Neoliberal Policies and Regimes in Post-Independent Nigeria at The Dawn of Postneoliberalism (1960-2007) : A Research Agenda

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences
Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012
Neoliberal Policies and Regimes in Post-Independent Nigeria at the Dawn of Postneoliberalism (1960-2007): A Research Agenda
*Richard INGWE1, James OKORO2, & Uno IJIM-AGBOR2 1 Researcher, Institute of Public Policy and Administration (IPPA), University of Calabar, Nigeria; Senior Scholar, Centre for Research and Action on Developing Locales, Regions and Environment (CRADLE), Calabar, Nigeria. 2Reader/Lecturer, Department of Political Science, University of Calabar, Nigeria. *ingwe.richard@gmail.com
Abstract
Devastation of neoliberal-capitalism promoting economies (USA and its allies) by the 2007-2010 global financial-economic crises has: stimulated increased interest in national development management; raised to high visibility the danger associated with reliance of Developing Countries (DCs) on neoliberal policies foisted on them by the Washington Consensus (WC) comprising International Financial Institutions (IFIs) created by the developed/advanced countries; leading to advocacy for post-neoliberal policies for DCs. Here, we examine the neoliberalism doctrine, overview half-century of implementation of fundamentalist neoliberal policies by Nigerias post-independent governments/administrations. Our findings include four decades of co-existence of economic mismanagement (monocultural over-reliance on export of hydro-carbons for generating revenue to an expanding and over-centralised federal government simultaneously with huge importation of expensive refined fossil-fuels; prolongation of military dictatorship. The conclusion comprises recommendations of directions for strategising on postneoliberal development policies and identification of areas deserving further research. Keywords: (Post) neoliberalism, doctrine, Nigeria, policies, poverty, Washington Consensus.
1. Introduction
Developing Countries (DCs) poor populations have steadily increased in the decades following their attainment of political independence in the 1950s-1960s. This socio-economic adversity beckoned for the questioning of the sustainability of prevailing development management paradigms of DCs, this was ignored by DCs rulers (which lacked leaders). The adversity is attributed to determination of DCs development management paradigmata by international financial institutions (IFIs) experts (Bayer 2009). In contrast, the US government promptly applied state funds to resuscitate private capital as part of its response to the 2007-2010 financial-economic crises. Despite this and other actions of the US government, like its other national capitalist allies, the financial crisis not only spread across globally integrated capitalist financial infrastructure, it degenerated rapidly into an economic depression that is yet to run its full course by 2012. It is apposite to underline the way the USA and its capitalist allies considered it expedient to question aspects of their neoliberalcapitalist doctrines contrary to the prolonged silence of DCs governments in the face of assaults by ineffective policies foisted on them by Western promoters of neoliberal-capitalism. Neoliberalism, a concept describing the paradigm that replaced liberalism (which was abandoned when it created fascism) has recently attracted the attention of scholars. The demise of neoliberalism as reflected by the 2008 collapse of global financial and economic systems and the compulsion of advanced industrialized economies to resort to the injection of state imperialistic finances (about US$200 billion in USA alone) as a desperate way of resuscitating their national economies (Bayer, 2009, Birch and Mykhnenko, 2010) suggest that there need to understand how the crises affects developing 23
countries, which have been less fortunate financially and economically is urgent and imperative. The 2007-2010 global financial-economic crises add to climate change impacts to show that charting a post-neoliberalistic sustainable development management strategy is urgent and imperative. However, the design of postneoliberalistic development strategy requires information-knowledge on previous administrations policies, which are poorly-haphazardly known. Clarifying neoliberalistic colourations involving distinguishing policies implemented by various administrations of individual DCs (Sekler, 2009) has not been seriously undertaken either due to ignorance or timidity of the Academia or other reasons. Nigeria presents oxymoronic development indicators manifesting immense human and natural resource endowment (including being a leading exporter of petroleum oil thereby earning about US$20 billion annually for nearly 40 years). Yet the country features one of the most paradoxical and scandalous levels of poverty (about 91% of the countrys population of over 161 million (BussinessDay, 2011) living in poverty earning/spending less than US$2/day- These justify and beckon for assessment of Nigerias neoliberal-capitalist policy profile urgently and imperatively in the quest for more effective postneoliberalistic development strategies. Objectives, Issues and Organisation Here, we contribute towards improving the understanding of the nature of neoliberalism implemented various administrations of post-independent Nigeria. The purpose of this overview is to highlight some of the notable neoliberalistic policies without necessarily analyzing them exhaustively to lay foundations for further studies. This overview outlines general areas for more focused and longer term national development policy strategising research programmes of DCs think-tanks. An example is the Centre for Research and Action on Developing Locales, Regions and Environment (CRADLE), based out in Calabar, Nigeria, which has a track-record and potentials for investigating, publishing and consulting in this academic field (Ingwe, Ikeji and Ojong, 2010). In the rest of this paper, we highlight notable characteristics of Nigerias previous administrations. We show that dictator Ibrahim Babangida was distinctive for brutishly treating Nigerians opposed to neoliberal fundamentalism (especially, the structural adjustment programme (SAP) for which Babangida insisted had no alternative before assisting the IFIs to foist SAP on Nigerians since mid1980s. We show the nature of Nigerias neoliberalism, a country perceived/expected to be the giant of Africa due to her enormous natural and human resources which present potentials for achieving socio-economic and political development. We justify this undertaking by reviewing the persistence of mass poverty and under-development despite the countrys position as the worlds leading petroleum (oil) exporter for nearly half a century and the implementation of neoliberal policies since political independence in 1960. We show that irrespective of the neoliberalist approach applied by Nigerias elite, the nation fails to realize her socio-economic and ecological development objectives. It is believed that thievery by Nigerias elite from the federal treasury has cost the public more than the equivalent of four Marshall plans (i.e. funds used for reconstructing Europe after its devastation by war (Olomola, 2007 citing Ribadu). Context for profiling Nigerias neoliberalistic policies Distinctive periods have been used to sketch previous eras identifiable by specific (economic, political, cultural, and social, among other sectoral) characteristics. Other criteria or features and changes that distinguish of these eras have also been the achievements recorded and other special features. Therefore, there have been periods described as the age of mercantilism, industrial revolution, the third wave and the forth wave and so forth. Although less well there known have been eras that have been distinguished by a combination of the political, economic, cultural and social factors rand to varying degrees of unanimity of agreement with their creation. However, are 24
of considerable value as instruments for analyzing achievements recorded by countries regions or continents where they expressed themselves. Three of such related eras seem to have evolved between the seventeenth century and last year 2008 up to the present and include; liberalism, neoliberalism and postneoliberalism in chronological order of their datedness. While the specific characteristics will be elaborated later, it is apposite to state that the shockwaves and adverse impacts on the national regional and global systems of economic, political, social and cultural institutions, structures, processes and attitudes of the last but one of these three eras (i.e. the neoliberal one) has raised to high pedestal the need for rigorous examination and reevaluation of these eras especially the one which is unfurling; the postneoliberalistic age as a way of assessing the degree to which its understanding and implementation represents an adequate social philosophical framework for achieving the aspirations of the society over which it is operated or imposed. Therefore, this article examines the way liberalism and neoliberalisms have reflected on the development economic history of Nigeria and provide the context for pursuing national development objectives in the newly unfurling postneoliberalism. The literature reveals relative ignorance of neoliberalism and post-neoliberalism- which seem to be concepts that are explored by a selective class of high-end scholars. However, it has been suggested that rather than being homogenous or uniform, the form of capitalism in particular countries where it has been practiced has been variegated i.e. exhibiting multiple colours which correspond to national specificities, temporalities and other circumstances (Sum 2009: 166 citing Bob Jessups ideas). We extend this perception of the variegated color of capitalism to all economic, political, social and cultural systems and believe that the operation/implementation/expression of liberalism, neoliberalism and postneoliberalism have been and will be heterogeneous across nation states and regions. Therefore, analyses of their specific national characteristics promise to elucidate pitfalls and/or highpoints of development pursuit. Additionally, Nicola Seklers (2009) conception of various postneoliberalisms rather than one uniform postneoliberalism suggests that the coexistence of several postneoliberalisms within one nation makes the analysis of the setting within a nation a stating point (Sekler 2009 :63-71). These justify our undertaking of this task to contribute towards greater understanding of Nigerias development planning and managements effort. We show later of neoliberalism exhibited by various regimes in Nigeria. A global development impasse was recently created in August- September, 2008 when the real estates, financial (banking and capital market) institutions of the USA suffered a crisis of unmanageable scale. These quickly deteriorated severely to the extent that by the late last quarter of 2008 it became clear that the US economy was receding leading to the loss of jobs in numbers not recently witnessed except during the great depression of the 1930s USA. These crises (financial and economic) were rapidly globalize due to the strong integration of the new information economy supported by informationalised and digitalization of financial and economic infrastructure, institutions, processed, structures, and attitudes and most of all due to the nearly globalize operation of neoliberalism, in different forms by almost all societies since the past 30 years or longer if counted from 1945 when liberalism is thought to have collapsed and neoliberalism took effect. Owing to the fact that most advanced countries have failed to fulfill their promises of delivering development aid/assistance to developing countries a decision that was strongly emphasized at the G8 Summit in Gleneagles (Scotland) in 2005, the way the USA has become indebted and is sloughing enormous amount (US$200 billion) into economic resuscitation, indicates the increased pressure on the advanced countries to pay greater attention to domestic economic stimulus programmes thereby ignoring their responsibility for development aid. Moreover, the world has almost always 25
