By
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
You never change things by fighting the
existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the
existing model obsolete. – Richard Buckminster Fuller.
Elections have come and gone. The question is: What
happens after elections? Wait for another four years to perform another ritual
of elections with little or no impact on the electorate? Besides, the degree of
violence, political nuclearisation, money-bagged electoral marketing with votes
buying, ballot
snatching, ballot burning, etc. are so high that all the
multiple peace accords are reduced to paper exercise. Further, these recent
electoral processes have confirmed that no amount of technological devices can
resolve electoral malady as political hawkism has developed surreptitious adaptation
strategies at surviving at all costs during and after elections.
The engagement of the
military in electoral process further disengaged the citizens from democratic
system. From 1999 till date, the Nigerian political class has made a mockery of
our society in the face of international community. It is clear that the
present socio-economic, techno-political and environmental crisis require a
shift in thinking and practice from entrenched colonial paradigm and ideology
to Africentric development regime that prioritises endogenous knowledge economy,
which responds to the yearning and aspirations of the citizenry.
The rethinking will help
us in discovering the missing links within our polity and political economy. This
is because the present economic crisis is not disappearing now simply due to
the fact that Nigeria is producing about 2 million graduates annually into already job saturated
market, where these graduates still eat from their parents, whose salary/pensions
are either not paid or half paid. To worsen the case, there is a large scale retrenchment of workers in big companies, thus
doubling workloads on existing workers. This
high level of deprivation being experienced by Nigerians is 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. The only way out for us in Nigeria is to implement new
ideas on polycentric planning and problem-solving entrepreneurship.
Unfortunately, all
discussions by public and political economy analysts lack problem-solving
tendency; they only propagate theoretical formulations, empirical analysis, knowledge generation and policy formulation syndrome,
which are grossly insufficient to deal with the present governance crisis and
development dilemma. Analysis of our problems for the next ten decades does not
solve our problems; rather problem-solving thinking will help us resolve our
challenges and problems. Problem-solving entrepreneurship with pragmatism and
practical application of new ideas are imperative to deal with the challenges
of modern-day Nigeria. The post-election
management conference being proposed will be a waste of time and resources
because there is no any strategy whatsoever that can eliminate all these
elections related ugly experiences when we focus on elections only in our
democratic engagement, while other essential aspects of democracy are
neglected.
The late President, Musa
Yar Adua admitted that the election that brought him to power in 2007 was
highly flawed, which he promised to correct the electoral anomaly yet there has
been an increase in electoral violence and deaths of citizens. For example, in
2003, over 300 persons were killed, the figure rose rapidly to over 800 deaths
in 2011, over 50 persons died during elections in 2015, while the present rate
of casualty is above 35 deaths of human beings. For these citizens to have died
in the course of electing leaders confirmed that the leaders that emerged are
not true leaders.
There are two schools of
thought on post-elections debates/conference: (a) The first school of thought
is on “Post-Elections Debate/Conference on INEC”, while the second school of
thought is on “Post-Elections Debate/Conference on Democratic Governance and
National Development.”
Post-Elections
Debate/Conference on INEC
Supporters of this
school of thought are of the view that INEC should be unbundled into separate
units whereby different agencies can handled different activities such as (i)
voter education, (ii) 100% electronic voting that will include the Diaspora,
(iii) Local printing of election materials, (iv) Haulage and transportation of
election materials, (v) Peace accord and electoral peace, (vi) Speed
prosecution of electoral offenders to serve as deterrent to others, etc.
Considering the fact
that election accounts for 5% of democratisation/federalism, the adoption of
this school of thought will be the worst in the history of Nigerian democratic
experience because more resources will be spent; large sum of money will be
stolen by officials of various categories; citizens will be killed; political
hawkism will still operate unfettered, etc. By 2023, if this school of thought
is adopted, a reinforced cycle of violence, new method of rigging, 2023-version
of vote buying, etc. will be witnessed in new dimensions. At the same time,
between 2019 and 2023, poverty must have worsened and unemployment heightened
as 8 million graduates (2 million x 4 years) must have been produced into
already job saturated market, while the trend of retrenchment will continue
unabated. Invariably, organising debate/conference around INEC activities alone
will be tantamount to postponing solution to Nigerian democratic and
development crisis.
Post-Elections
Debate/Conference on Democratic Governance and National Development
The school of thought on
“Post-elections debate/conference on Democratic Governance and National
Development” is holistic and comprehensive as the debate will capture several
factors that resonate around sound democratic governance (election inclusive) and
national development. This school will engage in a multi-disciplinary strategy
that will identify the links between elections and democratisation/federalism,
democratisation and development, etc.
For this school of
thought, five factors that are highly problematic for Nigeria will be addressed:
(1) Persistent and current governance crisis and development dilemma are a
reflection of photocopy of ideas and policy borrowing from abroad that are
reducing citizens’ welfare; (2) Past and present political actors have no
specific ideas and strategies on how to resolve the current crisis, while academics
fail to engage problem-solving ideas and strategies; (3) Marginalisation, exclusion and
corresponding agitations by ethnic minorities for inclusiveness; (4) Devotion
of large resources to elections which account for 5% of democratisation in
spite of the fact that the electorate have no control over the elected
officials after elections; (5) Impeding national crisis due to increasing hiked
prices of food items, heightened poverty, increased youth joblessness, deepened
insecurity, wanton destruction of lives and property, forlorn hope, etc. These
are the critical national issues that should border intending leaders or
current leaders and as a matter of fact, any well-meaning Nigerian.
