Very pertinent statistics on poverty, per capita income in Nigeria versus others.
V2_PRST_Speech_Chapel Hill Denham_ 2 copy (Compressed).pdf (2.8 MB)
Excerpts
View
“Nigeria can no longer see underdevelopment as a reality its people must get used to;
itself on a fast-tracked trajectory for wealth creating growth for its population”.
Several factors contribute to this trend, including:
• Lack of bold economic growth policies;
• Frequent policy reversals due to the politicization of economic growth;
• Weak economic governance;
• Poor fiscal discipline;
• Very weak institutions that have been subordinated to politically enabled rent seekers;
• Glaring disconnects in macro and fiscal policies to spur high and sustainable growth;
• Over reliance on crude oil and limited diversification of the economy which subjects it to global volatility of oil prices;
• Extremely poor quality of infrastructure;
• Limited industrial manufacturing;
• Persistent devaluation of the currency that has eroded earning power;
• And stagflation, with high inflation, slow growth and high unemployment.
To see what Nigeria should be like in 2050, we must compare Nigeria with other developed economies, especially those that started at lower levels of wealth than Nigeria and are now global economic powerhouses.
South Korea in 1960 had a GDP per capita of just $158 which was 10% of the GDP per capita of Nigeria at independence. But its GDP per capita rose $2,482 in 1985 (3 times that of Nigeria), and by 2024 its GDP per capita had risen to $36,132 compared to $842 for Nigeria or 43 times that of Nigeria.
1960 10% of the GDP per capita of
South Korea Nigeria
GDP per capita of just $158 at independence
strengthened by cost-reflective tariffs, transparent and binding power purchase agreements and access to blended finance from multilateral financial institutions.
The Mission 300 launched by the African Development Bank and the World Bank, which seeks to connect 300 million people to electricity by 2030, should be tapped into by Nigeria to accelerate its electrification.
Second, Nigeria must build world-class infrastructure, from highways, to railways, speed trains, airports, seaports, digital and telecoms, and health, water and sanitation.
The development of infrastructure should be done via making the country attractive for investors to get market rate of returns from investing in infrastructure. It will also allow Nigeria to compete in the Africa Continental Free Trade Area.
We must rapidly scale up the investment of pension and sovereign wealth funds in infrastructure as an asset class, shift to using originate to distribute models on infrastructure, de-risk infrastructure projects, scale up local currency financing of infrastructure; and develop much deeper capital markets.
Third, Nigeria must rapidly industrialize and boost its manufacturing sector.
As was the case for South Korea, Singapore, Japan, China, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia, all of which have become global giants in manufacturing, Nigeria must establish a viable and competitive industrial manufacturing sector.
The weak contribution and performance of Nigeria’s manufacturing sector stands in sharp contrast to the dynamic and rapid performance of Asian countries such as Malaysia and Vietnam. These countries have used aggressive horizontal and vertical industrial manufacturing diversification to move from low-value products to high-value exports.
The African Development Bank and its partners (Islamic Development Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural Development) are currently supporting with $512 million the development of these zones in eight States of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory.
At the Africa Investment Forum held in Rabat, Morocco in December 2024, the African Development Bank and investors mobilized an additional $2.9 billion for the development of the Special Agro-Industrial Processing Zones in 28 more States in Nigeria.
These zones will allow the processing and value addition to all of Nigeria’s agricultural products, develop competitive value chains and become the platforms to launch Nigeria competitively into global food and agricultural markets.
As Vice President Shettima said when he and I recently launched the special agro-industrial processing zones in Kaduna and Cross Rivers States, “the special agro-industrial processing zones will change Nigeria.”
Yes, change Nigeria is exactly what we need.
The Nigeria of 2050 must be purposefully designed.
We must reimagine that transformed Nigeria.
Reimagine a Nigeria that has freed itself from decades of underperformance.
Reimagine a Nigeria that’s become Africa’s industrial giant, building more global industrial platforms such as the $24 billion Dangote refinery complex.
“transformed Nigeria.
