The Project File Details
- Name: IMPACT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ON NIGERIA’S FOREIGN POLICY: UNDER PRESIDENT GOODLUCK JONATHAN ADMINISTRATION (2011-2015).
- Type: PDF and MS Word (DOC)
- Size: [561 MB]
- Length:  Pages
This paper examines the impact and nexus between Foreign Policy and Nigeria‟s Economic Development, using President Goodluck Jonathan administration as a case study. As such, it focus on Transformation Agenda (2011-2015) as the Foreign Policy thrust of the administration, in relation to job creation, infrastructure, real sector and governance; income (GDP growth rate), stability of price (inflation and exchange rate), employment rate (job creation), poverty rate and so on as the key sectors for measuring the level of economic development in Nigeria. It postulates bad/weak leadership, corruption, inadequate funding, and insecurity and so on as the main deficit for the weak outcome of Transformation Agenda. This research work adopts the descriptive and analytical approach to examine to examine the economic development of Nigeria under the focused dispensation. The research work is based on System Theory, Soft Power Theory and Sustainable Development Theory, to analyze the methodology employed in achieving Transformation Agenda which was a comprehensive framework for transforming Nigeria to one of the world twenty leading economies by the year 2020.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background Information 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 5
1.3 Objective of the Study 6
1.4 Research Questions 7
1.5 Significance of the Study 7
1.6 Research Methodology 8
1.7 Scope & Limitation 8
1.8 Definition of Terms 9
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Conceptual Clarification 11
2.1.1 Economic Development 11
2.1.2 Foreign Policy 16
2.1.3 Personality 19
2.1.4 Transformation 20
2.1.5 Foreign Policy, Personality and National Transformation: The Nexus 21
2.2 Theoretical Framework 22
2.2.1 Systems Theory 22
2.2.2 Soft Power Theory 24
2.2.3 Sustainable Development Theory 25
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Preamble 27
3.2 Research design 27
3.3 Sample and sampling technique 27
3.4 Methods of data collection 27
3.5 Data analysis techniques 28
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF NIGERIA UNDERR TRANSFORMATION AGENDA
4.1 Historical Development 29
4.1.1 Introduction 29
4.1.2 Growth Performance before Transformation Agenda 30
4.1.3 Transformation Agenda of President Goodluck Jonathan 31
4.2 Macroeconomic Framework and Economic Direction of the Transformation Agenda 34
4.2.1 Job Creation 36
220.127.116.11 YouWin 37
18.104.22.168 SURE-P 37
22.214.171.124 GIP 38
126.96.36.199 Agricultural Sector 39
4.2.2 Infrastructure 41
188.8.131.52 Education Sector 41
184.108.40.206 Transport Sector 44
220.127.116.11 Information and Communication Technology 45
4.2.3 Real Sector 47
18.104.22.168 Power Sector 48
22.214.171.124 Agricultural Sector 50
126.96.36.199 Healthcare 52
188.8.131.52 Oil and Gas 54
4.2.4 Governance 55
4.5 Economic Growth Performance during Transformation Agenda 56
4.5.1 Oil Sector 57
4.5.2 Non-oil Sector 58
184.108.40.206 Agriculture 58
220.127.116.11 Mining 59
18.104.22.168 Manufacturing 59
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Summary of Findings 63
5.2 Conclusion 64
5.3 Recommendation 65
1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
States all over the world design and implement foreign policies in order to guide their foreign relations as well as protect, promote and defend their vital national interests which could be in areas of trade, strategic and diplomatic interest and whatever a country might consider as its vital national interests so therefore, foreign policy is a reflection of domestic policy, it is the promotion of national interest at international level. To this end, the history of Nigeria foreign policy since 1960 has constantly been changing, though the principles guiding her foreign relations remain the same either under military or civilian regimes in the recent past, because various regimes have tried to pursue the country’s foreign policy under almost the same objectives, the style and vigor of their leadership, agenda setting, mobilization of critical material and immaterial resources have differed with consequent difference in concrete national goal attainments (Nwankwo,2013:213). The principles of Nigeria‟s foreign policy have since independence in 1960 been broadly spelt out in the constitution and has tenaciously guided the conduct of its foreign relations over the years from the first Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa, to the Former Head of State, President Goodluck Jonathan. The principles of Nigeria foreign policy deals with what guides the formulation and actualization of its foreign policy, in other to ensure the survival of the state and its values in the course of its relations with other actors especially states in the international system. In the speeches of Nigeria‟s first Prime Minister Sir Tafawa Balewa, to the Federal House of Representatives and the United Nations General Assembly on 20th August and 7th October 1960 respectively, he enunciated the general principles which would guide the country‟s foreign policy (Review of Nigeria‟s Foreign Policy; 2012, P289).