For example, with 5% of
democratisation, even if an ‘angel’ is voted to power, there cannot be
improvement in the delivery of dividend of democracy to the electorate. Recent
awkward events that have enveloped us and claimed over 35 lives, sapped our
energies, time and financial resources (INEC budget = N242Bill.) (Nigerian Tribune, Tuesday 5, March,
2019, pp.15,40) as a nation are a pointer to the fact that we are yet to
understand the rudiments and rubrics of democratisation as a bundle with 21
elements. Here with us is electoral system of deaths where civilians killed the
military and the military, in turn, killed civilians. The question is: why
should we devote so much resources and waste human lives on elections which
account for about 5% of democratisation when we know that the electorate have
no control over the elected officials after elections? What do we do with the
other 95% of democratisation/federalism?
The dampening of the
morale of the electorate as indicated by decreasing rate of voters turn-out
from 70% in
1999 to about 42% in 2015
and 34.7% in 2019 strongly confirmed the
disengagement of the people that can be described as false democratisation. It
can be inferred that the higher the number of elections the people participated
and there was no dividend of democracy, the less the rate of voters turn-out.
This confirms that elections that do not benefit the electorate serve as
discouraging factor for future participation. Political thuggery and
assassination also distorted and dent electoral process in Nigeria as thugs
intimidate and terrorize their opponents and other innocent citizens; thus
further reduced voters turn-out.
“The term democracy implies that people govern. ‘The government,’
however, is plainly not the people. People vote and elect representatives who
participate in the government. Voting is a very slender thread, hardly strong
enough to let us presume that people, by electing representatives, govern. The
ordinary use of language strongly implies that the government governs” (V.
Ostrom 1994:5). But reality on ground in Nigeria confirmed that government
governs in a limited sense as demonstrated by calamitous failure of the state
in responding to the socio-economic aspirations of the citizenry. The people
also govern in the light of the resilience of self-organizing arrangements that
the people of Nigeria/Africa have devised over the years in addressing problems
of daily life, the same areas where governments have consistently faltered
(Wunsch and Olowu 1995; Sawyer 2005; Gellar 2005; Akinola, 2000, 2003a, 2004,
2005d, 2007a,f, 2008b, 2009a,b, 2010a,g,i, 2011a,b,c, 2016c,e).
Since democracy is an
outcome of democratisation/federalism, which is a process and at the same time
a bundle with 21 elements, of which election is one of the 21 elements, how and
when are we going to embrace all the 21 elements of democratisation? It is this
missing link of equating election to democracy in Nigeria that has proved our
democracy calamitous as elected officers are not accountable to the electorate
after elections. From 1999 till 2019 (20 years), evidence in Nigeria confirmed
that democratization, as the process of lively engaging the citizens in
contractual relations with the public authority, has never been realized and
cannot be realized through recurrent false, bloody and deadly electoral systems.
Following the dictates
of this school of thought – Democratic Governance and National Development, the
way forward for Nigeria depends greatly on the understanding and application of
other 95% of democratisation, which will enable Nigerians in designing
institutional mechanisms for checking the excessiveness of politicians. In this
vein, it is strongly believed that there is the need to search and try
alternative system(s) of government that will be culturally inclined, least
cost, people-oriented, devoid of god-fatherism, money bag politics and
violence; thus, paving the way for patriotic Nigerians to emerge in political
arena.
For example, in the USA,
all the other 20 elements (95%) are already built within institutional
mechanisms of governance of community affairs that regulate the conducts of
elected officials. We need to evaluate the impact of elections on
democratization in Nigeria within the last 20 years (1999 to date) and then
raise puzzles as the Americans did in the 18th C (about 300 years
ago). Hitherto, our democracy is perfectly equated to election, whereas, election
is an infinitesimal and fractional part of democratisation/federalism (Akinola,
2016c).
It is on this note that
this article believes that Nigerians should be prepared to try a new system of
government, which will draw inspirations
from their cultural heritage. For example, Nigerians can learn some lessons from Eastern (Asian) and
Western (American) contexts on how these two climes drew from their cultural
foundations in developing the ideas of their governments. To this effect, this
article suggests African Polycentric Cultural
Heritage and Development Renaissance Model (APCHDRM) for cultural reawakening
of socio-economic, techno-political and environmental ingredients/foundations
that are pre-requisites for African developmental infrastructure which were
lost through contact with European ideology. APCHDRM reflects Africentric
federalism or Africentric restructuring federalism which depends heavily on
socio-economic, techno-political and environmental susuism by beckoning to a new system of government that enables
Africans to cooperate on all facets of life (2019a).
Susuism is the
government of the people, which principles and philosophy are derived from the
peoples’ cultural heritage using cooperation and collective action to fulfil
the interests, yearnings and aspirations of the people through self-organising
arrangements. The new system of government will be self-governing with a
well-designed multi-centred and multi-layered institutional mechanisms cum
error correcting potentials. The new institutional mechanisms would enable
operators of municipals, urban and rural local councils to set up self-governing
structures that will avail the people the opportunity to have a robust
political dialogue with public officials in order to reposition MDAs and LGs to
effectively manage locally available environmental resources and deliver public
services to the people. The emerging new institutional arrangement would,
therefore, produce a new rural-urban governmentality that is polycentric,
citizens driven and inclusive; thus, entrenching good governance,
citizens-centred environmental planning and development in Nigeria.
This new system of
government will embrace all the 21 elements of federalism and democratisation (Grouped
under five features A-E) which are: A -
Bill of Rights – Bill of rights in federalism is not private rights but public
rights as contained in the constitution.
Citizens can relate with one another on lawful ground. (1) Limits
upon governmental authority – Government governs in a limited sense; the people
also govern. (2) Assign authority vested in “people” as “persons” or “citizens.”
