Lagos and Oyo states, as well as the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), have emerged as the best-performing states on Nigeria’s socio-economic scorecard, according to Analysts Data Services and Resources (ADSR).
He ADSR CEO and Chief EconomistAfolabi Olowookere made the disclosure on Tuesday during a series of webinars themed: “The Socio-Economic Scorecard of Nigerian States (Basic Edition 2023).”
Oloookere said while the Nigerian average was pegged at 45.79 percent, the best-performing states (Lagos, FCT, and Oyo) scored 62.5 percent, 58.9 percent, and 58 percent respectively.
According to him, a total of 57 relevant indicators were used in constructing the scorecard across 12 key broad socio-economic segments, namely, economic production; Government Finance; Financial sector; and Capital Importation.
Others were Land, Housing and Sanitation, Transport, ICT Infrastructure, Energy and Environment, Industrialization and Business Competitiveness, Education, Health and Citizen Livelihood and Wellbeing.
He stated that, in general, in all states, the best performing segments were the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) with 58.31 percent and the financial sector with 51.96 percent.
The economist revealed that the lowest performing sectors were transportation with 34.24 percent and the livelihood and well-being of citizens with 37.14 percent.
He added that the worst-performing states were Yobe with 34.5 percent, Gombe State with 35 percent, and Sokoto State with 36.8 percent.
According to him, after the elections earlier this year, many of the state governors constituted their cabinets and some are already reviewing or preparing the Economic Development Plan and Strategic Documents of their states.
“The usual promise is to improve the socio-economic status of a state’s citizens in the next four years and beyond.
“To objectively measure the degree of progress that a new administration will achieve and establish measurable and realistic objectives, it is necessary to provide baseline data that captures the current level of socioeconomic performance.
“This data is often not readily available, and when it is, it may not be in easy-to-understand, easily usable, and comparable formats; Therefore, this scorecard seeks to fill this gap.
“The objective is to provide baseline data and highlight the relative performance of the sub-national level of government in Nigeria and assist effective policy formulation at the sub-national level,” he added.
Meanwhile, Bright Eregha, Professor of Economics at Pan-Atlantic University, emphasized the need to address the binding constraints on overall productivity of industrialization.
Mr. Eregha called for a more structured and appropriate public-private partnership (PPP) framework to finance infrastructure facilities, thereby improving manufacturing and global competitiveness.
“It is also important for the government to be more efficient in providing an enabling environment for businesses to thrive.
“Education, health and human capital development must be refocused as key drivers of productivity, as Nigeria leverages its young population and trains them in skills that are relevant to achieving the necessary competitiveness in all states.
“The worst performing states in well-being and livelihoods show the critical importance of education and we must put more emphasis on programs that boost education to boost human capital development and strengthen institutions,” he said.
Similarly, OluwaSeyi Vincent, an economist with the Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG), urged the government to focus better on the health sector because of its ability to shore up productivity.
Praising the government’s various health schemes so far, Vincent also pointed out the need for broader National Health Insurance Scheme coverage, particularly in rural areas, to further increase access to healthcare.
Furthermore, Adedotun Seyingbo, a specialist in economic development and governance reform, said there was a need to rethink and review industrial policies at sub-national levels.
He noted that efforts by some states to boost industrialization through the provision of land and subsidies, among other measures, remained largely uncoordinated.
“States must stop imitating policies and create cookie-cutter reforms to address the particular industrialization needs of each state.
“It should focus more on domestic companies and encourage reforms for new and innovative companies.
“As such, states must reorient the development of entrepreneurship, startups, new ideas and businesses and encourage domestic companies until they grow enough to start attracting the necessary Foreign Direct Investment (FDI),” he said. .