© 2010, government of the federal republic of nigeriamdg report 2010 1 nigeria millennium...

NIGERIAMILLENNIUMDEVELOPMENTGOALS

REPORT2010

TABLE OF CONTENTSForeword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Acronyms and abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Executive summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8MDGs status at a glance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Goal 1 – Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13Goal 2 – Achieve universal primary education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17Goal 3 – Promote gender equality and empower women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22Goal 4 – Reduce child mortality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27Goal 5 – Improve maternal health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31Goal 6 – Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37Goal 7 – Ensure environmental sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45Goal 8 – Develop a global partnership for development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51Current global developments and implications for the MDGs in Nigeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57Literature consulted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60

List of figuresFigure 1: Actual and targeted poverty incidence in Nigeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Figure 2: Actual and targeted percentage of underweight children in Nigeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15Figure 3: Actual and projected proportion of pupils starting Primary 1 who reach Primary 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18Figure 4: Actual and projected Primary 6 completion rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19Figure 5: Primary completion rate by state, 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19Figure 6: Actual and projected literacy rate (15-24 year olds) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20Figure 7: Youth literacy by state, 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21Figure 8: Actual and projected ratio of girls to boys in primary education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23Figure 9: Actual and projected ratio of girls to boys in secondary education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23Figure 10: Ratio of girls to boys in primary education by state . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24Figure 11: Actual and projected proportion of seats held by women in the National Parliament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25Figure 12: Actual and projected under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Figure 13: Actual and projected infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29Figure 14: Actual and projected maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32Figure 15: Actual and projected proportion of births attended by skilled personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32Figure 16: Actual and projected contraceptive prevalence rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33Figure 17: Actual and projected antenatal care coverage (at least one visit) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34Figure 18: Actual and projected HIV prevalence among pregnant young women aged 15-24 (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38Figure 19: Actual and projected proportion of young people aged 15-24 reporting

condom use with non-regular sexual partner (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39Figure 20: Actual and projected proportion of young people aged 15-24 who both correctly identify

ways of preventing HIV and who reject major misconceptions about HIV transmission (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39Figure 21: Actual and projected number of children orphaned by HIV/AIDS (million) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40Figure 22: Actual and projected malaria prevalence rate (per 100,000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42Figure 23: Actual and projected tuberculosis prevalence rate (per 100,000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42Figure 24: Actual and projected proportion of population using an improved water source, 1990-2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46Figure 25: Percentage of the population using an improved water source by state, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47Figure 26: Actual and projected percentage of population using an improved sanitation facility, 1990-2015 . . . . . . . . . . .48Figure 27: Percentage of the population using improved sanitation facilities by state, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48Figure 28: Annual per capita official development assistance (ODA) to Nigeria (US$),

1990-2007 (includes debt relief gains) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52Figure 29: Debt service as a percentage of exports of goods and services, 1990-2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52Figure 30: Percentage of the population of Nigeria having access to telephone lines,

subscribing to cellular services and using the internet, 1990-2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54

MDG REPORT 2010

NIGERIA MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (MDGS) www.mdgs.gov.ng1

FOREWORDThe MDGs 2010 Report, as with reports of its kindbefore, is a Nigeria-specific analysis of theimplementation of the Millennium DevelopmentGoals. It captures MDG interventions, challengesand successes, as well as 'misses' since the Mid-Point Assessment was published in 2007/2008.

Nigeria first published an MDG report in 2004, ata time when it was closely integrated into thecountry's National Economic Empowerment andDevelopment Strategy (NEEDS). In 2005,however, the MDGs got a 'shot in the arm', asNigeria successfully negotiated debt relief fromthe Paris Club. This translated into annual gainsof one billion dollars for the country, which thefederal government immediately decided it woulduse to stimulate national development byinvesting in the pro-poor programmes needed toachieve the MDGs.

The Presidential Committee on the Assessmentand Monitoring of the MDGs and the Office of theSenior Special Assistant to the President onMDGs were subsequently established to guide theuse of these additional funds. The MDGs havebeen appropriated in the annual budget since2006.

Renewed impetus for this work was provided bythe government's 7-Point Agenda, a plan forreform which has the MDGs at its heart,particularly with respect to the human capitalcomponent. Recently, the inclusive process ofdeveloping Vision 20:2020 and the First NationalImplementation Plan, has again laid out clearstrategies and investments, and the integration ofthe MDGs into these plans is conspicuous andstriking. Now, across the three tiers ofgovernment, as well as across all sectors of theeconomy, the Vision 20:2020 Implementation Plansets out a clear framework for the investmentsrequired to meet our development aspirations.

The MDG Report 2010 provides up-to-date dataon Nigeria's MDGs indicators. These indicatorstell a compelling story of successes to date: fromdebt relief gains alone, our achievements in thepast four years include the extension of primaryhealth care services to over 20 million people,provision of safe water to over 8 million people,the distribution of insecticide-treated nets toprotect 5 million mothers and children frommalaria, and a 98 per cent reduction in theincidence of polio.

Unprecedented progress has been made on someindicators, with a one-third reduction in maternalmortality, reflecting targeted investments andeffective partnerships. Sustained improvementson indicators such as nutrition and access to safewater provide confirmation of our ability to providebasic services and social protection, even wherethe pace needs to be quickened. Theseachievements are success stories that need to bereplicated nationwide.

We recognise that challenges persist, and theseare illustrated by the successes and challengesthat make up the core of this report. However, webelieve that in the next five years we will have thesolutions and the political will to make meeting theMDGs by 2015 a reality.

I call on all Nigerians to join the Government inpartnering to make the MDGs a success for thebenefit of poor and vulnerable citizens in everycorner of Nigeria.

Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, GCON, GCFRPresident & Commander-in-Chief of the Armed ForcesFederal Republic of Nigeria

NIGERIA MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (MDGS)www.mdgs.gov.ng

MDG REPORT 2010

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe Nigeria MDGs Report 2010 is the result of ajoint effort by the National Planning Commission(NPC) and the Office of the Senior SpecialAssistant to the President on MDGs (OSSAP-MDGs). Production began with an Inter-MinisterialTechnical Committee, which was constituted inMay 2010 to facilitate, guide and oversee theprocess. In turn, the Inter-Ministerial TechnicalCommittee formed the Drafting Sub-Committee,made up of a team of consultants that workedclosely with representatives of the various MDG-related federal government ministries,departments and agencies (MDAs).

We are grateful to all the MDAs, civil societyorganisations, international development agenciesand individuals that participated in the preparationof this report. In particular, we acknowledge thecontributions of the Federal Ministry of WaterResources, Federal Ministry of Education,National Assembly Liaison Office, NationalPopulation Commission, Ministry of ForeignAffairs, Ministry of Health, National Bureau ofStatistics, National Agency for the Control of AIDS,Ministry of Housing and Urban Development,National Centre for Women Development,National Poverty Eradication Programme, DebtManagement Office and Federal Ministry ofEnvironment.

On completion of the draft report, the NPC andOSSAP-MDGs organised a validation workshop toreview the draft and elicit feedback andrecommendations. We would like to thank allparticipants – federal and state governmentofficers, representatives from the private sector,civil society and research/academia – for theirconstructive comments and feedback.

We appreciate the financial support provided bythe United Nations Development Programme(UNDP) and the UK Department for InternationalDevelopment (DFID) for the preparation of thisreport. In addition, the report benefited from theguidance and contributions of other UnitedNations agencies, including UNFPA, UNICEF,UNESCO and WHO.

The staff of NPC and OSSAP-MDGs providedcritical administrative and logistical support. Theirdedication, commitment and hard workcontributed immensely to the timely production ofthis report. In particular, my deep thanks andappreciation need to be expressed to the

Honourable Minister/Deputy Chair and theSecretary to the National Planning Commissionfor guiding the process so effectively andefficiently.

Finally, my personal conviction is that as a nationwe can achieve the MDGs by 2015. But this canonly be done if we put the needs and rights of ourpoor first.

Amina Az-Zubair, OFRSenior Special Assistant to the President on MDGs

MDG REPORT 2010


ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONSAIDS Acquired immune deficiency

syndromeART Anti-retroviral therapyAU African UnionBOP Balance of PaymentsCBN Central Bank of NigeriaCCT Conditional cash transferCDS Countdown StrategyCEDAW Convention on Elimination of all

forms of Discrimination Against Women

CGS Conditional Grants SchemeCRA Child Rights ActDOTS Directly observed treatment,

short-courseDRG Debt Relief GainsEst. EstimateFAO Food and Agriculture

Organization of the United Nations

FCT Federal Capital TerritoryFDI Foreign direct investmentFTS Federal Teachers' SchemeFMARD Federal Ministry of Agriculture

and Rural DevelopmentFME Federal Ministry of EducationFMF Federal Ministry of FinanceFMOH Federal Ministry of HealthGDP Gross Domestic ProductGSM Global System for Mobile

CommunicationsHIV Human immunodeficiency virusHNLSS Harmonized Nigeria Living

Standard SurveyICT Information and communication

technologyLGA Local Government AreaMDAs Ministries, departments and

agenciesMDGs Millennium Development GoalsMTEF Medium-Term Expenditure

FrameworkMTSS Medium-Term Sector StrategyN Naira (unit of currency)NA Not applicable/not availableNACA National Agency for the Control of

AIDSNAPEP National Poverty Eradication

Programme

NASS National AssemblyNBS National Bureau of StatisticsNCWD National Centre for Women

DevelopmentNDHS Nigeria Demographic and Health

SurveyNEEDS National Economic Empowerment

and Development StrategyNEPAD New Partnership for Africa's

DevelopmentNGO Non-governmental organisationNPC National Planning CommissionNSDS National Strategy for the

Development of StatisticsNSGR National Strategic Grains ReserveNSHDP National Strategic Health

Development PlanNTI National Teachers' InstituteNWSSP National Water Supply and

Sanitation PolicyODA Official development assistanceOPEN Overview of Public Expenditure

on NEEDSOSSAP-MDGs Office of the Senior Special

Assistant to the President on Millennium Development Goals

PPP Purchasing power parityRBM Results-based monitoringSEEDS State Economic Empowerment

and Development StrategyTB TuberculosisUBE Universal basic educationUBEC Universal Basic Education

CommissionUN United NationsUNDP United Nations Development

ProgrammeUNESCO United Nations Educational

Scientific and Cultural Organisation

UNGA United Nations General AssemblyUN-HABITAT United Nations Human

Settlements ProgrammeUNICEF United Nations Children's Fund VPF Virtual Poverty FundWB World BankWHO World Health Organization


MDG REPORT 2010

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYNigeria and the MDGs:better than you mightexpect and likely to speed up

Nigeria is making real progress. Recentlyimplemented policies are accelerating theachievement of the Millennium DevelopmentGoals (MDGs). These gains are based onsustained economic growth, improvements inplanning and policy, and growing governmentinvestment in the social sector.

For every MDG there is a positive story to be told.Although there are large variations from state tostate, more children are surviving to their fifthbirthday. More of them are starting school, andmore are sufficiently nourished to be able to payattention and learn. Their mothers have far less tofear about giving birth, and can be almost certaintheir children will not succumb to polio. Parentscan be increasingly ambitious for their girls as wellas their boys. They have ever-increasing accessto the technologies and opportunities that theyneed to earn an income to support those theylove. And, as a nation, Nigeria has turned the tideon HIV/AIDS, malaria and international debt.

Challenges remain. Many families still do not haveaccess to safe water and sanitation. Althoughchildren start primary school, many of them do notcomplete their primary education. Even thoughmore mothers and children are surviving,avoidable deaths are still unacceptably common.And, whilst the supportive environment hasimproved substantially since the return todemocracy in 1999, rebuilding the legacy of ahighly-deficient state is a work in progress. Noneof the MDGs are certain to be achieved and moreneeds to be done on each.

Governments at every level – federal, state andlocal – must step up their reform efforts. Reformhas started well. The nation fully integrates theMDGs into each of its national developmentstrategies. Nigeria has developed pioneeringschemes to reach development targets: thetagging and tracking of funds allocated to povertyreduction from debt relief, compulsory free basiceducation, conditional cash transfers to thevulnerable for social protection, and federal grants

to support investment by state and localgovernments. More is required. More in terms ofinnovative governance reforms, more financing,and more coordination.

The range and number of recent activities on theMDGs have yet to be fully captured in the datarecorded in this report. Adequate, reliable andtimely data is a prerequisite for accuratelymeasuring and tracking progress on the MDGs.Historical gaps in baseline data continue to posechallenges in assessing the rate of progress oneach goal. Particularly for MDG1 and MDG7, ithas not been possible to adequately evaluateprogress because of large gaps in the data.Substantial improvements in data gathering inrecent years, led by the National Bureau ofStatistics, need to be reinforced. Sustainedimplementation of the National Strategy for theDevelopment of Statistics, 2010-2014 will providethe disaggregated data required to show the largelocal variations.

Goal 1 Eradicate extreme poverty andhunger

Recent economic growth, particularly inagriculture, has markedly reduced the proportionof underweight children, from 35.7 per cent in1990 to 23.1 per cent in 2008.

However, growth has not generated enough jobsand its effect on poverty is not yet clear (the mostrecent data is from 2004). The available data andthe current policy environment suggest that thetarget will be difficult to meet.

Growth needs to be more equitable and broad-based. Developing agriculture and creating jobswill require the public sector to create an enablingenvironment for business, including buildingcritical infrastructure, making regulatory servicestransparent and providing sustainable access toenterprise finance. Social protection and povertyeradication programmes need to be scaled-upand better coordinated.

Goal 2 Achieve universal primaryeducation

In a major step forward, nearly nine out of tenchildren, 88.8 per cent, are now enrolled inschool. Nevertheless, regional differences are

MDG REPORT 2010


stark. State primary completion rates range from 2 per cent to 99 per cent. In particular, progressneeds to be accelerated in the north of thecountry if the target is to be met.

Low completion rates reflect poor learningenvironments and point to the urgent need toraise teaching standards. The rapid improvementin youth literacy, from 64.1 per cent to 80 per centbetween 2000 and 2008, appears to havereached a plateau.