(3) Freedom of communication, and speech – speech must count as votes count (4)
Protection of property (in spite of landuse decree). (5) Associationalism that
counts as vote counts in election at Self-governing Community Assembly (SGCA)
for neutralising
political hawkism (6) Due process of law (7) Rights
exercisable in the context of interpersonal relationship – SGCA. B - Separation of Power (Check Power by
Power) (8) Division of labour and separation of authority (9) Multiple
agency relationships - TOPREC, NBA, NUJ,
etc. constant engagement. Check power by power is impossible because all of
them (executives and legislature) are the same. A neutral body like SGCA is
needed to check the activities of politicians and public officials/civil
servants. C - Structures of Citizen
Participation in Decision Making - Linking citizens and government (10) ELECTION
– Election accounts for about 5% hence, the need for attention on the other 95%
of democratic process. (11) Jury trials that balances the operations of lawyers
and judges on specific sensitive cases – Police pension fund case needs jury
trials with inputs from men and women of integrity. Similarly, Ombudsman can be
adopted in settling conflicts. (12) Taxation – legitimizes and demands
accountability from leaders. (13) Associational life etc. – Associational life
constitutes the fulcrum of our society hence, the need to regard it as the
foundation of our democratic process. (14) Citizens are concerned with what is going on there (on ground) rather than
what is said on book – contract projects. This determines the efficacy and cost
effectiveness of public projects. (15) Constitutional prerogatives of
individuals and governments (16) Recognize harmonization between
characteristics of customs and law (17) Participatory links
– citizens in government – SGCA is the link. D - Concurrent units of governments (18) Distinguishes from unitary government (19)
What different levels of government can do – Food security and Employment
generation at the LG level are more appropriate. E - Nongovernmental realm of society (20) Allows and recognize
dynamic linkages between governmental and nongovernmental realm – CSO needs to
be constitutionally involved through SGCA and not be subjected to whims and
caprices of politicians as the present operation whereby they are used as
rubber stamp. (21) Conditions of the citizens are more important than other
things – Welfare of citizens – poverty reduction, employment, food security, and security of lives and property (V. Ostrom (1994,
2000); Tun Myint (2006); Akinola (2016c:7).
These 21 elements
constitute the democratic bundle upon which citizens’ engagements should
resonate. Some might say that some of these elements are located within our
Constitution. That is correct but they are in our Constitution as photocopy of
ideas from American Constitution; not as pragmatic experience that emanated from
our own culture and debate/discussions. The require thing is that the 21
elements be encased within specific Nigerian cultural-institutional mechanisms
where they can be transposed into models and strategies for deepening our
democratic process as already designed in 47 African problem-solving models
(see the list in the Appendix).
It grieves my heart to
realise that Nigeria of about 190 million people are groping in intellectual
and political darkness spending large resources on 5% democratisation that is
deadly and destructive. In order to capture other 20 elements (95%), I have
over the years embarked on series of intellectual activities and research that
culminate in evolving a new concept and tool called Polycentric Planning. Using Polycentric Planning, I
designed and published strategies and institutional mechanisms for the
application of at least forty-seven (47) African development models that are
pragmatic and problem-solving in
several sectors of African economy. Not less than 95 proposals have been
designed, within the last 25 years, using these models to addressing challenges
and problems in Nigeria.
Over the years, these models with their
accompanied strategies and framework of operations have been sent to Nigerian
leaders (Fed/State/LG & Universities) so that they (the leaders) can have
opportunity of trying these new ideas even on pilot scales to demonstrate the
workability of these models and accompanied strategies in resolving the current
governance and economic crisis and poverty in Nigeria. However, the responses
from these leaders are highly apathetic and dampening. The question is: Why did
these leaders fail to try the new ideas?
To be specific, I have
sent 23 problem-solving proposals to the present administration
of PMB since 29th of May 2015. In
order to resolve governance crisis and development dilemma, it is highly
imperative to domesticate democracy, restructure the public sphere and
political economy; adapt endogenous knowledge to real life situations in specific
sector of Nigerian economy.
In spite of the
potentials inherent in the proposals mentioned, two recent indicators of import
dependent economy clearly confirmed Nigeria as a non-starter. For example,
first, the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development[1] believed
that importers are the greatest wreckers of Nigeria’s efforts to promote
patronage of locally produced products. “The international merchants such as
importers of products such as toothpick, sugar, vegetables, and pencils were
frustrating government’s efforts at ensuring that Nigerians bought made in
Nigeria goods. Toothpick every year costs Nigeria 18 million dollars, tomato
paste costs the country 400 million dollars, while tomatoes are in abundance
with the cost of a basket of tomatoes less than N2,000” (Vanguard, March 26,
2019).
Second, according to
the CBN, palm oil was among a mainstay of the Nigerian economy[2] before
and immediate after independence in October 1960. The demise of the palm oil
industry, which was an important revenue, raw materials for the food and
cosmetics industry and a critical part of the overall national food production
negatively affected national development. From being the world’s leading
producer and exporter of palm oil, Nigeria has become an importer of the
commodity for both domestic consumption and industrial use. As the largest palm
oil producing nation in the 1960s, Nigeria accounted for 63% of global
production and supply and it donated oil palm seedlings to Malaysia in 1960. Currently,
Nigeria accounts for only 1.37% of global palm oil production and is an
importer of the commodity. It produces just 2.7% out of the 2 million tonnes
consumed annually, whereas Malaysia and Indonesia account for 83% of global
production of the commodity. Consequently, the country now loses N180 billion
annually due to importation of palm oil (Tribune, March 28, 2019).
The two problems
raised by the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development and CBN are better
resolved through the adoption and application of seven (7) problem-solving
models: (1)
African Local Economic Development Strategy (ALEDS) (2007f:233;
2008d,f,p:190-191), (2) African Polycentric Privatization Model (APPM) (Akinola
2007f:233), (3) African Endogenous Knowledge Development Model
(AKEDEM) (Akinola 2011j, 2019a,b), (4) African Polycentric Youth Mainstreaming
and Empowerment Model (APYMEM) (Akinola, 2014k,
2019a,b), (5) African Retirement and Economic Empowerment Model (AREEM)
(Akinola, 2013l, 2019a,b), (6) African Food Security Model (AFSM) (Akinola 2008f,p:193-195,
2011g), and (7) African Employment
Generation Model (AGEM) (Akinola
2008f,p:193-195, 2009d).
