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

8/12/2019 Neoliberal Policies and Regimes in Post-Independent Nigeria at the Dawn of Postneoliberalism (1960-2007): A Research Agenda

1/23

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences Vol. 2, No.12; December 2012

23

Neoliberal Policies and Regimes in Post-Independent Nigeria at the Dawn ofPostneoliberalism (1960-2007): A Research Agenda

*Richard INGWE1, James OKORO2, & Uno IJIM-AGBOR2 1Researcher, 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.*[email protected]

AbstractDevastation of neoliberal-capitalism promoting economies (USA and its allies) by the 2007-2010global financial-economic crises has: stimulated increased interest in national developmentmanagement; raised to high visibility the danger associated with reliance of Developing Countries(DCs) on neoliberal policies foisted on them by the Washington Consensus (WC) comprisingInternational Financial Institutions (IFIs) created by the developed/advanced countries; leading toadvocacy for post-neoliberal policies for DCs. Here, we examine the neoliberalism doctrine, overviewhalf- century of implementation of fundamentalist neoliberal policies by Nigerias post -independentgovernments/administrations. Our findings include four decades of co-existence of economicmismanagement (monocultural over-reliance on export of hydro-carbons for generating revenue toan expanding and over-centralised federal government simultaneously with huge importation ofexpensive refined fossil-fuels; prolongation of military dictatorship. The conclusion comprisesrecommendations of directions for strategising on postneoliberal development policies andidentification of areas deserving further research.Keywords: (Post) neoliberalism, doctrine, Nigeria, policies, poverty, Washington Consensus.

1. IntroductionDeveloping Countries (DCs) poor populations have steadily increased in the decades following theirattainment of political independence in the 1950s-1960s. This socio-economic adversity beckonedfor 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 determinationof DCs development management paradigmata by international financial institutions (IFIs)experts (Bayer 2009). In contrast, the US government promptly applied state funds to resuscitateprivate capital as part of its response to the 2007-2010 financial-economic crises. Despite this andother actions of the US government, like its other national capitalist allies, the financial crisis notonly spread across globally integrated capitalist financial infrastructure, it degenerated rapidly intoan economic depression that is yet to run its full course by 2012. It is apposite to underline the waythe USA and its capitalist allies considered it expedient to question aspects of their neoliberal-capitalist doctrines contrary to the prolonged silence of DCs governments in the fac e of assaults byineffective policies foisted on them by Western promoters of neoliberal-capitalism. Neoliberalism, aconcept describing the paradigm that replaced liberalism (which was abandoned when it createdfascism) has recently attracted the attention of scholars. The demise of neoliberalism as reflected bythe 2008 collapse of global financial and economic systems and the compulsion of advancedindustrialized 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, Birchand Mykhnenko, 2010) suggest that there need to understand how the crises affects developing


2/23


24

countries, which have been less fortunate financially and economically is urgent and imperative. The2007-2010 global financial-economic crises add to climate change impacts to show that charting apost-neoliberalistic sustainable development management strategy is urgent and imperative.However, the design of postneoliberalistic development strategy requires information-knowledge onprevious administrations policies, which are poorly -haphazardly known. Clarifying neoliberalisticcolourations involving distinguishing policies implemented by various administrations of individualDCs (Sekler, 2009) has not been seriously undertaken either due to ignorance or timidity of theAcademia or other reasons. Nigeria presents oxymoronic development indicators manifestingimmense human and natural resource endowment (including being a leading exporter of petroleumoil thereby earning about US$20 billion annually for nearly 40 years). Yet the country features one ofthe most paradoxical and scandalous levels of poverty (about 91% of the countrys population ofover 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 andimperatively in the quest for more effective postneoliberalistic development strategies.

Objectives, Issues and OrganisationHere, we contribute towards improving the understanding of the nature of neoliberalismimplemented various administrations of post-independent Nigeria. The purpose of this overview isto highlight some of the notable neoliberalistic policies without necessarily analyzing themexhaustively to lay foundations for further studies. This overview outlines general areas for morefocused and longer term national development policy strategising research programmes of DCsthink-tanks. An example is the Centre for Research and Action on Developing Locales, Regions andEnvironment (CRADLE), based out in Calabar, Nigeria, which has a track-record and potentials forinvestigating, 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 toneoliberal fundamentalism (especially, the structural adjustment programme (SAP) for whichBabangida insisted had no alternative before assisting the IFIs to foist SAP on Nigerians since mid-1980s. We show the nature of Nigerias neoliberalism, a country perceived/expected to be the giantof Africa due to her enormous natural and human resources which present potentials for achievingsocio-economic and political development. We justify this undertaking by reviewing the persistenceof mass poverty and under-development despi te the countrys position as the worlds leadingpetroleum (oil) exporter for nearly half a century and the implementation of neoliberal policies sincepolitical independence in 1960. We show that irrespective of the neoliberalist approach applied byNigerias 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 thanthe equivalent of four Marshall plans (i.e. funds used for reconstructing Europe after its devastationby war (Olomola, 2007 citing Ribadu).Context for profiling Nigerias neoliberalistic policiesDistinctive periods have been used to sketch previous eras identifiable by specific (economic,political, cultural, and social, among other sectoral) characteristics. Other criteria or features andchanges that distinguish of these eras have also been the achievements recorded and other specialfeatures. Therefore, there have been periods described as the age of mercantilism, industrialrevolution, 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 andsocial factors rand to varying degrees of unanimity of agreement with their creation. However, are


