THE latest assessment of the Nigerian economy by the World Bank strongly indicates that poverty is soaring. The government points to stronger foreign reserves, improved macroeconomic indicators and renewed investor confidence, yet millions of Nigerians continue to struggle with the elementary business of survival. The World Bank’s 2026-2032 Country Partnership Framework and its accompanying diagnostic identified widespread poverty, high informality, weak job creation and serious energy and infrastructure deficits as persistent constraints on Nigeria’s development. This appraisal should be treated as a summons to concrete action. The framework’s central proposal is unmistakable: Nigeria must create more, and better, private-sector jobs to achieve durable poverty reduction. The diagnostic puts 33 percent of Nigerians in the category of the ultra-poor, 61 percent below the poverty line, and 79 percent as either poor or vulnerable to falling into poverty. The Bank’s current country profile also shows that about 123 million Nigerians lived in extreme poverty in 2025. These figures are chilling. Behind them are parents eating less so their children can eat; graduates wandering from one unsuccessful job application to another; farmers unable to cultivate their land because of terrorist attacks; small businesses suffocating from energy costs; and workers becoming broke almost as soon as they are paid.
Reforms such as petrol subsidy removal, exchange rate normalisation, tighter monetary policy and tax review, among others, may have been necessary. The World Bank itself acknowledges that recent reforms have contributed to macroeconomic stabilisation. But such stabilisation must not become the final destination. It is not enough for the government to say that challenging reforms have been undertaken. The purpose of economic reform is to make citizens’ lives better. As John Steinbeck wrote in The Grapes of Wrath, ‘Wherever there’s a fight so hungry people can eat, I’ll be there.’ Reforms should be beneficial for all. The Federal Government must move beyond conditional cash transfers as a response to mass deprivation. Social protection has its place, particularly during periods of severe economic dislocation or public health emergency. But no country can sustainably lift its citizens out of poverty through cash disbursement alone. Nigerians must ultimately earn their way out of poverty through productive work. Disturbingly, there lies another paradox: Nigeria is not short of people willing to work; it is short of an economy capable of productively employing them. Three to four million young Nigerians reportedly enter the labour market every year. The World Bank projects that about 60 million young Nigerians will join the labour force over the next decade. At the same time, one in four Nigerian youths is neither employed, educated, nor trained. What happens when millions of young people discover that there is no place for them in the formal economy? Government must answer that question with urgency.
An answer lies in agriculture, it must become a genuine business rather than a slogan. Nigerian farmers cannot produce food when insecurity prevents them from reaching their farms. Government must decisively address insecurity in farming communities, expand irrigation and storage, improve rural roads and provide access to affordable finance. Besides, there is a direct relationship between energy and prosperity. A factory that cannot operate for 24 hours cannot compete effectively. A manufacturer forced to depend heavily on diesel cannot produce cheaply. A small enterprise spending an enormous portion of its income on electricity cannot employ many people. Nigeria cannot defeat poverty without solving its energy problem. Emphatically, the word ‘subsidy’ must not be treated like a profanity. Every serious government uses subsidies, incentives or strategic support to nurture sectors vital to national development. Nigeria should consider targeted fuel or energy support for productive enterprises. The question is not whether government should subsidise. It is what should be subsidised, who should benefit and what measurable public good should result.
Government must also confront its own appetite. Why is ‘bold reform’ so frequently invoked when the subject is subsidy removal, but less enthusiastically applied when the discussion turns to corruption, waste and the extravagant cost of governance? Fighting corruption, reducing official extravagance, recovering stolen public funds and making government procurement deliberately favourable to competent Nigerian producers are also bold reforms. In this context, Malaysia offers a useful lesson. Its government maintains structured policies governing official and departmental vehicles, while its wider industrial policies have supported domestic automotive production. Nigeria should similarly examine how public procurement can be used more deliberately to strengthen domestic manufacturing, provided local products meet reasonable standards of quality, safety and value. Nigerian automobile manufacturers, for their part, must rise to the occasion. Patriotism cannot compel Nigerians indefinitely to buy inferior products. ‘Buy Nigerian’ must be driven by the mantra: ‘Make Nigerian products worth buying.’
There is another elephant in the room: local government. How does Nigeria intend to fight poverty at the grassroots when the tier of government closest to the people is weakened by political interference? The Supreme Court’s July 2024 judgment affirmed the constitutional status and financial autonomy of local governments and held that state retention of local-government funds was unconstitutional. The Federal Government subsequently established an inter-ministerial committee to facilitate implementation. The matter must not end there. The President should engage the governors and insist, through sustained political dialogue, that local governments become functional institutions of grassroots development. As in the advanced economies, the local council should drive rural development. A local government controlled from the governor’s office cannot truly be the government of the people. The challenge in Nigeria today is not merely who occupies political office, but whether those in office possess the imagination and courage to build institutions that work beyond political convenience. Yet Nigerians themselves must also look inwards. They cannot demand integrity from leaders while celebrating corruption when it benefits them. A society eventually gets the leadership culture it tolerates.
There is another challenge: Artificial Intelligence (AI). The world of work is changing rapidly. Automation and AI will create opportunities, but they will also displace certain categories of jobs. Nigeria cannot afford to prepare millions of young people for an economy that no longer exists. Digital skills, technical education, vocational training and entrepreneurship must become central pillars of national economic policy. Above all, government must remember that not every Nigerian should be thrown naked into the international market and told to swim. Is a teacher earning ?100,000 not entitled to drive a modest Corolla? Must every ordinary worker bear the full weight of inflation while government continues to protect its own privileges? The country cannot return to square one after asking its citizens to endure painful reforms. Nigeria needs reform, certainly, but reform with a human face.
The true measure of economic success is not the comfort of the balance sheet in Abuja. It is whether the farmer can safely reach his farm; whether the factory can run through the night; whether the teacher can live with dignity; whether the graduate can find productive work; whether the family can afford food; and whether a young Nigerian can look into the future without despair. The World Bank has sounded the alarm. Government must now listen, for ultimately, the economy exists for the people, not otherwise. The fight against poverty must become the defining economic struggle of the moment.