These are part of the several areas that Nigerians need to debate so as
to identify the missing links and then conceptualise how to fix such gaps. That
is why this article believes that the type of post-elections debate that is
being proposed should not be within the purview of INEC which activities
resonate around elections (5% democratisation)
alone. Rather, it should be a national debate that focuses on democracy,
democratisation, federalism, restructuring, good governance and national
development; and consequently, on a system of government that can guarantee the
nation freedom, peace and prosperity.
As a matter of fact, no political
party, so far, has the required requisite capability for restructuring the
Nigerian state without subjecting
the system to smorgasbord and regarding it as aiye-nyism. The whole ideas being peddling around by those using
restructuring to campaign is gimmick as they lack the understanding of the
nitty gritty of restructuring. That is why this school of thought that believes
that post-elections tasks are better handled by National
Interim Government of Nigeria (NIGN).
A glimpse into the proposal
on National Interim Government of Nigeria (NIGN) shows an inspiring
intellectual and political light at the end of the tunnel for liberating the Nigerian
masses. Post-elections tasks that need to be performed to redeem the soul of
Nigeria resonate around the setting up of National Interim Government of
Nigeria (NIGN) for restructuring now or in 2023. Enough is enough. There should
be no more of deadly elections that claim lives of Nigerians and destroy
citizens’ property. NIGN will help us terminate the vicious cycle of
money-bagged politics, electoral violence and deadly elections.
The onus lies on
the Nigerian masses to understand the required ingredients of restructuring and
then demand the necessary thing to be done by the NIGN. The
proposal spells out the institutional structures of NIGN at all levels
(federal, state and local), the qualifications for members of NIGN, the
selection process of members of NIGN at various levels, the process of setting
up NIGN and the Operations of NIGN with the task of restructuring and nation building.
More importantly, using
polycentric planning and problem-solving entrepreneurship, a restructured
Nigeria that will decentralise economic activities to community level
government that is least cost, more productive in transforming locally
available natural resources into products, stimulate local industries, generate
employment, etc. will undoubtedly emerge.
Part of the tasks for
us in Nigeria is to carry out problem-solving debate similar to Philadelphia convention of the Americans
between now and 2023 or set up a NIGN in 2023. When
the United States
of America had serious
problems in the 18th C,
scholars and
intellectuals got involved in deliberation. For example, and relevant to the
Nigeria’s context was an approach taken by the authors of The Federalist (Hamilton, Jay and Madison [1788] 1961), the
participants in the Philadelphia
Convention where they resolved
on turning ideas to deeds – theory/knowledge
to actions/realities (V. Ostrom, 2000:9) and in the Mayflower Compact, the Americans made commitment among citizens to solve their common problems
together respectively (Tocqueville [1835-40] I, 1945:35; V. Ostrom 2000:12).
The intention of the proposed national debate is to enable Nigerians
to collectively commence the task of re-writing the history of this country in
a positive way. If all our political engagements, as a people of about 190
million, resonate around 5% of
democratisation leaving behind 95.0%, can we say that we are democratizing? If
we are not, then we must start by doing what the Americans did about 300 years
ago when they realized that the Articles of Confederation could not fulfil
their dream and aspirations, reviewed the Articles for the emergence of the
Federal Constitution in the Philadelphia
Convention.
Learning from
American experience, Nigerian scholars and intellectuals that have solution driven
ideas in several sectors of Nigerian economy will have the opportunity to come
up with such ideas with practical side and measurable impact. The outcome of
the debate/conference will lay the foundation for the commencement of the task
of restructuring and building the nation.
Federalism, according
to Americans’ conception of democracy, is the foundation upon which
democratisation is built, while federalism itself has some fundamental pillars.
Meaning that from federalism/foundation, we need to commence the task of
democratisation as a process, carrying along federalism with all the 21
elements.
I can assure you, and you will be convinced in
few years to come, that 5% democratisation is grossly inadequate for dividend
of democracy to trickle down to the Nigerian masses. In order to restructure
and build Nigeria, the whole bundle (100%) of democratisation is inevitable. If
this line of thought is adopted, the 100% of democratisation will be achieved
through the adoption and application of some of the 47 models below.
Innovative
Works - Problem-Solving and Home-Grown Models
I
have developed forty-seven (47) problem-solving and solution-seeking African
development models that are strongly applicable
to diverse policy issues in socio-economic, techno-political and environmental challenges
in Nigeria. The models are listed in Appendix I and focus on: (1) Justice-Peace Achievement
and Prosperity (2) Democracy Domestication (3) Corruption
Annihilation (4) Constitutional
Crafting (5) Youth Mainstreaming and Empowerment (6) Retirees
Economic Empowerment (7) Informal/Endogenous
Engagement and Nation-Building (8) Intellectual Gap Measurement (9) Public
Sphere and Political Economy Restructuring (10) Development Institutional
Mechanism (11) Development Planning (12) Information Networking and resolution of
fake news (13) Urban Governance Model (14) Urban Environmental Governance Model
(15) Food Security (16) Employment
Generation (17) Sustainable Environment Model (18) Road Triology (19) Community-Initiatives
and Development (20) Local Economic Development Strategy (21) Polycentric
Privatization (22) Polycentric Security (23) Conflict Prevention and Peace
Building (24) Electoral Reform and Democratisation (25) Forest Management (26) Human
Resources Development and Utilisation (27) Education Reform (28) Niger-Delta
Post-Amnesty Development (29) Women Empowerment and Mainstreaming (30) Politician
Performance Assessment (31) Niger Delta Polycentric Sustainable Environment (32)
Endogenous Knowledge Development (33) Public Service Delivery (34) Polycentric
Public-Private Solid Waste Management (35) Polycentric Urban Greenery (36) Urban
Renewal (37) Building Construction Triology (38) Public
Private New Town Development (39) Technological
Development (40) Climate Change Mitigation (41) Herdsmen-Farmers Conflict Resolution and Peace-building (42) Cultural Heritage and
Development Renaissance (43) Structure and Operations of Self-Governing Community Assembly (44) Technological
Flood Mitigation (45) Pharmaceutical Medicinal Development (46) Rwandan Post-Genocide
Model of Development, and (47) Debt-Easing and Development.
