OpinionPerspective

Is the 2023 Census Necessary?

5 Mins read

By abiodun KOMOLAFE

Nigeria is preparing for another round of population census rendezvous. Thanks be to God! But, if, at least, we must learn from past experiences, then, the primary question is: is the 2023 Census necessary? If one may also ask, when was the last time Nigeria held a census and how effective have previous exercises been? Or, must we fulfil the ritual of population head-count in Nigeria just for its sake?

From the look of things, one may safely conclude that the _National Population Commission_ (NPC), the body saddled with conducting censuses in Nigeria, has become an association created for political considerations. Needless to repeat that its census figures are unreliable because whatever figures we get are politicised! Since there are no other means of validating the figures, they are just left there. Not only that, since nobody uses the figures, it’s always an exercise in futility! Still, a huge sum of public money is spent on the exercise with little or no benefits. Nonetheless, each time a national census is about to commence, those who are involved in it know vividly why they are into it; and they are always very enthusiastic about it. More often than not, it is for pecuniary conveniences; not because they love Nigeria or because the veracity of the headcount figures matters; but, at least, the exercise will provide an avenue for some people to make money.

A credible demography deals with the geographical spread of the sample population. As of today, Nigeria hides the reality of the demographic structure of her population under mischievous headings. Sad that, whenever our university professors want to carry out research works, they rely on foreign institutions – those that could actually pay for informed figures about Nigeria’s population; certainly not statistics sourced by Nigerians – for reliable statistics. So far, so disheartening! The only constant and easily ratified thing about census in Nigeria is the estimated budget cost, not in any way about the accuracy or reliability of the census figures, or the general acceptability of the outcome of the exercise.

Arguably so, Nigeria is calling for a new census primarily because she has nothing in its database that’s close to an acceptable population figure. Ask a census taker the benefits of census to nation-building and excuses will saturate the demographic space. In the first instance, previous censuses have never been credible. There were always the invisible hands of politics; figures were imaginary; and the processes were always problematic! No effective planning; nothing verifiable! In each Local Government and/or District, there are no effective Birth and Death Control Registers; and that’s a major setback! For us to have a credible census, the infrastructure of a systemic population control must be on ground, and must be efficient. The right orientation must also be provided and corruption must be checkmated.

In the United Kingdom, for example, when a young man or woman turns 18, he or she is fit to approach the City Council for his or her own apartment. Of course, this followed a survey in which it was discovered that children even up to 21 years of age were still living with their parents. As fate would have it, the UK also has programmes which encourage a child of 18 years and above to start taking responsibilities. Well, that’s the UK, where God works wonders! Only God knows where yours sincerely was at age 18! Even now … still struggling! All these have shown how badly degraded our society has become!

Whenever issues about governance are raised in Nigeria, there lies the intriguing phenomenon: policy inexactitude. How do I mean? The approach of the NPC is akin to a man drawing water from the ocean with a basket full of holes. On the one hand, it is to enumerate the population. On the other hand, it has no means of accounting for accurate records of births and deaths in the society, among others. But the dangerous truth is that people don’t voluntarily reveal death details of family members or relations to government agencies for sociocultural and religious reasons. Even when it is in the hospital, the corpse is just taken away for burial without any room for post mortem. For some other people, it is not even part of their orientation to record births and deaths. So, until there’s a national law that says every birth and death must be reported, people will prefer to bury their dead without formal permits or imposed broadcasts.

In our clime, when people die, it’s known only to their families. When new babies are born, it is also known only to the families and some friends. People even worry more about naming ceremonies for the newborn babies, where partaking of _‘bread and tea’_ is the norm. To those people, the census is of no use! Even, the Local Government will not know that a child has just been born within its jurisdiction. At burial also, wads of cash exchange hands between the clerics and the congregants. There will be calls for prayers for all types of imaginary relationships. And that’s after the clerics must have fought for who should lead the prayers because, at the end of the programme, the leader goes home with the fattest portion of the largesse. Of course, that’s when the pastor will remember the church wall that’s about to fall down, which the children of the dead must contribute money to fix, not even minding whether or not the dead is already a candidate for hell!

Sad that the conscious understanding of the essence of the known figure of the population of a particular country has eluded Nigeria! So, how do we care for the aged when we don’t know how many they are? How do we prepare for the kids of school age when we don’t know their figure? How do we establish hospitals when we don’t know who to be catered for? The General Hospitals are no longer ‘general’ in their delivery of quality service while the Teaching Hospitals have become comfort zones for brain drain? Since nobody has the figure to plan with, Nigeria has become one sorry story of an unrepentant embracer of aimlessly drifting policies, one after the other.

In the not-so-distant past, people looked up to academia to provide a pragmatic plan for an incoming government. This is no longer the case! Even the academics are now overwhelmed and can no longer think of a novel and better approach to confront an insensitive government than the usual, old, _‘we-no-go-gree’,_ Michael Imoudu-era industrial action. And, as if the gods were angry, Nigeria’s universities were closed for the better part of the Year 2022; yet, the country continued as if nothing serious happened. The question is: can a nation grow beyond its intellectual capacity?

Population census is not a one-off. It’s an ongoing project. The more reason there must be a set standard for the coming exercise so that, by the time we are through with its rhyme and rhythm, Nigerians will be able to measure the outcome vis-à-vis the set standard. If we don’t have a set standard, then, it’s a scheme that has failed even before take-off. Let’s not be deceived, there’s no way a population census will be said to have achieved its purpose if it’s just a ritual. If it has no expectations and no goals to fulfil, then, it’s just a waste of time and resources. It is like national wealth squandered, as usual!

May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!

  • KOMOLAFE wrote in from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08098614418 – SMS only)

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a modern and general interest Magazine with its Headquarters in Abuja. The Magazine has a remarkable difference in editorial philosophy and goals, it adheres strictly to the ethics of Journalism by using the finest ethos of the profession to promote peace among citizens; identifying and harnessing the nation’s vast resources; celebrating achievements of government agencies, individuals, groups and corporate organizations and above all, repositioning Nigeria for the needed growth and development. Time Nigeria gives emphasis to places and issues that have not been given adequate attention by others. The Magazine is national in outlook and is currently being read and patronized both in print and on our vibrant and active online platform (www.timenigeria.com).
Articles
Related posts
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Abuja FileCover StoryOpinionPerspectivePolitics

Tinubu’s Reforms Deserve Continuity, Second Term Crucial — Onuigbo

4 Mins read
The President of Globe Legislators International, Rt. Hon. Sir Sam Onuigbo, has called on members and stakeholders of the All Progressives Congress…
Cover StoryHealthOpinionPerspective

Nigeria’s AMR Blind Spot: We Cannot Defeat Resistance Without Knowing Its True Scale

2 Mins read
  By Pharm. Mercy Aransiola Here is an uncomfortable truth about antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Nigeria: we do not fully know how…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com