been marked by economic paradigms which bear specific nomenclature and characteristics that are distinctive in economic, social and political coloration. The way the globalization of financial and economic crises occurred in the late 2008 engendering stimulus packages to be formulated in the affected economies has been equally captured as an emerging politico-economic era called post neoliberalism. (Before expatiating on this evolving era, it is opposite to understand previous eras which provided the bases for its emergence as a means of profiting from at temporal analysis of the issues. Liberalism: Its rise, fall and succession The era of liberalism has been constructed to coincide with a century starting from 1789 to 1914 (i.e. Firs World War) when a paradigm involving the promotion and execution of capital as the most powerful form of economic organization (in the perception of its proponents) held sway or dominated the lives of those societies which did not employ capital and organize capital with equals ferocity and seriousness. However, in employing and organising capital for national self profit to the detriment of other nations, the inevitable strategies; use of coercion or military force, uncivilized approaches to subdue others who were less forceful, led to a trained of capitalism implemented through robbery, barbarity and fascism . This was observed in the conduct of Germany under the leadership of the manipulative Adolph Hitler. This was what unfurled (anti-Semitism, imperialism, and racism) in Hitlers Germany up to 1945, when neoliberalsim took over from failed liberalism (Brie 2009: 16 citing Arendt 1976). Obasi lgwe stresses the free thinking ideological nature of liberalism, identifies its; social, economic, cultural, and political aspects and recommends allowances to be made in pursuing their achievement in a sequential rather than simultaneous or uniform way. It comprises belief in the freedom and human worth of the person and in the delivery of justice, rule of law and good government (Igwe 2005: 232-3). The judicial aspects of the latter definition offer a recipe for the problems of barbarity, robbery and so forth highlighted by Arendt. As the following account reveals, neither the succeeding era of neoliberalism nor scholars in politics, international relations, economics and so forth seriously incorporated the desired justice and good government, as a way of compensating for failures in liberalism. Liberalism: A persisting idea or a past era? Some scholars treat liberalism as a belief system or idea that has continued while others proclaimed its collapse in the early 20th century or mid 20th century. Andrew Reeve is among the former who state that liberalism refers to the notion that politics aims at preserving individuals rights and maximization of freedom of choice. It emerged from the combined influences of the eras of enlightenment, the industrial revolution and the political revolutions of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. It involves the belief that improvement in current social conditions could be achieved. Therefore, its relation to the notion of progress which held sway in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries becomes evident. While the idea of progress encompassing prospects for development in knowledge, in welfare, and in morality, has declined in the perception of its potency, the faith in liberalism has been sustained with regards to its potency in realizing amelioration of social conditions. The popularity of liberalism was diminished by some factors. The unlimited and the arbitrary will of the monarch to interferer with the freedom of individuals in the pursuit of their goals in life, and the goals or desires of what they consider to be good. This issue led to the guest for understanding the role of the rule of law in balancing the power that could be legitimately exercised by political leaders based on the consent of the led and related issues. Some issues explored by scholars regarding the relation between power in the political domain and within private jurisdiction of 26
individuals and entities include; master us servant. Paternal power and the power of a husband over a wife, on one hand and political power, on the (John Locke) the enormous power resident in the political domain was attributed to the consent for having such a situation granted by the governed as a way of achieving public/common good. This political power was to be regulated by socially organized, accepted and understood law for restricting the purposes of political power holders). While publicly accepted, political power was systematically governed by the creation and application of the rule of law, separation of powers, constitutionalism, emphasizing civil liberties as means of limiting the extent to which political power holders could encroach on the rights of individuals and private entities. Private property, the free market system or laissez-faire policy have not been fully endorsed by liberals due to their reservation about their capability to guaranteeing its own existence. The advent of democracy poses a new obstacle to the liberal idea of individual rights and freedom through the enthronement of the threat tyranny of the majority and tendency of the emergent mass society to threaten the initiatives of individuals and experiments capable of renewing life. Contemporary liberalism concentrates on justice and neutrality. Neutrality connotes several aspects but its common denominator is citizens neutrality regarding their conception of the good (Reeve in McLean and McMillan 2003: 209-210). Neoliberalism Although its emergence is dated back to 1945 or earlier, neoliberalism is relatively unknown to some political scientists who equate it with liberalism. It is omitted as a separate entry in pre-lexicographic works and dictionaries of politics which acknowledge liberalism prior to the 2007-2008 global financial-economic crises (lgwe 2005). Andrew Hurrel and Laura Gomez-Mera, academics in the University of Oxford, provide very helpful insights in this concept, and shed light on its two principal meanings. They, unlike most scholars highlight key aspects of the use of the concept in developing countries thereby improving the understanding of development placing and man agreement in the south. The first meaning of neoliberalism connotes a set of market-liberal economic policies, within which they distinguish two different meanings corresponding to the developed world and developing world. Neoliberalism is used in the developed world to describe Thatcherism (i.e. the over a decade politico-economic strategies that were applied by former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher from 1979-1990 and represented challenges of Keynesianism (i.e. the economic theory credited to John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946), a British economist. Wyn Grant, describes Keynesianism as an economic and social policy mix of government intervention designed to save capitalism and liberal democracy from the crisis of the great depression of the 1930s. acknowledging that his theory was moderately conservative in its implications, Keynes advocated selective state intervention in sectors such as employing taxation for influencing the social propensity to consume while allowing a wide range of sectors to be unaffected by government action. He suggested that there was need for state socialism, gradual introduction of measures that were necessary for achieving socio-economic objectives (of the state) and the preservation of social tradition (capitalism). He argued that measures which were recently repackaged as public-privatepartnership, (PPP) were enough/sufficient for accomplishing full employment thereby avoiding comprehensive socialization of investment which would be the last resort but considered by him to be unnecessary Keynes was not a believer in God, being a member of the Victorian period/times known for relinquishing religious belief to the background while highlighting and promoting moral rectitude founded on rational justification of issues/maters. The adoption of income policies is traced to Keynes recognition of full employment as the cause of increasing pressure on wages. To 27
