Nigeria: Poverty Reduction & Horizontal Inequalities

from All Africa

This Day (Lagos)

Abimbola Akosile
Lagos

The arguments were powerful, as expected from such a gathering of top egg-heads and experts in the fields of social research and human behaviour. The focus was deliberation on relatively new research findings on the root causes of ethnic conflict and tribal wars in Nigeria, West Africa, and the world over.

Facilitated by CRISE of University of Oxford, UK and supported by the UK Department of International Development (DfID), the Global Peace and Security Fund of the Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the two-day conference proved to be an eye-opener.

Over thirty-seven participants including eight professors and several doctors and research officers, drawn from Nigeria, Ghana, and the UK, debated heatedly on previously largely un-explored areas and issues of citizenship, ethnicity, indigeneity, social conflict and naturalisation, and their attendant effects on tribal wars, poverty, social dislocation and development especially in the developing countries.

Armed with adequate materials and research findings and figures on the various topics, the participants, led by Professor Frances Stewart, Director of CRISE, UK, analysed and amended various recommendations from surveys contained in the working papers at the conference; all with a singular focus on peace for all to aid and spur growth and development.

From the academia to the legislature, from civil society exponents to militia representatives, from researchers to the media, to other concerned stakeholders, the refrain was the same, 'there must be lasting and equitable peace before development in any form can take place anywhere in the world'.

Nigeria, the venue of the vital conference, was a special reference point, with detailed focus on various reasons for the existence and clamour of such ethnic militias like the Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC), the restive Niger-Delta region, and potential political violence on real or perceived inequalities, which may either be horizontal or vertical in nature.

Below are some research findings and recommendations:

Horizontal Inequalities:

A Neglected Dimension

According to Professor Stewart (Mrs.), current thinking about development places individuals firmly at the centre of concern for analysis and policy. She explored why groups are important for individual welfare and social stability, and argued that horizontal inequalities (i.e. inequalities between culturally formed groups) is a very important but neglected dimension of development.

Most attention is focused on inequality between individuals. The paper recognises that groups are socially constructed and malleable, often with fluid membership. Nonetheless, group's relative performance in economic, social and political dimensions is an important source of individual welfare and can cause serious political instability.

She illustrated her findings with nine case studies, in which horizontal inequalities have led to a range of political disturbances, in some cases modified by state action to correct the inequalities; and concluded by pointing to an array of actions that can be taken to correct horizontal inequalities, arguing that such policies should form an important part of development strategy, but currently do not in either economic or political conditionality.

In addition, Mr. Arnim Langer, a research officer with CRISE, claimed horizontal inequalities are likely causes of conflict, and that wherever such inequalities occur, there is a high probability that conflict would occur among the citizens.

He claimed the purpose of the research on HIs is to determine under which conditions conflicts merge, and insisted that public policies can play major roles in either increasing or reducing horizontal inequalities.

Identities, Violence and Stability

In an abstract by Professor Eghosa Osaghae, Vice-Chancellor of Igbinedion University, Edo State, and Dr. Rotimi Suberu of the Department of Political Science, University of Ibadan, Oyo State, both academicians dealt with the intervening variables between diversity and conflicts in order to unravel the nature of the connection between them and to discern the linkages between how identities get mobilised and politicised and how this relates to the level of conflict.

To the duo, the dynamic character of identity formation, mobilisation processes, and of the shift from identity-diversity to conflict suggests that interrogation must necessity be contextual and historical, if participants are to capture the ebbs, flows, nuances and changes that are involved.

Their papers focused on the development, diversity, and trajections of identities and identity conflicts in Nigeria. These identities are mainly ethnic, regional and religious, these being largely territorial identities within which the non-territorial identities of class, gender and youth tend to be encapsulated.

They claimed these identities have been shaped by the colonial experience, which created a culturally artificial and divided Nigerian state but did very little to nurture a unified Nigerian nation. Instead, they claimed the colonial regionist federal legacy in Nigeria fuelled big-tribe hegemonic ethnocentrism, ethnic minority insecurity, democratic instability, ethno-military infighting and secessionist warfare.

They also warned against trivialising the nation's achievement in accommodating multiple identities, despite the many structural pathologies and violent conflicts that plague Nigeria.

Ethnicity in Nigeria

This paper, presented by Dr. Ukoha Ukiwo, a CRISE scholar, reviewed the different perspectives that have been utilised to shed light on the phenomenon of ethnicity in Nigeria, arguably one of the world's most ethnically diverse countries.

From an overview of the literature, Ukiwo argued that while these perspectives have benefited from debates on ethnicity worldwide, Nigerian responses to historical developments such as the gruesome civil war in (1967 -1970) have enriched the study of ethnicity.

He noted, in particular, the dominance of instrumentalist interpretations in the literature that privilege the role of elites in ethnic mobilisation and conflicts; and suggested that such a position needs to be substantiated through a consideration of the connections and disconnection between elite and mass interests through a systematic study of horizontal inequalities.

He argued that the changing socio-political realities in Nigeria and the dominant intellectual traditions of the social sciences have greatly influenced the study of ethnicity in Nigeria.

To Ukiwo, a lack of interest in the study of internal dynamics of ethnic mobilisation arose from the assumption that violent ethnic conflicts are instigated by elites to serve their personal interests.

He also pointed at the need to enhance the capacity of the State, the Police, and the Judiciary, to perform their functions and overcome the problems of ethnic militias.

