Nigeria Must Invest in Creative Youth and Women, Not Political Patronage: A Ten-Point Reform Blueprint
By Umar U. Duguri
Nigeria cannot build a prosperous future by rewarding political loyalty while neglecting the creativity, energy and entrepreneurial potential of its young people and women. As households struggle with rising living costs, small businesses face mounting expenses and graduates search for meaningful work, governments at all levels must rethink their priorities.
The central question is simple: why should public resources go to people whose main qualification is proximity to politicians while young Nigerians with practical ideas, enterprising women and skilled citizens struggle to obtain the support needed to build sustainable livelihoods?
This is not an argument against politicians or legitimate political participation. It is an argument against a system in which political connections matter more than competence, creativity, hard work and demonstrable contributions to society.
Public money should serve the public interest, not reward political loyalty.
Nigeria already has empowerment programmes at federal and state levels. The challenge is to ensure that public spending translates into productive businesses, sustainable employment, improved household incomes and measurable social benefits.
Documented budget records from Kano and Imo states offer useful starting points for examining how governments can strengthen these programmes and make them more accountable to the people they are intended to serve.
The Politics of Empowerment in Nigeria
Across Nigeria, empowerment programmes have become a staple of political communication. Governors, legislators, local government chairpersons and other public officials regularly announce the distribution of cash, motorcycles, sewing machines, grinding machines, vehicles, agricultural inputs and other items to selected beneficiaries.
Such interventions can be useful. A sewing machine can help a tailor increase production, a grinding machine can support a small business and agricultural equipment can improve a farmer's productivity. Direct financial assistance can also provide vital relief to vulnerable households.
The problem is not the distribution itself but whether these programmes are designed to deliver lasting economic benefits or merely generate favourable publicity.
Who selects the beneficiaries? What criteria determine eligibility? Are recipients chosen because they have genuine needs and viable plans, or because they belong to a politician's inner circle? Is there follow-up to determine whether the equipment is being used productively? How many beneficiaries become economically independent after receiving support?
These are legitimate questions that taxpayers deserve to ask.
An empowerment ceremony may attract attention, but the real test begins after the cameras have gone.
A beneficiary who receives a machine but cannot afford electricity, raw materials, maintenance or transportation may struggle to sustain the business. A young person given equipment without training or access to customers may not achieve the promised economic transformation.
The lesson is clear: empowerment must be more than an event. It must be a process that produces measurable improvements in people's lives.
Kano State: What the Budget Performance Figures Reveal
A particularly instructive example can be found in Kano State's Citizens' Accountability Report on the Implementation of the 2024 Budget, published by the Kano State Government in 2025 through its official budget and accountability reporting channels: Kano State Budget Office.
According to the state government's report, the Innovation, Development and Effectiveness in the Acquisition of Skills Project, known as IDEAS and targeted at young people and women, had an original 2024 budget allocation of ₦7.245 billion.
The final budget allocation was revised to ₦4 billion. Actual expenditure recorded for the year was approximately ₦1.607 billion, representing about 40% of the final allocation.
In other words, approximately ₦2.393 billion of the programme's final budget allocation was not reflected in actual expenditure recorded for the year.
These are figures reported by the Kano State Government; they are not, by themselves, an independent audit or evaluation. They must also be interpreted fairly. A difference between an approved budget and actual expenditure does not, by itself, establish that funds were stolen, that the programme failed or that beneficiaries received nothing. Delays, implementation schedules, procurement challenges and other factors can affect budget performance.
Nevertheless, the figures raise legitimate questions.
How many young people and women received training under the programme in 2024? How many completed their training? How many secured employment or established businesses? What equipment, facilities or other support did they receive? Why was actual expenditure considerably below the revised allocation, and what results were achieved with the money spent?
These questions deserve answers from the responsible authorities.
The same Kano State accountability report recorded approximately 93% budget performance for Kano's Adolescent Girls Initiative for Learning and Empowerment project, which had a final allocation of about ₦1.334 billion and recorded expenditure of approximately ₦1.243 billion.
The contrast illustrates an important point: different programmes can have different implementation outcomes, even within the same state.
The appropriate response is not to condemn every empowerment initiative. It is to identify what works, investigate implementation gaps and ensure that public spending delivers its intended benefits.
For governments across Nigeria, the lesson is straightforward: announcing a budget is not the same as delivering a programme, and spending money is not the same as demonstrating impact.