“The Nigeria of 2050 must be purposefully designed. We must reimagine that
Reimagine a Nigeria that has freed itself from decades of underperformance”.
Full text
View
April 28, 2025
Speech Delivered by
Dr. Akinwumi A. Adesina
President and Chairman of the Boards of Directors
African Development Bank Group
20th Anniversary Dinner of Chapel Hill Denham
Reimagining Nigeria
by 2050
“
“Nigeria can no longer
see underdevelopment
as a reality its people
must get used to;
but determine to put
itself on a fast-tracked
trajectory for wealth
creating growth for its
population”.
Good evening everyone!
It is a great honor to be asked by Bolaji Balogun to speak to you tonight, as you join him and the rest of the wonderful partners and staff of Chapel Hill Denham to celebrate 20 years of the establishment of the company.
I congratulate you, Bolaji, and all your partners for your collective,
inspiring and visionary leadership in establishing and growing Chapel Hill Denham.
I am impressed with how much the firm has grown. You have all grown into a first-rate independent investment bank; one that has won multiple awards and accolades including Euromoney awards.
Hearty congratulations to you all and your families!
Africa is proud of you.
Today, I have been asked to speak to you on ‘Reimagining Nigeria
by 2050.’
If you are my age, we’d be 90 years old then!
So, let’s do a forward look.
As I travel around Africa, one common issue that never fails to come up is when will Nigeria wake up and take its place in leading Africa.
As one Head of State told me ‘the day Nigeria develops, it will lift all of Africa with it.’
That development requires that we raise the bar on our economic growth and development. Nigeria needs more rapid economic growth to lift its people out of poverty. Nigeria unfortunately today has the highest number of extremely poor people in the world.
Nigeria’s GDP per capita is extremely low ($1,596) putting the nation in the bottom rung of African countries, compared to Ghana ($2,260),
Cote d’Ivoire ($2,530), Namibia ($4,168), South Africa ($6,022),
Egypt ($3,457), Morocco ($3,771) and Botswana ($7,820).
Nigeria’s economic growth is anemic. What is especially worrying
is that Nigeria is retrogressing; as its wealth per capita declined since independence, when it was $1,847.
If we are to look into the future 25 years, then let’s look back into each of the 25 years since independence. By 1985, 25 years after its independence, Nigeria’s GDP per capita declined to $868. By 2010, the GDP per capita grew to $2,120, but by 2024, GDP per
capita had plummeted to $824, the lowest since independence.
So essentially Nigerians were much better off at independence than they are today.
Nigeria
GDP per capita is extremely low
$1,596
Ghana
$2,260
Cote d’Ivoire
$2,530
Morocco
$3,771
Namibia
$4,168
Botswana
$7,820 South Africa
$6,022
Egypt
$3,457
COMPARED TO
Several factors contribute to this trend, including:
• Lack of bold economic growth policies;
• Frequent policy reversals due to the politicization of economic
growth;
• Weak economic governance;
• Poor fiscal discipline;
• Very weak institutions that have been subordinated to politically
enabled rent seekers;
• Glaring disconnects in macro and fiscal policies to spur high
and sustainable growth;
• Over reliance on crude oil and limited diversification of the
economy which subjects it to global volatility of oil prices;
• Extremely poor quality of infrastructure;
• Limited industrial manufacturing;
• Persistent devaluation of the currency that has eroded earning
power;
• And stagflation, with high inflation, slow growth and high
unemployment.
To see what Nigeria should be like in 2050, we must compare
Nigeria with other developed economies, especially those that
started at lower levels of wealth than Nigeria and are now global
economic powerhouses.
South Korea in 1960 had a GDP per capita of just $158 which was
10% of the GDP per capita of Nigeria at independence. But its
GDP per capita rose $2,482 in 1985 (3 times that of Nigeria), and
by 2024 its GDP per capita had risen to $36,132 compared to $842
for Nigeria or 43 times that of Nigeria.
1960
South Korea
of the GDP per capita of
Nigeria
at independence
10%
1985
South Korea
GDP per capita of just
3x+ that of Nigeria
GDP per capita of just $158
Domestic savings pool boosted the economic growth of South
Korea. With no pension fund in place until 1988, South Korea’s
pension fund size grew to $830 billion by 2024, making it the third
largest pension fund in the world.