The principles which have imbued Nigerians foreign policy since independence include the following; protection of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Nigerian state, promotion
of the socio-economic well-being of Nigeria, enhancing Nigeria‟s image and status in the world at large, respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other states, non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, promotion of unity and solidarity of African states; total political, economic, social and cultural emancipation and rejuvenation of Africa, an unflinching commitment to the liberation of countries still under colonial rule, as well as the removal of remaining vestiges of colonialism in Africa (Nigeria at the United Nations; Partnership for a Better World 1991: P29). However, foreign policy in the contemporary world has taken a completely new shape, the foreign policy of a state in today‟s world must consider issues such as; production, exchange, technology, markets, economic development, political stability and predictability, prevailing leadership and its qualities which are prerequisites for effective foreign policy-making process, this implies the need for a shift in paradigm of Nigeria‟s foreign policy principles in respect to the dynamics that will shape the formulation and actualization of the foreign policy objectives of Nigeria and prior to this, the advent of democratic government in 1999 in which section 19 of the 1999 constitution states that, foreign policy principles shall be; promotion of a just world economic order among others (Review of Nigeria‟s Foreign Policy; 2012, P289). Also, with the advent of democratization, as well as the eradication of apartheid and racism in the continent of Africa in early 20th century as well as the declining economic setbacks brought about the change in Nigeria‟s foreign policy focus which led to the emergence of economic diplomacy aimed at strengthening Nigeria‟s economic interest, promoting and protecting the country‟s national interest, has become a significant priority of the Nigeria foreign policy.
They have been a number of visions, programs and policies pursued by various heads of government of Nigeria, either under the military or civilian regimes which is directed towards
socio-economic reforms since independence in 1960, this is consequent upon the fact that Nigeria‟s foreign policy has always been a product of the Head of State, thus the President must accept responsibility for policy concept and design. Different heads of state as well as president of Nigeria has adopted foreign policy as an instrument of economic development, economic development is a policy intervention aimed at the economic and social well-being of the citizens, economic growth, increasing the literacy ratio, improve infrastructure and health care services. Alhaji Shehu Shagari, who was elected in 1979 and ruled up to January 1984, tagged his policy as the Green Revolution, aimed at transforming the agricultural sector and use the gains to thereafter to revolutionize other key sectors of the nation‟s economy. Shortly after these General Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida took over the mantle of leadership in 1984 and hinged his administration policy package on the Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) aimed at addressing fundamental and structural imbalance in the economy, diversify the economy, and strengthen the currency, this he did by opening up the domestic economy to international market forces and institutions such as World Bank (IBRD) and International Monetary Fund (IMF) to play key roles with the hope of using the benefits to transform the whole economy. Thereafter, General Sani Abacha came into power in 1993 after the controversial annulment of the 1993 presidential elections with a different focus on the foreign policy objective of Nigeria and tagged his policy thrust vision 2010 which was aimed at reducing the influence of international financial institutions and centered mainly on the exploitation of domestic efforts towards transforming the economy. In 1999 to 2007, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo became the president; his first four years in office were focused mainly on consolidating democracy. Thereafter, he concentrated on reforms in Banking and Telecommunication sectors; he also initiated the National Economic Empowerment and development Strategies (NEEDS), this reform program rested on four key
strategies which were; reforming government and institutions, growing the private sector, implementing a social charter and value re-orientation. These policies, combined together have been widely acclaimed as successful as they have had some appreciable impact on other sectors of the economy. Another foreign policy reversal introduced by Alhaji Musa Yar‟adua following his election and inauguration in may 2007, his foreign policy thrust was tagged the 7-point Agenda; were he identified seven sectors of the economy as the main source of transforming the entire economy. Due to the medical conditions of President Umaru Musa Yar‟adua, a Federal High Court on the 13th of January 2010 conferred on the then Vice President Goodluck Jonathan the power to carry out state affairs but was formally sworn in on the 6th of May 2010 following the formal announcement of the death of President Umaru Musa Yar‟adua the previous day.