Imo State: Budgeting for Youth and Women's Empowerment
Imo State's approved 2024 budget provides another useful example of how governments can make empowerment a defined public policy objective. The figures cited here come from the Imo State 2024 Approved Budget, published by the Imo State Government in December 2023 through its official budget documents: Imo State Government budget portal.
The budget included a provision of ₦270 million for the empowerment of 100 women and young people per local government area. It also provided ₦90 million for the rehabilitation of the Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme and ₦80 million for the rehabilitation of the N-Power youth empowerment programme.
These are approved-budget provisions reported in the state budget document. They are not evidence that the money was fully released, spent or successfully converted into economic opportunities.
These allocations demonstrate that youth and women's empowerment can be explicitly incorporated into government budget planning.
However, an approved allocation is not proof that the money was fully released, spent or successfully converted into economic opportunities. To assess the programme's actual performance, citizens would need implementation records showing disbursements, beneficiary numbers, the nature of assistance provided and the results achieved.
For the ₦270 million initiative, for example, the government should be able to explain the selection criteria, the distribution across local government areas and the types of support provided to beneficiaries.
Were recipients trained? Did they receive equipment or financing? Were women-owned businesses supported? How many young people used the intervention to establish or expand productive enterprises?
These are the questions that transform a budget announcement into meaningful public accountability.
Imo's example also reinforces a broader principle: every government should make it possible for citizens to trace the journey from budget approval to actual expenditure and measurable outcomes.
Nigeria's Experience Shows That Empowerment Can Be Better Targeted
The case for supporting productive citizens is not merely theoretical. Nigeria has previously implemented programmes designed to support small businesses, market women, artisans, farmers and unemployed young people.
The federal Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme, for example, includes initiatives such as MarketMoni, TraderMoni and FarmerMoni. These schemes were designed to provide microcredit or other forms of financial support to small-scale traders, market women, artisans and farmers.
In a State House statement dated 15 December 2021, titled “Osinbajo: 4m MSMEs Benefited from FG’s Intervention Schemes in 5 Years,” former Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo reported that more than four million micro, small and medium-sized enterprises had benefited from federal intervention schemes involving more than ₦150 billion over five years. He also reported that 57% of the beneficiary businesses were owned by Nigerians below the age of 35 and that women accounted for close to 60% of beneficiaries. The statement is available through the State House archive.
These were government-reported figures, not an independent evaluation of the long-term survival of the businesses or the number of jobs created. The cited statement did not, by itself, establish how many enterprises remained operational, how many loans were repaid or what lasting income effects occurred. Nevertheless, it demonstrates the scale at which public intervention was reported to have been directed towards small enterprises rather than exclusively towards large institutions or politically influential individuals.
The important question is what happened after the assistance was provided.
How many businesses remained operational? How many expanded? What proportion of loans was repaid? How much additional income did recipients generate? What lessons can be drawn from the programme's successes and shortcomings?
Future empowerment schemes should answer such questions through credible monitoring and independent assessment.
Nigeria does not lack examples of policies intended to support productive citizens. What it needs is a stronger culture of measuring results and correcting weaknesses.
The Nigerian Youth: Talented, Resourceful and Under-supported
From Aba to Kano, Lagos to Jos, and Bauchi to Port Harcourt, young Nigerians are creating solutions, developing products and building businesses under difficult conditions.
Some repair electronic devices, manufacture footwear, design clothing, process agricultural products, develop software, produce films, create digital content and provide professional services. Others pursue opportunities in renewable energy, logistics, e-commerce and modern agriculture.
Many lack influential political connections. Their businesses survive on personal savings, family assistance, informal borrowing and customer income.
They face familiar obstacles: unreliable electricity, expensive transportation, high rents, limited access to affordable credit and rising equipment and raw-material costs.
For a rural entrepreneur, the challenge may be access to irrigation, storage or reliable markets. For a technology entrepreneur in an urban centre, it may be the cost of equipment, internet access and professional training. For a young filmmaker, it may be the lack of affordable production facilities, financing and distribution opportunities.
These are real economic barriers. Motivational speeches alone cannot overcome them.
Imagine a young Nigerian who has developed a promising agricultural-processing business and is ready to employ ten people. Imagine another who has acquired valuable technical skills but cannot afford the equipment needed to open a workshop.
Should their prospects depend on whether they know a governor, senator, member of the House of Representatives or local government chairman?
Certainly not.