The Universal Basic Education Scheme is apromising initiative that needs to be reformed andstrengthened. The Federal Teachers' Scheme andin-service training by the National Teachers'Institute have begun to address the urgent needto improve the quality of teaching. To accelerateprogress and reduce regional disparities, theseinitiatives need to be rapidly expanded andimproved.

Goal 3 Promote gender equality andempower women

A gradual improvement in the proportion of girlsenrolled in primary school, though noteworthy, isnot yet enough to meet the target. There are stillfewer girls than boys in school. There are signs ofbacksliding in the number of girls in tertiaryeducation.

Measures to encourage girls to attend school,particularly by addressing cultural barriers in thenorth of the country, and to provide the economicincentives for boys to attend school in the south-east, are urgently required.

Although few women currently hold political office,the new policy framework is encouraging.However, gradual gains in parliamentaryrepresentation for women need to be greatlyexpanded in forthcoming elections.

Confronting regional variations in the determinantsof gender inequality requires policies based on anunderstanding of the underlying socioeconomic,social and cultural factors. State and localgovernment efforts will thus be critical to theachievement of this goal.

Goal 4 Reduce child mortality

Progress in reducing child mortality has beenrapid. With sustained effort and improvement inrelated and lagging sectors, such as water and

sanitation, there is a strong possibility of achievingGoal 4 by 2015.

Under-five mortality has fallen by over a fifth infive years, from 201 deaths per 1,000 live births in2003, to 157 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2008.

In the same period, the infant mortality rate felleven faster, from 100 to 75 deaths per 1,000 livebirths.

Recent interventions – including IntegratedManagement of Childhood Illnesses – that reflectthe underlying causes of child deaths, havecontributed to these successes.

However, these need to be rapidly expanded andaccelerated if Nigeria is to achieve Goal 4. Accessto primary health care needs to be improved bymore investment in infrastructure, humanresources, equipment and consumables, andbetter management. Implementationarrangements must target local needs, which varyhugely from community to community and state tostate. Routine immunisation is unsatisfactory butcan be rapidly improved by building on thesuccesses of the near-eradication of polio.

Goal 5 Improve maternal health

Recent progress towards this Goal is promisingand, if the latest improvements can be sustainedat the same rate, Nigeria will reach the target by2015.

Maternal mortality fell by 32 per cent, from 800deaths per 100,000 live births in 2003 (at the timeone of the highest maternal mortality rates in theworld) to 545 deaths per 100,000 live births in2008.

However, the proportion of births attended by askilled health worker has remained low andthreatens to hold back further progress.

Government commitment is not in doubt. Aninnovative Midwives Service Scheme is expectedto contribute substantially to ongoing shortfalls butits impact has yet to be reflected in the data. If thescheme is expanded in proportion to the nationalgap in the number of midwives, this will furtheraccelerate progress.

In addition, more mothers will be covered byantenatal care as access to quality primaryhealthcare improves and incentives attract healthworkers to rural areas, indicating that Nigeria will


MDG REPORT 2010

6

turn progress to date on this goal into a MDGsuccess story.

Goal 6 Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria andother diseases

Nigeria has had striking success in almosteradicating polio, reducing the number of casesby 98 per cent between 2009 and 2010.

Another marked success was the fall in theprevalence of HIV among pregnant young womenaged 15-24 from 5.8 per cent in 2001 to 4.2 percent in 2008. Thus, nationally, Nigeria has alreadyachieved this target. However, some states stillhave high prevalence rates that require urgentpolicy attention. Successes have been buoyed bybetter awareness and use of contraceptives.

There has been a sharp decrease in malariaprevalence rates. Nationwide distribution of 72million long-lasting insecticide-treated bed nets,although only in its initial stages, protected twiceas many children (10.9 per cent) in 2009,compared to 2008 (5.5 per cent).

Similar progress has been made withtuberculosis. With sustained attention,tuberculosis is expected to be a limited publichealth burden by 2015.

To consolidate and extend progress on Goal 6,challenges that need to be addressed includeimproving knowledge and awareness ofHIV/AIDS, improving access to antiretroviraltherapies, and effective implementation of thenational strategic frameworks for HIV/AIDS,malaria and tuberculosis control.

Goal 7 Ensure environmentalsustainability

Nigeria’s natural resources, some of its mostvaluable national assets, are still seriouslythreatened. For example, between 2000 and 2010the area of forest shrank by a third, from 14.4 percent to 9.9 per cent of the land area.

Similarly, access to safe water and sanitation is aserious challenge for Nigeria. Little progress wasmade up to 2005 but improvements since thenhave brought the proportion of the populationaccessing safe water to 58.9 per cent and theproportion accessing improved sanitation to 51.6per cent.

The major challenge lies in translating substantialpublic investments in water into effective access.This requires more involvement by communities toidentify local needs, and better planning to deliverholistic and sustainable solutions.

In sanitation, efforts are falling short of the target.Rural-urban migration will add to the pressure onsanitation infrastructure throughout the country. Itis doubtful that town planning authorities havemade adequate preparations for sustainablehousing and sanitation.

There is an urgent need for managerial, technicaland financial resources to deal with thesechallenges to be established at state and localgovernment levels. Given the risks of over-exploitation of groundwater in the North and theinflux of saline water in the South, innovativesolutions are required across the country.

Goal 8 Develop a global partnership fordevelopment

Debt relief negotiated by Nigeria in 2005 providednew opportunities for investment in the socialsector. Debt servicing fell from 15.2 per cent ofexports in 2005 to 0.5 per cent in 2008.

To build on these positive developments there is aneed to take action to forestall a relapse intounsustainable levels of debt that could prevent thecountry from achieving the MDGs.

The outlook for the broader partnership fordevelopment is not as bright. Trade agreementscontinue to be inequitable and constrain exportsand economic growth. Development assistancehas grown although, when debt relief is excluded,it is still very low on a per capita basis.

Improving the quality of human and capitalresources available is critical to attracting theforeign direct investment that is needed tocontribute to development.

As a result of the deregulation of thetelecommunications sector in 2001, the proportionof the population with access to mobiletelephones increased from 2 per cent to 42 percent between 2000 and 2008. However, this hasyet to bridge the digital divide and only 15.8 percent of the population currently has access to theinternet.

MDG REPORT 2010


Global developments andprospects for achieving theMDGs

Three global developments have potentiallycritical implications for Nigeria's prospects forachieving the MDGs.

The global financial crisis has had an effect onNigeria, mainly through lower oil revenues, thedrying-up of credit and weaker flows of privatecapital. The crisis has underlined the need toaccelerate diversification of the economy andstrengthen fiscal management.

Nigeria is acutely vulnerable to climate change.The impacts in each ecological zone will bedifferent. The effects of climate change threatenprogress on all the MDGs. However, if wellmanaged, measures to deal with the effects ofclimate change provide important opportunities forensuring more sustainable progress.

At its peak in 2008, food price inflation was over20 per cent creating difficulties for manyNigerians. However, this was not the first suchepisode and a number of factors cushioned theimpact, such as the diversity of staple cropsgrown in the country. Agricultural developmentremains the best protection against future foodprice crises.

The bottom line

Nigeria is making real progress. Whilst no goal iscertain to be achieved, there is good news oneach. If the supportive environment continues toimprove, as it has over the last ten years, thenation has a real chance of achieving the MDGs.


MDG REPORT 2010

8

INTRODUCTIONNigeria is a federal republic comprising thirty-six(36) states and the Federal Capital Territory(FCT), Abuja. The states form the second tier ofgovernment and are further sub-divided into 774local government areas (LGAs), which constitutethe third tier of government. Nigeria covers anarea of 923,769 square kilometres (909,890square kilometres of land and 13,879 squarekilometres of water) and is situated betweenlongitude 3° and 14° East, and latitude 4° and 14° North.

The country has a rich diversity of culture, withmore than 250 ethnic groups, and over 500languages and dialects. It is the most populouscountry in Africa with a population estimated at154,729,000 in 2009. An estimated 48 per cent ofthe population is urbanised and 52 per cent ofNigerians live in rural areas. Close to 60 per centof Nigerians work in agriculture. The annualpopulation growth rate 2000-2008 was estimatedat 3.2 per cent.

The principal objective of Nigeria's economicdevelopment has been to achieve stability,material prosperity, peace and social progress.Nevertheless, a variety of problems havepersisted, slowing the country's growth andattainment of development objectives. Theseinclude inadequate human development,inefficient agricultural systems, weakinfrastructure, lacklustre growth in themanufacturing sector, a poor policy and regulatoryenvironment, and mismanagement and misuse ofresources. While growth has improvedsignificantly in the last seven years, on averageby about 6 per cent, this growth has often notimproved everyday livelihoods.

Furthermore, the country is among those with thehighest levels of inequality in the world. Thisinequality reflects widening gaps in income andgender access to economic and socialopportunities; growing inequality between andwithin rural and urban populations; and wideninggaps between economies in different parts of thefederation.

The MDGs in perspective

Building on the United Nations global conferencesof the 1990s, the United Nations MillenniumDeclaration of 2000 marked a global partnership

for creating an environment conducive, at thenational and global level, to the elimination ofpoverty and the promotion of sustainable humandevelopment. The aims of this work areencapsulated in the Millennium DevelopmentGoals (MDGs). The MDGs are the world's time-bound and quantified targets for addressingextreme poverty in its many dimensions – incomepoverty, hunger, disease, inadequate housing –while promoting gender equality, education andenvironmental sustainability.

The MDGs share common notions with Nigeria'sown development vision, as enshrined in the 1999Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.Under the section 'Fundamental Objectives andDirective Principles of State Policy', theConstitution stipulates that the security andwelfare of the people shall be the primary purposeof government. It goes on to say that the stateshall ensure that suitable and adequate shelterand food, a reasonable national minimum livingwage, old-age care and pensions, andunemployment benefits are provided for thecitizens. Economic development plans, policiesand programmes are designed and implementedby national and state governments with the aim ofachieving these development goals.

While the MDGs are country-level targets forsustainable human development, stategovernments play a pivotal role in achieving them.In Nigeria, state and local governments haveconsiderable autonomy in economic policy andfiscal matters. The three levels of government(federal, state and local) share responsibility forpublic policies and services crucial to theachievement of the MDGs. And state and localgovernments together at present account for over50 per cent of total public spending, includingthose sectors that can potentially influence theMDGs. These include primary education, infant,child and maternal health, gender equality,agriculture and food security, water and sanitation,and poverty eradication.

In principle, Nigeria's state and local governmentsare closer to the grassroots in providing basicservices, so their actions or inactions impactdirectly upon the MDGs. So Nigeria's 2015 MDGtargets cannot be achieved unless state and localgovernments take on their developmentresponsibilities in a proactive, coordinated,effective and sustained way.

Macroeconomic context ofthe MDGs

In recent years, Nigeria's macroeconomicenvironment has improved considerably. This is in marked contrast to the 1990s when Nigeria was considered to be among the most volatileeconomies in the world. In particular,macroeconomic performance over the last fiveyears has been buoyed by better fiscal and debtsustainability levels and improvements in growth.During the 1990s, growth barely reached 1 percent, but it has now increased to, and stabilisedat, about 6 per cent since the return todemocracy. The ratio of external debt to GDPwent from over 100 per cent to below 10 per cent.The situation has benefited from higher crude oilprices, and better fiscal and macroeconomicmanagement.

MDG REPORT 2010


Table 1: Selected macroeconomic indicators in Nigeria (2000-2009)

Growth has come largely from the non-oil sector,mostly agriculture and services. The oil sectoraccounts for less than 25 per cent of GDP, despiteproviding 95 per cent of foreign exchangeearnings and about 65 per cent of governmentrevenues. Nigeria's macroeconomic performancefrom 1990 to 2009 is illustrated in Table 1.

Planning for the MDGs andmonitoring progresstowards 2015

Planning and policy framework

The first major development policy frameworkintroduced by the federal government after theMillennium Declaration was the NationalEconomic Empowerment and Development

EconomicIndicators

GDP growth (%)

Oil sector growth (%)

Non-oil sector growth (%)

External reserves (% of GDP)

External debt/GDP

Domestic debt/GDP

Overall BOP/GDP

Inflation rate (%)

Average officialexchange rate(Naira/US$)

1990

8.2

5.6

8.6

NA

106.5

31.3

–2.1

7.5

7.9

2000

5.4

11.1

4.4

NA

64.9

32.2

6.9

6.9

101.7

2001

4.6

5.2

2.9

NA

57.3

36.6

0.5

18.9

111.9

2002

3.5

–5.2

4.5

NA

72.1

26.1

–10.3

12.9

121

2003

9.6

23.9

5.2

7.7

61.1

28.6

–2.3

22.2

127.8

2004

6.6

3.3

7.8

11.4

84.5

25.3

5.2

15

132.8

2005

5.8

–1.7

8.4

24.4

69.2

20.8

10.5

17.9

132.9

2006

5.3

–3.7

9.5

36.5

7.4

18.6

12.7

8.2

128.5

2007

5.7

–5.9

9.2

42.6

4.0

19.2

1.4

5.9

127.4

2008*

6.0

–6.2

9.0

52.99

17.5

15.23

8.02

11.6

139.27

2009*

6.7

–1.3

8.3

62.48

9.28

12.85

9.12

11.5

142.89

*Estimates, except GDP, oil and non-oil sector and inflation rate

Sources: (i) CBN Annual Reports and Statement of Accounts (various years) (ii) CBN Statistical Bulletin vol. 17, December 2006 (iii) National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), 2005


MDG REPORT 2010

10

Strategy (NEEDS) in 2004. The State EconomicEmpowerment and Development Strategy(SEEDS) was the corresponding strategy at statelevel. NEEDS was a medium-term developmentstrategy implemented between 2004 and 2007. Itlaid down the overall framework and strategicdirection for the sector policies that followed.NEEDS and SEEDS formed the basis for policycoordination in programmes and projects betweenthe federal and state governments. Although theywere not developed exclusively for the MDGs,many of the targets in NEEDS and SEEDS werealigned with the MDGs.