These
are my own thoughts and ideas for the way forward for Nigeria. We shouldn’t
rush into another election in 2023 in order to prevent election related deaths
of citizens. We can embark on similar adventure embarked upon by the Americans when the country had serious problems in the 18th C. At that time, scholars and
intellectuals got involved in deliberation by harvesting several ideas together
in solving their common problems.
04/04/2019
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
*******************************************************
*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-five (45) 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.
************************************************
APPENDIX I
Innovative
Works - Problem-Solving and Home-Grown Models:
I have
developed forty-four (45) problem-solving and solution-seeking African
development models that are strongly applicable
to diverse policy issues in socio-economic and techno-political challenges in
Nigeria. The models are listed below:
1. 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).
2. 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,
2016c:11-12).
3. 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).
4. African Polycentric
Constitutional Crafting Model (APCCM) for crafting constitution that emanates from
synergy of both the elite and non-elite through formulation of micro-constitutions
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 2014g).
5.
African
Polycentric Youth Mainstreaming and Empowerment Model (APYMEM) 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, 2014k).
6.
African Retirement and Economic Empowerment
Model (AREEM) is conceptualized as a process of 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).
7.
African Polycentric
Informal/Endogenous Engagement and Nation-Building Model (APIEENBM) for making
informal/endogenous sector as agent of change in
socio-economic and techno-political dimensions by harnessing the potentials of
the sector towards nation-building and national development (Akinola,
2015b).
8.
African Intellectual Gap Measurement Model
(AIGMM) for measuring intellectual potentials and relevance of African
universities/polytechnics as well as intellectual gap(s) among African scholars
with the aim of reforming African educational curriculum and making African
scholarship problem-solving and solution seeking (Akinola 2008m, 2010f);
9.
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).
10. African
Development Institutional Mechanism (ADIM) for connecting all the stakeholders
in development at various levels of decision making (Akinola 2007f:230-233,
2008p:188);
11. 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).
12. African Polycentric
Information Networking (APIN) for creating networks between the leaders and the
people for effective information sharing and communication (Akinola
2008p:188-189, 2009b:94-95);
13. African Polycentric Urban
Governance Model (APUGM) for mainstreaming
urban citizens-centred institutions in decision making, thus entrenching good
urban governance, citizens-centred planning and development in Africa (Akinola
2011k);
14. African Polycentric Urban
Environmental Governance Model (APUEGM) capable
of mainstreaming citizens-centred institutions in urban areas into
socio-economic and political decision making so that citizens (including the
urban poor) can participate effectively in decisions on redevelopment, thus
entrenching good urban governance, citizens-centred environmental planning and development in Africa (Akinola
2014p);
15. African
Food Security Model (AFSM) for securing food for the citizens (Akinola 2008f,p:193-195,
2011g);
16. African
Employment
Generation Model (AGEM) for
generating employment opportunities (Akinola 2008f,p:193-195, 2009d);
17. African Sustainable
Environment Model (ASEM) for conserving and protecting environmental resources
(Akinola 2008q);
18. African Road Triology (ART)
for building cost effective and durable roads (Akinola 1998, 2009b);
19. African Community-Initiatives
and Development Model (ACID) for empowering the people economically and
reducing poverty (Akinola 2000:186-187);
20. African Local Economic
Development Strategy (ALEDS) for enhancing economic growth through local
industrialization and sustaining development (2007f:233; 2008d,f,p:190-191);
21. African Polycentric
Privatization Model (APPM) for distributing the benefits of economic growth
among the citizenry equitably (Akinola 2007f:233);
22. African Polycentric Security
Model (APSM) for ensuring security of lives and property (Akinola 2009a);
23. African Conflict Prevention
and Peace Building (ACPPB) for detecting and preventing conflict as well as
building peace (Akinola 2008p:189, 2009b:96);
24. African Electoral Reform and
Democratisation (AERD) for inclusive democratisation and neutralising political
hawkism (Akinola 2008p:192-193, 2009b:98);
25. African Polycentric Forest
Management Model (APFMM) for preserving and sustaining forest resources
(Akinola 2007i);
26. African Human Resources
Development and Utilisation Model (AHRDUM) for bridging the gaps between
developers and utilisers of human resources in Africa (Akinola 2011c);
27. African Education Reform Model
(AERM) for reforming higher education system and making it organic,
problem-solving and solution-seeking (Akinola 2010f);
28. Niger-Delta Post-Amnesty
Development Model (NDPADM) for building peace and engineering people-centred
development in the Niger Delta (Akinola 2011e);
29. Niger Delta Women Empowerment
and Mainstreaming Model (NDWEMM) for according women their rightful position,
empowering, integrating and mainstreaming them into formal decision making,
where they can demonstrate their full potentials towards developmental
activities and governance of community affairs (Akinola 2010d);
30. African Politician Performance
Assessment Model (APPAM) for assessing the performance of African politicians
at the constituency level. The relevance of politicians to their community
through Politician Score Card (PSC) helps politicians to make adjustment in
their conducts by ensuring effective utilization of local resources towards
entrepreneurial development, techno-economic opportunities and citizens’
empowerment (Akinola 2010f,i);
31. Niger Delta Polycentric
Sustainable Environment Model (NDPSEM) for reducing vulnerability occasioned by
climate change in time of disaster in the Niger Delta (Akinola 2011h);
32. African Endogenous Knowledge Development Model
(AKEDEM) designed for generating self-reliant development in Africa (Akinola
2011j, 2019a);
33. Niger Delta Polycentric Public
Service Delivery Model (NDPPSDM) designed for connecting the public authority
with people-oriented institutions at evolving public sector reforms that will
complete six essential stages of project development – survey, analysis,
construction, monitoring, evaluation and maintenance (Akinola 2011i);
34. African Polycentric
Public-Private Solid Waste Management Model (APPPSWM) for engaging the private
sector in solid waste management to turning waste to wealth, provide jobs for
citizens and make available comparatively cheaper and better (organic)
fertilizer that is environmentally friendly; thus achieving a healthy and
aesthetic environment (Akinola 2011l, 2015 WABER);
35. African Polycentric Urban
Greenery Model (APUGryM) is designed to improve synergy between scholars,
public officials and citizens in urban greenery with the purpose of increasing
urban green cover so as to: (1) allows
percolation of rain water and regulate the flow of storm water instead of rushing
down the streets and makes drainage to overflow and causes flooding, and (2) reduce erosion,
debris and silts that cause siltation
and sedimentation of Atlantic Ocean and Lagoon that are noted for rising sea level and coastal flooding (Akinola
2012n:91-94);
36. African Polycentric Urban
Renewal Model (APURM) is designed for synergising the efforts of three major
groups - governments, financial organisations and community institutions in
addressing the problem of urban decadence and slums in Africa (Akinola, et. al,
2013b:13-15);
37. Nigerian
Building Construction
Triology Model (NBCTM) establishes that building construction should
be placed on tripod stand of survey, construction and monitoring/maintenance (SCM).