Local Inequality and Governance

Speaking on this issue, Dr. Abdul Raufu Mustapha, a Senior researcher with CRISE, investigated the contradictory process of ethno-regional fragmentation in Nigeria that takes place side-by-side with a centralising nation-building agenda.

The researcher claimed that since 1966, efforts at reforming inter-ethnic relations in Nigeria have had only limited success. To him, while the reforms have fundamentally transformed the Nigerian state, they have yet to solve the problem of ethnic mobilisation and conflict. Insisting that bureaucratic and political power are frequently used for personal and not collective advancement, Mustapha pointed at a resultant plethora of grievances from the various ethnic groups

However, he claimed the real problem lies not in the marginalisation of this or that group per se, but in the inadequate formulation and/or implementation of previous reforms, their politicisation and the rising pressures of poverty.

To him, attempts at creating inclusive institutions have had limited success, while it has been relatively easier to broaden ethnic representation in the executive and legislature than to create genuine structures of social inclusion.

"Instead of becoming more representative, political parties are now increasingly replacing ethnic forms of organisation with personal networks of wealthy and powerful individuals" he said.

"Professionalism has been threatened by political indifference, ethnic gate-keeping and internal factionalisation and the private sector bureaucracies in the media, banks, the formal sector economy and even civil society, continue to manifest considerable ethnic bias with minimum efforts at correcting the imbalances. These limitations notwithstanding, we should be mindful of the fact that Nigeria is now a more integrated country than it was in the 1960s", Mustapha claimed.

OPC: Making of an Ethnic Militia

In an abstract by Yvan Guichaoua, a researcher, he averred that mainstream economic literature on the causes of civil wars links the probability of emergence of civil conflicts to economic opportunities that make the initiation of a rebellion profitable.

To him, this perspective gives a passive role to the state and by resorting to primitive conceptions of mobilisation, ignores the issue of interaction between leaders and followers, which is crucial to the success of a rebellion.

Exploring the genealogy and evolution of a Nigerian Yoruba ethnic militia, the Oodua People's Congress (OPC), the paper provided a dynamic analysis of the rebellion-making decision in which the state plays an active role, direct or indirect. The researcher claimed history and evolution of the OPC display many features not found in the archetypal presentation of the rebellion-making process.

"First, despite Nigeria's oil wealth, greed for lootable natural resources in no way constitutes the impetus for formation of the militia: the OPC emerged largely as a response to the fiercest military dictatorship of Nigeria's post-colonial history. Second, we suggest that collective action problems typically associated with the mobilisation of followers are solved via the everyday benefits the organisation grants to militia members in the course of their activities" Guichaoua said.

He also claimed the OPC is successful because it accommodates many sections of Yoruba society, including high-profile political figures, and that it has gained its success largely by functionally replacing the state in domains where the latter has failed, such as security and the judiciary.

Final Words on Equality

Professor Stewart claimed Nigeria is an interesting mixture of good and bad aspects, where one group politically dominates the other and horizontal inequalities prevent a lot of people from really achieving their potential.

In the same vein, Professor Tekena Tamuno of the University of Ibadan, Oyo State, claimed the key word is legitimacy in the issues of ethnic representation and governance, which brings in key determinants of participation and performance. To him, the people are usually ignored and their mandate don't count.

Mustapha insisted that in Nigeria, there is little attempt to lift up the poor in terms of social indicators, and that the role is not for the government alone, but the private sector must also participate actively in the process

Professor Sam Egwu of Kogi State University, Anyangba, Kogi State, claimed that ethnic militias is one of the most important issues in the political process in Nigeria; which is a fallout of the interface between federalism and distribution of revenue from natural resources. To him, there is a need to link the needs and demands of the ethnic militias to issues of governance.

Professor Adele Jinadu, a Director of CASS, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, averred the need to take a historic perspective on the issues of ethnic conflicts and horizontal inequalities, to determine who actually owns the state. To him, we can employ all facets of decentralisation, devolution and restructuring. "You can be a majority ethnic group yet be historically disadvantaged. Embracing the concept of group rights brings the issue of individual rights into conflict".

Mr. Adagbo Onoja, a top media person with the Nation in Abuja, added that the character of the ruling class in Nigeria ought to attract more focus than the State itself, and that the pitfalls of Nigerian federalism have not been identified.

Professor Ogoh Alubo of the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Kuru, Plateau State, pointed at a largely ignored fact of State corruption in the development scenario, where some states have the capacity to develop themselves but choose to fritter away or loot the funds on unnecessary things. To him, the clamour for creation of States is an evidence of marginalisation but ways must be found to deal with the issue of marginalisation outside States creation.

Stewart, a fourth-time visitor to Nigeria, rounded up by claiming that though the country is blessed with oil, which has turned out to be a tragic resource, emphasis should be on other abandoned alternatives like agriculture which is a major employer of labour and capable of leveling any horizontal inequalities.

Deliberations have taken place and recommendations have been made, but the onus is still on every citizen, wherever he or she may live in Nigeria and beyond to foster peaceful interaction and promote general development at all levels.

Until that is done, coupled with visible government efforts at policy implementation backed by private investment and initiatives, Nigerians and by extension her regional neighbours, may not see the end of ethnic, religious, and social conflict, which all impact on poverty reduction and development. This seemingly simple task is for all.