3/23


4/23


5/23


27

individuals and entities include; master us servant. Paternal power and the power of a husband overa wife, on one hand and political power, on the (John Locke) the enormous power resident in thepolitical 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 sociallyorganized, accepted and understood law for restricting the purposes of political power holders).While publicly accepted, political power was systematically governed by the creation and applicationof the rule of law, separation of powers, constitutionalism, emphasizing civil liberties as means oflimiting the extent to which political power holders could encroach on the rights of individuals andprivate entities.Private property, the free market system or laissez-faire policy have not been fully endorsed byliberals due to their reservation about their capability to guaranteeing its own existence. The adventof democracy poses a new obstacle to the liberal idea of individual rights and freedom through theenthronement of the threat tyranny of the majority and tendency of the emergent mass society tothreaten the initiatives of individuals and experiments capable of renewing life. Contemporary

liberalism concentrates on justice and neutrality. Neutrality connotes several aspects but itscommon denominator is citizens neutrality regarding their conception of the good (Reeve in McLeanand McMillan 2003: 209-210).NeoliberalismAlthough its emergence is dated back to 1945 or earlier, neoliberalism is relatively unknown to somepolitical 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 2007-2008global financial-economic crises (lgwe 2005). Andrew Hurrel and Laura Gomez-Mera, academics inthe University of Oxford, provide very helpful insights in this concept, and shed light on its twoprincipal 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 managreement in the south. The first meaning of neoliberalism connotes a set of market-liberaleconomic policies, within which they distinguish two different meanings corresponding to thedeveloped world and developing world. Neoliberalism is used in the developed world to describeThatcherism (i.e. the over a decade politico-economic strategies that were applied by former Britishprime 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. WynGrant, describes Keynesianism as an economic and social policy mix of government interventiondesigned to save capitalism and liberal democracy from the crisis of the great depression of the1930s. acknowledging that his theory was moderately conservative in its implications, Keynesadvocated selective state intervention in sectors such as employing taxation for influencing thesocial propensity to consume while allowing a wide range of sectors to be unaffected by governmentaction. He suggested that there was need for state socialism, gradual introduction of measures thatwere necessary for achieving socio-economic objectives (of the state) and the preservation of socialtradition (capitalism). He argued that measures which were recently repackaged as public -private-partnership, (PPP) were enough/sufficient for accomplishing full employment thereby avoidingcomprehensive socialization of investment which would be the last resort but considered by him tobe unnecessary Keynes was not a believer in God, being a member of the Victorian period/timesknown 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 istraced to Keynes recognition of full employment as the cause of increasing pressure on wages. To


6/23


28

him, the stabilization of wages was a political rather than economic and was not resolvable throughanalytical methods. Keynesianism is believed to be ambiguous ideas; Keynes proposal ofmacroeconomic management strategies neither resolved the problem unemployment nor increasinginflation despite its popularity in second half of the 20 th Century (Grant in McLean and McMillan2003: 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 socialpolicy. The Thatcherites, under this general concept or school of thought attributed the decline ofBritains economic an d international status in the late 1970s to the post war (1945 onwards)consensus. Therefore, the application in 1979 of Thatcherite measures is credited with theresuscitation of Britains economic and political fortunes thereby avoiding a bitter inevita ble descentinto 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 influenceand 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 theachievement of the success of Thatcherism by 1987. Thatcherism was successful, in the view of theTchatcherites, due to the consistency and comprehensiveness of its leader who never entertainedany hesitation or wavering influences.Critics pointed out that increasing unemployment and deindustrialization which were associatedwith Thatcherism were not less serious compared to the decline in inflation achieved through theapplication of an outmoded laissez-faire principles monetarism of the 19 th century. The critics arguethat speculators in private capital were rewarded by Thatcherism through reduction in the size ofgovernment (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 fataldestabilization and weakening of various sectors of the British society such as traditional andintermediate civil society within the nation including; trade unions professions, civil service, andlocal government. Significantly, Thatcherism was closely associated with the hostile leadershipstyles and policies of USAs 40 th President, Ronald Reagan from 1980 to 1989 and pungent to thewider European community. The demise of Tchatcherite version of neoliberalism occurred duringThatchers third term. It comprised bad policies such as poll tax, reforms of welfare state, therebound of rising inflation and policies unfavourable to the European Union (EU). Critics in the1990s pointed towards the policy implementation failures of Thatcherism era. The absence ofspecific criteria for assessing performance of British governments, except electoral successes, is oneof the problems that make Thatcherism to remain a highly debatable and disputable subject inBritain. (Bulpitt 2003 in McLean and McMillan 2003: 534-6).Neoliberalism in the developing world arose as a challenge to defective national developmentstrategies that emphasized import substitution industrialization which prevailed between 1945 andthe 1980s. This conception is strongly related to what is widely called the Washington consensus -a strategy which emphasis a development strategy that emphasizes a package of multiple aspectsincluding privatization, deregulation liberalization of trade and financial processes and structures;reduction in the size of government, promotion of foreign direct investment (FDI) andimplementation of structural adjustment programme (SAP) as imposed by the international

organizations; the international monetary fund (IMF) and the World Bank. Another more recentmeaning of neoliberalism was created by anti-globalization movement, among others, to describe