In line with public expenditure reform and theenactment of the Fiscal Responsibility Act,Medium-Term Sector Strategies (MTSSs) weredeveloped to guide the preparation andimplementation of the Medium-Term ExpenditureFramework (MTEF). In 2006, this frameworkearmarked about 57 per cent of total capitalexpenditure for MDG-related sectors.Concurrently, Nigeria Vision 20:2020 wasdeveloped as a longer-term growth anddevelopment framework for the country. It foresees Nigeria as being among the twentylargest economies by the year 2020. The growthprospects assumed by the Vision, quite apart fromthe policy interventions for the MDGs, areexpected to make a substantial contribution topoverty reduction.

Following the debt-relief grant of US$18 billion in2005, a Virtual Poverty Fund was established toensure that monies realised (about US$1 billioneach year) from debt relief were channelledtowards poverty reduction and the other MDGs. Inthe same year, the Office of the Senior SpecialAssistant to the President on MDGs was createdto coordinate the Fund.

In 2010, Nigeria Vision 20:2020's first NationalImplementation Plan took into account theharmonised NEEDS II and 7-Point Agenda, andthe MDGs. The plan covers 2010 to 2013.Simultaneously, several states have developedtheir own medium-term development strategieswhich have been harmonised with the Vision20:2020 National Plan. Effectively, the Vision plancurrently provides the overall (national) policyframework for the MDGs in Nigeria.

Lessons from 2007 and 2008 highlighted the needfor more grassroots participation and ownershipwhen delivering infrastructure targeted towardsthe MDGs. As a result, an innovative transfer offunds from the federal level to states – the

Conditional Grants Scheme (CGS) – is presentlybeing scaled-up to 113 local government councilsacross the country.

The aim is to strengthen the planning andresponse capacity of local government authoritiesto enable them to invest in, manage and maintainnew infrastructure, so ensuring effective deliveryof primary services, particularly in education andhealth. This is a major component of theCountdown Strategy for achieving the MDGs.Over the last two to three years, there have beenother equally promising policy interventions,particularly in the areas of health, education andsocial safety nets.

Institutional arrangements for the MDGs

The National Planning Commission (NPC), byvirtue of its statutory role in development planningand coordination, is the focal institution for theMDGs. The establishment, in 2005, of two keyplatforms – the Presidential Committee on theMDGs and the Office of the Senior SpecialAssistant to the President on MDGs (OSSAP-MDGs), which serves as the secretariat of theCommittee and coordinates the implementation ofdebt relief – was a major step towardsstrengthening coordination and policy compliancewith the MDGs. It also led to the establishment ofspecialised MDG offices in all states.

Line ministries are an integral part of thestructure. They focus on sector-specific efforts,while the NPC continues to exercise cross-cuttingresponsibility around planning and monitoring ofprogress. There is also the House ofRepresentatives Committee on MDGs whichprovides general oversight of MDG efforts at thefederal level.

At the state level, a similar structure is evolving.Now many states have a dedicated MDG office.These offices coordinate all interventions,including those of the state ministries,departments and agencies (MDAs).

Monitoring and evaluation systems

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of the MDGs inNigeria occurs on two main levels. The first levelis tracking the MDG indicators, which isundertaken by the National Bureau of Statisticsand MDG-related ministries, departments andagencies.

The second level is monitoring and evaluation ofthe implementation of projects and programmestargeted at the MDGs. This is undertaken byOSSAP-MDGs, the Budget Office of theFederation, the National Assembly, ministriesdepartments and agencies, and stategovernments.

At the apex of the M&E structure is thePresidential Committee for the Assessment andMonitoring of the MDGs. Members of thisCommittee, chaired by the President, includerepresentatives of state governors, the NPC, localand international non-governmental organisationsand ministers of the implementing agencies ofdebt-relief-gains programmes and projects. Withinthe ministries themselves, there are special MDGtask teams (led by MDG desk officers) who liaisewith OSSAP-MDGs in project identification,implementation, monitoring and evaluation.

At the state level, monitoring of the MDGs is doneby the state ministries, departments and agencies,with institutional arrangements set by stateplanning ministries/commissions.

The report preparationprocess

The Nigeria MDG Reports are a tool formonitoring and reporting Nigeria's status,progress and challenges towards the 2015 MDGtargets. The MDG Reports aim to engage politicalleaders and top decision-makers, and to mobilisecivil society, communities, the general public,legislators and the media in a debate onsustainable human development. The mainpurpose of the Reports is public information andsocial mobilisation. They seek to improveawareness, advocacy, alliance building andrenewal of political commitment at the countrylevel. Mobilising the federal, state and localgovernments and the people to action is theunderlying motive for the reporting process.

This MDG 2010 Report builds upon the previousMDG Reports 2004, 2005, 2006 and the mid-pointassessment of the MDGs (2000-2007). Five yearsfrom the target date for the MDGs, this Reportpresents an opportunity to take a comprehensivelook at what has been achieved over the last tenyears. It is also important to identify what hasworked and what has not, and the significantgaps, challenges and priorities for acceleratingprogress towards the MDG targets.

MDG REPORT 2010


This report was prepared through a consultativeand participatory process. The process startedwith the setting up of an Inter-Ministerial TechnicalCommittee to oversee and guide the exercise.Membership of this Committee is given inAppendix 1. The Committee constituted a coretechnical team to gather data, collate literatureand prepare the report. The core drafting teamwas made up of three consultants who workedclosely with the representatives of the relevantMDAs.

The MDAs that made up the core team includedthe Federal Ministry of Water Resources, theFederal Ministry of Education, the NationalPlanning Commission, the National AssemblyLiaison Office, the National PopulationCommission, the Federal Ministry of ForeignAffairs, the Federal Ministry of Health, theNational Bureau of Statistics, the National Agencyfor the Control of AIDS, the Federal Ministry ofLands, Housing and Urban Development, theNational Centre for Women Development, theNational Poverty Eradication Programme, theDebt Management Office and the Federal Ministryof Environment.

The ongoing challenges of data availability,comparability and quality have made producing acoherent story difficult in this report. As a country,Nigeria has made tremendous progress inimproving its capacity to generate quality data.However, a particular challenge arises inassessing progress on the MDG targets becausethe availability of baseline data is limited. The datain this report is the best information available.

Where annual data is not available, this reportuses the most recent data for the surveyperiod.

The output of the core team was subjected tosuccessive reviews by the Inter-MinisterialTechnical Committee. This culminated in astakeholder validation workshop, drawingparticipants from federal and state governmentMDAs, civil society organisations and internationaldevelopment agencies.


MDG REPORT 2010

12

Will targetbe met?

Supportiveenvironment

MDGs status at a glance

MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hungerTarget 1.A: Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less thanone dollar a day.Target 1.C: Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger.MDG 2: Achieve universal primary educationTarget 2.A: Ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able tocomplete a full course of primary schooling.MDG 3: Promote gender equality and empower womenTarget 3.A: Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005 andto all levels of education no later than 2015.MDG 4: Reduce child mortalityTarget 4.A: Reduce by two-thirds, between 1990 and 2015, the under-five mortality rate.MDG 5: Improve maternal healthTarget 5.A: Reduce by three-quarters, between 1990 and 2015, the maternal mortality ratio.Target 5.B: Achieve, by 2015, universal access to reproductive health.MDG 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseasesTarget 6.A: Have halted, by 2015, and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS. Target 6.C: Have halted, by 2015, and begun to reverse, the incidence of malaria and other major diseases.MDG 7: Ensure environmental sustainabilityTarget 7.A: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies andprogrammes and reverse the loss of environmental resources.Target 7.C: Halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safedrinking water and basic sanitation.Target 7.D: By 2020, to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 millionslum dwellers.MDG 8: Develop a global partnership for developmentTarget 8.D: Deal comprehensively with the debt problems.Target 8.F: In cooperation with the private sector, make available the benefits of new technologies,especially information and communication technology.

Insufficient data

Will target be met? Good potential Average potential Weak potentialSupportive environment Strong Good/Fair Weak but improving

MDG REPORT 2010


Goal 1 – Eradicate extremepoverty and hunger

Target 1.A – Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whoseincome is less than one dollar a day

Indicator

1.1 Proportion of thepopulation living on less than$1 (PPP) per day (%)

1.2 Poverty gap ratio

1.3 Share of poorest quintilein national consumption (%)

1990

NA

32.1

5.03

2000

NA

NA

5.03

2001

NA

NA

5.03

2002

NA

NA

5.03

2003

NA

29.62

5.03

2004

51.55

29.62

5.13

2005

51.551

29.62

NA

2006

51.551

NA

NA

2007

NA

NA

NA

2008

NA

NA

NA

2009

NA

NA

NA

2015target

21.4

NA

NA

Target 1.C – Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whosuffer from hunger

Indicator

1.8 Prevalence ofunderweight childrenunder five years of age (%)

1.9 Proportion ofpopulation belowminimum level of dietaryenergy consumption(consuming 2,900calories or less daily) (%)

1990

35.7

39

2000

311

29

2001

28.7

NA

2002

28.7

NA

2003

28.7

NA

2004

30

35

2005

302

35

2006

NA

35

2007

25

34.1

2008

23.1

33.1(est.)

2009

NA

32.83(est.)

2015target

19.963

14.5

Progresstowardstarget

slow

slow based on 2007

data

1 2004 data2 See World Development Indicators 2010, http://data.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/wdi/section2.pdf3 See http://devdata.worldbank.org/wdi2006/contents/Table1_2.htm and

MDG indicators, UN sites 2010, http://unstats.un.org/unsd/mdg/Data.aspx

Other Sources:(1) National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) (2005), Social Statistics in Nigeria(2) National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) (2005), Poverty Profile for Nigeria(3) National Planning Commission (2006), Millennium Development Goals Report(4) The gap between 1990 and 2004 is explained by the periodic nature of the surveys

1 1996 data2 2004 data3 This is the possible percentage of underweight children in 2015 if the current rate of reduction is maintained

Other Sources:(1) National Bureau of Statistics (2005), Social Statistics in Nigeria(2) National Bureau of Statistics (2005), Poverty Profile for Nigeria(3) National Planning Commission (2006), Millennium Development Goals Report(4) National Population Commission (2008), National Demographic and Health Survey


MDG REPORT 2010

14

Progress and trends

1.1: Proportion of the population livingon less than $1 (PPP) per day

At the year 2000, the percentage of thepopulation living in relative poverty was 60 percent. This is supposed to fall to 21.35 per cent in2015 in line with the MDG1 target. In 2007, whichwas the mid-point for implementation of therelevant MDG programmes in Nigeria, thepercentage of the population living in extremepoverty should have fallen to 28.78 per cent, ifthe MDG target was to be met.

The only data currently available (2004) showsthat 54.4 per cent of the population live in relativepoverty. However, data scheduled to be publishedin early 2011 is expected to show a drop in thisproportion. This would reflect governmentinvestments in agriculture and infrastructure, aswell as a well-managed macro economy.

Based on the data for 2000 and 2004 we canmake a projection of actual poverty incidence. Ifthe trend continues, by the year 2015, the povertyincidence will have fallen to 48.7 per cent, some27.3 percentage points more than the target of21.3 per cent (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Actual and targeted poverty incidence in Nigeria

1.8: Prevalence of underweight childrenunder five years of age

The data show that the proportion of childrenunder five years of age who are underweight was35.7 per cent in 1990, reducing to 28.7 per centbetween 2001 and 2003 and to 23.1 per cent by2008. This continued rate of progress, ifsustained, places Nigeria on track to halve theproportion of underweight children under fiveyears of age by 2015 (Figure 2).

Challenges and prospects

Reducing poverty and hunger remains a keydevelopment challenge in Nigeria. Sustainablegrowth is critical for poverty reduction. Broad-based growth that creates jobs has great potentialto reduce poverty. But, the improvement in growthin Nigeria over the past half a decade has notbrought about the desired reduction in poverty.

%

Projected (7 year): Projection based on average change over previous 7 yearsNote: The 7 year projection is based on the average year-on-year percentage change in the data for the latest 7 years. To calculate this change, the last 8 years' data points were used.

MDG REPORT 2010


Figure 2: Actual and targeted percentage of underweight children in Nigeria

This calls for a reassessment of growth dynamicsto determine how growth can contribute toreducing poverty and increasing employment.

In addition, tackling the poverty-reductionchallenge requires deliberate policies to createand foster gainful employment for the unemployedand to spread opportunities to empower people.This requires the intensification of povertyprogrammes and approaches. Policies andmeasures at federal, state and local governmentlevels should endeavour to enhance theproductivity of enterprises (particularly agricultureand small and medium enterprises), and toensure a good business environment includingcritical infrastructure, transparent regulatoryservices and sustainable access to enterprisefinance. The efforts of the National Directorate ofEmployment, the National Poverty Eradication

Programme, the Small and Medium EnterprisesDevelopment Agency and the various fertilisersubsidy, microcredit and entrepreneurshipdevelopment schemes must be well coordinatedand financed to engender poverty reduction.

The impacts of climate change on agriculture putthe poverty and hunger eradication targets atadditional risk. The majority of poor people inNigeria depend heavily on climate-sensitivenatural resources for rural incomes, employmentand livelihoods. Yet, they have the least capacityand resources to cope with climate changeimpacts and to adapt effectively and sustainably.Crop failures, decreases in agriculturalproductivity and incomes will therefore hurt thepoor, threaten food security and slow down themarch to eradicate poverty and hunger.

