Should Livestock Not Remain Under Agriculture Ministry?
Last September, HE, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, set up a Committee to examine, amongst other things, the issue of the incessant clashes between Herdsmen and Farmers. Following the recommendations from the Committee to provide sector-specific solutions to the long-standing crisis, the Committee presented the President with 21 recommendations, including the creation of a Ministry of Livestock Resources, along with other measures, to help resolve the decades-long conflict between nomadic cattle Herders and Farmers in the country. Given the humongous cost of running the Government under the present dispensation, and Nigeria being in financial dire straits, not to mention the Tinubu administration’s commitment to the implementation of the Oronsaye Report which made recommendations for a cut in the cost of governance and downsizing, many have opined that the creation of an additional Ministry is absolutely unnecessary, particularly when a cohesive policy is required between agriculture and livestock, and this is easier to achieve under the umbrella of one Ministry, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Dr Sam Amadi; Jide Ojo; Dr Akpo Mudiaga Odje and Emmanuel Onwubiko submit that idea of a new Ministry of Livestock Development is not only inexpedient, a duplication of efforts, but a waste of the nation’s scarce resources, and that it would not in any way resolve the never-ending Herder-Farmer Attacks
Who Needs a Ministry of Livestock Development?
Dr Sam Amadi
Either in search for a lasting solution to the Herdsmen violence on farming communities, or in a bid to get political mileage from the herdsmen crisis, President Tinubu announced the establishment of the Ministry of Livestock Development. In addition, he constituted a Special Committee on the herdsmen-farmer conflict cochaired by himself and Professor Attahiru Jega, former Chair of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). These recent initiatives have drawn both criticism and applause from Nigerian analysts. It is important to take a closer look at these initiatives, to appreciate their wisdom or lack of it.
Proper Exercise of Executive Power?
Is setting up these initiatives a proper exercise of executive power by President Tinubu? The first point to make is that, the President is fully within his power to create a new Ministry and to structure the Federal cabinet as he wishes. Section 5 of the Constitution, vests the executive power of the Federation on the President personally. This power has three legal incidents. The first is that by virtue of Section 5 the President is the Chief Executive, the Commander-in- Chief, and the Sole Organ. As Chief Executive, the President supervises the Federal Government. This power is only subject to the express provisions of the Constitution, and any law that the National Assembly may make. Outside these restrictions, the President is uninhibited in managing the Federal executive.
Furthermore, the Constitution requires that the President appoints at least a person from the 36 States of the Federation as a Minister in the Federal Government. There is no other mandate, on the structure of the Federal cabinet. The President has unlimited discretion on the number of Ministries he can create and the staffing of the Ministries, as long as he complies with Federal character requirement under Chapter 2 of the Constitution, and any other law made by the National Assembly.
But, what is constitutional, is not necessarily prudent or effective. The exercise of Presidential power is not assessed only on the basis of legality, but also on the basis of effectiveness and reasonableness. Should the President at this time, set up a new Ministry to manage livestock business in Nigeria? How does such an act measure up to the President’s trumpeted policy of cutting down costs of governance? Does it make for effectiveness to sequester livestock management from the value chains and intersecting sectors of agricultural development in Nigeria? What evidence suggests that this is politics masked as administrative interventions?
Does the Size of Government Matter?
There is an overwhelming concern, about the big size of the Federal Government. Like everything popular, the concern for size and cost of governance in Nigeria may not be precise and grounded in evidence and clear logic. Is the Nigerian public sector truly over-bloated for its size, complexities and developmental challenges? How do the number and size of Ministries add to that problem?
It is arguable that Nigeria’s public service is not too large for its size as a country, its complexities and challenges of development for a country with that level of aspiration for development. The concept of the size of a public sector, is also ideological. When we conceive the role of the State basically to be to provide security, enforce contracts and secure property rights, then we would settle for a small public sector made up of security officials and a few regulators in handful of Ministries. It is the ideology of libertarianism and free market fundamentalists who have a distrust for the public sector, because of their alleged tendency to distort market operations. But, egalitarians and other developmental State schools think that the role of the government extends beyond protecting security and enforcing contractual and property rights. They believe that government is necessary to correct market failures, and positive and negative externalities that result from them. Since market failures are rife and pervasive, the State is more than a night watchman. It needs to be expansive enough, for the challenge of development.