7/23


29

the globalize globalizing capitalist economic ideology and the adverse impacts it brings to poorerdeveloping countries. Irrespective of the relationship among the foregoing definitions, the meaningsand usages of the concept in economic parlance is perceived to have remained rather imprecise andgeneral.Relevant to this article is the use of neoliberalism in the field of academic international relations todenote the theoretical study of regimes and institutions thereby making this usage to frequentlytake the label neoliberal institutionalism or regime theory. This usage emerged in the mid 1980sas a response to non-realist paradigm which held sway at the time. The objective of advocates ofneoliberal institutionalism was to show that with or without the premises of realism, nationalcooperation was/is achievable. This proposition is hinged on arguments that states representrational, unitary actors pursuing the maximization of their utility in an international systemexhibiting frequent and considerable anarchy. These neoliberals identify the absence of assovereign authority within the international system on which states cooperate as the cause offrequent 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 asmechanisms capable of assisting cooperating states to manage their affairs and fill the void left bythe absence of sovereign authority. The neoliberal institutions and regimes were expected tofunction in the areas of coordinating or articulating issues, curbing uncertainty, regulating behaviourof entities involve in international cooperation and facilitating the appreciation of the importance ofreputation in such relationship. Neoliberalism has emerged as a challenge to the foregoingarguments. The nonrealists argue that relative gains are superior to the absolute ones and that thedisappointment in international cooperation resulting from the unreliability of powerful states whichare active in promoting aspects of the institutions while ignoring those that are not attractive tothem; make the neoliberal claims doubtful (Hurrel and Gomez-Mera in McLean and McMillan 20003:

368).PostneoliberalismThe definition of postneoliberalism is unfurling together with the process considered to bedistinguishing its era from the proceeding neoliberalism. Its evolution is traceable to thepublications by some scholars and activists (e.g. the Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz) proclaiming theend 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 theWashington consensus a description of the mainstream development thinking drawn from theprinciples of neoclassical economics, and all ineffective development policies promoted byinternational financial institutions (IFIs); (IMF, World Bank (i.e. Washington, DC-based Breton woodsinstitutions). The WC enforce and promote; strict budget discipline, shifts, in public expenditureconsidered growth-stimulating, reduction in marginal tax rates and the broadening of taxfoundation; other principles are liberalization of interest rates, and exchange rates to promotecompetitiveness, 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 ameans of facilitating development in Latin America. Although used in the foregoing restrictivesense, i.e. to refer to Latin America and the neoclassical economic principle used by the IFIs, itsmeaning was later extended by critics to all defective development policies that have led to thefailure 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 1939i.e. within the past 70 years by applying development theories that are now called catching up


8/23


30

(Kblbck, 2008, Bayer, 2009). The high point or central elements of the neoliberal thinking and itspromoters under the umbrella of the WC was that the economic thinking, histories, and experienceof the advanced countries, should be repeated by developing countries (Bayer 2009: 30).Features that distinguish postneoliberalism from neoliberalism are being for formulated bycondensing 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 courseelsewhere, within the Breton woods institution emerged a staunch critic in Joseph Stiglitz (formerly aWorld Bank chief economist and senior vice president. He reported/published in 2002 that the WCwas habitually applying shock therapy to the development problems of developing countries andopposes 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 regulatingand guiding the market economy of developing countries (Stiglitz 2008). Bayer has reviewed orlisted several critics of the WC and states that the effect of the criticisms on the Breton woodsinstitutions has been mixed (Bayer, 2009: 90-1).