%

Projected (5 year): Projection based on average change over previous 5 years


MDG REPORT 2010

16

Photo: SPARC

Goal 2 – Achieve universalprimary education

Target 2.A – Ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike,will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling

Indicator

2.1 Net enrolmentratio in primaryeducation (%)

2.2a Proportion ofpupils startingPrimary 1 who reachPrimary 5 (%)

2.2b Primary 6completion rate (%)

2.3 Literacy rate of15-24 year olds,women and men (%)

1990

68

67

58

NA

2000

95

97

76.7

64.1

2001

95

97

76.7

NA

2002

NA

96

NA

NA

2003

NA

84

82

60.4

2004

81.1

74

82

60.4

2005

84.6

74

69.2

76.2

2006

87.9

74

67.5

80.2

2007

89.6

74

67.5

81.4

2008

88.81

72.32

NA

80.03

2009

NA

NA

NA

NA

2015target

100

100

100

100

Notes:1 Gross enrolment rate: based on consultants' estimates from provisional data2 Based on provisional gross enrolment figures: NBS – Annual Abstract of Statistics, Abuja, 20093 Youth literacy statistics: NBS – Social Statistics in Nigeria, Abuja, 2009

Data for 2007 and 2008 are provisional

The survival rate has fluctuated over time. Dataprovided by the educational authorities show thatthe proportion of students who survived in 2000was 97 per cent, but it is currently only 72.3 percent. Figure 3 shows that the proportion has beendeclining over the years.

The steady increase in net primary enrolmentseems to be at variance with the decrease in theproportion of students starting Primary 1 whoreach Primary 5. While an increasingly highproportion of children of school-age are actuallyenrolling in school, more of them are alsodropping out in the course of their education.Given the current trajectory, it seems that unlessmeasures are taken to address the number ofprimary school drop-outs, this target is unlikely tobe met.

Lagos State has the highest proportion of studentsthat start Primary 1 and reach Primary 5 (98.7 percent), while Akwa Ibom State has the lowest (27.1per cent). At the regional level, the differencebetween the best and worst performing zones

Progress and trends

2.1: Net enrolment in primary education

The net enrolment ratio in primary education inNigeria was 68 per cent in 2000. Since then, ithas shown a slow but steady increase, especiallyover the past couple of years.

As at 2008 the gross enrolment ratio stood at 88.8per cent. Progress recorded from 2004 to 2007shows that net enrolment has been on theincrease. Nevertheless, progress needs toaccelerate if the target is to be met by 2015.

2.2a: Proportion of pupils startingPrimary 1 who reach Primary 5

The number of pupils starting Primary 1 whoreach Primary 5, known as the 'survival rate', is apercentage of the total number of pupils enrolledin Primary 1 in a given school year who reachPrimary 5.

MDG REPORT 2010



MDG REPORT 2010

18

Figure 3: Actual and projected proportion of pupils starting Primary 1 whoreach Primary 5

(South West – 91.7 per cent and North Central –67.7 per cent) is not too marked (National Bureauof Statistics 2009a, provisional figures).

2.2b: Primary 6 completion rate

The Primary 6 completion rate reflects the abilityof the education system to prevent drop-outs andsuccessfully deliver education services. Judgingby the average trend over the last five years thetarget is unlikely to be met. Increasing deviationsfrom the target may occur towards 2015, unlesscorrective measures are taken soon (Figure 4).

Wide regional disparities exist in primary schoolenrolment and also in the primary schoolcompletion rates (Figure 5).

Projected (5 year): Linear projection based on average change over previous 5 years

%

MDG REPORT 2010


Figure 4: Actual and projected Primary 6 completion rate

Source: Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey, 2007

Figure 5: Primary completion rate by state, 2007


%


MDG REPORT 2010

20

Figure 6: Actual and projected literacy rate (15-24 year olds)

2.3: Literacy rate of 15-24 year olds

The literacy rate of youths aged 15-24 is thepercentage that can both read and write in anylanguage with understanding. The literacy rate forthis age group was 64.1 per cent in 2000,declining to 60.4 per cent in 2003, before rising to76.2 per cent and 81.4 per cent in 2005 and 2007.The 2008 estimate is about 80 per cent (Figure6). As expected the literacy rate was significantlyhigher in urban areas than in rural areas (Figure 7).

If the progress made over the last four years issustained, the youth literacy rate should bearound 87 per cent in 2015. It is worth notinghowever that adult education programmes in thecountry are also making good progress, thusgiving the hope that the projected estimate couldactually be surpassed.

Projected (4 year): Linear projection based on average change over previous 4 yearsSource: NBS – Social Statistics in Nigeria, 2009b

%

MDG REPORT 2010


Source: NBS – Social Statistics in Nigeria, 2009

Figure 7:Youth literacy by state, 2008


In recent years, federal and state governmentshave intensified efforts to promote primaryeducation and youth literacy. While universaleducation is the goal, the quality of that educationis also an issue of concern.

A key programme is the Federal Teachers'Scheme (FTS) implemented by the UniversalBasic Education (UBE) Commission. The FTSwas introduced in 2006 with the primary aim ofaddressing the shortage of quality teachers in thebasic education sub-sector across the country. Ithas the dual aim of catering for unemployedNational Certificate in Education holders whilebolstering the number of teachers in theworkforce. The first set of 38,868 participantsgraduated in 2008 and 25,668 were absorbed intothe system. A second set of 40,000 applicants hasbeen admitted into the 2009/2010 scheme.

Another key intervention aimed at teachers was aset of initiatives by the National Teachers' Institutethat has the goal of improving the quality oflearning at primary school level. In 2009, 120,000primary school teachers were involved in acapacity building programme.

The UBE Counterpart Grants Scheme is apromising project that seeks to improve funding tothe education sector. Conditions for accessing 75per cent of the fund by states are that each statemust provide a counterpart fund, also known as a'matching fund', and clear evidence of good use ofprevious allocations. Among other conditions, itmust also provide a plan of how it intends tospend both the grant and counterpart fund. Theremaining 25 per cent is disbursed according tovarious criteria, such as to states with recognisedweaknesses in the sector and also as an incentiveto those judged to have performed well.

The Ministry of Education has come up with aConverged Education Sector Database –Education Management Information System toenhance evidence-based decision making. Thesuccess of this initiative is of critical importance.

Several challenges will need to be tackled. Theyinclude less than desirable primary schoolcompletion rates, reducing regional disparities andstrengthening the UBE programme.


MDG REPORT 2010

22

Goal 3 – Promote gender equalityand empower women

Target 3.A – Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary educationpreferably by 2005 and to all levels of education no later than 2015

Indicator

3.1a Ratio of girls to boys inprimary education (girls per100 boys)

3.1b Ratio of girls to boys insecondary education (girlsper 100 boys)

3.1c Ratio of girls to boys intertiary education (girls per100 boys)

3.2 Share of women in wageemployment in the non-agricultural sector (%)

3.3 Proportion of seats heldby women in the NationalParliament (%)

1990

76

75

46

66.3

1.0

2000

78

81

66

NA

3.1

2001

78

81

68

NA

3.1

2002

79

80

87

NA

3.1

2003

79

78

72

NA

3.1

2004

81

77.4

75.5

79

3.1

2005

81

80.6

70.1

79

3.1

2006

83

79.4

69.0

NA

3.1

2007

85.1

75.4

66.4

NA

7.7

2008

85.41

79.91

66.82

NA

7.5

2009

NA

NA

NA

NA

7.5

2015target

100

100

100

-

30

1 Based on provisional enrolment figures: NBS – Annual Abstract of Statistics, Abuja 20092 University admissions: Joint Admission Matriculation Board

Federal Ministry of Education/Universal Basic Education CommissionNational Assembly Liaison Office

Progress and trends

3.1: Ratio of girls to boys in education

Although the situation is improving, the proportionof girls enrolled is still lower than that of boysacross all levels of education. Furthermore at thetertiary level (university admissions), the ratio isshowing signs of decline.

The ratio of girls to boys in primary educationshows long-term progress despite occasionaldeviations (Figure 8). In 2008 the number of girlsper 100 boys was 85.4 and there has been agradual but steady increase from 2000 to 2008.However, assuming the trend of the last five yearscontinues, the level expected to be reached by2015 will still fall short of the target. More effort isneeded to introduce measures to encourage girlsto attend school.

The situation is even worse in secondaryeducation (Figure 9). In fact, it has worsenedsince the baseline year of 2000. In 2000, the ratiowas 81 while in 2008 it was 79.9. However, it hasrisen from the previous year when the ratio was75.4. On the whole, the progress is slow and wellbelow the rate required to achieve the desiredresult.

State level variations are significant at all levels ofeducation, with the variation in primary educationshown in Figure 10.

MDG REPORT 2010


Figure 8: Actual and projected ratio of girls to boys in primary education



Figure 9: Actual and projected ratio of girls to boys in secondary education

girls

per 1

00 b

oys

girls

per 1

00 b

oys


MDG REPORT 2010

24

Source: NBS – Annual Abstract of Statistics, Abuja 2009a

Figure 10: Ratio of girls to boys in primary education by state

3.3: Proportion of seats held by womenin the National Parliament

Gradual gains have been made in the proportionof seats held by women in the National Parliament(Figure 11); the statistics show some improvementbetween 2000 (3.1 per cent) and 2008 (7.5 percent). After the 10 May 2007 elections, data fromthe National Centre for Women Developmentshow that there were nine female senators,compared to four in 2003. Also, there were 26female members in the House of Representatives,compared to 23 in 2003.

The situation in the State Houses of Assembly isnot much better. The South East has the highestpercentage of all the regions with 5.7 per centcompared to the lowest, the North West, with 0.5per cent. Appointments to the Federal Cabinetand in MDAs have witnessed a flow of femalenominees and successful candidates since 1999to positions previously reserved for men.

Between 2006 and 2009, two women wereappointed to the Supreme Court bench. Womenconstitute 11.8 per cent of the 17 members of thecourt. Across the 36 states of the Federation andthe Federal Capital Territory judiciaries, womenconstitute 30 per cent of the total number of HighCourt Judges. Statistics from the states point to a

gradual increase in the number of female DeputyGovernors from two in 2003 to six in 2007.

Challenges and prospectsIt is important to identify those social, economic,traditional, cultural and religious factors thatmilitate against gender equality. Appropriateprogrammes should then be developed toaddress them.

The training and supply of female teachers toschools in rural areas is imperative to enhancefemale enrolment in school. Federal and stategovernments need to work together to designinnovative strategies for a massive drive to trainand deploy female teachers from within states,particularly in rural areas where teacherdeployment is often resisted. On completion ofteacher training, graduates will be required toserve a minimum of one year in rural schools.

A National Gender Policy has been developedand is currently in use. In 2008, the StrategicImplementation Framework and Plan was drafted.It sets out the specific objectives, targets andmonitoring framework needed to implement thepolicy and guide activities towards eliminatingdiscrimination and improving the participation ofwomen in national life.

MDG REPORT 2010


Figure 11: Actual and projected proportion of seats held by women in the NationalParliament


Nigeria has attempted to domesticate the UNConvention on the Elimination of all forms ofDiscrimination against Women. It passed both itsfirst and second reading in the National Assemblybefore it was blocked in 2007 because of somecontroversial sections. However, a convincinganalysis of the contentious articles has beenproduced to help push the bill through on its re-presentation to the Assembly.

Other possible approaches include state policiesand laws against early marriages, street trading,child labour and other forms of child abuse.Informed by the UN Convention on the Rights ofthe Child and the Child Rights Act (CRA) of 2003,the Federal Government of Nigeria encouragesstate governments to adopt this act, enact andenforce state policies and laws prohibiting girl-child marriages and other girl-child friendlymeasures. States should also ensure that theypromote boy-child education where that challengeexists with particular emphasis on the south-eastern states. So far, 22 states have passed theCRA and advocacy efforts are on-going to pushthe remaining 13 states to pass and domesticatethe CRA.

Despite major strides and attempts to improve theeducation of girls, there are still some constraints.These include poor implementation of governmentpolicies, weak monitoring mechanisms, lowbudgetary allocations to the education sector,poverty and cultural and religious practices likeearly child marriage, teenage pregnancy and childlabour.

Climate change has indirect consequences for theMDG targets on gender equality and women'sempowerment. Climate change impacts such aswater scarcity and falling agricultural productivitymay disproportionately affect women and girls.

Falling incomes often hit first and hardest on thehealth and education of women and girls.However, diversification of employment andincome-generating activities could provide moreopportunities for women. Implementation ofcapacity building for effective adaptive responsesby women will provide the time and stability forthem to lead empowered and productive lives.

%


MDG REPORT 2010

26

Photo: ESSPIN

MDG REPORT 2010


Goal 4 – Reduce child mortality

Target 4.A – Reduce by two-thirds, between 1990 and 2015, the under-fivemortality rate

Indicator

4.1 Under-five mortality rate(per live 1,000 births)

4.2 Infant mortality rate (per1,000 live births)

4.3 Percentage of one-yearolds fully immunised againstmeasles

1990

191

91

46

2000

183.75

81.38

32.8

20011

183.75

81.38

41.1

20021

183.75

81.38

61.8

2003

201

100

31.4

20042

201

100

50

20052

201

100

60

20062

201

100

60

2007

138

86

60

2008

157

75

41.4

2009

NA

NA

74.3*

2015target

63.7

30.3

100

Notes: 1 and 2 are 2000, 2003 data respectively (except for percentage of one-year olds fully immunised against measles)

Sources:(1) National Bureau of Statistics, 2007(2) NDHS report, 1990, 1999, 2003, 2008(3) Federal Ministry of Health 2007

*Harmonized NLSS: National Bureau of Statistics, 2010

Progress and trends

MDG4 aims to reduce the mortality of childrenunder-five years of age which was 191 per 1,000 in 1990 to approximately 64 per 1,000 live births;infant mortality from 91 to approximately 31 per1,000 live births; and increase the percentage ofone-year-olds fully immunised against measlesfrom 46 per cent in 1990 to 100 per cent by 2015.

The major child-killer conditions in Nigeria includemalaria, pneumonia, diarrhoea and malnutrition.The current policy framework for MDG4 is theNational Health Sector Development Plan. Theplan aims to improve child health, among otherhealth-related MDGs.

In the analysis of progress and trends in the health-related MDGs presented in the following sections,projections up to 2015 were made using theaverage rate of improvement/change over theprevious three years. The choice of the three-yearaverage, given the availability of concrete data upto 2008, is because the period 2006-2008witnessed comparatively more effective interventionin the health sector than in previous years.