Government should create transparent systems through which qualified applicants can compete for grants, equipment, training and affordable financing without political sponsorship.
The objective should be to turn creativity into productivity, productivity into employment and employment into stronger communities.
Women Need Economic Opportunities, Not Just Political Recognition
In markets, farms, neighbourhood shops and roadside businesses, women contribute significantly to household survival and local economic activity. Many sell food, process grains, make clothing, operate beauty businesses, raise livestock or engage in small-scale trading.
Some support children, care for relatives and manage households while trying to keep their businesses afloat.
Yet many women-owned enterprises remain small because their owners lack affordable capital, suitable equipment, business training and reliable markets.
A woman selling food in a local market may not need a large government loan. She may need a small, fairly priced financing facility, better storage equipment, access to bulk purchasing and protection from exploitative lenders.
A woman processing rice, groundnuts, millet or other agricultural products may benefit more from modern processing equipment and a dependable supply chain than from a one-off cash distribution.
Similarly, a young woman with skills in fashion, digital marketing, photography or software development needs opportunities to compete in the marketplace, not merely recognition at political ceremonies.
Government programmes should reflect the actual needs of women in different economic circumstances.
That requires consultation, reliable data and follow-up support. It also requires recognising that women in rural communities may face different challenges from those operating businesses in Abuja, Lagos, Kano or Port Harcourt.
Empowerment should not be reduced to distributing household items or providing temporary relief. Where possible, it should help women expand their productive capacity, increase their incomes and achieve greater economic security.
Social assistance remains necessary for women and households facing severe hardship. But social protection and enterprise development should be treated as complementary policies with distinct objectives.
When Political Loyalty Becomes More Valuable Than Productivity
Nigeria's political system places considerable emphasis on party structures, campaign mobilisation and political alliances. These are recognised features of democratic competition.
Problems arise, however, when access to public opportunities becomes closely tied to political loyalty.
A citizen may feel that receiving assistance requires membership in a particular political group, attendance at party events or personal access to an influential officeholder. An entrepreneur may conclude that submitting a business proposal is pointless without a recommendation from someone in government.
When such perceptions become widespread, they weaken public confidence and discourage independent initiative.
The issue is not whether a beneficiary supports the ruling party or belongs to the opposition. Citizens have a democratic right to their political preferences.
The issue is whether those preferences determine access to resources financed by public revenue.
A government that collects taxes, receives federal allocations or manages public funds must serve the entire population. Its obligations extend to opposition supporters, non-partisan citizens, young entrepreneurs, market women, farmers, artisans and vulnerable households.
No citizen should have to demonstrate political loyalty to qualify for a programme intended to promote economic development.
Political officeholders must also distinguish between personal generosity and official responsibility. A politician distributing personal funds may choose whom to assist, within the law. A politician administering a publicly funded programme must comply with public rules, financial controls and accountability requirements.
That distinction is fundamental to responsible governance.
A Ten-Point Reform Blueprint for Nigeria
If Nigeria is serious about moving from political patronage to productive empowerment, governments must go beyond promises and establish practical mechanisms that citizens can see, understand and evaluate.
The following ten-point blueprint offers a realistic starting point for federal, state and local governments.
1. Establish Transparent Youth and Women's Enterprise Funds
Governments should establish or strengthen dedicated funds for youth-led businesses, women-owned enterprises, skilled artisans and innovative ventures.
Funding criteria should be published, and applications should be assessed according to relevant considerations such as demonstrated need, business feasibility, skills and potential economic or social benefits.
A young software developer may require equipment and technical training, while a woman processing agricultural produce may need machinery, storage facilities and working capital.
Where existing programmes can achieve these objectives, governments should improve them rather than create additional agencies that duplicate responsibilities and consume administrative resources.
2. Introduce Merit-Based Selection and Independent Screening
Every major empowerment programme should operate a documented selection process.
Applications should be assessed against relevant criteria, including demonstrated need, business feasibility, skills, community circumstances and the potential benefits of the proposed activity.
Not every applicant needs a sophisticated business plan. Many promising entrepreneurs operate in the informal economy and may require help preparing viable proposals.
Governments should therefore provide accessible application channels, including community-based support and offline options for people without reliable internet access.
Political officeholders may help identify community needs, but they should not have unchecked discretion to select beneficiaries.
3. Create Practical Skills and Apprenticeship Programmes
Nigeria needs more than certificates. It needs people with practical skills that employers and customers are willing to pay for.