The triology of building construction – survey, construction and
monitoring/maintenance (SCM) – pre-conditions durable and sustainable buildings
as it serves as efficacy of providing resilience and mitigation to climate
change (Akinola,
et. al, 2014t);
38. African
Polycentric Public Private New Town Development Model (APPPNTDM) has its roots
in existing cities where problems of urbanization have chocked good things of
life out of existence. 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 through inward-looking, priority on full use of local
resources, encouragement of microbusinesses and co-operatives, collective
ownership of the means of production, incorporation of excluded populations,
generation of dignified local employment, etc. The model provides the platform for actualizing
democratization which is the colossal restructuring of the mentality (Akinola, 2015e).
39. African
Polycentric Technological Development
Model (APTDM) designed for generating technologically inclined smart community and self-reliant
development by adopting eco-green framework for
appropriate technology in Africa (Akinola, 2017a).
It derives inspirations from AERM, AIGMM and AKEDEM (Akinola 2010f, 2011j). It is conceptualised as home-grown technology or
appropriate technology; a practise of co-creation
involving social and material aspects, social and natural sciences, and
societal and technological developments (Akinola, 2018b).
40. African
Polycentric Climate Change Mitigation Model (APCCMM) is designed for mitigating
the impact of climate change by emphasising good governance and accountability
of leadership in Africa in relation to the enforcement of climate mitigation
standards within economic society (business mogul) who are financiers of
elections (Akinola, 2018c).
41. African
Polycentric Herdsmen-Farmers
Conflict Resolution and Peace-building Model (APHFCRPM) for detecting,
preventing, resolving conflicts and building peace for harmonious relations,
co-habitation and shared community of understanding among herdsmen and farmers in Nigeria and Africa (Akinola, 2018d).
42. An African Polycentric
Cultural Heritage and Development Renaissance Model (APCHDRM) is designed for
cultural reawakening of socio-economic, techno-political and environmental
ingredients/foundations that are pre-requisites for African developmental
infrastructure which was lost through contact with European ideology. APCHDRM
reflects Africentric federalism or Africentric restructuring federalism which
depends heavily on socio-economic, techno-political and environmental susuism by beckoning on to a new system
of government that enables Africans to cooperate on all facets of life (Akinola,
2018e).
43. Structure and Operations of Self-Governing Community
Assembly (SGCA)
- Self-Governing Community Assembly (SGCA)
Model is designed for correcting the anomalies that are associated with state
bureaucratic structure of administration and political system due to the
deficiency of the public sector based on arid reasoning of tragedy of the
commons and the overbearing private sector in attempts to survive through
excessive profits. The design of the working mechanisms of SGCA will regard African realities as imperative and
also consider rule crafting system because the participants in SGCA would
operate using rules that are crafted by members at the SGCA. The outcome of the
restructuring is emergence of new institutional arrangements and
problem-solving federalism, which would reflect integrative constitutional
order in socio-economic and techno-political realms (Akinola,
2018f).
44.
African Polycentric-Technological Flood
Mitigation Model (APTFMM) designed for harvesting and storage of rainwater thus
preventing runoff from flowing into rivers and mitigating flooding. The
inspiration on water storage
system from innovation designed by researchers and
extension services in Tharaka
district of Kenya, an area classified as arid and semiarid lands is highly
instructive for other areas in Africa for the purposes of flood mitigation and
irrigation (Akinola
2018g).
45.
African Polycentric Pharmaceutical and Medicinal
Development Model (APPMDM) designed for utilising locally available natural
herbs, green vegetation for curative and healthy living of the citizenry. The
model distinguishes science of mixing herbs from spirituality of herbs. The
science of mixing herbs among the Yoruba of Southwest of Nigeria has produced Agbo as against ‘concoction’, a
derogatory view of the Western culture on Africa. This model does not regard
the spirituality of herbalism as part of the consideration in building African
Polycentric Pharmaceutical and Medicinal Development Model (APPMDM). The model
is designed for widening economic opportunities for grassroots in herbs
cultivation, planting and harvesting for job creation and local economic
empowerment. Skilled artisans in the production of agbo are co-opted into the endogenous industrial development on
Pharmaceutical and Medicinal development (Akinola, 2019c).
