Using STI to liberate Nigerians from poverty
The journey from science to innovation is very tortuous and complex. Little wonder, science has remained a consumption item in Nigeria rather than an investment item since it hasn’t significantly impacted on the nation’s economic development. Fortunately, most nations have attained prosperity through the use of science, technology and innovation (STI) capacity building programs. Nations such as China, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Malaysia, amongst others, have been liberated from poverty through STI.
Why is it difficult for Nigeria to liberate almost 100 million Nigerians from poverty through STI? Several years ago, one reasoned that reliance on sale of crude oil could lead to economic growth in Nigeria. Sadly, the nation is still in economic recession as the recent National Bureau of Statistics report shows that the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) shrank by 0.52 percent in the first quarter of 2017. With agriculture remaining at the heart of federal and state governments’ efforts to diversify the economy, the GDP contribution of the sector is declining. I observe a paradox of strategy for a nation that has extensive fertile and arable land in abundance, yet unable to feed her people. This suggests that all isn’t well with the agricultural sector.
In fact, a situation in which about 60 percent of Nigeria’s working population are still required to provide food requirements of the nation only shows that productivity is very low, and production technology is still primitive. This calls urgently for the development of improved planting and harvesting materials, insecticides, processing techniques, and other material inputs. By implication, there is a wide technological gap which requires urgent intervention through the application of research and development (R&D) in the agricultural sector of the economy. The Ministry of Agriculture has more work to do.
The vigorous injection of the US dollar into Nigeria’s import-dependent economy may be necessary, but certainly, not sufficient to eliminate poverty. For industrialists desperately in need of US dollars to import raw materials for production, the CBN’s “vigorous injection of the dollars” into the economy is likely to be in their favor. Injecting millions of dollars to increase importation, while there is no corresponding increase in the production of non-oil exports is a “bittersweet strategy” adopted by the CBN.
The “sweet” part of the CBN’s strategy takes care of those genuine industrialists who need foreign exchange (forex) to import raw materials for production. For this category of entrepreneurs, they have to contend with multiple forex rates and the challenge posed by incessant power failure. The “bitter” segment of the strategy takes care of those privileged, but idle Nigerians, with excess naira who don’t import anything.They have a ready-made market with huge profit in their multiple forex deals.
It’s the federal government’s affection for what an analyst refers to as “crony capitalism” for almost five decades, that has made elected and appointed officials not to be favorably disposed towards knowing how to build capacity in STI for sustainable growth. After all, why pursue STI when government-owned firms can easily be transferred to well-connected individuals. Nations where individuals set up firms that are to trade on the floor of either the New York Exchange or the Nigerian Stock Exchange, need knowledge of science, technology, engineering and innovation which are essential for growth of their businesses.
If the “vigorous injection of dollars” doesn’t improve the level of production and raise the level of employment, certainly, Nigeria will be having a jobless economy.It’s in the interest of Nigeria for those in the government to pursue agendas that will engender local production with increase in the level of employment. If governments-local, state and federal, want a prosperous country, then elected and appointed office holders must begin to discuss strategies, programs, and policies for building STI capacity. I say this because in today’s competitive global economy, STI can no longer be seen as a luxury, suitable for wealthier, more economically advanced economies. Rather, if Nigeria as a developing nation has the desire to prosper in the global economy with sustainable development and poverty reduction, her leaders must seek knowledge on how to use STI capacity for economic growth. Nations whose leaders understand that poverty cannot be easily managed at the macroeconomic level have tried STI and it has worked for them. Methinks the issue is how to build STI capacity; rather than question why Nigeria has to build capacity in STI.
Majority of the poor are in Nigeria’s rural areas. In order to build STI capacity, governments at all levels in Nigeria should evolve workable and sustainable poverty reduction strategy. Poverty reduction is one of the seventeen pillars of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The question that policy makers in Nigeria should always ask is: What STI capacity building programs can help the country improve the quality of life of the people- improved health care delivery, access to clean water, and affordable power supply for almost 100 million poor Nigerians in our society? Why is it that inappropriate technologies that wouldn’t benefit the people are being adopted for use? What information is available to rural communities, that those engineers and scientists working with government aren’t privy to in solving local problems? How can local views and perspectives be incorporated into the STI capacity building process, and into technology development and diffusion process?
All levels of government must ensure that local communities participateactively in the technology development process. Rural dwellers shouldn’t be spectators and passive recipients of technology developed for them by outsiders who don’t know the challenges they face on a daily basis. Local, state and federal governments must develop strategies for entrepreneurship and marketing skills for those living in local communities. This is one of the ways to break the generational cycle of poverty. Without entrepreneurship and marketing skills, technically superior solutions will not be widely adopted in local communities, and thus, will be of little or no use. The Ministry of Science and Technology may consider these proposals.
MA Johnson