The size of government matters, because we assume that bigger means costlier. But, this may not be so. Small can still be expensive. It depends on cost centres. Anyone who knows about public service, understands that the true costs of government shows when you compare both the number of Ministries, manning levels, capital and recurrent budget of all of them.
We can economise on cost, by being prudent in public procurement. The bulk of the costs of governance in Nigeria, is mostly corruption and waste. Every four years the National Assembly discards all furniture, and procure new ones for the Legislature. This unnecessary expenditure, is driven by contract money. There are many vehicles that are not needed, the expenditure for official functions are not accounted for and reviewed for prudence and relevance. The point is that, costs are based on the structure and administrative character of the public service, not necessarily on the number of Ministries. That should be clear.
But, in spite of the foregoing argument, it does not make much sense for a Government that has asked a Special Committee to implement the Oronsaye Report on the rationalisation of the public service, to quickly create a Ministry to manage an important national issue that can be easily managed under an existing Ministry. It is the more acute form of executive incoherence and organisational contradiction.
One of the reasons for the failure of administrations, is that there is no serious commitment to public policy. Government easily and routinely announce seemingly radical policies that are aimed improving the quality of administrative actions, but easily undermine such policy through subsequent actions. This incoherence is the heart of State ineffectiveness. Alignment, coherence and comprehensiveness, should be the watchwords of administrative effectiveness.
How Important is Livestock Development?
Is it necessary to single out livestock development for special attention, in the 21st century of technological innovation and energy transition? According to Professor Eustace Iyayi, the Registrar and Chief Executive of the Nigerian Institute of Animal Science, the Nigerian livestock industry is worth about N30 trillion. Nigeria spends about $1.5 billion on importation of diary products, because of insufficient local production. We have a deficit of about one million tons of milk. The diary shortfall, is about 60% of consumption. We have the third largest herds of cattle in Africa. So, the livestock industry has great potential to add to food sufficiency and export promotion. One can argue that by bringing singular executive attention to the issue of effective management of livestock in Nigeria, we may open a new source of foreign earning and enhance food sufficiency in the country. This is notwithstanding the job creation potential of the industry.
A supplementary argument in support of the new initiatives is that, it helps to deal with the problem of violent conflict between herders and farmers across Nigeria, especially in the Benue Valley. There is no doubt that herders-farmers violence, has cost the country so much. At recent count, it is estimated that about $1 billion is lost annually to herdsmen attacks on farming communities. This is huge. It calls for effective State intervention to remove the underlying causes of the attacks, and address the troubles faced by herdsmen that indirectly lead to these attacks. The proposition is that the Livestock Ministry will focus on controlling the spike in violence, and address the social, economic and environmental crises that are driving the southward movement of herders and the associated criminality and brutal attack. A Ministry seems to suggest that the Presidency has prioritised the crisis, and ready to invest resources and quality executive attention to it.
What About Politics?
The proposition that the reason for a standalone Ministry for Livestock, is because of commitment to provide lasting solutions to herders-farmers conflicts, and drive the actualisation of huge economic potentials of livestock industry in Nigeria. But, it is likely that the real reason for the creation of an expansive bureaucracy for livestock is politics, raw politics. The timing is suspicious. Before now, the Government had not articulated any urgency to address the conflict. There have not been policy documents, outlining the great economic value of the livestock sector. Then suddenly, the Government rolls out two major initiatives, and tags a Prof Jega, a Northerner with immense credibility, as the co-Chairman. The fact that this announcement was made a few days after there was an outbreak of attacks in Mosques in Northern Nigeria, against Government’s assent to the Samoa Agreement.
Conclusion
The key point is that, whatever bona fides President Tinubu has about driving the economic optimisation of Nigeria’s potential in livestock business and the urgency of controlling the herder-farmer conflict, he has existing platforms to utilise, to mount any new Presidential action. There is no reason to create a new Ministry, to drive more coherent and effective actions on livestock development. Based on the pathology of public leadership and the established political disposition of the Tinubu administration and its wastefulness and incoherence, we can assume that the overriding consideration for these initiatives is politics. The new Ministry and the Committee will constitute large pots of meat for Politicians from the North, as we count down to 2027.