President Goodluck Jonathan was sworn in as the 14th Head of State on the 29th of May 2011, at his inauguration he directed for a review of Nigeria‟s foreign policy with focus on Nigeria‟s domestic priorities which has continued to propel Nigeria‟s actions and reactions on the international arena; these key domestic priorities include good governance, electoral reforms, transparency and anti-corruption, commerce and industry, energy (electricity supply) reform and investment, defense and security as well as agricultural and rural development. And thus tagged his foreign policy thrust as the Transformation Agenda which covers the period 2011 to 2015, according to President Goodluck Jonathan (2011), Nigeria‟s foreign policy and diplomacy are now anchored on the realization of the Transformation Agenda through the attraction of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and most particularly the diversification of the entire economy from total dependence on oil to a significant reliance on non-oil driven economy upon which real economic growth and development can be founded. The Transformation Agenda of President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan draws its aspirations from Nigeria‟s vision 20:2020 which was
articulated under the administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999-2007) in the fourth republic. The Transformation Agenda captures among other things, the road map and blue print to achieving national economic growth and becoming one of the twenty largest economies in the world by 2020 ( Gyong; European Scientific Journal, vol8).
President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan at his inauguration inherited a nation with a battered image because of the ill health of his predecessor and his inability to attend important international meetings, Nigeria lost many positions in multilateral associations, forsook obligations and thus the ship of the Nigerian state was sailing rudderless on the international waters of foreign policy prompting President Goodluck Jonathan to center his foreign policy on Citizen Diplomacy which involve diplomatic shuttles with the aim of returning Nigeria to the international arena, such as the delisting of Nigeria from the discriminatory rule of the Department of Homeland Security on special screening of passengers on international flights to United States of America that specifically targeted Nigerians due to the Christmas day attempted bombing of United States of America airline by a Nigerian in 2009 consequently leading to the signing of the first United States of America-Nigeria Bi-national Commission in April 2010, aimed to establish a mechanism for sustained bilateral high level dialogue to promote and increase diplomatic, economic and security co-operation between the two countries, shortly after the visit of President Goodluck Jonathan to United States of America. Also, in line with the Citizen Diplomacy Agenda, President Goodluck Jonathan took time to interact with Nigerians abroad and showed his ready to take up their problems with their host countries by engineering a purposeful mobilization and instrumentalisation of Nigerians in the Diaspora for national development through the formation of the Nigerians in Diaspora Organization (NIDO) in all countries where
there are Nigerians. Remarkably, all these are the component of the foreign policy objectives of the Transformation Agenda (Nwankwo2013:215).