Governments should partner with technical colleges, reputable vocational centres, manufacturers, technology companies, artisans and professional associations to provide training in fields with identifiable demand.
Priority areas could include electrical installation, welding, construction, solar energy, vehicle maintenance, agricultural processing, digital technology, fashion, food production and creative services.
Training should include supervised practical work, recognised certification where applicable and links to employers or customers.
Graduates who wish to become self-employed should have access to starter tools, mentorship and appropriate business support.
4. Establish Women-Focused Business Support and Market Access
Women-led businesses should have access to financing and business services designed around their actual operating conditions.
Governments can work with credible financial institutions, cooperatives and business associations to provide suitable financing, equipment leasing, business training and market connections.
Special attention should be given to rural women, agricultural processors, traders, artisans and women entering technology and other skilled professions.
Programmes should also address practical barriers such as inadequate storage, poor transport links, limited access to digital tools and difficulties balancing business activities with caregiving responsibilities.
5. Link Empowerment to Job Creation and Local Economic Development
Empowerment should not focus exclusively on the number of people receiving money or equipment. It should also consider how support contributes to sustainable economic activity.
Governments should identify sectors with genuine local potential and develop programmes around them.
In an agricultural community, this may mean supporting processing, packaging, storage and distribution rather than concentrating exclusively on primary production.
In a commercial town, it may involve improving facilities for traders, supporting small manufacturers and strengthening transport and supply chains.
Employment targets should be realistic, and job creation should be verified rather than assumed from the number of grants awarded.
6. Publish Beneficiary Information, Budgets and Performance Reports
Public accountability must be built into empowerment programmes from the beginning.
Governments should publish programme budgets, selection criteria, aggregate beneficiary data, funding allocations and periodic performance reports.
Where beneficiary names are published, appropriate privacy and security safeguards should apply. Sensitive personal information and bank details should not be exposed.
Reports should explain how funds were spent, how recipients were selected and whether intended results were achieved.
Citizens should be able to distinguish between the amount approved, the amount actually disbursed and the results delivered.
7. Introduce Independent Monitoring and Post-Disbursement Assessment
Empowerment does not end when money is transferred or equipment is handed over.
Governments should establish proportionate monitoring arrangements to determine whether recipients received the promised support and whether it is being used for its intended purpose.
Assessments should examine business survival, changes in income, employment, productivity, skills acquired and other outcomes relevant to the programme.
A business that closes is not necessarily evidence of fraud or official misconduct. Economic conditions can change, and some legitimate ventures will fail.
The important questions are whether funds were properly used, risks were reasonably managed and lessons were incorporated into future programmes.
8. Improve the Business Environment for Small Enterprises
Government cannot empower entrepreneurs effectively while ignoring the conditions that make it difficult for them to operate.
Federal and state authorities should work within their respective responsibilities to improve electricity access, transport infrastructure, business registration processes, access to finance and the predictability of regulation.
Local governments should ensure that lawful charges are transparent, properly administered and not unnecessarily burdensome.
Support programmes should also help entrepreneurs understand tax obligations, maintain basic records and comply with relevant regulations without imposing disproportionate administrative burdens.
9. Protect Empowerment Programmes from Political Capture
Publicly funded empowerment programmes should not become informal extensions of party structures.
Governments should establish safeguards against preferential treatment based solely on party membership, campaign activity, personal loyalty or family connections.
Applicants should have access to clear complaint procedures if they believe selection rules were not followed. Credible allegations of fraud or misconduct should be referred to the appropriate authorities.
Political representatives can participate in identifying needs and publicising opportunities, but programme administration should follow published rules.
The same principle should apply during election periods, when the risk of confusing public programmes with partisan campaigning can become particularly significant.
10. Make Empowerment a Multi-Year Development Commitment
One-off distributions often fail to address the continuing needs of entrepreneurs and skilled workers.
Governments should adopt multi-year strategies that connect training, financing, infrastructure, mentoring and access to markets.
Annual budgets should identify available resources and explain how programmes will be sustained. Funding should not be announced without realistic plans for implementation and monitoring.
Governments should publish baseline information and measurable targets so citizens can assess progress over time.
For example, an administration could report how many enterprises received support, how many remained operational after two years, how many jobs were independently verified and how beneficiaries' incomes changed.
Where results fall short, officials should explain the reasons and identify corrective measures.