him, the stabilization of wages was a political rather than economic and was not resolvable through analytical methods. Keynesianism is believed to be ambiguous ideas; Keynes proposal of macroeconomic management strategies neither resolved the problem unemployment nor increasing inflation despite its popularity in second half of the 20th Century (Grant in McLean and McMillan 2003: 292-3). Jim Bulpitt (2003) states that although Thatcherism connotes various economic and social polities, its core elements were implementation of deregulation and privatization using authoritarian social policy. The Thatcherites, under this general concept or school of thought attributed the decline of Britains economic and international status in the late 1970s to the post war (1945 onwards) consensus. Therefore, the application in 1979 of Thatcherite measures is credited with the resuscitation of Britains economic and political fortunes thereby avoiding a bitter inevitable descent into the abyss of ungovernability or a banana republic. Its features were; the resolution of inflation, creation of a competitive economy, enhancement of national status for global visibility and influence and transformation of the hearts and minds of British people pertaining to the scope of government and the defeat of the Labour party, which meant the defeat of socialism in Britain. Mrs. Thatchers convictions, drive, and authority and use of a coherently doctrine was credited for the achievement of the success of Thatcherism by 1987. Thatcherism was successful, in the view of the Tchatcherites, due to the consistency and comprehensiveness of its leader who never entertained any hesitation or wavering influences. Critics pointed out that increasing unemployment and deindustrialization which were associated with Thatcherism were not less serious compared to the decline in inflation achieved through the application of an outmoded laissez-faire principles monetarism of the 19th century. The critics argue that speculators in private capital were rewarded by Thatcherism through reduction in the size of government (public sector) and elite nature and public expenditure thereby destroying welfare state structures and processes. Other losses to the British society arising from Thatcherism include fatal destabilization and weakening of various sectors of the British society such as traditional and intermediate civil society within the nation including; trade unions professions, civil service, and local government. Significantly, Thatcherism was closely associated with the hostile leadership styles and policies of USAs 40th President, Ronald Reagan from 1980 to 1989 and pungent to the wider European community. The demise of Tchatcherite version of neoliberalism occurred during Thatchers third term. It comprised bad policies such as poll tax, reforms of welfare state, the rebound of rising inflation and policies unfavourable to the European Union (EU). Critics in the 1990s pointed towards the policy implementation failures of Thatcherism era. The absence of specific criteria for assessing performance of British governments, except electoral successes, is one of the problems that make Thatcherism to remain a highly debatable and disputable subject in Britain. (Bulpitt 2003 in McLean and McMillan 2003: 534-6). Neoliberalism in the developing world arose as a challenge to defective national development strategies that emphasized import substitution industrialization which prevailed between 1945 and the 1980s. This conception is strongly related to what is widely called the Washington consensusa strategy which emphasis a development strategy that emphasizes a package of multiple aspects including privatization, deregulation liberalization of trade and financial processes and structures; reduction in the size of government, promotion of foreign direct investment (FDI) and implementation of structural adjustment programme (SAP) as imposed by the international organizations; the international monetary fund (IMF) and the World Bank. Another more recent meaning of neoliberalism was created by anti-globalization movement, among others, to describe 28
the globalize globalizing capitalist economic ideology and the adverse impacts it brings to poorer developing countries. Irrespective of the relationship among the foregoing definitions, the meanings and usages of the concept in economic parlance is perceived to have remained rather imprecise and general. Relevant to this article is the use of neoliberalism in the field of academic international relations to denote the theoretical study of regimes and institutions thereby making this usage to frequently take the label neoliberal institutionalism or regime theory. This usage emerged in the mid 1980s as a response to non-realist paradigm which held sway at the time. The objective of advocates of neoliberal institutionalism was to show that with or without the premises of realism, national cooperation was/is achievable. This proposition is hinged on arguments that states represent rational, unitary actors pursuing the maximization of their utility in an international system exhibiting frequent and considerable anarchy. These neoliberals identify the absence of as sovereign authority within the international system on which states cooperate as the cause of frequent conflicts, failure of parties (states) to fulfill their obligations/promises and taking advantage of the goodwill of their counterparts. Therefore, they proposed institutions and regimes as mechanisms capable of assisting cooperating states to manage their affairs and fill the void left by the absence of sovereign authority. The neoliberal institutions and regimes were expected to function in the areas of coordinating or articulating issues, curbing uncertainty, regulating behaviour of entities involve in international cooperation and facilitating the appreciation of the importance of reputation in such relationship. Neoliberalism has emerged as a challenge to the foregoing arguments. The nonrealists argue that relative gains are superior to the absolute ones and that the disappointment in international cooperation resulting from the unreliability of powerful states which are active in promoting aspects of the institutions while ignoring those that are not attractive to them; make the neoliberal claims doubtful (Hurrel and Gomez-Mera in McLean and McMillan 20003: 368). Postneoliberalism The definition of postneoliberalism is unfurling together with the process considered to be distinguishing its era from the proceeding neoliberalism. Its evolution is traceable to the publications by some scholars and activists (e.g. the Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz) proclaiming the end of neoliberalism (Stiglitz 2008) and highlighting problems afflicting globalization (Stiglitz 2002, Rodrik 2008 a/b) and Stiglitz 2006). Kurt Bayer suggests (WC) that it represents a challenge to the Washington consensus a description of the mainstream development thinking drawn from the principles of neoclassical economics, and all ineffective development policies promoted by international financial institutions (IFIs); (IMF, World Bank (i.e. Washington, DC-based Breton woods institutions). The WC enforce and promote; strict budget discipline, shifts, in public expenditure considered growth-stimulating, reduction in marginal tax rates and the broadening of tax foundation; other principles are liberalization of interest rates, and exchange rates to promote competitiveness, liberalization of trade and foreign direct investment (FDI), privatization, deregulation (aimed at curbing barriers at the entry and exit) and protection of property rights as a means of facilitating development in Latin America. Although used in the foregoing restrictive sense, i.e. to refer to Latin America and the neoclassical economic principle used by the IFIs, its meaning was later extended by critics to all defective development policies that have led to the failure of most developing countries (Bayer 2009: 90). Others suggest that postneoliberalism is a new development paradigm that will resolve the puzzle that neoliberalism failed to tackle since 1939 i.e. within the past 70 years by applying development theories that are now called catching up 29
(Kblbck, 2008, Bayer, 2009). The high point or central elements of the neoliberal thinking and its promoters under the umbrella of the WC was that the economic thinking, histories, and experience of the advanced countries, should be repeated by developing countries (Bayer 2009: 30). Features that distinguish postneoliberalism from neoliberalism are being for formulated by condensing the characteristics of the latter especially the defects failures of the WC-based policies. The recent challenge to the WC emerged from within the Breton woods institution, and of course elsewhere, within the Breton woods institution emerged a staunch critic in Joseph Stiglitz (formerly a World Bank chief economist and senior vice president. He reported/published in 2002 that the WC was habitually applying shock therapy to the development problems of developing countries and opposes the interference of advanced nations in the affairs of developing countries. Later (2008) Stiglitz argued that there is need for vibrant institutions the responsibility of the state in regulating and guiding the market economy of developing countries (Stiglitz 2008). Bayer has reviewed or listed several critics of the WC and states that the effect of the criticisms on the Breton woods institutions has been mixed (Bayer, 2009: 90-1). China as a model for postneoliberalistic paradigm China is being increasingly hailed as a model of postneoliberalism. Giovanni Arrighi attributes the declining politico-economic power of the USA -and its neoliberal-capitalist allies- to their operation of unnatural capitalism (Western countries economic system that ignores and deviates from Adam Smiths original postulations that state intervention is required for correcting undesirable imperfections and outcomes of unbridled free market. Arrighi distinguishes the Western hegemonic development model with East Asias championed by China, which ascended within the past 35 years- through application of a development strategy involving non-militaristic relations with other states. He posits that the latter conforms to Adam Smiths original postulate (Arrighi, 2007). Bayer reports that while neoliberalistic measures were being imposed on most DCs about 35 years ago, china was charting a different course characterized by originality and confidence, adapting policies learned in 1979 from non-WC economies (Malaysia and Hong Kong). The Chinese leader Teng Hsiao Ping preferred as gradualist approach of developing the market economy while retaining its communist institutions and reforming them to match the operation of the market system. One of the indicators of the acknowledgement of the potency of this alternative (to neoliberalism) by the WC has been cited to be inform of the Growth report, prepared by experts drawn from the world bank, the UN, academics and similar organizations. The report debunks the neoliberals and the WCs claim that development or economic growth can only be achieved by applying the grand schemes specified by the WC for the past over 30 years (Bayer 2009: 91-2) citing Spence 2008 and Rodrik 2008). The report hails the role played by non-conventional approaches and the application of the right mix of ingredients by the 12 sustainable growth countries, i.e. those which have achieved seven percent or higher economic growth rate for about 25 years. They include: Botswana, Brazil (China), Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Malta, Oman, Singapore, Taiwan and Thailand. Bayer argues that development economics under postneoliberalism must appreciate the role of promotion of human capital development programmes (e.g. SME) growth, building institutions, the devastating effect that opening up on national financial markets was recently demonstrated by the global crisis in the financial systems degenerating rapidly into global economic recession in September 2008. Bayer shows that the neoclassical concept (he considers to be in appropriately described as neoliberal) has crumbled. He faults the instruments used for macroeconomic stabilization, and institutional and legal transformation as well as other processes (Bayer 2009: 9530