46.
Rwandan Post-Genocide Model of Development (RPGMD)
for shedding blood of citizens, reduced population via centrifugal force of
refugees and genocide that reduced the population of the country from 7.1
million in 1990 to 5.5 million people in 1995[3]. RPGMD
cautions other African countries to be prepared for the worst if they fail to
look-inward and adopt Africentric models and strategies geared towards economic
renaissance (Akinola, 2019d).
47.
African Polycentric Debt-Easing and Development
Model (APDEDM) designs for enabling the citizens to be aware of the rationale
for loan, the momentary pain of bearing the burden of loan and collective
approval. APDEDM also provides awareness of various alternative endogenous
frameworks for tapping the potentials in utilising local resources for job
creation and products consumption locally (Akinola, 2019e).
Akinola,
S. R. (2000). “Balancing the Equation of Governance at the Grassroots.” In People-Centred Democracy in Nigeria? The
Search for Alternative Systems of Governance at the Grassroots, (eds)
Adebayo Adedeji and Bamildele Ayo (Ibadan: Heinemann), pp. 171–197.
Akinola, S. R. (2003a). Resolving the
Niger-Delta Crises through Polycentric Governance in Nigeria. Paper presented
at a Colloquium organized by the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy
Analysis, 1 December, in Indiana University, Bloomington, USA.
Akinola, S.R. (2004). ‘Local Self-Governance
as an Alternative to Predatory Local Governments in Nigeria.’ International Journal of Studies in
Humanities, Enugu, Nigeria, Vol.1, No. 3, pp. 47–60.
Akinola, S. R. (2005d). “Structural Transformation and
Polycentric Governance: Complementary Strategy towards Nigeria’s Reform
Agenda”. Proceedings of the 14th General Assembly of Social Science Academy of
Nigeria, pp. 238-250.
Akinola, S. R. (2007a).
“Coping with Infrastructural Deprivation through Collective Action among Rural
People in Nigeria.” Nordic Journal of African Studies. Vol. 16(1) 2007, pp. 30-46. (Online – http://www.njas.helsinki.fi).
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. (2008b). “Coping With Social Deprivation through
Self-Governing Institutions in Oil Communities of Nigeria.” Africa Today. Volume 55, Number 1
(October 2008), Africa Program, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana State,
USA, pp. 89-108.
Akinola, S. R. (2008p). “Alternative
Planning Models for Development in Africa.” In Knowledge to Remobilise Africa. ed. The Development Bank of South Africa, Johannesburg:
Knowledge Management Division, pp. 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, Vol. 9, Nos. 1-2.
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA, pp. 55-82.
Akinola, S. R. (2010g). “The Roles of Civil Society in Elections and Democratisation in Africa: A
Polycentric Planning Perspective.” Zimbabwe Political Science Review (ZPSR), Midlands State
University, Zimbabwe. Vol. 1,
No. 1, September 2010, pp. 6-31 (www.ssrct.org).
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. (2011c). “Overcoming Tyranny and Underdevelopment in
the Niger Delta Through Appropriate Human Resources Development and
Utilization.” (Chapter 3). In Okechukwu Ukaga, Ukoha Ukiwo & Ibaba S. Ibaba
(eds.). Natural Resources, Conflict and Sustainable
Development: Lessons from the Niger Delta (Routledge, Taylor & Francis
Group, New York, USA), pp. 59-86.
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. (2014d). “The Military,
Security Challenges and Development Dilemma in Nigeria: A Polycentric Planning
and Poverty Reduction Perspective.” Paper Submitted to the Nigerian Defence
Academy Golden Jubilee Book Project, “The Nigerian Defence and Security, March,
2014.
Akinola, S. R. (2014e). “Food Security and Employment
Generation in The State of Osun: A Polycentric Planning and Knowledge
Management Strategy.” Proposal Submitted to His Excellency, Ogbeni Rauf Adesoji
Aregbesola, Governor of The State of Osun, Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria, April 1, 2014.
Akinola, S. R. (2014g). “Democratising Constitutional
Making Process for Development in Africa: The Imperative of Polycentric
Planning and Restructuring Mechanism.” Paper Completed, April 2014.
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. (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.
and Adesopo, A. (2014v). ‘Human Rights
and Human Development Nexus in Africa: A Polycentric Planning and
Poverty Reduction Perspective.’ Advance
Topics in Social Science and Humanity Research. International Institute for
Science, Technology and Education (IISTE), Chester
House, George St., Oxford, United Kingdom
and 50 Salem Street, Lynnfield, MA, USA, pp. 3-37.
Akinola, S. R. (2015a). “Dysfunctional 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. (2015b). ‘The Role of
Informal/Endogenous Sector in Nation-Building: A Polycentric Planning
Perspective.’ Paper prepared for Presentation as a Guest Speaker at the
2015 Biennial Dinner of the Nigerian Institute of Town Planners (NITP), Ogun
State Chapter to Honour the Newly Elected National President of the NITP, Tpl.
(Dr.) Amos Olufemi Olomola, FNITP on Tuesday, 3rd February 2015 at
the the Main Hall of KIDOT ’O’ Event Center, No. 10, Quarry Road, Near
Agbeloba, Abeokuta, Ogun State.
Akinola, S. R. (2016c). “Domesticating Democracy for Development Using Community Initiatives in
Africa: A Polycentric Planning Perspective.” Maurice N. Amutabi and Linnet
Hamasi (eds.): Africa and Competing
Discourse on Development: Gender, Agency, Space and Representation. The
Catholic University of East Africa (CUEA), Nairobi, Kenya, pp. 3-15.
Akinola, S. R. (2016d).
“Knowledge Management Economy for Solution Seeking Entrepreneurship in Kenya: A
Polycentric Planning Strategy.” Maurice N. Amutabi and Linnet Hamasi (eds.). Rethinking Development Paradigms in Africa:
International Perspectives.” African
Interdisciplinary Studies Association (AISA), Nairobi, Kenya, pp. 436-451.