2027 is actually far. But, it looks that President Tinubu has shifted from governance gear to politicking gear, too soon.
Dr Sam Amadi, former Chairman of Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission
Creation of Ministry of Livestock Development is Needless
Jide Ojo
“To enable Nigeria to finally take advantage of livestock farming, we have seen the solution and opportunity for this adversity that has plagued us over the years, and I believe the prosperity is here in our hands.” – President Bola Tinubu while announcing the creation of Federal Ministry of Livestock Development on Tuesday, July 9, 2024
Introduction
On Tuesday, July 9, 2024, President Bola Tinubu announced the creation of Federal Ministry of Livestock Development. Following the approval, he said the Federal Government is fully prepared to cover the cost of acquiring lands to ensure the peaceful co-existence of Pastoralists and Farmers. This came as he inaugurated the Renewed Hope Livestock Reform Implementation Committee at the State House, Abuja. While President Tinubu will chair the Committee, a former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Attahiru Jega, is the Deputy Chairman. The Committee is expected to propose recommendations aimed at fostering a peaceful co-existence between herders and farmers, ensuring the security and economic well-being of Nigerians.
The PUNCH of July 9, 2024 (online edition) reported that on September 14, 2023, the National Livestock Reforms Committee recommended that Tinubu create a “Ministry of Livestock Resources” to, among other deliverables, reduce the decades-long gory conflict between farmers and nomadic cattle herders nationwide. Former Kano State Governor and Chairman of the All Progressives Congress, Abdullahi Ganduje, disclosed this to State House Correspondents shortly after he led the Committee in an audience with the President at the Aso Rock Villa, Abuja. It formed part of 21 recommendations captured in a document submitted to the President, to enhance the Federal Government’s holistic response to the lingering cases of bloodshed.
The document spelt details of the proposed solutions where the committee advocated a reform agenda examining conflict mitigation and resource management. “This agenda should include the establishment and resuscitation of grazing reserves as suggested by many experts and well-meaning Nigerians and other methods of land utilisation. Create the Ministry of Livestock Resources in line with practice in many other West African countries. In the alternative, Federal and State Governments should expand the scope of existing Departments of Livestock Production to address the broader needs of the industry,” it read.
Previous Efforts to Resolve Herders Versus Farmers Conflict
There is no gainsaying the fact that Pastoralists and Farmers’ conflicts have a long history, but became most pronounced under the immediate past administration of President Muhammadu Buhari. In the Kaduna, Benue, Plateau, Nasarawa and Taraba axis alone, hundreds, if not thousands of people, have been killed and millions displaced from their ancestral lands and homes as a result of this lingering crisis. The creation of the Ministry is the latest attempt by the Nigerian Government, to address the decades-long conflict between herders and farmers over access to land, pasture and water.
In the past, previous governments have reeled out a draft of measures including reforestation, Great Green Wall, building of dams for irrigation, importation of grass, creation of grazing routes, the highly controversial Rural Grazing Area (RUGA), Cattle Colony and an 82-page National Livestock Transformation Plan (2019 – 2028). According to International Crisis Group, “In 2019, Nigerian authorities launched a ten-year National Livestock Transformation Plan to curtail the movement of cattle, boost livestock production and quell the country’s lethal herder-farmer conflict. But, inadequate political leadership, delays, funding uncertainties and a lack of expertise could derail the project. Covid-19 has exacerbated the challenges”. It is believed that if the NLTP can be overhauled, it still provides the best roadmap and blueprint to resolving the Pastoralists and Farmers age-long conflict.
Why Creating Ministry of Livestock Development May not Resolve the Conflict
What is the definition of livestock? According to the Britannica online dictionary, livestock includes both beef and dairy cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, mules, asses, buffalo, and camels; the raising of birds commercially for meat or eggs (that is, chickens, turkeys, ducks, geese, guinea fowl, and squabs) is treated separately. This means that, not all animals are covered by livestock. Poultry farming and fisheries, are exempted. It just doesn’t make much sense, to treat only a section of the animals preferentially.