99). Nicola Sekler argues that to employ postneoliberalism as a concept for undertaking counter hegemonic programme of vamping national economics (of developing countries) that were wrecked by defective grand schemes of the WC, various forms (rather than one) postneoliberalism are required. Using several postneoliberalism is necessary because of the need to accommodate different issues pertaining to the continuities and discontinuities as a means of making postneoliberalism an appropriate response or befitting analytical alternative (Sekler 2009: 63-70). Moreover, Nga-Ling Sum reveals that chinas possession of a foreign reserve of $ 1.8 trillion as at 2008 (Sum 2009: 165) and Kurt Bayers reference to chine as a lender of some $200 billion to the USA (Bayer 2009: reinforces china as a model of neoliberalism. Moreover, Nigerias hope for national restoration since her fourth return to democracy in 1999 after intermittent dark ages of dictatorship was dashed when the 8-year Obasanjo administration (19992007) undertook megalomaniac programmes of urban-biased physical- infrastructural development while neglecting human power/capacity building in small and medium (scale) entrepreneurship (SME) acknowledged to have catalysed increased manufacturing in several countries (China since 1985, Japan, among others). We show failures of this dictatorial-parochial neoliberalism: high unemployment, crime, social vices, conflicts and wars in the Niger Delta and elsewhere in Nigeria. Nigerias elite has contrived ethnocentrism by implementing neoliberalistic policies thereby provoking animosity among Nigerias multiple ethno-linguistic groups-an attitude that adversely affects socio-economic and political cooperation towards pursuing national development objectives (Eteng, 2008). We show also that the gross failure of representative democracy is one of the most devastating problems for Nigerias advancement in the post neoliberalism era considering that while other nations might easily draw lessons from the failure of neoliberalism to offer a cost effective democratic governance framework (as proposed by Brie 2009: 15-32), Nigeria remains entrapped in the political quagmire contrived by her thieving elite who have turned election fraud (rigging) to a technology of brutishness, nastiness and shortening of human lives. Methods and data We used the methods of description and case study for implementing this study. We preferred description because it is reportedly suitable for research of the nature being reported here: investigating the status of things, events, and phenomena (here neoliberalistic policies applied by Nigerias successive post-independent administrations, 1960-present). Description provides an important background for undertaking research that produces results that give insights and highlight hunches for formulating hypothesis for implementing further studies that might employ experimental research methods. Therefore, description facilitated the study of neoliberal policies in Nigeria-a developing country under the throes of the promoters of the doctrine: advanced countries. The specific method of description that we used is case study. The literature shows that the case study method facilitates analysis of a selected item (country) out of a multiplicity of countries encompassing the developing world where neoliberalism operates. Therefore, we applied the case study approach with the purpose of using the findings of this study provide insights (through generalization) into similar DCs and the way the doctrine contributes towards their underdevelopment instead of sustainable development (Ogunniyi, 1992; Isangedighi, Joshua, Asim, and Ekuri, 2004). We used data from multiple primary and secondary sources. Primary data include the authors experience comprising extensive participant in, observation of, public policy-speak and discourses, knowledge and affectation for over forty years for each author, with public policy analysts working in universities and numerous employments and extensive education in the social
31
sciences. Moreover, extensive review of secondary data sources including the popular literature and desk research were undertaken. Development context at the dawn of postneoliberalism: Neoliberalistic legacies of Nigerias Postindependent regimes Nigerias First Republic (post-independent-democratic regime) might exhibited some timidity emerging from the throes of colonialism and suffered hangovers of previous epochs of neoliberalism including invidious inhuman ill-treatment of Nigeria by successive European offensives unequal trade in commodities, trans-Atlantic slavery, before (neo)colonialism, it rapidly degenerated within five years- into perpetrating identity politics, ethnicity and corruption provoked the seizure of democratically elected leaders through violence by the Nzeogu-led revolutionary coup in 1966 (Eteng, 2008, Ladipo, 1981?) leading to prolonged underdevelopment of Nigeria by indigenous military dictatorships (Asuquo, 2009). The Abacha dictatorship (1993-1997) represents the heyday of looting Nigerias treasury at least drawing from evidences that were exposed following his sudden death as incumbent head of state. It is documented that the despot stole and stashed-away in foreign banks about US$5billion-US$50billion (Olomola, 2007, Ribadu 2009, among others). The post-Nzeogu military coup dictatorship led by Yakubu Gowon for nine years including the civil-war-time dictatorship (1966-1975) was characterized by implantation of executive mediocrity and bureaucratic politics of the Super-Permanent Secretaries into Nigerias socioeconomy. This dictatorship is infamous for the vices mentioned in the foregoing and several others. For example, conducts and utterances of the top-echelon of this dictatorship suggested that Nigerias problem was her difficulty in spending the huge funds from the Petro-Dollars flowing into Nigeria. The regime was ousted for unwholesome corruption perpetrated under the contrivances of its highly politicized bureaucrats while Gowon was pre-occupied with exhibiting unwarranted generosity towards some Black and Africa countries, whose socio-economic circumstances were not worse than Nigerias when the poor silent majority of her citizens is considered. Nigerias assumption of the leadership of Africa, contests with the neoliberal gladiators (Britain, USA, among others) over their imperialistic offensives on Africa especially Southern African states was launched by Muritala Muhammads brief dictatorship (1975-6). Although hailed for Figure 1: Nigeria embedded in Africa
32
tackling imperialistic offensive on Nigeria, this dictatorship is discredited for some overzealousness. The Culture of corruption; everyday deception and syndromic theft of public funds by Nigerias civil servants and public officers, among other problems e.g. job insecurity, is traced to the neoliberalistic dictatorship featuring shocking impunity of sacking most of them with immediate effect, among other inappropriateness acknowledged by colleagues of the Muritala Muhammad dictatorship (1975-1976) (Garba, 1987, 1993, 1995). The Muhammad-Obasanjo administration (1975-1979) notoriously squandered Nigerias funds to host the Lagos-hosted Second World Black and African Festival of Arts and Culture (FESTAC 77). Obasanjos squander mania on luxury automobiles, building of FESTAC town, a National Theatre at Iganmu, Lagos, among others) scares other Black-African countries which participated in FESTAC-77 from hosting a follow-on FESTAC. Notable in the second Obasanjo administration (1999-2007) are: his replication of the squandermania characterizing his first administration; and his imposition by fellow military elite on Nigerians; his attempt to extend his administration. Among the Obasanjo squandermania-megalomania were hosting of the CHOGM in Abuja with the lavishness that the head of government of a southern African country that was awarded the next hosting right feared that was a very tall order; the all African games, the Eagles square and so forth. By 2007, Nigerias energy sector was at its abyss: electricity supply to the less than 50% of the national population (about 150 million) declined to about 2,000MW while the country, which is reputed for being one of the worlds leading exporter of oil was actually the leading importer of refined oil (Ingwe, 2012). How this happened is explained below. 33
Economic mismanagement and Infrastructure decay The Shehu Shagari administration (Second Republic, 1979-1983) represents decay in values and the perpetuation of the culture of squandermania started by the preceding first Obasanjo administration: those politicians are best remembered for ostentation abroad, the politics of import licenses, abandonment of key physical and social infrastructure -from the commanding heights of the economy (maintenance of petroleum refineries and roads, to national electricity grid, healthcare, among others. Picking up from the austerity measures introduced by the Second Republic politicians after the occurrence of the Dutch Disease sudden decline in purchase of Nigerias petroleum oil following conspiracy by Western buyers, the Buhari dictatorship fiercely followed-on with embargo on employment, among other stern measures that made Nigerians to easily accept the Babangida dictatorship that turned out more ruthless. The Ibrahim B. Babangida (IBB) dictatorship (1985-2003) by the vice of its prolonged tenures, ferocity and meddling in multi-dimensional national issues beckons for research attention. This regime is easily the most poorly understood of all in the post-independence era. It is infamous for a numer of reasons including: implementation of Africas longest and most expensive transitions from dictatorship to democracy; appointment of the highest number of top functionaries in both the armed forces and bureaucracy; corruption of the socio-economic and polity; among others. After ousting the 1983-1985 junta led by Mohammadu Buhari, which truncated Nigerias second Republic (1989-1982), Babangida fooled Nigerians by beaming a toothy-smile that deluded Nigerians that there was an end to the Buhari-Idiagbons hard-linning. After from the failure of Babangidas transition, he annulled the famous the June 12 (1993) election of Chief MKO Abiola, which is fondly remembered as Nigerias freest and fairest in their nations history. Babangidas notoriety for failing to account for the huge earnings from increased export of Nigerias oil during the Mother of all wars (Gulf War) between the USA and Iraq (Akpan 2011) has been deplored in the popular literature but scarcely in the academic literature. This bestial IBB regime waged the fiercest battle with Nigerian critics of neoliberalism by deploying state violence against opposition (scholars, and institutions). Notable, among the critics is Adebayo Adedeji, an emeritus Professor, then a Director at the UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA). IBBs dictatorship infiltrated university teachers ranks with state security personnel and reportedly engaged in concealed and open killings during the anti-SAP roots of the late 1980s in Lagos mega-city and elsewhere in urban Nigeria where labour unions and civil society including students protested neoliberal policies. The IBB dictatorship was remarkable for promoting and rationalizing corruption and sharing of oil money by recording the highest appointment of ministers and officers. Generally, the elite systematically emasculated opponents of state neoliberalistic formations using several tactics-one of which is one of the lowest public sector wages/salaries that have remained until the present date; under funding of universities leading to the weakening of vibrant independent scholarship that is without the restrictions, inhibitions of repressive government. The legacy of scrambling for personal shares of the national cake via corruption and treasury looting is one of the most virulent forces killing anti-corruption in Nigeria (Ribadu 2009). Development approaches of Nigerias neoliberalistic era During the era of liberalism (defined here to coincide with the seventeenth century up to 1945), Nigeria was under the external forces such as unequal trade with foreigners from Europe, later there was the in human slave trade that revolved the Atlantic ocean and later again the European conquest and scramble for Africa before the attainment of flag (political) independence in 1960. Most of these issues have been explored by scholars of history, economic politics and so forth and 34