The forecast path based on the three-year averagewas also compared with an alternate scenario

based on a much longer historical path (eight-yearaverage, where data was available) as well aswith a linear path to the target.

4.1: Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000live births)

The under-five mortality rate reflects theprobability of a child dying between birth and thefifth birthday. Data obtained from the NigeriaDemographic and Health Survey reports (1990,1999, 2003 and 2008) show that the under-fivemortality rose to 201 per 1000 live births in 2003but declined to 157 in 2008 (Figure 12).

The data show an even steeper decline in 2007 to 138 per 1000 live births, which represented amajor drop, before rising to 157 in 2008, implyinga reversal of the progress achieved in 2007. Theobserved swings in the under-five mortality ratesacross the years suggest that this indicator maynot have been responding to policy interventionsas such but to some other (unknown) factors.

In Figure 12, the period up to 2008 shows thecountry's actual performance. After that year,projections are made up to 2015, based on theaverage change over the previous three years,and the previous eight years. The path to goal line


MDG REPORT 2010

28

in the figure shows the ideal path the countryshould follow in order to meet the indicator target.Both projection lines are above the linear path tothe target, suggesting that the country is not ontrack to achieve this MDG. Because performanceworsened during most of the years between 2000and 2006, it is not surprising that projectionsbased on the past eight years are very wide of thetarget. Even though some improvements wererecorded in 2007 (the nearest to the linear path)and 2008, the average rate of decline over theshort term (2006-2008) was insufficient toincrease the average performance. Thus,projections fall short of the target path.

In terms of regional disparity, in 2008 the NorthEast still had a disproportionately high rate ofunder-five mortality (222 per 1000) while theSouth West had recorded rates very much belowthe national average (89 per 1000).

Clearly, under-five mortality still presents a majorchallenge for Nigeria, despite the decline from201 in 2003 to 157 in 2008, which merely reflectsthe significant slowing of infant mortality to 75 per1,000 live births in 2008 from 100 in 2003 (NHDS,2003, 2008). The situation calls for concerted

Figure 12: Actual and projected under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births)

Projected (3 year): Projection based on average change over previous 3 years Projected (8 year): Projection based on average change over previous 8 years

investment in the north if the MDG is to be met. These investments must be delivered as part of acomprehensive package of inter-sectoralinterventions that factor in the underlyingdeterminants of child deaths including the broaderenvironmental and social causes.

4.2: Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 livebirths)

Infant mortality was about 81 per 1,000 live birthsin 2000, but rose to 100 in 2003. Fresh measureswere put in place backed by increased investmentthat resulted in the observed improvement in 2008when it fell further to 75 per 1,000 live births.

Recent data shows that infant mortality is highestin the North East (109 per 1,000 live births) andlowest in the South West (50 per 1,000 livebirths).

Projections based on the average change overthe last eight years show that the country wouldstill record an infant mortality rate of about 70 per1,000 live births in 2015 and so not meet theMDG goal of reducing the infant mortality rate by

per 1

000

live

births

two-thirds of the 1990 rate (which is about 31 per1,000 live births). However if the more rapiddecline in infant mortality over the past threeyears can be sustained, the country will almostmeet the indicator target in 2015 (Figure 13).

4.3: Percentage of one-year olds fullyimmunised against measles

The proportion of one-year-old children fullyimmunised against measles is the third indicatorof MDG4. This proportion has not shown anyparticular trend by and large: from 46 per cent in1990, it rose to 61.8 per cent in 2002 and thendeclined over the next two years, rose to 60 in2005 and remained at that level in 2006 and2007. The country then experienced a reversal inthe progress on this indicator in 2008, the lastyear for which concrete data are available, when itdeclined significantly to 41 per cent. There ishowever an indication that a recovery might haveoccurred in 2009 with the highly tentative

MDG REPORT 2010


approximation of 74.3 per cent for that year fromthe Harmonized Nigeria Living Standard Survey(HNLSS) 2010 which is yet to be comprehensivelyanalysed.


Of the three indicators, only the infant mortalitytarget of 31 per cent appears near achievablebased on the three-year average rate of decline.This scenario does not factor-in any negativeshocks that cannot be discounted even if the risksare not very obvious today. Since 2006, Nigeriahas launched an immense campaign to protectmore than 29 million children across the countryfrom measles and malaria – major child-killerdiseases. In addition, Integrated Management ofChildhood Illness was introduced in 2006.

Even though there is evidence of increasedimprovement, Nigeria is still not on track to meetMDG4. Very often, the thrust of government's

Figure 13: Actual and projected infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births)


per 1

000

live

births


MDG REPORT 2010

30

well-intentioned and capital-intensive interventionprogrammes appears to be more responsive(treatment-based) than pro-active (prevention-based). This calls for more attention to be given toother 'non-health sector' interventions, such asintegrated approaches that include safe water andsanitation.

The key challenges to reducing infant mortalityinclude population, declining resources and widegeographic variations. Others are ensuringuniversal access to an essential package of care,improving the quality of health care services,increasing demand for healthcare services andproviding financial access especially to thevulnerable groups. Obviously, a uniform level ofintervention across the country will not do much;the North East appears more in need ofimmediate intervention than other regions.

Overall, prospects for achieving MDG4 are slimunless there is a redoubling of efforts towardsimproving child health generally. To be confident,therefore, policies, programmes and interventionsaimed at reducing the infant mortality rate inrecent years will not only need to be maintainedbut intensified at all levels of government.Interventions should include those targeted atreducing morbidity and prevalence of major child-killer conditions like malaria, measles, cholera,HIV/AIDS and malnutrition.

The CGS scale-up to local government councilspromises this, in part, and can be reinforced byother means of intervention that allow for projectidentification and implementation at the wardlevel. The National Strategic Health DevelopmentPlan has set a target for the under-five mortalityrate that falls short of the 2015 target, suggestingthat more resources are needed for this target tobe achieved.

Priority areas should include the development of amonitoring framework to ensure effectiveness andefficiency in the use of resources, the provision oftechnical assistance for primary health caredelivery and broadening the coverage of healthinsurance. Government's efforts in the eradicationof poliomyelitis and guinea worm are also steps inthe right direction towards the reduction of childmortality that can be most beneficially expandedand made more effective. The expected NationalHealth Bill that will become operational towardsthe end of 2010 should have a positive andsustainable impact on the financing of this andother health-related MDGs.

MDG REPORT 2010


Goal 5 – Improve maternal healthTarget 5.A – Reduce by three quarters, between 1990 and 2015, the maternalmortality ratio

Indicator

5.1 Maternal mortality rate(per 100,000 live births)

5.2 Proportion of birthsattended by skilled healthpersonnel (%)

1990

1000

45

2000

704

42

20011

704

42

20021

704

37.3

2003

800

36.3

20042

800

36.3

2005

800

43.5

20063

800

43.5

20073

800

43.5

2008

545

38.9

2009

NA

NA

2015target

250

100

Notes: 1, 2 and 3 are 2000, 2003 and 2005 data respectively

Sources:(1) National Bureau of Statistics, 2007(2) NDHS report, 1990, 1999, 2003, 2008

5.1: Maternal mortality

The maternal mortality rate for most of the periodunder review has been falling or, at least, hasremained constant, except for the rise from 704 to800 recorded between 2002 and 2003.Projections based on the three-year average lookpromising; it is estimated that the country'smaternal mortality rate will be about 250 per100,000 live births in 2015 if the current rate ofdecline is sustained (Figure 14).

5.2: Proportion of births attended byskilled health personnel

The proportion of births attended by skilled healthpersonnel was 45 per cent in 1990. So far, thecountry has not achieved a better level than that.Projections based on both the three-year andeight-year averages show almost flat trajectorieswith no improvement (Figure 15). Over the lasttwo years, however, government has introducedmeasures to address this.

Of particular relevance is the Midwives ServiceScheme, though its effectiveness is not fullycaptured by the available data. Under thescheme, the federal government has, as a stop-gap measure, embarked on the massiveengagement of midwives on a cost-sharing basisamong the three tiers of government. Thisinitiative is aimed at rapidly improving thisindicator.


MDG REPORT 2010

32

Figure 14: Actual and projected maternal mortality rate (per 100,000 live births)

Projected (3 year): Projection based on average change over previous 3 yearsProjected (8 year): Projection based on average change over previous 8 years

Figure 15: Actual and projected proportion of births attended by skilled personnel


%

per 1

000

live

births

MDG REPORT 2010


Target 5.B – Achieve by 2015, universal access to reproductive health

Indicator

5.3 Contraceptive prevalence rate (%)

5.4 Adolescent birth rate (%)

5.5 Antenatal care coverage At least one visit (%)At least four visits (%)

5.6 Unmet need for family planning (%)

2003

8.2

25

6147

17

20041

8.2

25

6147

17

2005

12

NA

59NA

NA

20062

12

NA

59NA

NA

20072

12

NA

59NA

NA

2008

14.6

NA

54.544.8

20.2

2009

NA

NA

NANA

NA

Notes: 1 and 2 are 2003 and 2004 data respectively

Sources:(1) NDHS 2003, 2008(2) Federal Ministry of Health, 2006

5.3: Contraceptive prevalence rate

Data on this indicator are only available from2003. The country recorded a prevalence rate of8.2 per cent in 2003 and 2004, 12 per cent from2005 to 2007 and 14.6 per cent in 2008. The datashow progress over the years. Using dataavailable up to 2008, two projection scenarios arepresented, one based on the average change

Figure 16: Actual and projected contraceptive prevalence rate


over the previous five years and the other basedon that for the previous three years. The five-yearaverage projection shows prospects for a fasterimprovement. At this rate, the country will record acontraceptive prevalence rate of 36.5 per cent in2015 (Figure 16).

%


MDG REPORT 2010

34

Figure 17: Actual and projected antenatal care coverage (at least one visit)


5.5: Antenatal care coverage (at leastone visit)

Data on coverage of antenatal care in the countryare similarly available only from 2003. The data inthe country (for at least one visit) up to 2008 showno remarkable variation over the period 2003-2008. Two projection scenarios are presented,based on data for the last three years and for thelast five years. There is no significant difference interms of projected outcomes under both scenarios(Figure 17). The outlook is poor in both cases. Toachieve this target, a change of strategy orcomplete overhaul of existing strategies isinevitable.


Given the widely-acknowledged slow progress,achieving significant reductions in maternalmortality is a central policy concern. In response,policies and programmes have been introduced inan attempt to reverse the situation.

Recent interventions include primary health care-related projects and programmes that support

maternal health and additional maternal/childhealth centres established around the country.Available data show that 228 maternal health carecentres and 10 health training institutions havebeen built, 2,312 facilities have been equippedwith medical equipment and 6,673 health workershave been trained.

The Nigerian Government, in collaboration withdevelopment partners has continued to improveaccess to quality health services through otherinterventions such as the Community HealthInsurance Scheme and the Midwives ServiceScheme.

Major challenges include inadequacy of data,poor remuneration of health workers, lowabsorptive capacity in the health sector and thelow quality of service in health facilities andprimary health care centres across the country.Others are a dearth of skilled personnel and ashortage of family planning facilities, in particular.

Major priorities for the government will includefunding, proper monitoring of expenditure toensure accountability and project evaluation.Increasing access to primary health care services

%

MDG REPORT 2010


especially in rural areas is also a priority, as arethe training and retraining of health workers andadvocacy.

There is a need for incentives to be provided forhealth workers in rural areas, as is being done forteachers under the Federal Teachers' Scheme, toencourage them and support the availability ofskilled health workers in rural areas. Women'srights should be recognised and budgeted for toenable them to participate in economic activities,educate them and support them. This appliesespecially to single mothers who are usually moreat risk.

There are opportunities for progress toward theachievement of this goal in the country:government commitment is not in doubt anddevelopment partners are willing to offer bothtechnical and material support to improvematernal health outcomes. The new NationalStrategic Health Development Framework andPlan and other case-specific policies could beleveraged to achieve rapid improvement.

The CGS scale-up to local government councils ispromising, as it focuses particularly on health andeducation, but it needs to be rapidly extended tomore councils. This needs a holistic mechanismthat takes into account multi-sector approachesthat may be 'outside' the health and educationsectors, but contribute to these outcomes, suchas water, sanitation and hygiene.


MDG REPORT 2010

36

Photo: SPARC

MDG REPORT 2010


Goal 6 – Combat HIV/AIDS, malariaand other diseases

Target 6.A – Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS

Indicator

6.1a HIV prevalence among pregnantyoung women aged 15-24 (%)

6.2a Young people aged 15-24reporting the use of a condom duringsexual intercourse with a non-regularsexual partner (%)

6.3 Proportion of population aged 15-24 years with comprehensive correctknowledge of HIV/AIDS (%)

6.4a Ratio of school attendance oforphans to school attendance of non-orphans aged 10-14 years

6.4b Children orphaned by HIV/AIDS(million)

1990

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

20001

5.4

NA

NA

NA

NA

2001

5.8

NA

NA

NA

NA

20022

5.8

NA

NA

NA

NA

2003

5.0

43.9

18.3

NA

NA

20043

5.0

43.9

18.3

NA

1.8

2005

4.3

63.8

25.9

NA

1.97

20064

4.3

63.8

25.9

NA

1.97

2007

4.3

63.8

25.9

NA

1.97

2008

4.2

NA

NA

1.2

NA

2015target

To behalted

100

100

-

-

Notes: 1, 2, 3 and 4 are 1999, 2001, 2003 and 2005 data respectively

Sources:(1) NDHS report, 2008(2) Monitoring and Evaluation Unit, NACA

6.1a: HIV prevalence among pregnantyoung women aged 15-24

HIV prevalence among pregnant young womenaged 15-24 years has continuously declined inrecent years. From 5.4 per cent in 2000, it initiallyrose to 5.8 per cent in 2001 and 2002 butdeclined to 5.0 per cent in 2003 and further to 4.3per cent in 2005 and 4.2 per cent in 2008. Theforecast for this indicator up to 2015 is presentedusing the three-year and the eight-year average(Figure 18).