Secondly, there is already a Department in the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, that is in charge of livestock. Why not strengthen that Department, to make it more efficient and functional? If that department is well resourced, and is given the mandate to implement the National Livestock Transformation Plan, with appropriate Key Performance Indicators and adequate funding, it should be able to deliver.
Thirdly, President Tinubu already has a bloated cabinet with about 34 Ministries and 48 Ministers. The performance of many of these Ministers has been largely lacklustre, in the past 11 months of their being in office. In the face of dwindling economic resources, inability to resolve the new national minimum wage for workers, huge debt portfolio and the Presidential order to reduce the Departments and Agencies in line with the Steve Oronsaye Report, it is baffling that the President will deem it fit to establish an additional Ministry. This new Ministry may well have two Ministers, which will then bring the number of the cabinet to 50!
The other issue here is that, creating a new Ministry mid-year will present funding challenging for proper take off. This is because, the Ministry was not captured in the 2024 FG budget. The new Ministry will need office space, full complement of staff, equipment, and office furniture. Thus proper take off of the new Ministry, may not be until next year. Furthermore, the new bureaucracy being created will substantially increase the overheads and cost of running this Government. I don’t think there will be value for money, creating this new Ministry.
Furthermore, it is doubtful if the State Governors are carried along in the FG plan. Interestingly, the FG has no square metre of land anywhere in Nigeria. By virtue of the 1978 Land Use Act, all lands are vested in the State Governor who holds it in trust for the people. Part of the challenge NLTP faced under ex-President Buhari, was the unwillingness of most of the Southern State Governors to give part of their State’s land for the take off of ranching. Resuscitating the already obliterated grazing routes of the 1960s in 2024 will be problematic, as the land in question may have been used for residential housing or building purposes having been parcelled out to beneficiaries. I do hope the plan of the Federal Government to acquire land from the States, will yield positive results.
If the Federal Government is establishing a new Ministry with the aim of resolving the farmers-herders conflict, what is the President doing to support other forms of animal husbandry, in particular, rabbitry, poultry and fisheries. Farmers in these sectors too, need to be encouraged to contribute meaningfully to the food security agenda of the Tinubu Administration. I am of the considered view that if the Federal Government of Nigeria can get the buy-in of the sub-national government vis States and Local Governments, it will achieve greater success in its food security agenda.
Conclusion
I understand the burning desire of President Tinubu, to resolve the conundrum surrounding the herders – farmers conflict in Nigeria. However, creating an additional layer of bureaucracy, will not solve the lingering and protracted challenge. FG should try to fashion a bottom-up approach to resolving this age-long dispute, and not vice versa. Reforestation of the deforested Northern part of Nigeria and making the herders embrace modern techniques of livestock farming, will yield better results than just creating an additional Ministry.
Jide Ojo, Development Consultant; Author; Columnist and Public Affairs Analyst
New Livestock Ministry: A Necessary Evil? Or A National Pastime?
Dr Akpo Mudiaga Odje
Like a whirlwind, Nigerians were woken up by the breaking news that, President Bola Tinubu, GCFR, had announced the establishment of Ministry of Livestock Development responsible inter-alia, for addressing issues of the farmer and herders.
Instructively, Mr President thus, made the pronouncement during the inauguration of the “Renewed Hope Livestock Reform Implementation Committee”, apparently also set up for the purpose of addressing farmer and herders squabbles.
Establishment of a New Ministry for Livestock Development
These unfolding events, seem to suggest that the Federal Government is now embarking on establishing a Ministry of Livestock Development to fulfil the demands of some interests, who have been agitating for this Special Agency.
Indeed, Mr President also mandated the new Ministry to develop livestock and their products, to enhance our chain of food supply and national agricultural development. The new Ministry is expected to boost export opportunities, agricultural productivity and economic growth.
The Minister of Finance and allied Government Departments, have been directed by Mr President to ensure the seamless facilitation of the new Ministry.
As an aside, Mr President also declared that the new Ministry is also to look into the matter of ranching that has been on the front burner of national issues.
Ministry of Livestock Development: A Duplication of the Ministry of Agriculture
Hitherto, our nation had always had in existence a Ministry of Agriculture and therefore, is at a loss as to where to situate this new Ministry of Livestock Development.
