THE concern regarding the country’s weak industrial base, which was re-echoed during the recent Nigerian Economic Summit Group’s 2026 Macroeconomic Outlook launch in Lagos, has indeed been longstanding, dating back to independence in 1960.
Successive administrations have since then consistently introduced various forms of industrial policy, with most of them yielding little success.
The Goodluck Ebele Jonathan administration had developed a very broad industrial policy framework in 2014, the Nigerian Industrial Revolution Plan (NIRP), which appears to have been abandoned.
Subsequently, the Muhammadu Buhari administration designed its broad-based macroeconomic and sectoral programme, the Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP), which also crafted some form of policies to grow the industrial sector.
This came to no avail and the industrial sector remained comatose to the present time. The broad question that would arise here is, what difference would this new policy from the Bola Ahmed Tinubu administration make in changing the fortunes of the industrial sector? This would be the concern of experts and other stakeholders in the growth of Nigeria’s industrial sector. This is a question begging for an answer.
At the Nigerian Economic Summit Group’s event, the Federal Government soft-launched a new Nigeria’s National Industrial Policy (NIP) with John Enoh, the Minister of State for Industry, Trade and Investment, stating that the new policy will fill a huge gap in the country’s economic architecture.
The plan, according to him, is to raise the industrial sector’s contribution to gross domestic product (GDP) up to 25 per cent by 2030. How realistic can that be?
This is more so given that the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) has projected that for 2026, there would be the need for disciplined policymaking, clarity of direction and heightened private sector resilience as the country navigates through its challenges.
The key to addressing the challenges of the industrial sector is to identify the reasons why most of the projections for the sector fail and the policies become ineffective. That should be the preoccupation of the Tinubu administration.
The challenges to industrialisation, and manufacturing in particular, are not unique to Nigeria alone. They cut across the majority of the developing world, except that many Asian countries have been able to confront the mitigating factors and thus achieved meaningful progress in this regard.
That is why the Asian Tigers emerged in the late 1960s up to the 1980s with countries such as Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan breaking through by crafting a set of policies that were highly supportive of industrialisation with a curious mix of tariff measures that protected home and infant industries to thrive in the midst of the growing challenge of globalisation and the threat of dumping by more developed nations.
In Africa, the challenges were clearly identified many years ago. That was why the 10th Ordinary Session of the African Union (AU) Assembly of Heads of State (HOS) and Government which held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, in January 2008, focused on the growth of African Industrialisation and adopted the Action Plan for Accelerated Industrial Development of Africa (AIDA) with the African Union Commission (AUC) charged with the responsibility of establishing priorities, programmes and projects in close collaboration with key stakeholders.
This is intended to further assist in the implementation of the Plan. In this, benchmarks were set for African member states to use in designing their respective industrial policies with relevant collaborations with the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO) and approvals by the United Nations General Assembly.
It does not appear that Nigeria has made meaningful progress in this regard, as many of the prerequisites for the growth of industrialisation in the country have not been met.
These range from adequate budgetary provisions for the sector, engagement of the private sector, utilisation of linkages in industrial production and enhancement of a friendly operating environment for the growth of industrialisation in the country.
In fact, over the years, a process of de-industrialisation has prevailed in Nigeria, such that many firms have left the country and relocated to neighbouring countries such as Ghana due to a poor operating environment.
The challenges include harsh exchange control measures, inadequate power supply, poor physical infrastructure and insecurity, among many others.
It is a known fact that the inefficient operations of the ports have added more challenges in the importation of inputs for production. Even after production, the low demand for locally manufactured goods has not been an incentive for local manufacturers, thus leading to a continual decline in the fortunes of the sector.
Hence, merely declaring that a new industrial policy is in the offing is not cheery news, as Nigerians have heard such before now. The current operating environment for industry is just not conducive. That is the fact.
That is what the Tinubu administration should focus on. Structural transformation of the economy should be the focus, where the transition from agriculture to manufacturing through value addition and then to services is pursued.
Currently, the country has skipped the middle and jumped into services, which are currently contributing over 50 per cent to GDP. While the government, through the Minister of State, has expressed optimism that, for the first time in a while, the country has a clearly defined and nationally validated industrial policy, the policy is yet in its infancy and needs to be consciously operated.
According to John Enoh, the newly designed industrial framework would address long-standing gaps, with a detailed implementation framework, performance benchmarks, timelines, inter-ministerial coordination, and public reporting to rebuild trust amid widespread fatigue with unimplemented government policies.
Nigerians would be glad to embrace a new direction in the resuscitation of the industrial sector.
But the government has a task of divesting them of age-old scepticism, fuelled by past failed policies of previous administrations.
END
Be the first to comment