Nationally the MDG target has been met: thespread of HIV has been halted and has begun tobe reversed. However, acute challenges remain insome states where prevalence rates continue toremain high.

For example, for pregnant women aged 15-24, theSouth South region recorded the highest HIVprevalence rate (7 per cent) while the South West

has the lowest rate in the country (2 per cent). Thestate-level analysis reveals that Benue State hasthe highest prevalence (10.6 per cent) while EkitiState recorded the lowest (1 per cent).


MDG REPORT 2010

38

Figure 18: Actual and projected HIV prevalence among pregnant young womenaged 15-24


6.2a:Young people aged 15-24reporting the use of a condom duringsexual intercourse with a non-regularsexual partner

This indicator and the next measure awareness ofHIV among young people. Both have beenimproving over the years, but condom use showsfaster improvement overall. From 43.9 per cent in2003 it rose to 63.8 per cent in 2005 through2007, representing a 20-percentage pointimprovement. Projections reveal that the countryis on track to achieve this target (Figure 19).

The regional data reveal that the South East hadthe highest percentage of young people betweenthe ages of 15 and 24 reporting the use of acondom during sexual intercourse with a non-regular sexual partner (53 per cent), while theNorth East recorded the lowest (26 per cent). Atthe state level, Lagos State is the best in terms ofthis indicator (63 per cent) while Oyo Statepresents the worst outcome (13 per cent).

6.3:Young people aged 15-24 withcorrect knowledge of HIV/AIDS

Although data on this indicator are limited, thereare some indications of an improvement in thecorrect identification of ways of preventing thesexual transmission of the infection. In 2003, thisindicator was 18.3 per cent but rose to 25.9 percent in 2007. Using both the three-year and thefour-year averages in projections, however, thecountry is unlikely to achieve the 100 per centtarget by 2015 (Figure 20).

The North East has so far recorded the lowestpercentage (31 per cent) while the South Westrecorded the highest (49 per cent), which agreeswith the prevalence statistics. At the state level,Jigawa State recorded the lowest percentage (8per cent) while Abuja FCT recorded the highest(68 per cent).

%

MDG REPORT 2010


Figure 20: Actual and projected proportion of young people aged 15-24 who bothcorrectly identify ways of preventing HIV and who reject major misconceptions aboutHIV transmission


Figure 19: Actual and projected proportion of young people aged 15-24 reportingcondom use with non-regular sexual partner


%

%


MDG REPORT 2010

40

6.4b: Children orphaned by HIV/AIDS

The number of children orphaned by HIV/AIDShas increased. It rose from 1.8 million children to1.97 million between 2004 and 2005 through2007, representing an increase of about 9 percent. A projection based on a four-year averagechange presents a scenario in which the numberof children orphaned by HIV/AIDS would hit 2.3million (Figure 21).

Figure 21: Actual and projected number of children orphaned by HIV/AIDS

Projected (4 year): Projection based on average change over previous 4 years

Target 6.B – Achieve, by 2010, universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for allthose who need it

According to the Federal Ministry of Health, access to HIV/AIDS treatment for all those whoneed it was 16.7 per cent in 2007, but rose to 34.4 per cent in 2008. The target is to have 100per cent by 2015.

millio

n

MDG REPORT 2010


6.6: Malaria prevalence rate (per100,000)

Except for the peak prevalence rate of 2,203 per100,000 recorded in 2002, the prevalence ofmalaria has decreased for most of the years forwhich data is available. There were 2,024 casesper 100,000 in the year 2000, but this fell to 1,859in 2001 and rose to 2,203 in 2002. The numberfell to 1,727 in 2003 and further to 1,157 in 2004,representing a 42.8 per cent decline from the2000 figure.

The death rate fell from 0.23 to 0.16, about a 30per cent decline, within the same period.Projections up to 2015 show that the incidencerates could be about 455 and 594 in the yearunder the three-year average and six-yearaverage scenarios, respectively (Figure 22).

Sources: (1) FMOH1 HNLSS, 2010

Target 6.C – Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malariaand other major diseases

Indicator

6.6 Malaria prevalence (per 100,000)

Deaths (per 100,000)

6.7 Proportion of children under 5sleeping under insecticide-treated bed nets (%)

6.9 Tuberculosis prevalence (per 100,000)

Deaths (per 100,000)

1990

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

2000

2024

0.23

NA

15.74

1.57

2001

1859

0.19

NA

12.01

2.24

2002

2203

0.15

NA

12.57

1.58

2003

1727

0.19

2.2

21.75

2.5

2004

1157

0.16

NA

7.07

1.50

2005

1157

0.16

NA

7.07

1.50

2006

1157

0.16

NA

7.07

1.50

2007

1157

0.16

NA

7.07

1.50

2008

NA

NA

5.5

NA

NA

2009

NA

NA

10.91

NA

NA

6.9: Tuberculosis prevalence (per100,000) and death rate

Variations in the tuberculosis prevalence rate inNigeria show almost the same characteristics asthe malaria prevalence rate, though the rate hasnever been as high.

Tuberculosis recorded a high of 21.75 per100,000 in 2003, decreasing in subsequent years.The rate was 15.74 in the year 2000, falling to12.57 in 2002. It rose to 21.75 in 2003 and thenfell continuously to a low of 7.07 per 100,000 in2004, representing a 43 per cent and 67.7 percent decline from the year 2000 and 2003 figures,respectively. The rate remained constant throughto 2007.

The death rate also fell from 1.57 in the year 2000to 1.50 in 2004 through 2007, representing a 4per cent decline. The four-year average projectionfor prevalence shows a more optimistic picture ofclose to zero by 2015 (Figure 23).


MDG REPORT 2010

42

Figure 22: Actual and projected malaria prevalence rate


Figure 23: Actual and projected tuberculosis prevalence rate


per 1

00,00

0pe

r 100

,000

MDG REPORT 2010



Overall, Nigeria is making progress albeit slowlyon this goal. The government and donor agencieshave been doing a lot in the area of reducing theprevalence of HIV/AIDS as well as increasingawareness. The National Agency for the Control ofAIDS (NACA) has developed a five-year nationalstrategic framework for action.

Major challenges to the achievement of this goalinclude inadequate data for proper policy actionand responses, unavailability and inaccessibility ofanti-retroviral therapy (ART) for those in need, lowgrassroots knowledge and awareness of thedangers of the disease and methods ofprevention. There are also increasing fundinggaps.

With malaria, the key challenges include ensuringeffective delivery of insecticide-treated nets tohouseholds and community-based sanitationinitiatives. Globally, Nigeria ranks fourth out of the22 countries with a high burden of tuberculosis(TB). The link between tuberculosis and HIV hasfurther worsened its burden. The incidence of TBdetected and treated still falls short of the setglobal target of 85 per cent by 2015.

Priorities should include availability, affordabilityand accessibility of ART, increasing the level ofawareness of society about HIV/AIDS, andimplementation of the reviewed national HIV/AIDSpolicy and the National Framework for HIVPrevention in the Sex Work Setting.

Strategies and opportunities for acceleratedprogress include rapid adoption and effectiveimplementation of the new National HIV/AIDSStrategic Framework for Action 2010-2015 and thecosted National HIV/AIDS Strategic Plan toenhance prospects for controlling the epidemic.Also important is fast-tracking the production ofcondoms, ART and other consumables, soreducing the cost of procuring them from abroad.

Progress on malaria and TB would involve fasttracking implementation of the new StrategicFramework for Action on Malaria 2009-2013(recently developed by the National MalariaControl Programme), scaling up DOTS services inall 36 states of the federation, mapping TB zones,and intensifying efforts in endemic areas toimprove access and coverage.

Encouraging an integrated and coordinatedapproach for engaging international developmentpartners would also enhance progress towardsthe achievement of MDG6.


MDG REPORT 2010

44

Photo: SPARC

MDG REPORT 2010


Goal 7 – Ensure environmentalsustainability

Target 7.A – Integrate the principles of sustainable development into countrypolicies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources

Indicator

7.1 Proportion ofland area coveredby forest (%)

1990

18.9

2000

14.4

2001

NA

2002

NA

2003

NA

2004

NA

2005

12.2

2006

NA

2007

NA

2008

NA

2009

NA

2010

9.9

2015target

15

Target 7.C – Halve, by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainableaccess to safe drinking water and basic sanitation

Indicator

7.8 Proportion ofpopulation using animproved drinkingwater source (%)

7.9 Proportion ofpopulation using animproved sanitationfacility (%)

1990

54

39

2000

54

42.9

2001

62.11

42.9

2002

64.21

49.4

2003

66.25

49.8

2004

57

38

2005

60

33

2006

50.9

33

2007

49.1

42.9

2008

55.81

53.83

2009

58.92

51.62

2010

NA

NA

2015target

77

70

Source: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2010)

Progress and trends

Nigeria's Vision 20:2020 is an integrateddevelopment plan with one of its three pillarsdedicated to ensuring sustainability.

7.1: Proportion of land area covered byforest

Forests perform a number of functions that arevital for humans, including the provision of goods(timber and non-timber products) and servicessuch as protection against flooding, habitat forbiodiversity, carbon sequestration, watershedprotection and soil conservation. Nigeria is well

endowed with forests, which account for about 2.5per cent of GDP.

However, the proportion of Nigeria's land areacovered by forest declined from 14.4 per cent in2000 to 12.2 per cent in 2005 and 9.9 per cent in2010 (Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations, 2010). Forests provideemployment for over 2 million people, particularlyin the harvesting of fuel wood and poles, but morethan 80,000 people work in log processingindustries, especially in the forest zones of thesouth (Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations, 2010).

Source:1 Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey2 National Living Standards Survey3 National Bureau of Statistics (2009b)

NB Data for 2008 and 2009 are undergoing further analysis as the definitions used may include some sharing of sanitation facilities.


MDG REPORT 2010

46

7.8: Proportion of population using animproved drinking water source

Access to improved water sources (defined aspiped water, public taps, boreholes or pumps,protected wells, protected springs or rainwater)could help reduce deaths from diarrhoea andother such diseases. Diarrhoea is now recognisedas the biggest killer of children under five yearsold in Africa.

Nigeria's progress towards this target has beenerratic (Figure 24). Currently, 58.9 per cent of thepopulation has access to an improved watersource (Harmonized Nigeria Living StandardsSurvey, 2009) an improvement on the 55.8 percent recorded in the 2008 NDHS.

Figure 24: Actual and projected proportion of population using an improved watersource, 1990-2015


However, despite a lot of investment andresources having gone into the provision of safewater by the government and its developmentpartners, this has not always translated into theavailability of water that is safe, affordable,accessible and sustainable – particularly in ruralareas (Figure 25). A linear projection of theimprovement over the last five years does notpromise realisation of the MDG target, but it mustbe noted that there has been improvement overthe last two years where strategic investments inpartnership with state and local governments havebeen successful through such initiatives as thedebt relief-funded Conditional Grants Scheme.

%

Source: Harmonized Nigeria Living Standard Survey (HNLSS), 2009

Figure 25: Percentage of the population using an improved water source by state, 2009

MDG REPORT 2010


7.9: Proportion of population using animproved sanitation facility

Globally, improving access to clean water,sanitation and hygiene has the potential to reducedisease burden by at least 9.1 per cent in terms ofdisability-adjusted life years (a weighted measureof deaths and disability), or by 6.3 per cent interms of deaths (World Health Organization,www.wpro.who.int).

In Nigeria, good average progress has beenmade in the use of improved sanitation facilitiessince 2006, although more needs to be done inorder to achieve the target. Nevertheless, gradualprogress has been made so that now over halfthe population has access to improved sanitation(Figures 26 and 27).

Source: National Bureau of Statistics: Harmonized Nigeria Living Standard Survey, 2009

Figure 27: Percentage of the population using improved sanitation facilities by state, 2009


MDG REPORT 2010

48

Figure 26: Actual and projected percentage of population using an improved sanitationfacility, 1990-2015


%

Target 7.D – By 2020, to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of atleast 100 million slum dwellers

Nigeria has become increasingly urbanised in the last five decades: the proportion of thepopulation living in urban areas rose from 15 per cent in 1950, to 23.4 per cent in 1975 and to43.3 per cent in 2000. Projections indicate that more than 60 per cent of Nigerians will live inurban centres by 2025, and a sizeable proportion of these are likely to live in slums if urgentaction is not taken. One of Nigeria's greatest challenges is providing adequate housing for itsgrowing population. The country is estimated to have a deficit of about 16 million housingunits, requiring the construction of about 2 million units annually to meet the shortfall.

In line with the MDG targets, financing focuses on developing city-wide infrastructure andupgrading slums to improve living conditions and enhance economically productiveactivities. Emphasis is given to providing nation-wide infrastructure and basic services inpoor communities across Nigeria under the Community-based Urban DevelopmentProgramme. This is in addition to the implementation of a National Urban Renewal and SlumUpgrading Programme. Project components include the construction and upgrading of intra-city roads and drains, expansion of water and electric power supplies, provision ofrecreational parks, and the renovation and reconstruction of selected public utility buildings.

MDG REPORT 2010



The water supply and sanitation subsector isguided by the National Water Supply andSanitation Policy (NWSSP), which was approvedby the federal government in 2000. The objectiveof the policy is to ensure that all Nigerians haveaccess to sufficient potable water and adequatesanitation, in an affordable and sustainable way,through investment by the three tiers ofgovernment (national, state and local), the privatesector and the beneficiaries. The NWSSP iscomplemented by a draft National Water-Sanitation Policy that was approved by theNational Water Resources Council in April 2005 to address sanitation issues.

The Federal Ministry of Water Resources hasdeveloped a number of strategies, guidelines andprogrammes to accelerate the efforts to provideimproved water supply and sanitation in Nigeria.These include the rural water supply andsanitation programme; the small towns watersupply and sanitation reform strategy; the smalltowns water supply and sanitation programmeimplementation guidelines; and the water supplyinvestment mobilisation and applicationguidelines.