do not bear repetition here. While, a classic exposition of the underdevelopment of Africa was published in the 1970s (Rodney, 1972), the invasion of Nigeria by Britain was documented about a decade later (Asiegbu, 1987). British colonial development planning in Nigeria was reported by Eniola O. Adeniyi as a rather unserious action which started formally with the ten-year plan of development and welfare for Nigeria from 1 April 1946. This plan was revised in response to Nigerias transformation into a federation in 1 October 1954 there by producing the 1951-56 plans to replace the earlier ten year plan. These colonial plans were fundamentally flawed by overgeneralization, emphasis on the top-down planning approach, exclusion of Nigerian indigenes in the process, and poor linkages among schemes which formed the plans and so forth (Adeniyi 1980: 280-283. Between 1955 and 1962-1968, Nigerias four-sub-national regional management focused on: south east, south western, Northern and Midwestern regions. The regional planning was inadequate in terms of proceeding from distinct perspectives and objectives towards formulation of programmes. The western region was the most credited with success within the 1955-60 and 1960-65 plan periods with clear statements of detailed expenditure for 1955-60 (Adeniyi 1980: 280-3). The entry of the Washington consensus WC in Nigerias development planning occurred with the arrival of the mission of the international bank for reconstruction and development (IBRD) to the country in 1953 and tasked with Appraise(ing) the economic development prospects of Nigeria and to recommend practical measures for their realization. This represent an invitation by the Nigerian authorities, with a good does of colonial thinking and political influence to lay the foundation for the domination of development planning by characteristics of the WC (Adeniyi, 1980-284). Associated with the WC have been the declaration of the 1960s as the development decade during which a high rate of economic growth rate of a specific numbers of points was vigorously pursued in the four national development plans (First 1962-68; second; 1970-75; third; 1975-80) The failure of all of Nigerias national development plans have been widely acknowledged or documented. Most recently, the official acknowledgement was contained in the nationals economic empowerment and development strategy (NEEDS) a new development planning approach created under the chairmanship of Nigerias national planning commission (i.e. the nations planning agency) by Dr. Charles Soludo, famous for improving the performance of Nigerias banks by implementing recapitalization policy. The NEEDS was compelled by a post independence history of Nigeria plagued by high unemployment of the youth, increasing poverty valuelessness (lack of values in political rulers/leaders and the people). Therefore, the goals of the NEEDS were; wealth creation, employment generation, poverty reduction and value reorientation (National Planning Commission 2004: x, 7-12) Adeniyi 1980). Nigerias wealth in natural resource endowments is well documented. Among its endowments are huge proven fossil fuel reserves include US$4,635 million metric tones of oil equivalent of oil in 2003 thus making her one of the worlds largest oil exporters since the 1970s. moreover, her possession of 4,497 million metric tones (mmt) of oil of nature equivalent gas in 2003 makes her one of the worlds leading exporters of the fossil fuel with grandiose natural gas pipelines originating from its gas production plants to western Europe and west African countries but without similar distribution channels within the country to supply energy-hungry Nigerians. Disappointingly, the countrys net fuel imports metric tones of oil equivalent) indicating the abysmal level of leadership and institutional failure in the country. Other natural resources including energy solid minerals and so forth in Nigeria are documented elsewhere (WRI UNDP, UNEP, and World Bank, 2005: 201).
35
Nigeria is regarded as a considerably wealthy country in terms of human resources. Her population of over 161 million in 2006 was the largest in Africa for a long time (BusinessDay 2011, WRI, UNDP, UNEP, & World Bank 2005: 177). Owing to the way postneoliberal scholars is drawing attention to pro-poor growth (Bayer 2009:93-4) there is need to examine how this has happened in Nigeria since independence. What has been the nature of pro-poor development programming in Nigeria? Irrespective of the various estimates of Nigerias earnings from the export of crude oil: about US$300 billion since the mid 1970s, as at 2000 (National Planning Commission 2004: 7), and the report by Nuhu Ribadu (former chairman of Nigerias Economic and Financial crimes commission (EFCC) to the US Congress in June 2009 (Ribadu, 2009). Nigerias per capita income has declined by about 20% since its level in 1975 (National Planning Commission 2004: 7). Although the nations total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was US$32,953 million in 2002 (the second largest in subSaharan Africa, where South Africa had the largest GDP of US$182,280 million), Nigerias per capital GDP in 2002 was only $234 while South Africas was $4,201. The proportion of Nigerias poor based on international rating and survey of 1997 revealed that 70.2 and 90.8 percent of Nigerias population lived on less than $ 1 or and $2 per day. The human poverty indeed (in which 100 represented the highest poverty) in 2002 was 35.1 (WRI, UNDP, UNEP, and World Bank 2005: 188195). Ribadu attributes the scandalously high level of poverty and failure to achieve growth and development to corruption (Ribadu, 2009). More debilitating was the huge debt that overhung Nigeria from the mid 1980s to 2005 when the Obasanjo administration had to use the new earnings from crude oil export to settle under a special arrangement by the world bank executive Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, who was at the time Nigerias finance minister, as at 2004, the nations debt (external and domestic) was about 70% of GDP thereby posing enormous problems of debt serving. With a high regional and sector at unevenness in growth performance, the real sector is dominated by primary productions sectors (agriculture): while crude oil accounted for 13 percent present agriculture accounted for 41 percent of the real sector, manufacturing made minor contributions (five to seven percent) of the GDP. These make Nigeria to remain one of the least industrialized economies even in sub-Saharan Africa, where poverty and lack of growth is most serious (National Planning commission 2004: 7-8). Nigerias post independence economic history Nigerias economic history of nearly half a century (since 1960) has been dominated by low economic growth: as at 2004, a growth rate of over 7 percent for more than three consecutive years had not been attained: the contrasts sharply with the sustainable growth countries which have achieved growth rates of at least seven percent for about 25 consecutive years (National Planning Commission 2004: 9; Bayer 2009). The former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Paul Ogwuma, stated in 1997 that the failure to exploit opportunities which existed to achieve economic reforms, growth and development were attributable to economic mismanagement, political instability and instability in the macroeconomic policy environment factors which led the economy into slow growth, and disequilibria in both internal and external fronts (Ogwuma, 1997: vi-ii). Although several comments have attempted to explain the reason why Nigerias has failed to achieve economic growth and attain leadership of Africa despite her immense human and material resources, most of the comments seem to revolve around the grand scheme paradigm of the WC. For example, the National planning commission attributes the problem to decades of corruption, mismanagement; military dictatorship (promoted these above vices, application of moribund import substitution strategy of development, statism. The latter (statism) refers to the dominance of the government and its agencies in production and 36