China as a model for postneoliberalistic paradigmChina is being increasingly hailed as a model of postneoliberalism. Giovanni Arrighi attributes thedeclining politico-economic power of the USA -and its neoliberal-capitalist allies- to their operationof unnatural capitalism (Western countries economic system that ignores and deviates from AdamSmiths original postulations that state intervention is required for correcting undesirableimperfections and outcomes of unbridled free market. Ar righi distinguishes the Westernhegemonic development model with East Asias championed by China, which ascended within thepast 35 years- through application of a development strategy involving non-militaristic relations withother 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, adaptingpolicies learned in 1979 from non-WC economies (Malaysia and Hong Kong). The Chinese leaderTeng Hsiao Ping preferred as gradualist approach of developing the market economy while retainingits communist institutions and reforming them to match the operation of the market system. One ofthe indicators of the acknowledgement of the potency of this alternative (to neoliberalism) by theWC has been cited to be inform of the Growth report, prepared by experts drawn from the worldbank, the UN, acade mics and similar organizations. The report debunks the neoliberals and theWCs claim that development or economic growth can only be achieved by applying the grandschemes specified by the WC for the past over 30 years (Bayer 2009: 91 -2) citing Spence 2008 andRodrik 2008). The report hails the role played by non-conventional approaches and the applicationof the right mix of ingredients by the 12 sustainable growth countries, i.e. those which haveachieved 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 andThailand.Bayer argues that development economics under postneoliberalism must appreciate the role ofpromotion of human capital development programmes (e.g. SME) growth, building institutions, thedevastating effect that opening up on national financial markets was recently demonstrated by theglobal crisis in the financial systems degenerating rapidly into global economic recession inSeptember 2008. Bayer shows that the neoclassical concept (he considers to be in appropriately

described as neoliberal) has crumbled. He faults the instruments used for macroeconomicstabilization, and institutional and legal transformation as well as other processes (Bayer 2009: 95-


9/23


31

99). Nicola Sekler argues that to employ postneoliberalism as a concept for undertaking counterhegemonic programme of vamping national economics (of developing countries) that were wreckedby defective grand schemes of the WC, various forms (rather than one) postneoliberalism arerequired. Using several postneoliberalism is necessary because of the need to accommodatedifferent issues pertaining to the continuities and discontinuities as a means of makingpostneoliberalism 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 at2008 (Sum 2009: 165) and Kurt Bayers reference to chine as a lender of some $200 billion to theUSA (Bayer 2009: reinforces china as a model of neoliberalism.Moreover, Nigerias hope for national restoration since her fourth return to democracy in 1999 afterintermittent dark ages of dictatorship was dashed when the 8-year Obasanjo administration (1999-2007) undertook megalomaniac programmes of urban-biased physical- infrastructural developmentwhile 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: highunemployment, crime, social vices, conflicts and wars in the Niger Delta and elsewhere in Nigeria.Nigerias elite has contrived ethnocentrism by implementing neoliberalistic policies therebyprovoking animosity among Nigerias multiple ethno -linguistic groups-an attitude that adverselyaffects 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 mostdevastating problems for Nigerias advancement in the post neoliberalism era considering that whileother nations might easily draw lessons from the failure of neoliberalism to offer a cost effectivedemocratic governance framework (as proposed by Brie 2009: 15-32), Nigeria remains entrapped inthe 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 dataWe used the methods of description and case study for implementing this study. We preferreddescription 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 byNigerias successive post -independent administrations, 1960-present). Description provides animportant background for undertaking research that produces results that give insights and highlighthunches for formulating hypothesis for implementing further studies that might employexperimental research methods. Therefore, description facilitated the study of neoliberal policies inNigeria-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 casestudy method facilitates analysis of a selected item (country) out of a multiplicity of countriesencompassing the developing world where neoliberalism operates. Therefore, we applied the casestudy approach with the purpose of using the findings of this study provide insights (throughgeneralization) into similar DCs and the way the doctrine contributes towards theirunderdevelopment instead of sustainable development (Ogunniyi, 1992; Isangedighi, Joshua, Asim,and Ekuri, 2004). We used data from multiple primary and secondary sources. Primary data includethe authors experience comprising extensive participant in, observation of, public policy -speak anddiscourses, 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


10/23


32

sciences. Moreover, extensive review of secondary data sources including the popular literature anddesk research were undertaken.Development context at the dawn of postneoliberalism: Neoliberalisti c legacies of Nigerias Post -independent regimesNigerias First Republic (post -independent-democratic regime) might exhibited some timidityemerging from the throes of colonialism and suffered hangovers of previous epochs of neoliberalismincluding invidious inhuman ill-treatment of Nigeria by successive European offensives unequaltrade in commodities, trans-Atlantic slavery, before (neo)colonialism, it rapidly degenerated withinfive years- into perpetrating identity politics, ethnicity and corruption provoked the seizure ofdemocratically elected leaders through violence by the Nzeogu-led revolutionary coup in 1966(Eteng, 2008, Ladipo, 1981?) leading to prolonged underdevelopment of Nigeria by indigenousmilitary dictatorships (Asuquo, 2009). The Abacha dictatorship (1993-1997) represents the heyday oflooting Nigerias treasury at least drawing from evidences that were exposed following his suddendeath 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 executivemediocrity and bureaucratic politics of the Super -Permanent Secretaries into Nigerias socio -economy. 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 thatNigerias problem was her difficulty in spending the huge funds from the Petro-Dollars flowing intoNigeria. The regime was ousted for unwholesome corruption perpetrated under the contrivances ofits highly politicized bureaucrats while Gowon was pre-occupied with exhibiting unwarrantedgenerosity 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. Nigeriasassumption of the leadership of Africa, contests with the neoliberal gladiators (Britain, USA, amongothers) over their imperialistic offensives on Africa especially Southern African states was launchedby Muritala Muhammads brief dictatorship (1975 -6). Although hailed for

Figure 1: Nigeria embedded in Africa


11/23


33

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 civilservants and public officers, among other problems e.g. job insecurity, is traced to the neoliberalisticdictatorship featuring shocking impunity of sacking most of them with immediate effect, amongother 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 tohost the Lagos-hosted Second World Black and African Festival of A rts 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-77from 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 byfellow military elite on Nigerians; his attempt to extend his administration. Among the Obasanjosquandermania-megalomania were hosting of the CHOGM in Abuja with the lavishness that thehead of government of a southern African country that was awarded the next hosting right fearedthat was a very tall order; the all African games, the Eagles square and so forth. By 2007, Nigeriasenergy 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 ofthe worlds leadi ng exporter of oil was actually the leading importer of refined oil (Ingwe, 2012).How this happened is explained below.


12/23


13/23


35

do not bear repetition here. While, a classic exposition of the underdevelopment of Africa waspublished in the 1970s (Rodney, 1972), the invasion of Nigeria by Britain was documented about adecade later (Asiegbu, 1987). British colonial development planning in Nigeria was reported byEniola O. Adeniyi as a rather unserious action which started formally with the ten-year plan ofdevelopment and welfare for Nigeria from 1 April 1946. This plan was revised in response toNigerias transformation into a federation in 1 October 19 54 there by producing the 1951-56 plansto replace the earlier ten year plan. These colonial plans were fundamentally flawed byovergeneralization, emphasis on the top -down planning approach, exclusion of Nigerian indigenesin the process, and poor linkages among schemes which formed the plans and so forth (Adeniyi1980: 280-283. Between 1955 and 1962- 1968, Nigerias four -sub-national regional managementfocused on: south east, south western, Northern and Midwestern regions. The regional planningwas inadequate in terms of proceeding from distinct perspectives and objectives towardsformulation of programmes. The western region was the most credited with success within the1955-60 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 thearrival of the mission of the international bank for reconstruction and development (IBRD) to thecountry in 1953 and tasked with Appraise(ing) the economic development prospects of Nigeria andto recommend practical measures for their realization. This represent an invitation by the Nigerianauthorities, with a good does of colonial thinking and political influence to lay the foundation for thedomination of development planning by characteristics of the WC (Adeniyi, 1980-284). Associatedwith the WC have been the declaration of the 1960s as the development decade during which ahigh rate of economic growth rate of a specific numbers of points was vigorously pursued in the fournational 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. Mostrecently, the official acknowledgement was contained in the nationals economic empowerment anddevelopment strategy (NEEDS) a new development planning approach created under thechairmanship of Nigerias national planning commission (i.e. the nations planning agency) by Dr.Charles Soludo, famous for improving the performance of Nigerias banks by implementingrecapitalization policy. The NEEDS was compelled by a post independence history of Nigeriaplagued by high unemployment of the youth, increasing poverty valuelessness (lack of values inpolitical rulers/leaders and the people). Therefore, the goals of the NEEDS were; wealth creation,employment generation, poverty reduction and value reorientation (National Planning Commission2004: x, 7-12) Adeniyi 1980).Nigerias wealth in natural resource endowments is well documented. Among its endowments arehuge proven fossil fuel reserves include US$4,635 million metric tones of oil equivalent of oil in 2003thus making her one of the worlds largest oil exporters since t he 1970s. moreover, her possessionof 4,497 million metric tones (mmt) of oil of nature equivalent gas in 2003 makes her one of theworlds leading exporters of the fossil fuel with grandiose natural gas pipelines originating from itsgas production plants to western Europe and west African countries but without similar distributionchannels within the country to supply energy- hungry Nigerians. Disappointingly, the countrys netfuel imports metric tones of oil equivalent) indicating the abysmal level of leadership andinstitutional 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).


14/23


36

Nigeria is regarded as a considerably wealthy country in terms of human resources. Her populationof 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 topro-poor growth (Bayer 2009:93-4) there is need to examine how this has happened in Nigeria sinceindependence. What has been the nature of pro-poor development programming in Nigeria?Irrespective of the various estimates of Nigerias earnings from the export of crud e oil: aboutUS$300 billion since the mid 1970s, as at 2000 (National Planning Commission 2004: 7), and thereport 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 byabout 20% since its level in 1975 (National Planning Commission 2004: 7). Although the nationstotal Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was US$32,953 million in 2002 (the second largest in sub-Saharan Africa, where South Africa had the largest GDP of US$182,280 million), Nigerias per capitalGDP in 2002 was only $234 while South Africas was $4,201. The proportion of Nigerias poor basedon 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 100represented the highest poverty) in 2002 was 35.1 (WRI, UNDP, UNEP, and World Bank 2005: 188-195). Ribadu attributes the scandalously high level of poverty and failure to achieve growth anddevelopment to corruption (Ribadu, 2009).More debilitating was the huge debt that overhung Nigeria from the mid 1980s to 2005 when theObasanjo administration had to use the new earnings from crude oil export to settle under a specialarrangement by the world bank executive Ngozi Okonjo- Iweala, who was at the time Nigeriasfinance minister, as at 2004, the nations debt (external and domestic) was about 70% of GDPthereby posing enormous problems of debt serving. With a high regional and sector at unevennessin 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 realsector, manufacturing made minor contributions (five to seven percent) of the GDP. These makeNigeria to remain one of the least industrialized economies even in sub-Saharan Africa, wherepoverty 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 loweconomic growth: as at 2004, a growth rate of over 7 percent for more than three consecutive yearshad not been at tained: the contrasts sharply with the sustainable growth countries which haveachieved growth rates of at least seven percent for about 25 consecutive years (National PlanningCommission 2004: 9; Bayer 2009).The former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Paul Ogwuma, stated in 1997 that the failure toexploit opportunities which existed to achieve economic reforms, growth and development wereattributable to economic mismanagement, political instability and instability in the macroeconomicpolicy environment factors which led the economy into slow growth, and disequilibria in bothinternal and external fronts (Ogwuma, 1997: vi-ii). Although several comments have attempted toexplain the reason why Nigerias has failed to achieve economic growth a nd attain leadership ofAfrica despite her immense human and material resources, most of the comments seem to revolvearound the grand scheme paradigm of the WC. For example, the National planning commissionattributes 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


15/23


37

control of the economy thereby creating pervasive rewards (incentives) to top governmentfunctionaries and their relatives. Others are inefficiency and waste. The derivation of rent bygovernment from oil producing companies is held accountable for the creation of the culture of rentseeking and entrenchment of the belief that Nigerias government represents a means for the illegalbut rapid accumulation of wealth. The loss of values (of dignity of labour or work, development ofthe culture of work by individuals and a means of cultivation of personal dignity and reputationarose from the above rent-seeking attitude. Instead, the failure to reward private enterprise,promote and enforce transparency or accountability were entrenched bys successive militaryregimes, which in themselves were embroiled in cops and countercoups, which confirm the elitistkeen contest for political power as a means for achieving personal health. Therefore, prolongedmilitary dictatorship in Nigeria deliberately allowed: the weakening or destruction of socio-economicinstitutions in order to ease their looting of the public treasury; promoted and caused instability ofgovernment policies and programme, which were in themselves plagued by inadequate vision anddescription 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 patronageas a means of survival (National Planning Commission 2004: 10 -1). One erroneous position ofNigerias national planning commission which deserves mention here is its attribution of the failureto achieve growth to the dominance of government or statism (2004: 10) it deserves statementhave been credited with the achievement of sustainable growth in most, if not all of the 12sustainable growth countries (Bayer 2009). Extremist implementation of the WCs structuraladjustment programmes by Nigerias military dictators. The marking of neoliberalism as a phenomenon that has taken place within the past 30 years (Brandand Sekler 2009), reveals that Nigerias development management was dominated by militarydictatorship. The incursion of soldiers into Nigerias government started with the Nzeogu -led coup

of the four majors in 1966; it contin ued with general Yakubu Gowons nine -year dictatorship (1967-1975), general Muhammad, Muritala (1975-6); general Olusegun Obasanjo (1976-9). After a civilrule break October 1979-1983, Generals Muhammadu Buhari and Tunde Idiagbon aborted theSecond democratic dispensation through their 1983 coup. This discriminatory policy of deprivingNigerias undergraduates of meal subsidies while retaining same in the Kaduna -based NigerianDefence Academy (a military university) set the pace for steady abandonment of the Nigerianuniversity thereafter. The Ibrahim Babangida dictatorship, which claimed to be more lenient thanthe Buhari-Idiagbon dictatorship ruled fiercely and manipulatively for nine years (1985-1993). It isknown for scuttling Africas longest military -democratic transition through his annulment of thefreest and fairest election whose result showed that chief MKO Abiola won as the president andimposed an interim National Government which lasted for a few months. General Abacha, whopreviously ruled Nigeria, as assistant dictator under the Babangida dictatorship for nine years oustedthe Ernest Shonekan-led Interim National Government in 1993 and ruled again with iron hands tillhis 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 GeneralObasanjo, who was on a second missionary Journey/ (without a vision to Nigerias presidency butannulled General Abachas vision 2010) and ru led for eight long years (1999-2007). Owing to thecontrivance 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 informof several violations of democratic procedure among other breaches of the rule of law attributed by


16/23


38

some to his military background (Ntufe 2005). The resource curse thesis that the nations oilwealth and the way the government obtains income directly from rent paid by oil producingcompanies does not only destroy the nations values, it is held responsible for the recalcitrantattitude of the nations successive governments (especially those of the Generals: Abacha andObasanjo, which violate the rule of law notably against the Ogoni people, the Odi village razed downon orders of former president Obasanjo (Mitee, 2007).Key neoliberalistic features of military dictatorship in NigeriaThe General Ibrahim B. Babangida military junta (1985-1993) would be remembered for its extremeand brutal implementation of the structural adjustment programme (SAP. Since 1986 (two yeas intohis 8-year regime interestingly when General Olusegun Obabanjo (retired) appealed severally toBabangida that SAP should be given a human face because of the pains and difficulties that SAPcaused Nigerias poor masses, Babangida obstinately replied that there was no alternative to SAP.Disappointed by Babangidas interest -laden response, professor Adebayo Adedeji of the economiccommission 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 underGeneral Babangida, Nigerias poor masses staged several anti SAP riots in the 1980s which wereassociated with deaths of citizens felled by the bullets short from Nigeria police wielding gunspurchased with citizens taxes and resources in their home lands. The damage done by SAP onNigerias economy has been documented. Dr RO Makanjuola, professor former vice chancellor ofUniversity 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 theUniversity of Port Harcourt, in identifying the cause of the collapse of Nigerias healthcare (Harrison,2009, speaking as part of Nigerias national netwo rk News aired at 1600 hours local time, 10 June2009). 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 SMEscompounded the problem of unemployment (Babalola 2007: 14).Privatization of Nigerias public enterprisesOlu Akinnifesi elucidated this subject at the the 15-17 April, 1996 workshop in Abuja that sought toforge the Abacha dictatorships Vision 2010 . He traced the origin of privatization of Nigerias publicenterprises to General Babangidas speech which inaugurated the SAP in 1986, the promulgation ofdecree number 25 (privatization and commercialization decree) providing legal enforcement ofprivatization and commercialization policy and the establishment of a technical committee onprivatization and commercialization charged with treating 135 public enterprises enumerated in theabove 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 improvedoperational efficiency of affected banks and insurance companies but recommended that thegovernment should its policies plan to privatize utilities (electricity and telecommunicationcompanies: NEPA and NITEL) (Akinnifesi 1997: 298- 334). It is reported that Nigeria's move toliquidate Nitel (the nation s premier telecommunication company) highlights problems inprivatization process (http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/ ). This privatization of telecoms assetsstarted 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) wasdelayed until the inauguration of President Umaru Musa YarAdua in 2007, there were lots of
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/


17/23


39

impediments on the path of the Nigerian Bureau of pubic enterprises (BPE), the agency that recentlyimplemented the privatization in Nigeria. The transnational corporation of Nigeria (TransCorp) hasbeen 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 ventseeking. The steady decline in the quantity of power produced by the PHCH has been documented(Ingwe et al 20 03). The damage done by the failed power sector to Nigerias economy especially theclosure of business and manufacturing establishments across the country has been documented. Ithas been PHCN will lead to the failure to realize the vision 20/2020, which the Obasanjo- YarAduaadministration fashioned aiming to make Nigeria to join the ranks of the worlds 20 largest and mostsuccessful economies by the year 2020 (.). Nigerias power sector failure also affects otherneoliberalistic claims of Nigerias dictators such as their argument that in conformity with the WCsdogma of small government downsizing and/or right sizing of the pubic workforce and placingembargo 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 viaentrepreneurship to flourish in Nigeria due to inadequacy of electrical power from the national gridand poor support by the government, which has embraced the neoclassical ideas of economists andthe WC as a means of conserving public funds for embezzlement and corruption. We show how theabandonment of the high unemployment problem adversely affects Nigerias economy since thenearly 1970s and 1960s.Unemployment and underemployment in NigeriaThe unemployment of school leavers started in the late 1960s prompting recommendation ofgovernment 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. TheBuhari-Idiagbon junta was its most extreme by their policy of placing embargo on employment andpromotion while promoting only soldiers (National dailies, 1983-5). High unemployment amongyouthful school leavers, a source of serious social and political problems, in any country, hadconstituted problems to Nigerias economy in the 1960s. It was acknowle dged at them time aseconomic wastage and instability, but there was no sign that the problem was being seriouslyaddressed. It was further acknowledged that, the failure to address this problem representedexecutive ignorance of the fact that Nigerias m ajor economic and social assets were its humannatural resources Ayida 1971: 8). Walter Rodney shows that human resources especially itsimprovement through education in science and technology determined how the people so trainedcould masterfully transform the natural environment and resources on it in order to meet social andeconomic needs and demands (Rodney 1972). Although this prompted the recommendation of ahigh economic growth rate (output her head of population capable of enabling every individualNigerian to enjoy a standard of living that by 1985 was twice that in the 1960s and job creation toreduce 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 thesuccessive 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 wasthe best means of progressing. This legacy of the WC pervaded successive military governments

from the 1960s to the Obasanjo administration. The Muhammad-Obasanjo dictatorship wasnotorious for promulgating anti-labour anti-industrial productions laws that prevented workers from


18/23


19/23


41

Jonathan Bradbury reports that think-tanks have been very instrumental to the promotion of specificpolicies the USA and Britain: two countries which have actively foisted neoliberalistic ideas on thedeveloping countries (McLean and McMillan 2003: 536 citing Bradbury 2003). It should take thinktanks of different mould and ideological characteristics to reverse the damage done by institutionsand international organizations that were molded by think tasks of the neoclassical economicthinking and neoliberalistic colouration. With an impressive foreign reserves of about US$1.8trillion, and lending to the USA for prosecution of economic resuscitation (stimulus package afterthis real estate and financial crises and economic recession of September 2008 ongoing, chinapromises to offer a good example for studying its sustainable growth strategy that like its II othercounterparts has lasted for two decades and going strong (Sum 2009: 165), as a means of buildingnew think tanks for developing countries.Mediocrity of Nigerias economic development policiesSeveral indicators showing that Nigerias economy is weak and backwar d exist, have beendocumented. The formal sector employment collapse was reportedly shifting responsibility for job

creation to the informal sector the so called self employment campaign associated with thecounter hegemony of nebliberalism since the 1970s and onwards (Bond, 2009). This could beillustrated by recent industrial manufacturing scenario; that has been rather poor compared toexport of crude petroleum oil and natural gas which contributes a disproportionately high percent ofNigerias nati onal income. Recently, development analysts have been concerned about the ratherhigh expenditure of the nations income on recurrent goods and services thereby ignoring capitaldevelopment programmes. By extension, Nigerias central bank Governor ---- Lamido Sanusi,criticizes the annual expenditure of about 30% of Nigerias national annual budget to sustain thepolitical elite in Nigerias National Assembly, which enjoys the luxury of comprising two unnecessarychambers (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 senatorsfrom 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 especiallyaffliction of about 70% 92% of Nigerians by poverty Nigerias expenditure profile over the decades featured structural defect (higher expenditure onrecurrent and low expenditure on capital goods and services, which benefit the citizens; inefficientspending, 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 thecentral bank governor of the 2010 budget, the promise by the finance minister (Olusegun Aganga) toshift 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 obstinacyand 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 (Ingwe2009).President Obasanjos globetrotting in search of foreign in vestment and abandonment of small andmedium enterprises (SMEs). The rather high frequency of foreign travels undertaken by presidentObasanjo and the political impasse generated between his presidency and the federal legislature

over the latters objectio n of the purchase of additional presidential jet to undertake more foreigntravels marked much of the Obasanjo administration as proffering foreign direct investment to


20/23


21/23


22/23


44

National Planning commission (2004). National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy,NEEDS. Abuja: National Planning Commission.

Ingwe, R. (2012). Energy dependency, consumption of renewableenergies and sustainable development in developing countries under neoliberalism globalisation:

Comparing scenarios in Africa, Central/South America and the Caribbean (Unpublishedpaper in file at CRADLE).

Ingwe, Richard, Aniah, Eugene & Otu, Judith E. (2008). Lagos, Nigeria: sustainable energytechnologies for an emerging African mega city in: Peter Droege (Ed) Urban EnergyTransition. Amsterdam: Elsevier: 631-646.

Isangedighi, A.J., Joshua, M.T., Asim, A.E., & Ekuri, E.E. (2004). Fundamentals of Researchand 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 telec ommunication company) highlights

problems in privatization process (http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/ ).Accessed 20 March 2012.

Ntufe, IO. 2005. Discordant chords in Nigerian Politics (An articlepublished 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%20POLITICS.pdf .

Obadan, MI & Odusola, AF. (2000). Productivity and unemployment inNigeria. 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. vision2020. (Proceedings of the workshop organized by Central Bank of Nigeria: vi-vii) (SheratonHotel & 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 ofIfe press: 139-163.

Reeve, Andrew (2003) Liberalism in Iain McLean & Alistar McMillan (Eds). Oxford concisedictionary 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. Project syndicate.org.commentary/rodrik.

Rodney, Walter. (1972). How Europe under developed Africa. Owerri: Ikenga Publishers.
http://www.nigeriansenate.org/senate.htmlhttp://www.nigeriansenate.org/senate.htmlhttp://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.okpenation.org/doc/DISCORDANT%20CHORDS%20IN%20NIGERIAN%20POLITICS.pdfhttp://www.okpenation.org/doc/DISCORDANT%20CHORDS%20IN%20NIGERIAN%20POLITICS.pdfhttp://www.okpenation.org/doc/DISCORDANT%20CHORDS%20IN%20NIGERIAN%20POLITICS.pdfhttp://www.okpenation.org/doc/DISCORDANT%20CHORDS%20IN%20NIGERIAN%20POLITICS.pdfhttp://www.okpenation.org/doc/DISCORDANT%20CHORDS%20IN%20NIGERIAN%20POLITICS.pdfhttp://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3343561/nigerias-move-liquidate-nitel-highlights-problems-in-privatization-process/http://www.nigeriansenate.org/senate.html


23/23


45

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 Brandand 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 inNigeria ,. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Stiglitz, Joseph. (2008). The end of Neoliberalism? www.project-syndicate.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 thefederal republic of Nigeria, Nov. (Abuja: TCND).

WRI UNDP, UNEP, & World Bank (2005). World Resources 2005: The Wealth of the Poor: managingEcosystems to Fight Poverty. Washington, D.C: WRI.

Documents

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