One does not need the clairvoyance of a Nostradamus, to know that it is squarely a duplication of the objectives and activities of the Ministry of Agriculture.
It would have been much better if this new Ministry of Livestock Development was added as a new Department under the Ministry of agriculture, to stem expected bureaucratic clashes of objectives and jurisdiction between the two Ministries.
Cost Implications for Nigeria
Above all, the cost of establishing this new Ministry will be heavy on the lean resources available in the current implementation of the dualistic budgets of 2023 and 2024, as “miraculously” approved by the National Assembly. This, no doubt is another unnecessary financial strain on our economy.
Still on the economic front, the 2023 budget has suffered poor funding to the tune of about one trillion Naira already! So one wonders where the resources will come from, to fund this fresh Ministry which is a very gigantic project?
Oronsaye Report Recommends Merging and Downgrading of MDAs, Whilst the Same Government is Establishing New Ones
We recall this Administration declared its intention to implement the above Oronsaye Report piecemeal, in order to drastically cut down the huge costs of running government. And yet, the same Government is now establishing new MDAs, like the Ministry of Livestock Development.
It is thus, incongruous with its own policy as a Government.
Presidential Committee Dedicated to the Reform of the Livestock Industry and the New Ministry of Livestock Development
We recall also that Mr President, in September, 2023 approved the establishment of the above Committee for the same purpose! And, apparently the above Committee will run alongside the New Ministry of Livestock Development and indeed, the Ministry of Agriculture!
Its simply frightening indeed!
Panacea to Open Grazing
The Federal and State Governments must not shy away from the antidote to these recent upsurges in farmers and herders’ clashes in Nigeria. The axiomatic fact is that it is the livestock of the herders, that go after the crops of the farmers. The reverse has never happened, except by way of retaliation from the farmers, after the herders must have destroyed their farms and crops therein. In this connection, some States, particularly Benue State have outlawed open grazing, which is in sync with international best practices and modern civilisation. Open grazing is the fundamental problem, leading to the clashes between farmers and herders
Nothing more!
And, here is where we need Mr President to muster the political and legal will, to outlaw open grazing within Federal territories/routes, as the States outlaw same within their demographic jurisdiction.
No amount of the establishment of a Ministry of Livestock Development or Livestock Development Committee, can reduce, let alone, stop the farmers and herders’ clashes. Mr President, Sir, open grazing by armed wielding herders, is the fundamental reason for the clashes and nothing more.
Developing livestock and establishment of a Ministry in that respect, without adequate regulatory laws and enforcement to tackle open grazing, will further exacerbate the already volatile situation on ground at the moment.
Security Agencies, Especially the Military are Required to Curtail Herders and Farmers Clashes, and not the Creation of a New Ministry in that Respect
The issue as regards herders and farmers clashes, requires total and decisive enforcement of the outlawing of open grazing throughout Nigeria, and not the creation of this new Ministry. These herders are comprehensively armed, and as such, detect the farms to invade and even those to kill, whenever there is resistance.
So, the establishment of a Ministry for their development will even be counter-productive, and be used as a facade to cause more havoc.
Mr President should therefore, proclaim a ban on open grazing, whilst adding this new Ministry as a department to the Ministry of Agriculture to implement ranching for the herders. Anything less, as in this instance, will be hopelessly ineffective and a fleeting illusion never to be attained in this clime.
Way Forward
1. Instead of creating a new Ministry of Livestock Development, the Federal Government should add same as a special department to the Ministry of Agriculture.
2. That department should also be specifically engrossed with implementing ranching in Nigeria. This will reduce the huge costs required to establish a new Ministry, and also promote efficiency.
3. The Federal and State Governments should outlaw open grazing throughout Nigeria.
4. Security agencies, especially the military, should be facilitated to enforce the ban on open grazing.
5. Registration and identification of all herders in Nigeria; their nationalities, State and Local Government of origin.
6. Farmers should also be equally registered by the Federal and State Governments, with the location of their farms and crops recorded by the department of livestock development.
7. Equal opportunity, for loans or subsidy, for development of livestock and crops, be given to herders and farmers.
8. A comprehensive database of all herders and farmers in Nigeria be created, to identify both categories in the country. Their biometrics, be taken as a condition precedent for recognition and Government support.