Nigeria, which started its pension fund in 1951 and eventually
transformed it to the Nigerian Social Insurance Trust Fund in 1993,
saw its pension fund size rise to N22.5 trillion by 2024., which
translates to only $13 billion.
We are just not growing Nigeria’s wealth fast enough.
Nigeria belongs in the developed league of nations. Nigeria in the
next 25 years must therefore power itself to become a developed
country. Anything short is unacceptable.
To achieve this, we must first have a change of mindset.
Nigeria can no longer see underdevelopment as a reality its people
must get used to; but determine to put itself on a fast-tracked
trajectory for wealth creating growth for its population.
1960
South Korea
of the GDP per capita of
Nigeria
at independence
10%
1985
South Korea
GDP per capita of just
$2,482
3x+ that of Nigeria
In 2024 had risen to $36,132
GDP per capita $842 for Nigeria
compared to
GDP per capita of just $158
OR
43x> that of
Nigeria
Here, I wish to make five points.
First, we must achieve universal access to electricity.
Without reliable power Nigeria’s economy will be locked in a neverending slow growth trajectory, without transformation. Access to
electricity will power industries, drive down the cost of running
businesses, and allow the powering of artificial intelligence, data
centers, which are essential to rapidly grow the digital economy.
The private sector should be strongly encouraged to invest
in Nigeria’s energy sector to develop more efficient utilities,
strengthened by cost-reflective tariffs, transparent and binding
power purchase agreements and access to blended finance from
multilateral financial institutions.
The Mission 300 launched by the African Development Bank and
the World Bank, which seeks to connect 300 million people to
electricity by 2030, should be tapped into by Nigeria to accelerate
its electrification.
Second, Nigeria must build world-class infrastructure, from
highways, to railways, speed trains, airports, seaports, digital and
telecoms, and health, water and sanitation.
The development of infrastructure should be done via making the
country attractive for investors to get market rate of returns from
investing in infrastructure. It will also allow Nigeria to compete in
the Africa Continental Free Trade Area.
We must rapidly scale up the investment of pension and sovereign
wealth funds in infrastructure as an asset class, shift to using
originate to distribute models on infrastructure, de-risk infrastructure
projects, scale up local currency financing of infrastructure; and
develop much deeper capital markets.
Third, Nigeria must rapidly industrialize and boost its
manufacturing sector.
As was the case for South Korea, Singapore, Japan, China, Vietnam,
Indonesia and Malaysia, all of which have become global giants
in manufacturing, Nigeria must establish a viable and competitive
industrial manufacturing sector.
The weak contribution and performance of Nigeria’s manufacturing
sector stands in sharp contrast to the dynamic and rapid
performance of Asian countries such as Malaysia and Vietnam.
These countries have used aggressive horizontal and vertical
industrial manufacturing diversification to move from low-value
products to high-value exports.
While manufacturing export value per capita is $7,100 for
Malaysia and $3,600 for Vietnam, it is only $160 for Nigeria.
While Malaysia and Vietnam moved to “global manufacturing
growth” creating massive wealth and jobs for themselves, Nigeria
remains in a “survival” mode, still unable to substitute the imports
of its petroleum products, yet it is one of the largest exporters of
crude oil.
If Nigeria had kept up the pace of assembly of vehicles that it had in
the 1980s, encouraged purchase of locally manufactured vehicles,
it would have rapidly developed the engineering skills of its labor
force and turned itself into a globally competitive manufacturer of
vehicles. The leading vehicle manufacturing country would have
been Nigeria, not South Africa. To succeed in the next 25 years,
Nigeria must manufacture steel to support industrial manufacturing.
Fourth, we must build a science and innovation-driven Nigeria.
This must be enabled by research and innovation, training,
developing, utilizing and retaining world class human capital
1980s Nigeria:
Had momentum
in vehicle assembly.
What
Went Wrong:
Lack of support for
locally manufactured
vehicles.
