COLUMN | Nigeria where the absurd and the incredible sit side by side (2)

By Abdulqadir M. Habeeb

Part II: The States and Nigeria’s Missing Systems Thinking

When Nigeria struggles, attention quickly turns to Abuja. The Presidency. The National Assembly. Federal agencies and national policy directions.
Yet much of the federation’s structural weakness originates elsewhere.

It begins in the states.

If the federation wobbles, the states are not spectators. They are participants. Sometimes reluctant. Sometimes constrained. Often simply operating within governance models too narrow for the complexity of the societies they are meant to manage.

Nigeria’s federal conversation frequently gravitates toward the centre. But beneath that towering structure lies the layer that most directly shapes everyday life: the states. They build the roads citizens drive on daily. They manage the primary healthcare centres where most Nigerians seek treatment. They oversee schools that educate the next generation. They regulate land, markets and local infrastructure.
And here lies a paradox.

While the federal government is often criticised for excessive centralisation, many states themselves operate with surprisingly narrow governance lenses. They function like isolated islands, each administration charting its course without a deep understanding of how governance systems intersect.

Projects are announced. Committees are inaugurated. Buildings are commissioned. Yet beneath these visible gestures, the architecture of coordinated development often remains thin.
The problem is not merely funding. It is vision.

Governing in Silos

Across many states, governance still follows an outdated administrative logic. Ministries function as independent compartments rather than interconnected components of a larger system.

Agriculture belongs to the Ministry of Agriculture. Security falls under separate committees or federal coordination. Works and infrastructure manage roads and buildings. Education pursues its curriculum reforms. Health oversees hospitals and clinics.
Each prepares its own budget. Each designs its own programmes. Each measures success through its own internal metrics.

But society does not operate through administrative compartments.

Take the simple example of a farmer.

A farmer’s productivity is not determined by fertiliser distribution alone. It depends on the condition of rural roads that connect farms to markets. It depends on security patrols that prevent banditry during harvest seasons. It depends on irrigation systems, access to credit, stable electricity for cold storage, and the presence of buyers who can move produce efficiently.

Those factors fall under multiple ministries.

When planning happens in silos, results fragment.

A state may subsidise fertiliser while neglecting rural road maintenance. Another may build a modern hospital yet fail to retain qualified doctors because housing, incentives and career pathways remain unaddressed.

Yet another may expand universities while ignoring the industries that could absorb their graduates.

The result is effort without multiplier effect. Resources are spent. Outcomes remain modest.

Short Sighted Cycles

Another recurring pattern lies in the rhythm of political cycles.

Many state governments plan within electoral calendars rather than developmental horizons. The emphasis shifts toward projects that deliver immediate visibility rather than those that generate systemic impact over time.

Flyovers emerge in cities where drainage systems remain broken. Government houses receive elaborate refurbishments while primary healthcare centres deteriorate quietly across rural districts. Sports stadiums rise in places where industrial parks remain perpetual proposals on paper.

Infrastructure without integration becomes ornament.

A more disciplined planning culture would begin with different questions.

What are this state’s structural advantages? Which industries naturally align with its geography, climate and labour patterns? What value chains already exist but remain weak due to missing infrastructure or policy support? How can coordinated investment across ministries strengthen those value chains?

Instead, repetition prevails.

Every state attempts to replicate the same development template regardless of terrain, demography or economic structure.

Uniform ambition replaces differentiated strategy.

But vision requires differentiation.
The Missing Intersections
Governance problems rarely exist in isolation.

Security intersects with agriculture. Education intersects with employment. Health intersects with productivity. Urban planning intersects with flooding, climate resilience and housing affordability.

Yet policy conversations frequently fail to map these intersections.

Consider flooding. When heavy rainfall strikes, emergency relief programmes quickly appear. Food supplies are distributed. Temporary shelters emerge. Damage assessments follow.
But preventive coordination often remains weak.

Environmental agencies rarely work closely with urban planning departments on drainage expansion. Waste management failures continue to block waterways. Land administration systems fail to regulate construction along flood plains.
The result is predictable recurrence.

Consider youth unemployment.

States organise empowerment programmes filled with training workshops and certificates. Yet those programmes often operate in isolation from procurement policies, SME financing frameworks, or regional industrial strategies that could create real market demand for those skills.
Training without economic linkage becomes temporary relief rather than structural transformation.

Layered thinking requires more than enthusiasm. It demands data, coordination and institutional discipline.

The Regional Blind Spot

No Nigerian state exists in isolation.

Agricultural corridors cross state boundaries. Security threats move through forests and highways without respect for administrative borders. Rivers flow across jurisdictions. Markets link cities to neighbouring states.

Yet inter state collaboration remains surprisingly weak.

Economic geography rarely obeys political boundaries.

Regional planning forums should therefore function as engines of strategy rather than ceremonial gatherings. States that share ecological zones or economic corridors should coordinate infrastructure investment, security intelligence, tax frameworks and industrial clusters.

Competition without collaboration fragments growth.

Fiscal Discipline and Execution

Another constraint frequently cited by state governments is revenue.

Internally Generated Revenue remains narrow across many states. Borrowing fills the gaps. Debt servicing grows.

But fiscal reform requires more than new taxes.

Revenue expansion depends on economic growth, formalisation of informal sectors and digital tax administration systems that improve transparency and compliance.

Borrowing itself is not inherently problematic. The risk emerges when borrowing funds consumption rather than productivity.

Execution discipline matters as much as financial planning.

Projects must move from announcement to completion within defined timelines. Maintenance must be built into budgets from the beginning, and procurement decisions must reflect lifecycle costs rather than short term contract values.

A state cannot afford ornamental governance.

Leadership as Systems Stewardship

Governorship demands systems stewardship. A governor must see connections that ordinary bureaucratic processes obscure.

How rural roads reduce maternal mortality. How technical education reduces crime. How land titling unlocks credit markets. How water infrastructure reduces disease burden and improves school attendance.

This kind of thinking requires strong advisory teams, data driven planning units and regular cross sector policy reviews.

The Cost of Neglect

When state governance falters, the consequences extend far beyond local boundaries.

When primary healthcare collapses, tertiary hospitals become overwhelmed. When rural roads deteriorate, food supply chains break down and national food prices rise. When local policing coordination fails, insecurity spreads across regions.

The federation is only as strong as its weakest planning unit.

A Different Path

States that embrace systems thinking can transform their trajectories.

They can map sector intersections and design integrated policies. Align budgets around cross ministry outcomes. Collaborate regionally on infrastructure and security. Digitise governance data. Invest in long term civil service capacity.
Development is cumulative. Fragmentation delays it.

Conclusion

Nigeria’s structural strain cannot be resolved by federal reform alone. The states hold enormous leverage.

Governors who govern in silos produce isolated achievements. Governors who govern through systems produce durable transformation.

The moment demands depth, coordination and courage.

Posterity does not measure ribbon cuttings. It measures whether leaders built systems strong enough for progress to compound long after they have left office.

Posterity shall vindicate the just.
Habeeb is a Tech, Strategy and Innovations consultant based in Abuja. He keeps a periodic column and can be reached via habeebajebor@gmail.com.