Akinola, S. R. (2016e). “Urbanısatıon, Collectıve
Actıon and Copıng Strategıes in Informal Areas of Afrıcan Cıtıes: A Polycentrıc
Envıronmental Plannıng Perspectıve.” Chapter
1. Ä°n Sahar Attia, Shahdan
Shabka, Zeinab Shafik, Asmaa Abdel Aty (eds.) Dynamics and Resilience of Informal Areas: International
Perspectives. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland,
pp. 5-24).
Akinola, S. R. (2017b). “Economic Recession, Food Inflation
and Development Dilemma In Nigeria: Surgical Operation Through Polycentric
Planning.” Africa’s Ombudsman Paper No. 1 (Abridge Version). (For
Planning/Nigerian/African Students & African Youth @ OAU, Ile-Ife, April,
2017). Paper presented at the Maiden Conference of Urban and Regional Planning
Students’ Association of Nigeria (URPSAN) held at Obafemi Awolowo University,
Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria on 15th April, 2017.
Akinola, S. R. (2018a).
“Resolution of Africa’s Economic Crisis, Inequalities and Conflicts through
Polycentric Planning: Lessons for the Global World.” Proposal sent to Mr. António Guterres, UN Secretary-General, UN Headquarters, 405 East 42nd Street, New York, NY, 10017, 5th
January 2018.
Akinola, S. R. (2018c). “Restructuring for Resolution of
Herdsmen-Farmers Conflicts and Peacebuilding in Nigeria through Polycentric
Planning.” Paper presented at the 49th Annual Conference and GM of NITP scheduled to be held between Monday, 19th and Friday, 23rd
November 2018 at Hotel 17, No. 6 Tafawa Balewa Way/Lafiya Road, Kaduna, Nigeria but held at Obasanjo Space Centre, Abuja due to
Kaduna crisis, pp. 153-185.
Akinola, S. R. (2019a). “Knowledge Management for Food Security,
Industrialisation and Employment Generation in Nigeria: A Polycentric Planning
Strategy.” Paper resented at The Science, Technology
and Innovation Expo’ 2019 organised by The Federal Ministry of Science
and Technology, at
the Okpara Square, Enugu, Enugu State, Nigeria between Monday, 14th and Friday, 18th January 2019.
Akinola, S. R. (2019b). “Urbanisation, Citizenship and Human
Solidarity Nexus in African
Cities: A Polycentric Environmental Planning Perspective.” Guest Lecture
Presented at HABITAT 2019 Organised by Osun State Broadcasting Corporation (OSBC),
Oke-Bale, Osogbo, Monday, March 25, 2019.
Akinola, S. R. (2019c). African Polycentric Pharmaceutical
and Medicinal Development Model (APPMDM) designed for utilising locally
available natural herbs, green vegetation for curative and healthy living of
the citizenry. The model distinguishes science of mixing herbs from
spirituality of herbs. The science of mixing herbs among the Yoruba of
Southwest of Nigeria has produced Agbo
as against ‘concoction’, a derogatory view of the Western culture on Africa.
This model does not regard the spirituality of herbalism as part of the
consideration in building African Polycentric Pharmaceutical and Medicinal
Development Model (APPMDM). The model is designed for widening economic
opportunities for grassroots in herbs cultivation, planting and harvesting for
job creation. Skilled artisans in the production of agbo be co-opted into the endogenous industrial development on
Pharmaceutical and Medicinal development (Akinola, 2019c).
Akinola, S. R. (2019d). Rwandan Post-Genocide Model of
Development (RPGMD) for shedding blood of citizens, reduced population via
centrifugal force of refugees and genocide that reduced the population of the
country from 7.1 million in 1990 to 5.5 million people in 1995[4]. RPGMD
cautions other African countries to be prepared for the worst if they fail to
look-inward and adopt Africentric models and strategies geared towards economic
renaissance (Akinola, 2019d).
Akinola, S. R. (2019e). African Polycentric Debt-Easing and
Development Model (APDEDM) designs for enabling the citizens to be aware of the
rationale for loan, the momentary pain of bearing the burden of loan and collective
approval. APDEDM also provides awareness of various alternative endogenous
frameworks for tapping the potentials in utilising local resources for job
creation and products consumption locally (Akinola, 2019e).
Elazar, Daniel J. (1987). Exploring Federalism.
Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
Gellar, Sheldon (2005). The Art of Association. In Democracy
in Senegal: Tocquevillian Analytics in Africa (pp. 92-107). New York and
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hamilton, Alexander, John
Jay, and James Madison. [1788] (1961) The Federalist. Ed. Edward M. Earle. New York:
Modern Library.
Ostrom, V. (1994). The
Meaning of American Federalism: Constituting a Self-Governing Society. San
Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.
Ostrom, Vincent (2000). The
Meaning of Democracy and the Vulnerability of Democracies: A Response to
Tocqueville’s Challenge (An Arbor: The University of Michigan Press).
Sawyer, A. (2005). Beyond
Plunder: Toward Democratic Governance in Liberia. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner, Inc.
Tocqueville, Alexis de. (1966). Democracy in America. Translated
by George Lawrence and edited by J. P. Mayer. New
York: Harper Perennial.
Tocqueville, A. (1966). Democracy
in America, Vols.1&2, Phillips Bradley, ed. New York: Vintage Books.
First Published in 1835 and 1940.
Tun Myint (2006): Political Science Y673: Constitutional
Democracies in Plural Societies, Spring Semester, Week 12, 2006, Workshop in
Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University, USA.
Wunsch, James S. and Dele Olowu. (eds).
(1995). The Failure of the Centralised
State: Institutions and Self-Governance in Africa. Boulder, Colorado:
Westview Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment