjected to ICT and local languages right
from the beginning so that governments and citizens could understand the pace
of changes. The emergence of the middle class and reduction in the proportion
of the bottom pyramid are a possibility if the masses could be given
opportunity to share in the ownership of enterprises that generate wealth.
This, however, requires government interventions by giving subsidies and tax
holiday to industries and enterprises that are willing to accommodate the
people into investment ownerships through shareholdings. Governments could buy
additional shares for citizens as a way of boosting their economic capability
and encourage the development of local industrialisation. At the end of the day
the number of jobless people on the streets as well as crime rate and other
unemployment related activities such as prostitutions would be reduced.
It is suggested that traducture should be adopted in order to convey
these ideas to the people. According
to wa Goro (2005, 2007), traducture
can be defined as the explorations of several possible means of conveying
knowledge-based development issues to stakeholders instead of relying on
translation of words alone. In this sense, several avenues that the people are
familiar with should be explored to discuss, convey and communicate ideas among
stakeholders. Such avenues may include: radio, theatre, drama, artefacts,
computer, IT, etc. that people can easily understand. For instance, ewi (poem/poetry) and ijala chants
(Yoruba traditional hunters’ chants) could be used in various dialects, among
the Yoruba of South-West of Nigeria, to reach the people of Egba, Egun, Lagos,
Ijebu, Ijesa, Igbomina, Ikale, Ile-Ife, Ondo, Offa, Osogbo, Owo, Lagos, etc.
The same applies to the Hausa-Fulani, Ijaw, Ibo, Edo languages, etc. Similarly,
religious clerics can also be involved in using religious platforms to convey
the ideas to the people. It is translation and traducture
that enable scholars to effectively tailor endogenous knowledge and innovations
from university to real life situations (Akinola 2011h).
For effective implementation of
innovative ideas and strategies advocated by this article, it is highly
imperative to open a platform for alternative narratives which will enable us
to explore how Nigerians can learn from American
experiment. The Americans, in the 18th C, raised a puzzle which led
to reactions from several groups, scholars, intellectuals in the form of
deliberation. The outcome of their engagement produced deliberateness/action on
federalism and eventual democracy as an experiment. By engaging in
retrospection, we can draw some parallels between Americans and the Yoruba,
Igbo/Ijaws and Hausa/Fulani, especially in the area of associationalism.
The alternative narratives will
help us in restructuring the public sphere and political economy and
domesticating democracy. Restructuring and domesticating democracy require the
application of federalism as a problem-solving strategy; rather than as only a
form of government. This requires proper understanding of American federalism,
and defining our own federalism that will reflect collegiality through
associational life and power
of collectivity that exist among Nigerians within people-centred-democratic
space.
Domesticating democracy, and restructuring
political economy and public sphere can be achieved through polycentric
planning and error correcting potentials and institutional mechanism via the
setting up of Self-Governing Community
Assembly (SGCA) for practical
experiment at all levels and layers – community, ward, LG, state and federal.
SGCA will create the platform for deliberation and inclusion of minorities and
the marginalised groups – the youth, women, retirees, etc. – to be mainstreamed
and empowered through inclusive institutional mechanism. Polycentric planning
is a deliberate act of setting up multilayered and multicentred institutional
mechanism that regards self-governing capabilities of local communities as
foundation for reconstituting order from the bottom up. It can also be
described as the process of ordering the use of physical, human and
institutional resources as well as engaging the citizens in contractual
relations with the public authority. The outcome of this engagement will
produce Nigerian manifesto for justice, freedom, peace, progress and
prosperity.
The application of the above
named models would enable Nigerian citizens to operate in synergy to resolving
issues of daily existence, and then linking this to how people can work
together at community level (i) for securing food for the citizens, (ii) for generating employment opportunities, (iii)
for enhancing economic growth through local industrialization, and (iv) for
distributing the benefits of economic growth among the citizenry.
By
the time Polycentric Public-Private Partnership (PPPP) is established at the
state and local government levels across Nigeria using entrepreneurial
capability for food production, local industrialisation and employment
generation through effective linkage, partnership and collaboration between
State Governments, higher institutions, industries and local communities, innovative
ideas will be translated into machines that are capable of enhancing agricultural
productivity in each state. Consequently, local economic ventures will be
created, local resources will be fully
utilized, different local industries will be developed, economic and revenue
base will be diversified, employment will be generated for the local people and
revenues for Local Government will increase. Further, using polycentric
privatization planning, shareholding in, and joint ownership of local
industries by the local people will empower the people economically, LGs will assume
entrepreneurial roles, revenue base of LGs will be widened, oil/aid dependency
syndrome will be broken, and state and LGs will be economically self-reliant
and sustainable.
CONCLUSION
The
paper concluded that the Nigeria’s debt burden can be addressed when
innovative strategies are adopted in restructuring and re-orientating the 36
States and 774 Local Governments to look inward and become active
agents and centres of change in the production of goods and services using
locally available resources to harness food security and employment potentials. Polycentric
privatization planning will help in reversing the present trends of independent
accumulation of wealth from economic growth that perpetuates mass poverty among
the workers through equitable redistribution of wealth using polycentric
privatization mechanism.
Using
polycentric privatization planning, Polycentric Public-Private Partnership
(PPPP) will be established at the state and local government levels across
Nigeria using entrepreneurial capabilities for food production, local
industrialisation and employment generation through effective linkage,
partnership and collaboration between Governments, higher institutions,
industries and local communities. This will result in translating innovative
ideas into machines that are capable of enhancing agricultural productivity. Consequently,
local economic ventures will be created, local
resources will be fully utilized, different local industries will be developed,
economic and revenue base will be diversified, employment will be generated for
the local people and revenues for Local Government will increase. Further,
using polycentric privatization planning, shareholding in, and joint ownership
of local industries by the local people will empower the people economically, LGs
will assume entrepreneurial roles, revenue base of LGs will be widened, oil/aid
dependency syndrome will be broken, and state and LGs will be economically
self-reliant and sustainable.
It needs to be pointed out that
without restructuring that
could enable all the diverse interests to operate as colleagues with equal
standing such that benefits of growth are shared equitably, governmental efforts
and ‘developmental’ programmes in bringing about change will be tantamount to a
waste of resources and a cycle of heightened and reinforced poverty.
Prof. Samson R. AKINOLA,
Professor of Urban and
Regional Planning,
(Polycentric Planner
and Problem-Solving Entrepreneur)
(Development Planner,
Community Developer, Environmentalist,
Policy/Institutional
Analyst, Governance/Poverty Reduction Expert)
Provost, College of Science,
Engineering and Technology
Osun State University,
Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria
e-mail:srakinola@yahoo.com;
samson.akinola@uniosun.edu.ng
Mobile:
+234-803-407-5110; +234-815-275-8280
****************************************
REFERENCES
Adejokun, Sanya
(2018). “Unemployment to rise as NBS prepares new data.” September 2, 2018. Top
News, Tribune Business. https://www.tribuneonlineng.com/162512/ (Accessed
05/09/18).
Adegoke, Yetunde O. (2013). ‘Disparity in Income Distribution in Nigeria:
A Lorenz Curve and Gini Index Approach, Universal Journal of
Management and Social Sciences,
Vol. 3, No. 7, July 2013, pp. 16-28.
Akinola,
S. R. (2005b)
“Economic Polycentricity and Partnership at the Local Level: A Strategy for
Overcoming Food Insecurity and Poverty in Osun State, Nigeria”. Paper presented at the First Economic Summit
organized by the Osun State Government, MicCom Golf Hotels and Resort, Ada,
Osun State, 25 – 26 April, 2005.
Akinola,
S. R. (2007f).
“Knowledge Generation, Political Actions and African Development: A Polycentric
Approach.” International Journal of African
Renaissance Studies. Multi-, Inter and Transdisciplinarity, Vol. 2, No.
2, pp. 217-238.
Akinola,
S. R. (2008p).
“Alternative Planning Models for Development in Africa.” Knowledge to Remobilise Africa. The
Development Bank of South Africa, Knowledge Management
Division, Research and Information Division, Midrand, 2008, South Africa, pg.169-202.
Akinola,
S. R. (2009a).
“The Failure of Central Policing and the Resilience of Community-Based Security
Institutions in Nigeria.” In Adekunle Amuwo, Hippolyt A.S. Pul and Irene
Omolola Adadevoh, Civil Society, Governance and Regional Integration in Africa.
Development Policy Management Forum (DPMF), Nairobi, Kenya, pp. 257-274.
Akinola, S. R. (2009b). “Polycentric Planning and Community
Self-Governance as Panacea to the Niger Delta Crisis.” African
Journal of Development (AJD).
New York University, USA, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 79-104.
Akinola, S. R. (2010a). “Restructuring
the Public Sphere for Social Order in the Niger Delta through Polycentric
Planning: What Lessons For Africa?” Journal of African Asian Studies, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA, Vol. 9, Nos. 1-2, pp. 55-82.
Akinola, S. R. (2010i). “Institutional Crisis, Resources Governance
and Economic Prosperity in Africa: Crossing the Great Divide through
Polycentric Development Planning.” Social Science Research Consultancy Trust, Midlands
State University, Zimbabwe.
Monograph Series, Volume 1, Number
2, December 2010, 87p.
Akinola,
S. R. (2011a).
“Restructuring the Public Sphere for Democratic Governance and Development in
Africa: The Polycentric Planning Approach.” In Abdalla Bujra (ed.). Political Culture, Governance
and the State in Africa. Development Policy Management Forum (DPMF), Nairobi, Kenya, pp. 1-61.
Akinola, S. R. (2011h). “Resolving
Africa’s Development Dilemma through Endogenous Knowledge, Traducture and Problem-Solving
Scholarship.” Paper Prepared for Presentation at an International Colloquium on “Translation
and Traducture.” Cumberland Lodge, Windsor, UK, 27-29, May 2011.
Akinola,
S. R. (2013l).
“Innovative and Practical Investment Strategies for Retirees in Osun State: A
Polycentric Planning Approach.” A paper Prepared for Presentation at a Workshop
Organised for Principals of Secondary Schools in Osun State.
Akinola,
S. R.,
M. B. Gasu, D. S. Ogundahunsi & T. I. Ojo (2014a). “Human Rights, Food and Employment Crises in Africa: Defusing the
‘Time-Bomb’ through Polycentric Planning and Poverty Reduction Strategy.” International Journal of Advanced Studies in
Economic and Public Sector Management, Coventry University, Coventry, UK,
Vol. 2, No. 1, January 2014, pp. 209-229.
Akinola,
S. R. (2014h).
“Democratising Constitutional Making Process for Development in Africa: The
Imperative of Polycentric Planning and Restructuring Mechanism.” Paper
Completed, April 2014.
Akinola,
S. R. (2014i).
“Eliminating Corruption through Polycentric Planning and Corruption
Annihilation Strategy in Nigeria.” Paper Completed, May 2014.
Akinola,
S. R. (2014j).
African Justice-Peace Achievement and Prosperity Model (AJPAPM) for entrenching
justice, peace and prosperity for the citizenry and countries in Africa through
a deliberate effort and a process for redressing injustice at various levels
and layers of human interactions at interpersonal, intercommunity,
organisational and governmental levels (Akinola, 2014j).
Akinola,
S. R. (2014k).
African Polycentric Democracy Domestication Model (APDDM) for domesticating
democracy in Africa for domesticating democracy in Africa by adapting features
of American federalism to African realities through appropriate institutional
arrangements that are self-organising and self-governing within
rule-ruler-ruled configuration in Africa.
Akinola,
S. R.,
(2015a). “Disfunctional
Political Economy, Restructuring
Public Sphere and Social Transformation in
Africa: Polycentric Planning and New Policies to Combat Poverty in Comparative
Perspective.”
Paper Accepted for Publication by Comparative Research Programme on Poverty
(CROP), Bergen, Norway.
Akinola,
S. R. (2015e). “Knowledge Management Economy, Flood Mitigation and Lagos Megacity
Project: A Polycentric Planning Strategy.” Proposal sent to His Excellency, The
Executive Governor of Lagos State,
Governor Akinwumi Ambode, Governor’s Office, Alausa, Ikeja, Lagos
State, Nigeria on 21st
June, 2015.
Akinsola, Eni (2007) ‘Still Sad Tales for
Afro-Arabian Migrants.’ The Nations,
Lagos, Sunday, June 3, 2007, p. 51.
Bolaji, Kayode (2017).
“Four Million Nigerians became jobless in 2017 – Bureau of Statistics.”
December 22, 2017.
http://www.naijabroad.com/2017/12/22/4million-nigerians-became-jobless-2017-bureau-statistics/
(Accessed 23/12/17).
CDD, (2013). “Creating Traction for Scaling up the MDGs and Poverty
Reduction in Nigeria.” Centre for Democracy and Development, Abuja, Nigeria. http://us-mg5.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=dhvdst2ij8vso#mail
(Accessed 15/10/2013).
DBSA (2006). Knowledge to Address Africa Development
Challenges. Edited Proceedings of the Inaugural Knowledge Management Africa
(KMA), organised by the Development Bank of South Africa (DBSA) held in
Johannesburg, South Africa, March 2005.
Elliott, Larry &
Pilkington, Ed (2015). ‘New Oxfam report says half of global wealth held by the
1%.’ The Guardian, Monday 19 January 2015.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/19/global-wealth-oxfam-inequality-davos-economic-summit-switzerland (Accessed 21/01/2015).
Elliott, Larry
(2017). Economics editor,
Monday 16 January 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jan/16/worlds-eight-richest-people-have-same-wealth-as-poorest-50
(Accessed 15/03/2017).
FRN (Federal Republic of Nigeria) (2004) Nigeria:
Demographic and Health Survey, 2003.
National Population Commission, Federal Republic of Nigeria, April,
2004.