control of the economy thereby creating pervasive rewards (incentives) to top government functionaries and their relatives. Others are inefficiency and waste. The derivation of rent by government from oil producing companies is held accountable for the creation of the culture of rent seeking and entrenchment of the belief that Nigerias government represents a means for the illegal but rapid accumulation of wealth. The loss of values (of dignity of labour or work, development of the culture of work by individuals and a means of cultivation of personal dignity and reputation arose from the above rent-seeking attitude. Instead, the failure to reward private enterprise, promote and enforce transparency or accountability were entrenched bys successive military regimes, which in themselves were embroiled in cops and countercoups, which confirm the elitist keen contest for political power as a means for achieving personal health. Therefore, prolonged military dictatorship in Nigeria deliberately allowed: the weakening or destruction of socio-economic institutions in order to ease their looting of the public treasury; promoted and caused instability of government policies and programme, which were in themselves plagued by inadequate vision and description of representation of the development aspiration of the country; the creation of a coerced citizenry characterized by docility and vulnerable to the use and acquiescence to patronage as a means of survival (National Planning Commission 2004: 10 -1). One erroneous position of Nigerias national planning commission which deserves mention here is its attribution of the failure to achieve growth to the dominance of government or statism (2004: 10) it deserves statement have been credited with the achievement of sustainable growth in most, if not all of the 12 sustainable growth countries (Bayer 2009). Extremist implementation of the WCs structural adjustment programmes by Nigerias military dictators. The marking of neoliberalism as a phenomenon that has taken place within the past 30 years (Brand and Sekler 2009), reveals that Nigerias development management was dominated by military dictatorship. The incursion of soldiers into Nigerias government started with the Nzeogu-led coup of the four majors in 1966; it continued with general Yakubu Gowons nine-year dictatorship (19671975), general Muhammad, Muritala (1975-6); general Olusegun Obasanjo (1976-9). After a civil rule break October 1979-1983, Generals Muhammadu Buhari and Tunde Idiagbon aborted the Second democratic dispensation through their 1983 coup. This discriminatory policy of depriving Nigerias undergraduates of meal subsidies while retaining same in the Kaduna-based Nigerian Defence Academy (a military university) set the pace for steady abandonment of the Nigerian university thereafter. The Ibrahim Babangida dictatorship, which claimed to be more lenient than the Buhari-Idiagbon dictatorship ruled fiercely and manipulatively for nine years (1985-1993). It is known for scuttling Africas longest military-democratic transition through his annulment of the freest and fairest election whose result showed that chief MKO Abiola won as the president and imposed an interim National Government which lasted for a few months. General Abacha, who previously ruled Nigeria, as assistant dictator under the Babangida dictatorship for nine years ousted the Ernest Shonekan-led Interim National Government in 1993 and ruled again with iron hands till his sudden death in 1997 when he was replaced by the General Abdulsalami Abubakar dictatorship (1997-1999) who was compelled by civil society agitation to hand over to yet another General Obasanjo, who was on a second missionary Journey/ (without a vision to Nigerias presidency but annulled General Abachas vision 2010) and ruled for eight long years (1999-2007). Owing to the contrivance of general Obasanjos return to power by generals Abubakar and colleagues in 1990s (late), we treat the eight-year Obasanjo administration as extension of military dictatorship. This is appropriate considering mounting evidence of the dictatorial conduct of president Obasanjo inform of several violations of democratic procedure among other breaches of the rule of law attributed by 37
some to his military background (Ntufe 2005). The resource curse thesis that the nations oil wealth and the way the government obtains income directly from rent paid by oil producing companies does not only destroy the nations values, it is held responsible for the recalcitrant attitude of the nations successive governments (especially those of the Generals: Abacha and Obasanjo, which violate the rule of law notably against the Ogoni people, the Odi village razed down on orders of former president Obasanjo (Mitee, 2007). Key neoliberalistic features of military dictatorship in Nigeria The General Ibrahim B. Babangida military junta (1985-1993) would be remembered for its extreme and brutal implementation of the structural adjustment programme (SAP. Since 1986 (two yeas into his 8-year regime interestingly when General Olusegun Obabanjo (retired) appealed severally to Babangida that SAP should be given a human face because of the pains and difficulties that SAP caused Nigerias poor masses, Babangida obstinately replied that there was no alternative to SAP. Disappointed by Babangidas interest-laden response, professor Adebayo Adedeji of the economic commission for Africa and former university don debunked Babangidas claim by arguing that there was an alternative to everything the alternative to death is living and vice versa and so forth under General Babangida, Nigerias poor masses staged several anti SAP riots in the 1980s which were associated with deaths of citizens felled by the bullets short from Nigeria police wielding guns purchased with citizens taxes and resources in their home lands. The damage done by SAP on Nigerias economy has been documented. Dr RO Makanjuola, professor former vice chancellor of University attributed the collapse of Nigerias health care sector to the SAP (Makanjuola 2002: 27 -9). This point was confirmed by Dr. Kingsley Harrison, professor and former vice-chancellor of the University of Port Harcourt, in identifying the cause of the collapse of Nigerias healthcare (Harrison, 2009, speaking as part of Nigerias national network News aired at 1600 hours local time, 10 June 2009). Joel B. Babalola revealed recently that the SAP caused the demise of Nigerias SMEs system, which in Nigeria was accompanied by abrupt devaluation of the national currency (Naira and Kobo) thereby making inferior and uncompetitive with the US Dollar. The collapse of numerous SMEs compounded the problem of unemployment (Babalola 2007: 14). Privatization of Nigerias public enterprises Olu Akinnifesi elucidated this subject at the the 15-17 April, 1996 workshop in Abuja that sought to forge the Abacha dictatorships Vision 2010. He traced the origin of privatization of Nigerias public enterprises to General Babangidas speech which inaugurated the SAP in 1986, the promulgation of decree number 25 (privatization and commercialization decree) providing legal enforcement of privatization and commercialization policy and the establishment of a technical committee on privatization and commercialization charged with treating 135 public enterprises enumerated in the above decree and consequent placement of the first set of the enterprises for sale by March 1989. He claimed that the privatization and commercialization yielded positive effect inform of improved operational efficiency of affected banks and insurance companies but recommended that the government should its policies plan to privatize utilities (electricity and telecommunication companies: NEPA and NITEL) (Akinnifesi 1997: 298-334). It is reported that Nigeria's move to liquidate Nitel (the nations premier telecommunication company) highlights problems in privatization process (http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-moveliquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/). This privatization of telecoms assets started during the short regime of General Abubakar and General Obasanjo up to 2007. While, the privatization of NEPA whose name was changed to power Holding company of Nigeria (PHCH) was delayed until the inauguration of President Umaru Musa YarAdua in 2007, there were lots of 38
impediments on the path of the Nigerian Bureau of pubic enterprises (BPE), the agency that recently implemented the privatization in Nigeria. The transnational corporation of Nigeria (TransCorp) has been enmeshed in corrupt ownership of large shares by General Obasanjo had its officers/executives (including Thomas Isegohi among others) incriminated over the mismanagement of parts of NITEL (namely M-Tel) ( ). The inefficiency of the PHCN has continued due to the Nigerian malaise of vent seeking. The steady decline in the quantity of power produced by the PHCH has been documented (Ingwe et al 2003). The damage done by the failed power sector to Nigerias economy especially the closure of business and manufacturing establishments across the country has been documented. It has been PHCN will lead to the failure to realize the vision 20/2020, which the Obasanjo-YarAdua administration fashioned aiming to make Nigeria to join the ranks of the worlds 20 largest and most successful economies by the year 2020 (.). Nigerias power sector failure also affects other neoliberalistic claims of Nigerias dictators such as their argument that in conformity with the WCs dogma of small government downsizing and/or right sizing of the pubic workforce and placing embargo on employment (Bayer, 2009) is capable of causing Nigerias expanding youth population to create their own jobs through entrepreneurship. It has been impossible for self-employment via entrepreneurship to flourish in Nigeria due to inadequacy of electrical power from the national grid and poor support by the government, which has embraced the neoclassical ideas of economists and the WC as a means of conserving public funds for embezzlement and corruption. We show how the abandonment of the high unemployment problem adversely affects Nigerias economy since the nearly 1970s and 1960s. Unemployment and underemployment in Nigeria The unemployment of school leavers started in the late 1960s prompting recommendation of government sponsored and managed farms to employ the youthful population (Oladosu 1973: 156-7). This problem has been neglected by successive post-independent administrations of Nigeria considering that it forms the most deplored aspect of the nations development in the 2010s. The Buhari-Idiagbon junta was its most extreme by their policy of placing embargo on employment and promotion while promoting only soldiers (National dailies, 1983-5). High unemployment among youthful school leavers, a source of serious social and political problems, in any country, had constituted problems to Nigerias economy in the 1960s. It was acknowledged at them time as economic wastage and instability, but there was no sign that the problem was being seriously addressed. It was further acknowledged that, the failure to address this problem represented executive ignorance of the fact that Nigerias major economic and social assets were its human natural resources Ayida 1971: 8). Walter Rodney shows that human resources especially its improvement through education in science and technology determined how the people so trained could masterfully transform the natural environment and resources on it in order to meet social and economic needs and demands (Rodney 1972). Although this prompted the recommendation of a high economic growth rate (output her head of population capable of enabling every individual Nigerian to enjoy a standard of living that by 1985 was twice that in the 1960s and job creation to reduce the high unemployment and underemployment (as development objectives of the 1970s (Ayida 1971: 17), it is clear from the statement of the National Panning commission (2004) that the successive governments and elites of the country did nothing to achieve such objectives. Instead, they yielded to neoliberalistic proposals that downsizing the government and public workforce was the best means of progressing. This legacy of the WC pervaded successive military governments from the 1960s to the Obasanjo administration. The Muhammad-Obasanjo dictatorship was notorious for promulgating anti-labour anti-industrial productions laws that prevented workers from 39