How the Blueprint Can Be Implemented
These ten reforms need not begin simultaneously or require the creation of expensive new institutions.
Governments can start by reviewing existing empowerment programmes, identifying duplication, publishing selection procedures and establishing a clear system for tracking spending and outcomes.
Within the first 90 days, authorities could review existing schemes, publish programme objectives and eligibility criteria, and establish baseline performance information.
Within six months, they could strengthen transparent selection procedures, introduce accessible complaint channels and begin linking beneficiaries to training, markets and business support.
Within 12 months, governments could publish consolidated performance reports showing expenditure, beneficiaries reached and the results achieved.
Over two to three years, independent evaluations could examine business survival, employment, income changes and value for money, allowing governments to expand approaches that demonstrate credible results.
The precise timetable will depend on available resources, institutional capacity and legal obligations. The essential requirement is that implementation should be measurable, publicly accountable and consistent with applicable financial management rules.
Constituency Projects Must Also Pass the Test of Public Value
The same principles apply to constituency projects and other interventions associated with elected representatives.
Legislators have legitimate responsibilities to represent their constituents, advocate for public services and help ensure that communities receive appropriate development attention.
Projects that improve schools, health facilities, water supply, roads, agricultural productivity or access to economic opportunities can benefit communities for years.
However, a project's value should not be determined by the political prominence of the person associated with it.
It should be assessed by its cost, quality, relevance, accessibility and lasting impact.
A project that creates jobs and strengthens local economic activity deserves recognition because of what it achieves, not merely because a politician commissioned it.
Equally, a programme that consumes substantial resources without producing meaningful results should be open to scrutiny, regardless of the officeholder responsible.
Politicians Are Part of the Solution
A balanced argument must acknowledge that politicians can play a constructive role in youth and women's empowerment.
Elected representatives can advocate for funding, identify underserved communities, facilitate access to institutions and help remove barriers to development.
The problem is not political involvement itself. It is the use of public resources to preserve personal influence without sufficient regard for fairness, need or measurable outcomes.
Politicians can help change this pattern by supporting open application processes, encouraging independent assessment and resisting pressure to reserve opportunities for political associates.
They should compete on the strength of their development records.
A representative who helps establish a transparent programme that enables young people to acquire useful skills or supports women in building sustainable enterprises has a stronger public-interest case than one whose achievements consist mainly of distributing benefits without evidence of lasting results.
Political leadership should expand opportunities for citizens, not make them permanently dependent on political leaders.
Government Must Also Create an Enabling Environment
Grants and empowerment programmes alone cannot solve Nigeria's economic challenges.
Businesses cannot flourish when electricity is unreliable, insecurity threatens livelihoods, transportation costs are excessive and access to financing remains difficult.
A young entrepreneur who receives equipment but cannot afford to operate it may gain little from the intervention. A farmer who increases production without access to storage and markets may suffer losses. A woman who expands her business but faces prohibitive borrowing costs may struggle to sustain that growth.
Governments must therefore combine targeted support with broader economic reforms, including infrastructure improvements, stronger education and vocational training, access to finance, support for agricultural value chains and predictable regulation.
The goal should be to build an economy in which citizens succeed because their ideas meet real needs and their work is productive, rather than because they enjoy privileged access to public officials.
Conclusion: Let Government Invest in Those Who Build the Future
Nigeria's development challenges demand a more thoughtful approach to public resources.
The country cannot afford to overlook talented young people, enterprising women, skilled artisans and innovative businesses while allowing political connections to dominate access to economic opportunities.
Government should invest in citizens who can turn ideas into products, skills into services and enterprise into employment. It should also protect vulnerable people who need assistance, whether or not they can demonstrate immediate economic returns.
Political leaders have a legitimate place in this process, but public resources must never become the private property of political networks.
The real measure of empowerment is not how many people gather at a political event, how many items are distributed before cameras or how many supporters applaud a public officeholder. It is how many lives improve, how many opportunities emerge and how much lasting public value is created.
Nigeria needs governments that empower citizens to stand on their own feet, not systems that make access to political power the principal route to economic survival.
The country will be better served when creative young people and women receive a fair opportunity to succeed, public funds are managed transparently and politicians are judged by the quality of the opportunities they create for the people they represent.
The future of Nigeria must be built on productive citizens, accountable leadership and public investment that delivers measurable results—not political patronage without public value.
The Analyst Online Media