Podmore,
F. (1906).
Robert Owen: A Biography. Vol. 1. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Tocqueville, Alexis de. (1966). Democracy in America. Translated
by George Lawrence and edited by J. P. Mayer. New
York: Harper Perennial.
UWN (University World
News) (2011) ‘TUNISIA: Inequality, unemployment as Ben Ali leaves.’ 30 January
2011, Issue: 0070.
http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20110128225848842
(Accessed 01/03/2011).
wa Goro, Wangui
(2005) unpublished thesis “Hectorosexism in translation: A comparative study of
Ngugi wa Thiong’o's Matigari and Devil on the Cross, Middlesex University.
wa Goro, Wangui
(2006/2007) Problematizing the gaze through traducture. Does it matter if
you’re back or white? In: White matter/Il bianco in questione. Athanor 17(10):
52-61.
World
Bank (2009). Knowledge Economy Index (KEI) 2009 Rankings. The World Bank,
Knowledge for Development Programme for Development Programme, 2009.
World
Prout Assembly (2005). “What is
Endogenous Development?” The World Prout Assembly, Proutist Universal
Global Headquarters, Kolkata, India. On-Line
- http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archives/2005/09/what_is_endogen.html
(Accessed 15/03/2011).
[1] Samson AKINOLA (PhD) is Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, Osun
State University, Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria and Provost, College of Science,
Engineering and Technology, Osun State University, Osogbo, Osun State. He is a
Polycentric Planner, Problem-Solving
Entrepreneur, Community Developer,
Development/Environmental Planner, Policy/Institutional Analyst and
Governance Expert with vision and interests in problem-solving scholarship and solution-seeking intellectualism to alleviate
poverty in Nigeria and Africa.
Following the principles underlining the works of fathers of planning such as
Robert Owen’s Industrial village (1799) and the Garden
City concept of Ebenezer
Howard (1898), he engages in multidisciplinary approach in confronting complex,
complicated and hydra-headed problems that are bedevilling Nigeria and Africa.
Using the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework in tandem with
Knowledge Management (KM) tools and Political Economy Approach (PEA) he
innovated Polycentric Planning to planning profession in Nigeria/Africa to
solving socio-economic, techno-political and environmental problems. He applies
the approach to community development for ordering the use of physical, human,
environmental and institutional resources as well as engaging the citizens in
contractual relations with the public authority on community development
matters to alleviating poverty. He is concerned
with knowledge generation and application to the challenges that are
confronting Africa, especially how to initiate and implement comprehensive
development planning that cuts across various sectors of Nigerian and African
economy. He designed and published strategies and institutional mechanisms for
the application of at least forty-four (44) African development models that are
pragmatic and problem-solving in
several sectors of African economy. He has published numerous journal articles
on the socioeconomic and political development of Nigeria and Africa. With
Sixty-Six (66) publications (of which Thirty-two {32} are international) and
eighty-eight (88) conference papers, he believes in drawing pragmatic lessons
from community institutions to reconstitute order from the bottom-up for the
emergence of adaptive self-reliant arrangements in Nigeria and Africa.
[2]
http://www.nigeria70.com/nigerian_news_paper/80_of_nigerian_graduates_unemployed_cipm/547821
[3] “Migrants
for sale: Slave trade in Libya.” On Nov 28, 2017.
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/11/migrants-sale-slave-trade-libya/ (Accessed
05/12/2017).
[4] Nigeria is a country
of paradox with widespread poverty in the midst of plenty with high levels of
poverty affecting over one hundred million Nigerians and low access to social
services. Nigeria is the largest oil producer in Africa and the seventh largest
in the world, and yet the country has the third largest number of poor people
in the world after China and India. While China and India have taken giant
steps to tackle poverty and promote inclusive growth leading to a reduction in
the number and proportion of poor people in the last decade, Nigeria has seen a
significant rise of the absolute number of poor people in spite of impressive
economic growth rates. Economic growth has not been impacting on our drive to
reduce poverty as shown by statistics from the National Bureau of Statistics
(NBS) (CDD, 2013).
[5] There
are three distinct social organizations as forms of co-operations among the
Yoruba of South-western Nigeria which are: (1) Aaro, (2) Owe, and (3) Esusu. (1) Aaro is a cooperative system devoted for bush clearing or farm
cultivation, including harvesting, and is strictly rotational among the group
members. (2) Owe is applied, more often than not, to house construction
and, occasionally, to harvesting of crops.
(3) Esusu applies to a group of people who come together to start a
round of periodic (daily, weekly, monthly, market days) cash contributions that
are then given to each member in turn until all members have had their turn
(see Akinola, 2007a).
No comments:
Post a Comment