democratically relating among themselves and their employers (Fashoyin, 2005). Later, General Obasanjo urged his colleague (dictator Babangida) to give SAP a human face but promptly retorted that he did not promise that it was going to be easy when he was inaugurated as president on 29 May 1999. Records show that between 1999 and 2007 when he presided over the economy the unemployment and underemployment problem was ignored. Therefore, it was natural that the Obasanjo administration gave birth to the new problem of youth restiveness, militancy which started as agitations for fairer shares of the fruits/yields of oil and gas resources in the Niger Delta but later took forms of criminality involving sabotage, destruction of oil production infrastructure, facilities, kidnap or abduction of civilians and ransom taking before releasing victims. The administration presided over the proliferation of militant groups across Nigeria with the highest concentration in the Nigeria Delta. It also witnessed escalation of sabotage of oil production facilities and the greatest loss of oil and gas products in the history of the country and governments. A recent study reports that Nigeria lost $ 61.6 billion in oil revenues between 2006 and 2008 alone. Yet this was the result of the effort of the president YarAdua who set up a committee to study the situation in the Niger Delta (Obasanjo had ignored the problem throughout (Ajaero, Chigbo, Azubuike and Ochai 2009:12-21 citing the Technical Committee on the Nigeria Delta, 2008). The loss of oil to bunkerers was valued at US$1.97 million in 2006. Over 180 people were killed between January 2006 and September 2008. That included about 91 armed forces members and other people including pregnant woman and so forth (Egwemi, 2010). Analysis of recent data reveals that the population of unemployed/underemployed Nigerians has been high (Obadan & Odusola 2000). Conclusion This article provided the background to the unfurling of postneoliberalism globally by reviewing the proceeding eras of liberalism and neoliberalism as a basis for examining the context on which Nigeria would be operating in the postneoliberalistic age. We have shown that successive Nigerian governments have been encapsulated or entrapped in rather euphuistic ideas of neoliberalism whose protagonists or proponents have recently acknowledge the potency of alternative development approaches which differed from neoliberalistic Washington consensus and neoclassical economic thinking but have enable the 12 sustainable growth countries to achieve high rates of economic growth for a considerably long and consecutive years. We have highlighted some flaws of successive Nigerian governments: dominance of military dictatorship and disguise of it during Nigerias Fourth Republic (return to democratic rule), extremism in the implementation of structural adjustment programme leading to the destruction of human capital development institutions such as the health care system. Owing to constraints of space and time, the analysis of the adverse consequences of indiscriminate implementation of neoliberalistic programmes on other human capital development sectors such as education, security and so forth were omitted in order that they could be separately analyzed in ways that they might be better understood. The analysis in this paper raises to high pedestal the need for a paradigm-shift in Nigerias policy making approach by pluralistically employing alternative ideas from outside the WC-neoliberalism, and neoclassical economics whose impotence are betrayed the elusiveness of economic growth and sustainable development in Nigeria despite abundant human and natural resources, which have been improperly harnessed through faulty policy conceptualization. Therefore, we recommend that the need for creating and nurturing think tanks, civil society and non-government organizations for creating information and knowledge on alternative development ideologies, approaches and related issues or subjects and disseminating these to policy and decision makers of Nigerian and Africans societies is urgent, imperative and cannot be overemphasized. This is appropriate because as 40
Jonathan Bradbury reports that think-tanks have been very instrumental to the promotion of specific policies the USA and Britain: two countries which have actively foisted neoliberalistic ideas on the developing countries (McLean and McMillan 2003: 536 citing Bradbury 2003). It should take think tanks of different mould and ideological characteristics to reverse the damage done by institutions and international organizations that were molded by think tasks of the neoclassical economic thinking and neoliberalistic colouration. With an impressive foreign reserves of about US$1.8 trillion, and lending to the USA for prosecution of economic resuscitation (stimulus package after this real estate and financial crises and economic recession of September 2008 ongoing, china promises to offer a good example for studying its sustainable growth strategy that like its II other counterparts has lasted for two decades and going strong (Sum 2009: 165), as a means of building new think tanks for developing countries. Mediocrity of Nigerias economic development policies Several indicators showing that Nigerias economy is weak and backward exist, have been documented. The formal sector employment collapse was reportedly shifting responsibility for job creation to the informal sector the so called self employment campaign associated with the counter hegemony of nebliberalism since the 1970s and onwards (Bond, 2009). This could be illustrated by recent industrial manufacturing scenario; that has been rather poor compared to export of crude petroleum oil and natural gas which contributes a disproportionately high percent of Nigerias national income. Recently, development analysts have been concerned about the rather high expenditure of the nations income on recurrent goods and services thereby ignoring capital development programmes. By extension, Nigerias central bank Governor ---- Lamido Sanusi, criticizes the annual expenditure of about 30% of Nigerias national annual budget to sustain the political elite in Nigerias National Assembly, which enjoys the luxury of comprising two unnecessary chambers (i) House of Representatives (lower federal legislature) with a statutory size of 360 members and (ii) senate (upper federal legislature) with a statutory size of 108 (i.e. three senators from each of Nigerias 36 states (Nigeria, Senate, *No year), http://www.nigeriansenate.org/senate.html). Critics argue that the first of the two (representatives) ought to suffice considering the poor state of economic, social and environmental affairs especially affliction of about 70% 92% of Nigerians by poverty Nigerias expenditure profile over the decades featured structural defect (higher expenditure on recurrent and low expenditure on capital goods and services, which benefit the citizens; inefficient spending, waste of financial resources, corruption (ghost workers) have recurrently been reported), apart from a rather large size of public workforce and low productivity (Ingwe, Ikeji and Otu, 2010); poor quality of government expenditure. Despite critiques of this culture by Nigerians, including the central bank governor of the 2010 budget, the promise by the finance minister (Olusegun Aganga) to shift the 2011 budget away from this culture of recording the highest gross domestic product (GDP) deficit in 2010 remained unchanged in the proposed budget for 2011. This reflects the obstinacy and insensitivity of President G. Jonathan to the plight of Nigerians (Editorial, Business day Dec. 15, 2010: 12). Million people were higher than the total population of several nations sates (Ingwe 2009). President Obasanjos globetrotting in search of foreign investment and abandonment of small and medium enterprises (SMEs). The rather high frequency of foreign travels undertaken by president Obasanjo and the political impasse generated between his presidency and the federal legislature over the latters objection of the purchase of additional presidential jet to undertake more foreign travels marked much of the Obasanjo administration as proffering foreign direct investment to 41
endogenous economic growth and development of course, this presidential attitude was deplored by public policy analysts. The eight-year Obasanjo administration could only produce a proposal for creating the small and medium enterprises development association or council in Nigeria (SMEDAN), which is yet to come into effect. The proposal involves mobilization of funds for supporting SMEs from financial including banks and insurance companies. The ignorance and abandonment of SME based development strategy by Nigerias governments represents poor understanding of the benefits that accrue from this approach. Kurt Bayer argues in favour of the SME focused development strategy, which he credits with the capability of mobilizing indigenous labour (a factor that is used intensively thereby drawing those who would have been left unemployed to engage in crime and vices away to productive work) and amenable to combination with a rural development transformation policy. With a vast rural area, the latter strategy is suitable for Nigeria. Bayer recommends also the supplementation of the SME rural development policy with redistribution based on tax measures that favour those mobilized to gain from the scheme under a reformed public expenditure policy. As the Chinese and other examples (Japan and so forth) revealed, strong government and institutional mechanism are required to achieve SME-rural development goals. These should comprise provision of micros financing, easing of enterprise formalization (registration) processes, entrepreneurship training, supply chains and clusters promotion, training in skills, cooperative management training, development of products supply logistical and other necessary skills. The following gains accruable from the SME-rural development strategy are superior to the FDI-focused strategy which, if successful, is self-defeatist because profits generated by difficult to achieve regionally concentrated firms are frequently repatriated to the countries of origin of capital (Bayer 2009: 93-4). As stated earlier the Babangida dictatorship from 1986 to 1997 were effective for destroying the countrys SMEs through the structural adjustment programme (SAP) which started in 1986 and was followed by series of socio-economic destabilization policies and programmes (Babalola 2007: 14). The foregoing has outlined distinctive eras of neoliberalistic without rigorously detailing consequences of the policies implemented. Owing to the huge and myriad outcomes of each of the policies, there is need for further studies of aspects of the individual neoliberal policies. This could either be done by sector, by each regime, or by policy strand, by programme/project within specific temporal scales or based on other creative approaches.