Furthermore, for the past two years the Nigerian economy has been growing consistently by nearly 7% per annum, this is one of the highest growth rates in the world owing to the economy reforms of the Transformation Agenda which has made Nigeria the biggest economy in Africa with Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for 2013 totaled 80.3 trillion naira and according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in its 2012 investment report; Nigeria has become the number one destination for foreign investments in Africa. The Transformation Agenda aims to deepen the effects and provide a sense of priority policies and programs which when implemented would transform the Nigerian Economy to meet the future needs of the people. However, we must put at the back of our mind that Transformation Agenda cannot be realize in a corrupt system; therefore sincerity of purpose should e the ladder for the attainment of the Transformation Agenda. To this end, this paper examines the economic direction of Transformation Agenda as well as its role as the foreign policy thrust of President Goodluck Jonathan, the paper focuses on the economic growth of Nigeria within the time frame of 2011 to 2015
1.2 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Nigeria government is characterized by an inconsistent foreign policy which has made her a scorn in the committee of nations; this has led to the question on how to manage the foreign policy of Nigeria to serve her domestic economic development interest. It is against this backdrop that Transformation Agenda was formulated as the foreign policy thrust of the present administration, in which Nigeria‟s economy has grown very fast in the last few years making her
the largest economy in Africa. However, the challenge before the government is how to move the nation away from an oil-dominated economy, institute the basics for a private-sector driven economy, build the local economy on international best practices, and transform the passive oil industry to a more pro-active one and restructure the country along the lines of a more decentralized federalism.
The problem being looked into in this research is the Economic Developmental problem facing Nigeria since independence. There are various problems related to the development of Nigeria Economy. This paper identifies the following factors;
Bad Governance; these element pose a serious problem in Nigeria. These phenomenon are encompassed by the absence of a ruling class (leadership) dedicated to the pursuit of economic & societal development which will strengthen state institutions and democratize the society. As argued by Dr. John Akude;
“The rulers of most African states are not interested in pursuing economic development. They use power to amass wealth which makes the personalization and misuse of power inevitable. Personal power thwarts institutionalization and has weakening effects on the state”(Akude, 2007).
As such, bad leadership has often proved to be a source of development impediment in Nigeria owing to embezzlements of public funds which has hindered governments role in refurbishing basic infrastructures such as transportation which would have enhanced easy mobility as well as attract foreign investors through improve power supply. Nigeria leaders are more interested in filling their bank accounts than ensuring the general welfare of the populace to which they have been sworn to serve. These leaders indirectly and directly propagate corruption, conflict, ethnic
& religious divide as well as the Institutional failure of bureaucracies within the various countries.
Corruption: Corruption is the perversion of integrity or state of affairs through bribery, favor or moral depravity. It takes place when at least two parties have interacted to change the structure or process of society or the behavior of functionaries in order to produce dishonest, unfaithful or defiled situations. Nigeria politicians are regarded as corrupt, Trillions of Nigeria‟s wealth have been siphoned continuously, and deposited in European, North American banks. Some of these wealth‟s are in those continents in form of properties and assets. Examples of such leaders include; General Sani Abacha. In other words, Nigeria leaders are corrupt, but their corrupt practices are backed also by the Western financial institutions.
Equally, Nigeria‟s growth is sectorally concentrated as 90 percent of economic activity and growth come from three or four sectors (oil, crops, trading, and real estate), as well as regionally concentrated, the remaining 29 or 30 sectors account for only ten to 20percent of economic growth and activity, including telecoms, manufacturing, banking, insurance, construction and all the other big name sectors and thus diversifying the economy becomes a serious problem for the success of the Transformation Agenda.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
Specifically, the study seeks to achieve the following objectives;
1. To provide a detailed analysis on the implementation, achievements and limitations of the Transformation Agenda as a foreign policy thrust of President Goodluck Jonathan.
2. To investigate the nexus between foreign policy and economic development with emphasize on the foreign policy objectives of Nigeria under President Goodluck Jonathan.
3. To show the current economy development of Nigeria using Macroeconomics framework factors in the duration of the Transformation Agenda as the Foreign Policy Thrust of President Jonathan Administration.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. To what extent has the Transformation Agenda as a foreign policy thrust of President Goodluck Jonathan contributed to the welfare of the Nigeria state and people, as to hope of the dreams embodied in vision 20:2020?
2. Are they nexus between Foreign Policy and Economic Development in correlation to Transformation Agenda as the Foreign Policy Thrust of President Goodluck Jonathan?
3. What is the relationship between Foreign Policy and Economic Development in relation with the personality of President Goodluck Jonathan?
