The unidentified problem of Nigeria: From forced migration to AUTOSUCOM Revolution (I) 

By Victor-Bandele Dada

For more than six decades, Nigeria has debated its problems without ever adequately identifying the problem beneath the problems.

Economists have diagnosed fiscal instability. Political scientists have examined institutional weakness. Sociologists have studied ethnic and religious fragmentation. Development specialists have focused on poverty, unemployment, food insecurity and human capital. Security analysts have examined insurgency, banditry and communal conflict.

All these observations are valid. But they remain, substantially, descriptions of consequences. The more fundamental question is this: Why has Nigeria remained unable to convert its vast human, territorial and material potential into a continuously self-renewing system of prosperity?

This question takes us beyond the familiar language of corruption, bad leadership and inadequate policy. The central proposition of Prosperity Governance & Management is that Nigeria has suffered from a scientific and institutional knowledge deficit in community self-renewal.

The Nigerian state inherited political structures. It inherited administrative structures. It inherited economic institutions. It inherited legal systems.

What it did not possess was a scientifically articulated operating knowledge-base for the continuous renewal of its primordial communities. That is the unidentified problem.

The country has attempted to govern communities without first establishing the scientific conditions by which communities can become economically productive, internally integrated and continuously sustainable. Consequently, governance has too often become an exercise in the administration of scarcity. And when scarcity is administered for long enough, migration becomes inevitable.

Nigeria’s Problem Is Not Simply Poverty

Poverty is frequently treated as the primary problem of Nigeria. I submit that this is an incomplete diagnosis. Poverty is a condition. The deeper problem is the absence of a systemic mechanism capable of continuously converting available human and territorial potential into sustainable prosperity.

A community may possess land, people, natural resources, entrepreneurial energy and cultural knowledge, yet remain poor if these elements are not scientifically integrated into a productive system. This distinction is fundamental. The question is not merely: What resources does Nigeria possess? The question is:

What institutional architecture continuously converts Nigerian resources into self-reproducing prosperity?

For decades, the answer has been absent. Nigeria has therefore operated through a predominantly extractive and distributive logic. Wealth is generated in relatively narrow sectors, concentrated in limited geographical and institutional spaces, and then redistributed through political, fiscal or administrative channels.

This model creates a dangerous national illusion. It gives the impression of a functioning economy while large sections of the population remain structurally disconnected from the productive system. The result is a country with economic activity without sufficient community economic reproduction.

This distinction explains much of the Nigerian paradox. Nigeria is not without resources. Nigeria is without a sufficiently developed science of systemic prosperity formation at community level.

From Administrative Geography to Economic Displacement

The Nigerian community has historically been treated primarily as a political and administrative unit. It has not been adequately treated as an economic organism. This is a critical error.

A community is not merely a collection of people living within a geographical boundary. It is a system of relationships involving land, labour, production, consumption, capital, technology, social organization and institutional authority.

Where these relationships are not deliberately integrated, the community begins to lose its capacity for internal economic reproduction. People may remain physically present in a community while becoming economically excluded from it.

The young person who cannot find productive work is excluded. The farmer who cannot obtain secure and productive access to land is excluded. The entrepreneur who cannot access finance, markets or appropriate technology is excluded.

The family that can no longer sustain itself through local economic activity is excluded. The result is a phenomenon that Nigeria has not sufficiently conceptualized: Internal economic displacement. The person may not have crossed an international border.

But economically, the person has been displaced from the productive life of the community.

The Actual Basis of Forced Migration in Nigeria

This is where the question of forced migration must be rigorously reconsidered. Forced migration is often associated primarily with war, terrorism, natural disasters or direct physical violence. These are undeniable forms of forced displacement.

But in Nigeria, the deeper basis of forced migration is more extensive. Forced migration begins when the territorial and economic system ceases to provide a viable basis for human existence. The individual may technically possess freedom of movement.

But freedom to move is not the same as freedom to remain. A person who leaves a village because there is no sustainable livelihood is not necessarily making a conventional economic choice. A person who abandons ancestral land because insecurity has made production impossible is not exercising a normal market preference. A young person who leaves a community because the community has no productive role for his or her energy is responding to structural compulsion.

The decision to migrate is therefore frequently made under conditions in which remaining has become economically or physically untenable.

This is the very basis of forced migration in Nigeria.

When a community cannot reproduce the conditions of sustainable livelihood, it progressively forces its people outward. The compulsion may be direct. It may be indirect. It may be violent. It may be economic.

But the underlying logic is the same: the failure of the local system to sustain human life and productive participation.

This is why I contend that forced migration in Nigeria must not be studied merely as a migration problem. It must be studied as a community sustainability problem.

The Migration of Human Potential

There is another dimension that has been almost entirely neglected. Nigeria is not only losing people. Nigeria is losing productive human potential.

Every time a young person leaves a community because the community cannot provide a productive role, the community loses labour, intelligence, initiative and future leadership.

Every time a farmer abandons productive land because the territorial system cannot provide security and economic integration, the national production system is weakened. Every time a skilled Nigerian is compelled to seek a viable future elsewhere, the country exports a portion of its accumulated human investment. This is not simply migration. It is the migration of national productive capacity.

Nigeria has therefore been experiencing a continuous leakage of its own future. And the more this occurs, the more the remaining population becomes dependent upon a national economy that is itself weakened by the departure of productive energy. This is a systemic vicious cycle.

The Missing Science of Community Renewal

It was this fundamental question that shaped my forty-year research into Universal Sustainability Dynamics. Under the extraordinary and intellectually radical mentorship of the late Emeritus Professor Isaac AyindeAdalemo and the late Emeritus Professor OyewusiIbidapo-Obe, my research became increasingly focused on a simple but profound question: What are the conditions under which a human community can continuously sustain and renew itself?

The answer cannot be found in conventional political rhetoric alone. It requires the identification of the relationships, roles and institutional arrangements that make sustainability possible.

The resulting body of knowledge has evolved into Prosperity Governance & Management. Its central proposition is that prosperity is not an accidental political outcome. It is a consequence of systemic configuration. The community must be configured to produce. Its people must be assigned productive roles. Its land must be integrated into a coherent economic system. Its financial architecture must support productive participation. Its institutions must be coordinated. Its food and essential logistics must be secured. And its knowledge must be continuously renewed.

This is the intellectual foundation upon which AUTOSUCOM—the Automatically Sustainable Community—has been conceived.

•Dada writes from Lagos.

The post The unidentified problem of Nigeria: From forced migration to AUTOSUCOM Revolution (I)  appeared first on Vanguard News.