References
Adeniyi, Eniola O. (1980). National Development Planning & Plan Administration in Nigeria in: E.C. Ndekwu (Ed) Proceedings of NISER Staff Seminar. Ibadan: NISER: 279-302. Ajaero, C., Chigbo M. Azubuike G. & Ochai P. with Millee, L. (2009). We (ha)ve lost more than 1,000 Lives (An interview between Newswatch team and Ledum Mitee), Newswatch (Lagos) Vol. 49, No. 18 (4 May). Akpan, M. (2011). The Pot and Kettle War. Newswatch (Lagos), 5 Vol. 54, No. 10, September: 5. Arendt, Hannah. (1951). The Origins of Totalitarianism. (City of publication, not stated): Schocken Books (A. new title designed to fit the cold war condition. The original title of this book in 1945 was: Elements of shame; anti-Semitism, Imperialism, Racism (An outline of a book project by the author found by American-led troopsin the Nazi concentration camp in Auschwitz in January 1945). https://www.google.com/search?q=Arendt,+H.+1945.+%E2%80%9DElements+of+shame;+a nti-Semitism,+Imperialism,+Racism. Accessed 20 March 2012. 42
Arrighi, Giovanni. (2007). Adam Smith in Beijing: Lineages of the Twenty-first Century. New York: Verso. Asiegbu, JUJ. (1984). Nigeria and its British invaders (1851-1920). New York: Nok Publishers. Ayida, AA. Onitiri (Eds). (1971). Reconstruction & Development in Nigeria (proceedings of a National conference). Ibadan: NISER/oxford University Press: 1-30. Babalola, Joel B. (2007). Reinventing Nigerian higher education for youth employment in a competitive global economy. Calabar; University of Calabar. Bayer, Kurt. (2009). Neoliberalism & development policy- Dogma or progress, in Ulrich Brand and Nicola Sekler (eds) Postneoliberalism- A beginning debate, development dialogue, nor 51 January 2009:89-100. Birch, Kean and Mykhnenko, Vlad (eds). (2010). The Rise and Fall of Neoliberalism: The collapse of an economic order? London: Zed Books. Bradbury, Jonathan. (2003). think tanks, in: Iain McLean & Alistair McMillan (eds.) Oxford concise Dictionary of Politics. Oxford: University press. Bulpitt, Jim. (2003). Thatcherism in Iain McLean & Alistair McMillan (Eds) op. cit: 534-536. Egwemi, V. (2010). From Militancy to Amnesty: Some Thoughts on President Yaraduas Apparoach to the Niger Delta Crisis, Current Research Journal of Economic Theory 2(3): 136-141. Ekanem, S. A. (2010). How the Military Underdeveloped Nigeria, Calabar: University of Calabar Press. Eteng, IA. (2008). Ethnicity, Ethno-class relations and crisis of Nigerias enduring National Question and political instability: 37-81, In: D. Oni, S. Gupta, T. Omoniyi, E. Adegbiji and S. Awonusi (eds.) Nigeria and Globalisation: Discourses on Identity Politics and Social Conflict: Lagos: CBAAC. Editorial (Businesses Day) (2010) Can Aganga cut recurrent expenditure? Business Day (Lagos) December 15, 2010: s12 (www.businessdayonline.com). Fashoyin, T. (2005). Industrial Relations in Nigeria. Lagos: Longman. Garba, JN. (1982). Revolution in Nigeria: Another View. London: Africa Books. Garba, JN. (1987). Diplomatic Soldiering: Nigerian Foreign Policy, 1975-1979. Ibadan: Spectrum Books. Garba, JN. (1993). The Honour To Serve: reflections On Nigerias Presidency of the 44th U.N. General Assembly. Ibadan: Heinemann Educational Books (Nigeria). Garba, JN. (1995). Fractured History: Elite Shifts and Policy Changes in Nigeria. Princeton: Sungai Books. Grant, Wyn. (2003). Keynes, John Maynard (1883-1946). In Iain McLean & Alistair McMillan (Eds) op. cit; 292-293. Hurrel, Andrew & Gomez-Mera, Laura (2003). Neoliberalism in Iain McLean & Alistair McMillan (Eds) oxford concise dictionary of politics. Oxford: University press. Igwe, Obasi (2005) Liberalism (232-3pp). In Obasi Igwe: politics and Globe Dictionary. Aba: Eagle publishers. 601pp. Isangedighi, A.J., Joshua, M.T., Asim, A.E., & Ekuri, E.E. (2004). Fundamentals of Research and Statistics in Education and Social Sciences. Calabar: University of Calabar Press, 308. Kblbck, Karin (2008), Kontroversen in der Entwicklungsdiskussion, in Freudenschuss-Reichl and Bayer (eds): 23-37.
43
National Planning commission (2004). National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, NEEDS. Abuja: National Planning Commission. Ingwe, R. (2012). Energy dependency, consumption of renewable energies and sustainable development in developing countries under neoliberalism globalisation: Comparing scenarios in Africa, Central/South America and the Caribbean (Unpublished paper in file at CRADLE). Ingwe, Richard, Aniah, Eugene & Otu, Judith E. (2008). Lagos, Nigeria: sustainable energy technologies for an emerging African mega city in: Peter Droege (Ed) Urban Energy Transition. Amsterdam: Elsevier: 631-646. Isangedighi, A.J., Joshua, M.T., Asim, A.E., & Ekuri, E.E. (2004). Fundamentals of Research and Statistics in Education and Social Sciences. Calabar: University of Calabar Press, 308. Makanjouola, RO. (2002). Health care in Nigeria. The Nigerian scholar, (A journal published by academic staff Union of (Nigeria) Universities, (ASUU), September: 27-9. Mitee, Ledum (2007). Nigeria: The challenge of statehood: Selected speeches of Ledum Mittee, Vol. 1. Port Harcourt: Ebenezer Printing & Publishing House. Nigeria, Federal Republic of. [No year]. Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. http://www.nigeriansenate.org/senate.html). Accessed 20 March, 2012. Nigeria's move to liquidate NITEL (the nations premier telecommunication company) highlights problems in privatization process (http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/networkwifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/). Accessed 20 March 2012. Ntufe, IO. 2005. Discordant chords in Nigerian Politics (An article published in series in Nigeria Today Online on December 09, 12, 13, & 14, 2005). Retrieved 20 March 2012 from: http://www.okpenation.org/doc/DISCORDANT%20CHORDS%20IN%20NIGERIAN%20POLIT ICS.pdf. Obadan, MI & Odusola, AF. (2000). Productivity and unemployment in Nigeria. Ibadan: National Centre for Economic Management & Administration (NCEMA). Ogunniyi, M.B. (1992). Understanding Research in the Social Sciences. Ibadan: University Press PLC. 132. Ogwuma, Paul A. (1997). Preface in: M.O. Ojo, Awoseyila, ASF, Atoloye, FCO Analogbei, AM Akinyelu, A. Englama & O, L. Akinboyo (Eds). Nigeria: Prospects for development a.k.a. vision 2020. (Proceedings of the workshop organized by Central Bank of Nigeria: vi-vii) (Sheraton Hotel & Towers, Abuja, 15-17 April, 1996). Oladosu, Samuel A. (1973) Administrative aspects of urbanization in Adebayo Adedeji & L. Rowland (Eds). Management Problems of Rapid urbanization in Nigeria. Ile-Ife: University of Ife press: 139-163. Reeve, Andrew (2003) Liberalism in Iain McLean & Alistar McMillan (Eds). Oxford concise dictionary of politics. Oxford: University press: 309-310. Ribadu, Nuhu (2009). Corruption: The Nigeria Example (Address presented before the US congress, June), THE WEEK (Lagos), Vol. 29, No. 14 & Vol. 28, No. 13. Rodrik, Dani (2008). Is there a New Washington consensus? Project Syndicate. www.Project syndicate www. Projectsyndicate.org.commentary/rodrik. Rodney, Walter. (1972). How Europe under developed Africa. Owerri: Ikenga Publishers.
44
Rodrik, Dani. (2008) The Death of the Globalization consensus Project syndicate. www.project syndicate.org. Sekler, Nicola (2009). Postneoliberalism from a counter-hegemonic perspective in Ulrich Brand and Nicola Sekler (eds.) Postneoliberalism. A beginning debate, development dialogue, No. 51 January, 59-71. Smith, Daniel J. (2007. A Culture of Corruption: Everyday Deception and Popular Discontent in Nigeria,. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Stiglitz, Joseph. (2008). The end of Neoliberalism? www.projectsyndicate.org.commentary/stiglitz101. Stiglitz, Joseph (2006). Making Globalization Work. New York: WW Norton. Stiglitz, Joseph (2002). Globalisation and Its discontents. New York: Penguin. Spence, Michael (Ed) (2008). The growth report: Strategies for sustained growth & inclusive development. Washington, DC: World Bank. Sum, Ngai-Ling (2009). Struggles against Wal-Martisation and Neoliberal competitiveness in (southern) china-towards postneoliberalism in A beginning debate, development dialogue, no. 51, January: 157-168. Technical committee on the Niger Delta (TCND). (2008). Report submitted to the president of the federal republic of Nigeria, Nov. (Abuja: TCND). WRI UNDP, UNEP, & World Bank (2005). World Resources 2005: The Wealth of the Poor: managing Ecosystems to Fight Poverty. Washington, D.C: WRI.
45

Neoliberal Policies and Regimes in Post-Independent Nigeria at The Dawn of Postneoliberalism (1960-2007) : A Research Agenda

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Neoliberal Policies and Regimes in Post-Independent Nigeria at The Dawn of Postneoliberalism (1960-2007) : A Research Agenda

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences

Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

S-ar putea să vă placă și