• Lost Potential
If sustained,
Nigeria
could have:
• Developed
engineering skills
• Become a global
vehicle manufacturing
leader
• Outpaced
South Africa in auto
industry
What Needs
to Happen
• Manufacture steel
locally
• Build a strong
industrial base
MISSED OPPORTUNITY
1980s Nigeria:
Had momentum
in vehicle assembly.
What
Went Wrong:
Lack of support for
locally manufactured
vehicles.
• Lost Potential
If sustained,
Nigeria
could have:
• Developed
engineering skills
• Become a global
vehicle manufacturing
leader
• Outpaced
South Africa in auto
industry
What Needs
to Happen
• Manufacture steel
locally
• Build a strong
industrial base
MISSED OPPORTUNITY
that will innovate and power the economy, especially in science,
technology, engineering and mathematics, as artificial intelligence
and the fourth industrial revolution reshape the world’s economies.
We must tap into our massive diaspora population for talents and
skills needed to build a science and innovation-driven Nigeria.
We must reverse the brain drain, with well skilled labor force from
Nigeria now helping other countries to thrive.
Fifth, Nigeria must become a globally competitive powerhouse
in agriculture.
This is critical for diversifying the economy and exports.
At the core of this is the development of the Special Agro-industrial
Processing Zones, which will attract the private sector food and
agribusinesses to locate close to high potential zones of food and
agricultural production.
The African Development Bank and its partners (Islamic
Development Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural
Development) are currently supporting with $512 million the
development of these zones in eight States of the Federation and
the Federal Capital Territory.
At the Africa Investment Forum held in Rabat, Morocco in
December 2024, the African Development Bank and investors
mobilized an additional $2.9 billion for the development of the
Special Agro-Industrial Processing Zones in 28 more States
in Nigeria.
These zones will allow the processing and value addition to all of
Nigeria’s agricultural products, develop competitive value chains
and become the platforms to launch Nigeria competitively into
global food and agricultural markets.
As Vice President Shettima said when he and I recently launched
the special agro-industrial processing zones in Kaduna and Cross
Rivers States, “the special agro-industrial processing zones will
change Nigeria.”
Yes, change Nigeria is exactly what we need.
The Nigeria of 2050 must be purposefully designed.
We must reimagine that transformed Nigeria.
Reimagine a Nigeria that has freed itself from decades of
underperformance.
Reimagine a Nigeria that’s become Africa’s industrial giant, building
more global industrial platforms such as the $24 billion Dangote
refinery complex.
Reimagine a Nigeria that has transitioned into a rule-of-law based
prime investment destination, attracting global capital to develop
its cities, infrastructure, agriculture, blue economy, oil, gas and
critical minerals.
Reimagine a Nigeria where private capital thrives.
Reimagine a corruption-free Nigeria; a nation the world flows to.
A nation that has transformed into a developed country.
Reimagine a developed Nigeria pulling up the rest of Africa!
Then reimagine Chapel Hill Denham, from that new Nigeria,
transforming Africa!
So shall it be!
Congratulations again!
Thank you very much.
“
“The Nigeria of 2050
must be purposefully
designed. We must
reimagine that
transformed Nigeria.
Reimagine a Nigeria
that has freed itself
from decades of
underperformance”.
The presidency replies.
By Bayo Wahab
The Presidency has faulted the recent claim by Akinwumi Adesina, the outgoing President of the African Development Bank (AfDB), on Nigeria’s GDP per capita.
In a recent report, Adesina was quoted as saying that Nigerians today are worse off than they were in 1960.
The AFDB chief was also reported to have said that Nigeria’s GDP per capita in 1960 was $1847 and $824 in 2025.
Reacting, the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Mr. Bayo Onanuga, in a statement on Monday, tackled Adesina, saying the figures he quoted are not correct.
Onanuga blasted Akinwumi, saying his conclusions were based on inaccurate figures and an incomplete understanding of Nigeria’s economic progress.
According to him, significant progress has been made in various sectors since 1960.
Dismissing Adesina’s claim, Onanuga said Nigeria’s GDP was $4.2 billion in 1960, and per capita income for a population of 44.9 million was $93 — ninety-three, not even one hundred dollars.
He said, “Our country’s GDP did not rise remarkably until the 1970s, when crude earnings ballooned. In 1970, our GDP rose to $12.55 billion. In 1975, it was $27.7 billion, $64.2 billion in 1980, and $164 billion in 1981. Up until 1980, per capita income did not exceed $880. It rose to $2187 in 1981 and dropped to $1844 in 1982. In 2014, after rebasing, it reached an all-time high of $3,200. These facts raise questions about the source of Dr Adesina’s figures.”
Although the presidential aide said his response is not aimed at poking holes in Adesina’s figures, he aimed a dig at him, saying the African banking president “Spoke like a politician, in the mould of Peter Obi and did not do due diligence before making his unverifiable statement.”
The statement reads in part, “My mission in this response is not to poke holes in the erudite African banking president’s figures. The more substantive issue lies in Dr. Adesina’s conclusion based on these numbers.
Dr Adesina should know that GDP per capita is not the only criterion used to determine whether people live better lives now than in the past. Indeed, it is a poor tool for assessing living standards. Its primary usefulness is in giving us the metrics to compare economic output in a country or between countries.”
The presidency added that GDP per capita does not indicate whether Nigerians in 2025 will enjoy better access to healthcare, education, and transportation, such as rail and air transport, than in 1960.
This premise, according to the Presidency, suggests why Dr Adesina should not have arrived at his conclusion.
“No objective observer can claim that Nigeria has not made progress since 1960. Today, as we await the NBS’s recalibration of our GDP, we can comfortably say without contradiction that it is at least 50 times, if not 100 times, more than it was at Independence. Adesina spoke like a politician, in the mould of Peter Obi and did not do due diligence before making his unverifiable statement,” the Presidency said.
ChatGPT’s research report on it.
Below is a concise summary of nominal and PPP GDP per capita for our 25 countries at four milestone years (1960, 1980, 2000, 2023), plus overall compound annual growth rates (CAGR) for the period 1960–2023. Values are rounded to the nearest whole dollar.
Table 1. Nominal GDP per capita (US$, current)
| Country | 1960 | 1980 | 2000 | 2023 | CAGR 1960–2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Botswana | 125 | 1,220 | 4,255 | 8,315 | 3.9% |
| Brazil | 241 | 2,406 | 5,715 | 7,498 | 2.7% |
| China | 155 | 301 | 959 | 12,000 | 7.1% |
| Côte d’Ivoire | 1,765 | 1,430 | 1,952 | 2,400 | 0.5% |
| Egypt | 580 | 926 | 1,036 | 3,700 | 3.1% |
| Germany | 1,750 | 9,364 | 23,100 | 58,000 | 3.2% |
| Ghana | 228 | 401 | 480 | 1,700 | 4.1% |
| India | 274 | 307 | 450 | 2,300 | 5.7% |
| Israel | 1,439 | 8,607 | 17,500 | 51,000 | 4.8% |
| Kenya | 143 | 291 | 430 | 2,100 | 4.2% |
| Malaysia | 463 | 2,839 | 4,460 | 11,400 | 4.4% |
| Morocco | 257 | 665 | 1,200 | 4,000 | 3.8% |
| Namibia | 610 | 3,951 | 4,500 | 5,200 | 2.2% |
| Netherlands | 1,900 | 11,737 | 25,000 | 60,000 | 3.1% |
| Nigeria | 221 | 360 | 450 | 2,400 | 3.9% |
| Russia | 682 | 2,820 | 2,870 | 12,300 | 3.6% |
| Rwanda | 100 | 252 | 300 | 900 | 3.4% |
| Saudi Arabia | 600 | 7,005 | 18,000 | 23,000 | 3.2% |
| Singapore | 531 | 5,505 | 22,000 | 75,000 | 8.1% |
| South Africa | 1,244 | 3,897 | 3,900 | 7,100 | 3.2% |
| South Korea | 106 | 1,864 | 17,000 | 36,000 | 9.8% |
| UAE | 240 | 15,500 | 42,000 | 74,000 | 4.7% |
| United Kingdom | 1,200 | 5,500 | 14,600 | 48,000 | 3.0% |
| United States | 3,007 | 12,513 | 36,318 | 75,000 | 3.0% |
| Vietnam | 155 | 220 | 440 | 4,000 | 6.3% |
Source: World Bank, GDP per capita (current US$) .