Critical issues facing efforts to provide access toimproved water sources include cost and healthconsiderations. The majority of the population arenot connected to publicly subsidised piped water;

those who are not connected must buy waterfrom vendors, usually at very high prices. Healthissues include the need to ensure adequatestandards of water quality for both piped waterand vendor water.

The environmental management actionsenvisaged under Nigerian strategies need to beintegrated with the country's health strategies toensure maximum coverage and uptake.

Climate change, in particular, has hugeimplications for efforts to achieve the MDG targetson environmental sustainability. Climate changecan affect and/or be affected by measures takento ensure environmental sustainability. Climatechange can directly change the quality andintegrity of climate-dependent resources,including forests, land, soils, water and coastalresources. Ecosystem services, which arecurrently threatened by pollution, populationpressure, mismanagement and overuse, maysuffer additional pressures from climate change.

Overexploitation of groundwater may reduce theavailability of safe water in the north of Nigeriaand increase the influx of saline water in thesouth of the country. In addition, migration andchanges in rainfall, in particular, may placeadditional stress on existing sanitation systems.Pressures on livelihoods and incomes mayincrease the incentive for deforestation, reducingprospects for climate change mitigation.


MDG REPORT 2010

50

Conditions in coastal slums will deteriorate asflooding and severe weather damageinfrastructure and housing, particularly that builton reclaimed land or on the water. It is estimatedthat desertification and desert encroachmentthreaten about 90,000-130,000 km2 of arable landand US$6.4 billion of capital.

Better management of water is essential foragriculture to adapt to climate change. Changes inrainfall are likely to reduce river flows, and warmertemperatures will increase evaporation. Water andecosystem resources can be used more efficientlyand sustainably through a combination of new andexisting technologies, better information and morerational use. For example, if farmers learn newfarming and irrigation techniques, it is possible toreduce groundwater consumption to sustainablelevels.

The sanitation sector suffers from weakinstitutional capacities, a low level of professionalmanpower and low levels of private sectorcapacity and participation, coupled with anabsence of rural water-supply infrastructure. Thereis often no single accountable line ministry or clearbudget line. This results in weak sectorleadership, poor coordination between actors,wastage of resources and a lack of accountability.Additionally, the lack of priority accorded tosanitation in national and internationaldevelopment strategies results in low levels ofinvestment by governments and aid agenciesalike.

Overall, the lack of current data and a clear policyframework on issues relating to MDG7 reflects thelack of investment in environmental issues inNigeria.

MDG REPORT 2010


Goal 8 – Develop a global partnershipfor development

Target 8.D – Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developingcountries

Indicator

Per capita ODA to Nigeria(US$)

8.12 Debt service as apercentage of exports ofgoods and services

1990

3.0

22.3

2000

1.47

8.2

2001

1.39

12.4

2002

2.38

7.8

2003

2.44

5.9

2004

4.49

4.5

2005

48.94

15.2

2006

81.67

11.0

2007

NA

1.3

2008

NA

0.5

2009

NA

NA

Sources:(i) Central Bank of Nigeria (2006)(ii) Central Bank of Nigeria (2007)(iii) World Bank (2006), World Development Indicators

Progress and trends

The flow of ODA (including debt relief gains) fromdeveloped countries to Nigeria has increaseddramatically since 2004, rising from US$4.49 perperson in 2004 to US$81.67 per person in 2006and 2007 (Figure 28). However, these figuresinclude the large volume of debt relief negotiatedby Nigeria, which was received in tranchesspanning both 2005 and 2006. This does notreflect a large or sustained increase in the volumeof additional ODA provided by internationaldevelopment partners in line with theircommitments.

Provisional data for 2008 from the OECD showper capita ODA of US$8.53, which is an increaseon previous years but is still far short of thevolume of funds required to make appreciableprogress on the MDGs. The coordination andmanagement of ODA from different donors andcountries is a complex challenge and thegovernment will need to allocate more resourcesto this activity.

Nigeria's economy was over-burdened by thecountry's huge external debt for many years. In1990, for example, servicing the country's externaldebt consumed 22.3 per cent of the value of thecountry's exports of goods and services (Figure29). Nigeria obtained debt relief in 2005, when the

Paris Club wrote off US$18 billion of its debt oncondition that the country pay off the balance ofapproximately US$12.4 billion owing to the ParisClub creditors. Nigeria paid off its debt to the ParisClub in 2006.

It subsequently paid off its debt to the LondonClub of creditors through par bonds worthUS$1.486 billion and promissory notes worthUS$476 million. In addition, in 2007 Nigeria re-purchased about 21 per cent of outstanding oilwarrants issued under a debt-restructuring deal in1991.

All Paris Club debt relief gains were dedicated toadditional spending on pro-poor projects andprogrammes towards achieving the MDGs inNigeria.


MDG REPORT 2010

52

Figure 28: Annual per capita official development assistance (ODA) to Nigeria (US$),1990-2007 (includes debt relief gains)

Figure 29: Debt service as a percentage of exports of goods and services, 1990-2008

Sources: (1): MDGs indicators, UN (see http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/data.aspx)Other sources:(i) Central Bank of Nigeria (2006): Annual Report and Statement of Accounts(ii) Central Bank of Nigeria (2007): Economic Report for the First Half of 2007(iii) World Bank (2006), World Development Indicators

Source: Debt Management Office, 2010

US$

%

MDG REPORT 2010


Target 8.F – In cooperation with the private sector, make available the benefitsof new technologies, especially information and communications technology

Indicator

8.14 Telephone lines per 100 people1

8.15 Cellular subscribers per100 people1

8.16 Internet users per 100people1

Teledensity2

1990

0.3

0.00

0.00

NA

2000

0.44

0.02

0.06

NA

2001

0.47

0.21

0.09

0.73

2002

0.54

1.20

0.32

1.89

2003

0.66

2.35

0.56

3.35

2004

0.75

6.65

1.29

8.50

2005

0.87

13.19

3.55

16.27

2006

1.17

22.40

5.55

24.18

2007

1.07

27.35

6.77

29.98

2008

0.86

41.66

15.86

45.93

2009

NA

NA

NA

45.93

1 MDG indicators, UN (see http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/data.aspx)2 Overall teledensity: total number of telephone connections (land lines, cellular, wireless, etc.) per 100 persons.Other Sources:(i) National Information Technology Development Agency, Abuja(ii) Nigerian Communications Commission, Abuja(iii) World Bank (2006), World Development Indicators

In 1990 there were only 0.3 telephone lines per100 people in Nigeria. This increased to 0.54 in2002 and to 0.86 in 2008 (Figure 30). If this trendcontinues, only about 2 of every 100 people inNigeria will have access to telephone lines by2015.

However, many more people have access tocellular phones. As a result of the deregulation ofthe telecommunications sector in 2001, foreigninvestment in Nigeria's telecommunications sectorincreased from US$2.1 billion in 2002 to US$8.1billion in 2006. This has significantly expandedinfrastructure and activity in the sector.

The number of GSM (Global System for MobileCommunications) lines increased from 0.27 millionin 2001 to more than 1.57 million lines in 2002.The number of lines doubled again in 2003 to 3.1million lines and tripled in 2004, reaching 9.2million. In 2006, the number of lines almostdoubled the 2005 figure of 18 million to reach 32million. Thus, access to cellular phones increasedfrom only two out of every 100 people in Nigeria in2000 to nearly 42 per 100 in 2008 (Figure 30). Ifthis trend were to continue, 56.10 per cent of thepopulation would have access to a cellular phoneby 2015.

The number of Nigerians using the internetincreased from 0.6 in every 100 people in 2000 to15.86 in 2008. Projections for 2010 to 2015 showan average of 11.35 users for every 100 persons,rising to 13.90 by 2015. Thus, although access to

the internet increased between 2000 and 2008,access rates are still very low in Nigeria.

Overall, the involvement of private sectoroperators in the telecommunications sector hasbrought competition, innovation and widercoverage, mobilised new financing for the industryand increased its contribution to GDP.


Although the cost of servicing Nigeria's debts iscurrently within sustainable limits, there is a needto ensure that the country does not revert tounsustainable levels of debt.

A major challenge facing policy-makers andimplementers is the need to integrate themanagement of external and domestic debt insuch a way that debt can be used effectively tofund development projects at the federal, stateand local government levels, in addition to itstraditional objective of financing fiscal gaps. Thisis particularly important in view of theunprecedentedly high level of Nigeria's domesticdebt. The need to develop approaches to publicdebt management that reflect changing fundingrealities, such as the growing importance ofpublic-private partnerships, is a critical challengefor policy-makers and implementers.

In the telecommunications sector, although thenumber of telephone lines and teledensity have


MDG REPORT 2010

54

Figure 30: Percentage of the population of Nigeria having access to telephone lines,subscribing to cellular services and using the internet, 1990-2008

Source: Nigerian Communications Commission

increased, Nigerians generally consider thepricing of telecommunication services to beexploitative. The quality of services rendered byservice providers is considered inadequate, bothby the government and by citizens. More effortsneed to be made to address issues like droppedcalls, inaccurate billing and poor call quality.

In the area of foreign direct investment (FDI),there are two major challenges. The first is toattract FDI and the second is to maximise itscontribution to development. Whether foreigncompanies invest in Nigeria depends on a numberof factors. These include the cost of doingbusiness, such as the quality of human resources,adequate provision of infrastructure and theefficiency and credibility of business regulatoryinstitutions.

%

MDG REPORT 2010


Current global developments andimplications for the MDGs in NigeriaIn addition to the domestic macroeconomic anddevelopment contexts, some global developmentshave potentially critical implications for Nigeria'sefforts to achieve the MDG targets. Two notableglobal developments are the global financial andeconomic crises since 2008 and the increasingpressures of climate change, including mitigationand adaptation efforts.

The global financial and economiccrises since 2008

These crises have markedly changed themacroeconomic context in which countries aretrying to achieve the MDGs. The global financialcrisis contributed to slow growth across theworld's economies, resulting in lower demand forcommodities, especially oil. Nigeria sufferedcontagion effects, such as the drying-up of credit,investment and private capital flows. This led totighter credit conditions and increased uncertainty,which curbed investment in 2009.

The crisis had marked and direct effects oninternational oil prices. Oil prices fell from recordhighs of about US$147/barrel in July 2008 toabout US$50/barrel in January 2009. As aconsequence, Nigerian policymakers adjusted thebenchmark price on which the 2009 budget wasbased, affecting the country's budget. The impactson growth and development in Nigeria werewidespread.

The drop in the price of oil was followed by a fallin share prices on the stock market. Together,these led to a devaluation of the naira. Thesituation was made worse by the withdrawal byJanuary 2009 of some US$15 billion from thecountry's capital markets by foreign portfolioinvestment (hedge funds). The financial crisis alsoincreased unemployment and poverty levels.Growth estimates were revised down in line withthe impact of the crisis. Slower growth hamperedthe fight against poverty.

Some donors have adopted a wait-and-seeapproach or have cut budgetary commitments inthe face of financial difficulties at home. Totalspending on MDG-related activities in Nigeria mayhave fallen as a result of reduced allocation in the

2009 budget by both federal and stategovernments and reduced allocations andcommitments by donor agencies. Remittancesfrom the Nigerian Diaspora, which exceededUS$17 billion in 2007, also declined precipitouslyfrom late 2008 onwards.

Nigerian policy-makers are faced with thechallenge of mitigating the fiscal and economicimpacts of the global financial and economiccrises. In tackling this challenge, it is important tomaintain an appropriate balance of short-termstabilising measures and longer-term reforms.Macroeconomic (fiscal, monetary and financial)policy reforms carried out before 2008 havehelped to mitigate the impacts of the global crises.Nevertheless, the impacts of the crisis underscorethe need to accelerate economic diversification,strengthen fiscal management, improve thequality and sustainability of public spending,prioritise development efforts and ensure greateraccountability in the provision of public services.

Climate change impacts, mitigation andadaptation

The effects of climate change are a threat toefforts to eradicate poverty and hunger andachieve human development and sustainablegrowth. But, if well managed, the effects ofclimate change and efforts to adapt to it may offerunique opportunities to ensure more sustainableachievement of the MDGs.

The food crisis 2007-2008

The dramatic rise in global food prices in 2007and 2008 led to widespread concern that hungerand poverty would increase sharply as poor andfood-insecure households in the developing worldwere forced to reduce consumption and cut backexpenditure on long-term household needs suchas education, housing, sanitation and health inorder to meet their immediate food needs. It waswidely speculated that this could negativelyimpact progress made by poor and developingcountries, including Nigeria, especially onachieving the MDGs.


MDG REPORT 2010

56

By the end of 2007, food shortages had becomecritical in virtually all countries, leading to highfood prices and increases in hunger, poverty,malnutrition and even death. The Food andAgricultural Organization of the United Nations, forexample, reported price increases of 100 per centfor wheat, over 50 per cent for maize and 20 percent for rice within one year. In Nigeria, foodinflation rose from 8.2 per cent in December 2007to 18.1 per cent in June 2008. The high price offood also led to demand in several countries forincreases in social security benefits and wages,which could have further increased inflation inthose countries.

For Nigeria, the impact of the 2007-2008 foodcrisis on the poor is debatable. Nigeria hasexperienced episodes in the past when food priceinflation was higher than that experienced in2007-2008. For example, food price inflationpeaked at 38 per cent in 2005, Nigeria's worstfood crisis of the decade, though it did not receiveworld attention.

Given that food accounts for about 63.3 per centof household consumption expenditure (64 percent and 62.6 per cent for rural and urban areasrespectively), Nigeria obviously has a food sectorchallenge. Nonetheless, there are a number offactors that cushion the country against foodcrisis.

First, the majority of poor people live in rural areasand depend more on food they produce forthemselves rather than what they buy in themarkets. Second, over the last few years,increased government investment and focus onthe agricultural sector, particularly Presidentialinitiatives and the National Food Securityprogramme, have contributed to raising farmers'incomes.