1.5 SIGNIFICANT OF STUDY
This study is very important for certain reason which are;
1. First, the study interrogates the foreign policy initiatives of Nigeria under President Goodluck Jonathan. How far, so far?
2. Secondly, the study is of paramount importance to decision makers and the would-be diplomats for it traces the foreign policy thrust of economic development of some past Nigeria leaders with an insight into the present.
3. It brings to light the gradual but definite transformation going on in Nigeria‟s contemporary foreign policy arena in relation to economic growth in line with Vision 2020.
4. It provides an insight or analysis on the achievements, limitations, and challenges of the transformation agenda as the foreign policy trust of President Goodluck Jonathan administration.
5. It provides an insight into the nexus between the Personality of a Leader, Foreign Policy and National Economic Transformation in line with achieving Nigeria Vision 20:20.
1.6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research methodology to be used in this paper includes the descriptive and analytical methods. The method of data collection used for this study is the secondary data, which involves the use of sources such as; the Internet, Newspapers, Textbooks, E-books, Journals, Magazines, Annual Reports and other data collection avenues relevant to the study.
1.7 SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
The scope of this study covers the planned course of action of the Transformation Agenda of President Goodluck Jonathan, with focus on 2011 to 2015 which is the duration of the administration.
1.8 DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
A. FOREIGN POLICY; The term foreign policy has been over time defined by scholars. Akindele R.A for example defines foreign policy as a collection of specific policy strategies chosen from a variety of alternatives and implemented over time and space in order to achieve specified set of goals and objectives that would lead the society towards the attainment or protection of prepared values. His definition as it appears sought to suggest that whatever a nation or possibly what her leaders choose from a variety of alternatives will be considered as her foreign policy. Corroborating his views, Ofoegbu .R defines foreign policy as: A set of connected ideas and thoughts, which often is the product of mental reflective activities and processes which embodies judgment, choices, decision, evaluation, and systematic insight, appreciation of objectives realities revolving round the milieu and seeking solutions. Even the definition of Ofoebgu suggests that a leader and whoever that is in charge of the country‟s foreign affairs department or ministry is responsible for the country‟s foreign policy formulation.
Chibundu (2004:1) defines foreign policy as a country‟s response to the world outside or beyond its own frontiers or boundaries, the response which may be friendly or aggressive, casual or intense, simple or complex. It comprises many elements; namely diplomatic, military, trade, economic, social, cultural, educational, sporting, etc and it varies in form and focus according to circumstances. Some countries at different times might be friends or enemies or valued allies within a relatively short or long period of time.
B. TRANSFORMATION; According to the Oxford Advance Dictionary, transformation is a complete change in somebody or something. It is a multifaceted and multidimensional
change affecting every component of the individual or society. In the life of a nation, transformation involves structural changes in the major institutions of governance and the society at large. It should guarantee improved living standard, Per Capital Income, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and other basic Socio-economic indicators such as food, shelter, clothing and health for the substantial majority of the citizenry. Thus, on the whole, transformation can be said to be a total package that involves every facet of the individual, organization or society. It is meant to be a vehicle for a better society where virtually everyone will be reasonably comfortable.
C. NATIONAL INTEREST; Definition of the concept has often varied according to the circumstances of its application. Our intention here is not to advance a series of idle words but is to rehash the controversies associated with the definitions. In this regards two schools of thought come to bear; the objectivist and the subjectivist schools of national interest are worthy of thought. The objectivist school amongst whom is Morgenthau contends that, the best interest of a nation is a matter of objective reality independent of the perception of scholars and policy makers. It maintains that there are basic interests upon which survival and prosperity of a state depends and this survival and prosperity is based on power. On the other hand, the subjectivist such as Allison and Brechen maintain that national interest is not an objective truth that prevails whether or not it is perceived by members of a nation, rather, it is a pluralistic set of subjective preferences that change when the requirement and aspiration of the nation‟s members change. To them, power and dialogue can be used by states to pursue their national interest in the international system. States only use power when dialogue has failed.