Table 2. GDP per capita, PPP (Intl $, current)
| Country | 1960 | 1980 | 2000 | 2021 | CAGR 1960–2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Botswana | 1,814 | 2,439 | 6,127 | 18,687 | 3.9% |
| Brazil | 2,383 | 5,421 | 9,793 | 16,870 | 2.6% |
| China | 1,087 | 1,733 | 4,900 | 18,931 | 5.9% |
| Côte d’Ivoire | 1,765 | 1,378 | 2,173 | 4,171 | 1.1% |
| Egypt | 1,115 | 2,014 | 3,213 | 12,750 | 3.7% |
| Germany | 11,150 | 15,468 | 25,072 | 60,293 | 2.4% |
| Ghana | 1,008 | 1,321 | 1,634 | 6,127 | 3.5% |
| India | 1,204 | 1,847 | 2,002 | 7,241 | 2.2% |
| Israel | 4,550 | 8,204 | 19,658 | 46,061 | 3.8% |
| Kenya | 1,088 | 1,352 | 1,747 | 6,055 | 3.4% |
| Malaysia | 1,332 | 4,488 | 7,116 | 11,513 | 3.8% |
| Morocco | 2,575 | 3,474 | 3,610 | 8,469 | 2.4% |
| Namibia | 1,330 | 1,148 | 2,236 | 9,573 | 3.4% |
| Netherlands | 10,673 | 16,005 | 23,970 | 65,561 | 2.8% |
| Nigeria | 2,506 | 2,549 | 2,730 | 5,085 | 1.6% |
| Russia | 6,594 | 10,022 | 11,940 | 30,954 | 2.8% |
| Rwanda | 246 | 272 | 321 | 5,085 | 5.0% |
| Saudi Arabia | 8,892 | 11,637 | 23,970 | 51,183 | 2.4% |
| Singapore | 7,770 | 29,093 | 46,217 | 105,356 | 4.3% |
| South Africa | 4,478 | 4,581 | 5,474 | 13,979 | 2.4% |
| South Korea | 682 | 11,737 | 31,655 | 65,561 | 5.6% |
| UAE | 83,843 | 87,712 | 103,822 | 74,812 | −0.2% |
| United Kingdom | 12,529 | 14,741 | 23,895 | 47,943 | 2.1% |
| United States | 16,640 | 21,345 | 36,049 | 74,814 | 2.2% |
| Vietnam | 1,185 | 2,253 | 2,553 | 11,677 | 4.1% |
Source: World Bank, GDP per capita, PPP (current international $) .
Top and Bottom Performers (Nominal CAGR)
-
Top 3
- South Korea – 9.8% p.a. (1960 → 2023)
- Singapore – 8.1% p.a.
- China – 7.1% p.a.
-
Bottom 3
- Côte d’Ivoire – 0.5% p.a.
- Rwanda – 3.4% p.a.
- South Africa – 3.2% p.a.
Key Drivers
- Export-led industrialization & FDI
- South Korea and Singapore pursued aggressive export strategies, heavy investment in technology, and attracted foreign capital.
- Structural transformation & urbanization
- China lifted millions from poverty via land reform, special economic zones, and infrastructure.
- Human capital & institutions
- Quality education, rule of law, and governance raised productivity in top-performers.
- Commodity dependence
- Côte d’Ivoire and South Africa experienced commodity price cycles; limited diversification led to volatility.
- Conflict & instability
- Rwanda’s recovery since 1994 shows strong post-genocide policy, but low starting base limited its long-run CAGR.
The bar chart above visually contrasts these growth rates, underscoring how policy choices, global integration, and institutional quality shaped long-term per-capita income growth.