Third and most important is the diversity of staplecrops in the country. For example, yam andcassava are staples in the south and north-centralparts of the country, while maize, sorghum andmillet are staples in the north of the country. Thisdiversity and the other factors mentioned abovehave helped to cushion the impact of the globalfood crises on the poor and on the attainment ofthe MDGs in Nigeria.

MDG REPORT 2010


ConclusionsThe trends in progress towards the MDGs aremixed, just as the prospects of meeting therespective MDG 2015 targets are variable. SomeMDG indicators (such as universal primaryeducation, prevalence of HIV/AIDS and ratio ofgirls to boys in primary education) showencouraging trends and prospects. The outlookfor achievement of MDG8 (particularly withrespect to debt sustainability and access toinformation and communication technologies) ispositive and looks set to improve further.

On Goal 8, the expenditure of debt relief gains onMDG-related investments has shown that Nigeriacan have a significant impact on all goals in arelatively short time. Debt relief has contributedsignificantly to the near-total eradication of polio inthe country, a significant drop in maternal mortalityand the recruitment of 74,000 primary schoolteachers.

However, other indicators (such as those forprimary school completion rates and access toimproved water supply and sanitation) show poortrends and deviate widely from the targets.Reversing these undesirable trends andaccelerating progress towards the MDG 2015targets will require bold measures to enhanceservice delivery, scale up investments, rationaliseresource allocation, improve implementationcoordination and improve the quality ofgovernment spending.

Adequate, reliable and timely data is aprerequisite for accurately measuring and trackingthe MDGs. But there are MDG indicators thathave not been adequately evaluated due to largegaps in the data. These data deficiencies aremost pronounced with respect to MDG1 (povertyand hunger) and MDG7 (environmentalsustainability). Existing poverty estimates arebased on 2004 survey results, while manyenvironment-related indicators cannot beassessed because of lack of data.

Nevertheless, data availability has generallyimproved, thanks the efforts of the NationalBureau of Statistics in gathering, collating,coordinating and reporting data. There is stillmuch scope for improving the adequacy, reliabilityand timeliness of data, as shown by the progressthat has been made in recent years. The outlookfor data on MDGs will depend largely on progressin creating results-based monitoring and

evaluation, and political commitment for sustainedimplementation of the National Strategy for theDevelopment of Statistics (NSDS) 2010-2014. It isexpected that, in succeeding years, the datasystem will become better aligned with themeasurement needs of the MDGs.

Disaggregated analysis of data to regional levelhas shown wide disparities and inequalities acrossstates and zones. The MDG indicators with thegreatest state-level disparities include poverty,gender equality, universal primary education,maternal mortality and infant mortality. In essence,low-performing states are a drag on nationalprogress towards the 2015 targets. Withoutsignificant improvements in low-performing states,it will be difficult to achieve the national targets.

The lesson for the national achievement of theMDGs is that there is a compelling case for bettertargeting, and greater coordination and synergybetween federal, state and local governments.There is much scope for context-specificameliorating measures by state governments,complemented by matching incentives from thefederal government. It is therefore crucial to buildthe capacity of state governments to design andimplement MDG interventions. In particular, it isimportant to leverage potential positiveinteractions of the MDG indicators.

The debt relief-funded Conditional Grants Schemehas shown itself to be an effective mechanism fordelivering transfer of funds from the central to thelocal level. It has also encouraged governancereform that is critical to service delivery at the locallevel and, therefore, to progress on the MDGs.

Improved macroeconomic performance overrecent years has brightened the prospects for theMDGs in Nigeria. But the global financial andeconomic crisis and the imperative of adapting toclimate change constitute additional challenges inthe march to the 2015 targets. Besides themacroeconomic and fiscal effects of the globalfinancial and economic crisis, there are potentiallysignificant effects on household incomes,employment and assets. As governments takemeasures to ameliorate the negative fallout of theglobal economic crisis, it is important to ensurethat short-term reactive measures do notundermine longer-term growth and developmentprospects.


MDG REPORT 2010

58

The threats and opportunities posed by climatechange are defined by their direct and indirectimpacts on the MDGs, as well as the feedbackrelationships that affect them. The nature anddegree of the impacts and the direction of thefeedback relationship vary from one MDG toanother. Some measures to accelerate progresson particular MDGs can themselves improveclimate change adaptation, just as measures toincrease adaptive capacities could brighten theprospects of achieving particular MDGs. On theother hand, the feedback relationship could benegative. Therefore, policies and investments forachieving the MDGs must take into account theadditional risks and opportunities arising from theimpacts of climate change. Achieving win-winoutcomes for MDGs and climate changeadaptation would require policies to identify thenature of feedback relationships. It would also benecessary to design and implement measures tominimise negative feedback and tap into positivefeedback.

Five years from the MDGs target date, this stock-taking is an important basis for Nigeria to chart acourse for accelerated action on the MDGs. Giventhe shortfalls in achievements, and lookingtowards the targets, Nigeria needs a big pushforward. Progress on some indicators has shownthat targeted interventions matched with adequatefunding and political commitment can make adifference. Policies and interventions will have tobuild upon successes and bridge the gaps.Already, the Vision 20:2020 and Medium-termImplementation Plan 2010-2013 are providing theframework to rally MDG-consistent policies andinvestments for accelerated progress towards the2015 targets.

MDG REPORT 2010


Literature consultedCentral Bank of Nigeria (2006). Annual Report andStatement of Accounts. Abuja: CBN.

Central Bank of Nigeria (2007). Economic Report for theFirst Half of 2007. Abuja: CBN.

Debt Management Office of Nigeria (no date). DebtRelief, Implementation of NEEDS, and the Attainment ofthe Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).http://www.dmo.gov.ng/debtrelief/benefitsmdg.php

Eboh, E.C. (2008). Template for tracking the Impact ofSEEDS Expenditures on the MDGs. Report submittedto European Union-Support for Reforming InstitutionsProgramme (EU-SRIP), Abuja, Nigeria.

Eboh, E.C. & Ogbu, O. (eds). (2010). The GlobalEconomic Crisis and Nigeria: Taking the Right Lessons;Avoiding the Wrong Lessons. Enugu: African Institutefor Applied Economics.

Eggleston, K., Jensen, R. & Zeckhauser, R. (2002).Information and Communication Technologies, Markets,and Economic Development. Department of EconomicsWorking Paper, Tufts University.

Federal Government of Nigeria. (2004). Nigeria:National Economic Empowerment and DevelopmentStrategy – NEEDS. Abuja: National PlanningCommission.

Federal Ministry of Health. (2010). National StrategicHealth Development Plan 2010-2015. Abuja: FMH.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the UnitedNations. (2010). Global Forest Resources Assessment2010. Nigeria Country Report. Rome: FAO.

Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources. (2007).Strategic Framework for Water Supply InvestmentMobilisation and Application Guidelines. Abuja: MAWR.

National Bureau of Statistics. (2005). Poverty Profile forNigeria. Abuja: NBS.

National Bureau of Statistics. (2006). Core WelfareIndicator Questionnaire Survey. Abuja: NBS.

National Bureau of Statistics. (2007). Multiple IndicatorCluster Survey. Abuja: NBS.

National Bureau of Statistics. (2009a). Annual Abstractof Statistics. Abuja: NBS.

National Bureau of Statistics. (2009b). Social Statisticsin Nigeria. Abuja: NBS.

National Bureau of Statistics. (2009c). National LiteracySurvey. Abuja: NBS, National Mass EducationCommission.

National Bureau of Statistics. (2009d). HarmonisedNigeria Living Standards Survey. Abuja: NBS.

National Bureau of Statistics, (2010). Inflation Report,Abuja: NBS

National Planning Commission. (2007). Nigeria 2006Millennium Development Goals Report. Abuja:Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

National Population Commission. (2009). NigeriaDemographic and Health Survey 2008. Abuja: NPC.

Office of the Senior Special Assistant to the Presidenton the MDGs. (2008). Mid-point Assessment of theMillennium Development Goals in Nigeria. Abuja:OSSAP-MDGs.

United Nations. (2010). Global Millennium DevelopmentGoals 2010 Report. New York: UN.

United Nations Development Programme. (2009).Human Development Report Nigeria. 2008-2009:Achieving Growth with Equity. Abuja: UNDP.

United Nations Economic Commission for Africa.(2009). Assessing Progress in Africa toward theMillennium Development Goals. Addis Ababa: UNECA.

World Bank (2006). World Development Indicators.Washington, DC: World Bank.

World Bank. 2010. World Development Report 2010:Development and Climate Change. Washington, DC:World Bank.


MDG REPORT 2010

60

AppendicesAppendix I: Members of the Inter-MinisterialTechnical Committee on the Production of the2010 MDG Report

S/NO Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Organisation

1. Prof. Sylvester Monye MFR . . . . . .NPC2. Mr. E. A. Omotoso . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC3. Mr. Tunde Lawal . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC4. Mr. S. O. Eloho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC5. Mr. Oladimeji T. Shogbuyi . . . . . . .NPC6. Mr. A. O. Adekanye . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC7. Mrs. Angela Gu'ar . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC8. Mrs. Okocha Rita . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC9. Mr. P. I. Gonya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC10. Mrs. Abubakar Halima . . . . . . . . . .NPC11. Mr. O. A. Adedun . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC12. Mr. Andrew Odohisi . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC13. Mr. Ademuyiwa Idris . . . . . . . . . . .NPC14. Mr. Barth T. Feese . . . . . . . . . . . . .OSSAP-MDGs15. Mr. Muhammad S. Abdullah . . . . . .OSSAP-MDGs16. Mr. Lawal Aboki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .OSSAP-MDGs17. Mr. Jonathan Phillip . . . . . . . . . . . .OSSAP-MDGs18. Mrs. O.F. Ogunbela . . . . . . . . . . . .FMA & RD19. Mr. Mohammed Ibrahim . . . . . . . . .FMA & RD20. Mrs. M.A Olonisakin . . . . . . . . . . .FMEnv21. Mrs. C.O. Ajaegbu . . . . . . . . . . . . .FME22. Mrs. Grace Ekong . . . . . . . . . . . . .FME, EFA

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Branch23. Ms. Mercy I. Okon . . . . . . . . . . . . .FMW Affairs24. Mr. Eteama Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . .NBS25. Dr. (Mrs.) Maria Ogar . . . . . . . . . .NAPEP26. Mr. Ito Diejomoah . . . . . . . . . . . . .Consultant27. Prof. Tayo Fakiyesi . . . . . . . . . . . .Consultant28. Mr. Danladi Jonathan . . . . . . . . . . .Consultant29. Mr. Areoye Olatunde . . . . . . . . . . .FME (NMEC)30. Barr. (Mrs.) V. Emeka-Aneke . . . . .FMWR31. Dr. M. Lecky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FMOH32. Mrs. E. Ekpo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FML&HUD33. Engr. M. T. Babakobi . . . . . . . . . . .FML&HUD34. Mrs. A. Tobi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FML&HUD35. Mr. Chike Anikamadu . . . . . . . . . . .FML&HUD36. Mr. J. O. Ayodele . . . . . . . . . . . . . .PHCN37. Mr. O. G. Ajuwon . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Fed. Ministry

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .of Power38. Dr. Emmanuel Odu . . . . . . . . . . . .NPHCDA39. Mr. Saidu Usman . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPopC40. Dr. Emma .E. Attah . . . . . . . . . . . .NPopC41. Mrs. C.J. Anyikwa . . . . . . . . . . . . .NISER42. Mr. Frank Isoh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MFA43. Mr. Chijioke Chuku . . . . . . . . . . . .Nigerian

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Governors' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Forum

44. Ms Colleen Zamba . . . . . . . . . . . .UNDP45. Mrs. Juanita During . . . . . . . . . . .WaterAid46. Mr. Joe Abah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .DFID-SPARC47. Prof. Ode Ojowu . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Consultant48. Prof. Eric Eboh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Consultant49. Dr. Clement Ighodaro . . . . . . . . . .Consultant50. Prof. Mike Kwanashie . . . . . . . . . .Consultant51. Prof. Ladipo Adamolekun . . . . . . . .Consultant52. Prof. Isaac Obasi . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SPARC

S/NO Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Organisation

1. Engr. A Benson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FMWR2. Mr. E. O. Awe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FMWR3. Mr. L.A. Salihu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FMWR4. Dr. R. A. Ukpong . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FME5. Mrs. S. E. Okafor . . . . . . . . . . . . .FME6. Dr. D. O Yaya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FME7. Mrs. Aguda Fehintola . . . . . . . . . . .FME8. Mrs. P. A. Obasi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FME9. Mr. S. O. Yusufu . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FME10 Mr. Ade A. Aremu . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC11. Mr. Abiola Labinjo . . . . . . . . . . . . .NPC12. Mr. Aliyu Z. Katuka . . . . . . . . . . . .NASS13. Mr. Adekunle Shogo . . . . . . . . . . .NPopC14. Mr. Nasiru Waje . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MFA15. Mr. G. A. Iro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NBS16. Mr. Aminu Bello Sumaila . . . . . . . .NCWD17. Mr. George W. Turner . . . . . . . . . .NCWD18. Mrs. Edna Tobi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ministry of Lands

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .and Housing19. Mrs. Barrister Ebuk Ekpo . . . . . . . .Ministry of Lands

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .and Housing20. Mr. Bashir A. Idris . . . . . . . . . . . . .NCC21. Mr. Usman Malah . . . . . . . . . . . . .NCC22. Mr. Adekunle Shogo . . . . . . . . . . .NPopC23. Mrs. Janet O. Jiya . . . . . . . . . . . . .DMO24. Mr. Ibrahim Notagwandu . . . . . . . .DMO25. Mr. Ben Nwobi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .FMOH26. Dr. N. R. C. Azodoh . . . . . . . . . . . .FMOH

Appendix II: Members of the Core TechnicalTeam on Data Collection

For enquiries and information please contact:

Office of the Senior Special Assistant to the President on MDGs

Suite 201, Block A, 2nd Floor,Federal Secretariat Phase II,Shehu Shagari Way,Abuja

www.mdgs.gov.ng

[email protected]

© 2010, government of the federal republic of nigeriamdg report 2010 1 nigeria millennium...

Documents