9. Co-opting the head of Myetti Allah and leader of Farmers Association of Nigeria, into the architecture for the enforcement of ranching.
10. Immediate arrest and prosecution of any herder whose livestock is responsible for destroying farmlands of farmers.
11. Products from livestocks should be well packaged for consumption and export, by the department of livestock development under the Ministry of Agriculture.
12. Assemblage of veterinary doctors, professionals and animal experts to ensure the health status of these livestocks, to boost productivity and prevent diseases as well.
Conclusion
It is our modest view, that new Ministry of Livestock Development should be downgraded to a department of the Ministry of Agriculture, with a clear mandate to develop and regulate through ranching, livestock development and their products. This will aid efficiency, and drastically reduce any further financial affliction on our now severely drained economy.
Dr Akpo Mudiaga Odje LLD, LLM (Merit)(London), BL; Constitutional Lawyer; Member of the British Council
New Ministry of Livestock: A Questionable Approach to Addressing Security Challenges
Emmanuel Onwubiko
The recent establishment of a new Ministry of Livestock Development by President Bola Tinubu, has ignited a significant and contentious debate. This new Ministry is purportedly designed to address the ongoing and severe violence, perpetrated by armed herders against farmers. While the Government presents this initiative as a solution to the crisis, critics argue that it will not effectively address the root causes of the violence, and might even exacerbate existing issues. This scepticism is compounded by the Ministry’s announcement coinciding with reports of continued attacks on farms, highlighting the urgent need for a more direct and effective response to these security threats.
The violence inflicted by armed herders on farmers is not a mere conflict, but a serious issue of terrorism. This violence, characterised by intimidation, destruction of property, and loss of lives, targets agricultural communities that are often left helpless in the face of these attacks. Unlike conflicts where both parties have grievances, these attacks are unprovoked acts of terrorism aimed at destabilising farming communities and undermining agricultural productivity. Therefore, the creation of a new Ministry appears to be a misguided approach, that does not address the immediate and pressing needs of the affected communities.
Proponents of the new Ministry argue that the unique challenges of the livestock sector and herder-farmer conflicts, justify a dedicated Ministry. They believe a specialised focus can lead to innovative solutions, and substantial livestock management and dairy production improvements. The new Ministry aims to provide targeted interventions, such as establishing ranches and grazing reserves, which could mitigate conflicts by reducing competition for land and resources.
The Tinubu administration contends that by fostering the development of the livestock sector, the Ministry could potentially transform it into a significant economic contributor, creating jobs, enhancing food security, and reducing poverty in rural areas. They believe that this focused approach is necessary, for sustainable development and peace in affected regions.
Critique of the Decision: No Need for a New Ministry
However, some civil society organisations, such as the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA), have condemned the creation of the Ministry, arguing that it rewards violence by armed herders. HURIWA claims the new Ministry legitimises groups accused of terrorising farmers, and questions why a similar focus isn’t given to farmers themselves. They advocate for compensating farmers for losses, and ensuring justice for those affected by violence.
HURIWA also criticises the perceived favouritism towards the Fulani ethnic group, which is predominantly involved in cattle herding. This perception could exacerbate ethnic tensions, and undermine efforts to foster national unity. The organisation calls for transparency in the Ministry’s operations, and accountability for any misuse of resources.
The establishment of the Ministry of Livestock Development, comes at a time when Nigeria is grappling with significant economic challenges and increasing calls for government downsizing. With 48 Ministers in the current administration, many of whom are criticised for their lack of effectiveness, the addition of a new Ministry raises concerns about fiscal responsibility and bureaucratic efficiency. The Government is already facing scrutiny for the performance of its existing Ministries, many of which are perceived as underperforming. In this context, expanding the bureaucracy by creating a new Ministry seems counterproductive. Critics argue that the Government should prioritise streamlining existing structures and ensuring that current Ministries are functioning optimally, before considering additional layers of administration.
President Tinubu had previously committed to implementing the Oronsaye Report, which advocates for the downsizing and reform of Nigeria’s public service. The Oronsaye Report is a comprehensive document that recommends dissolving redundant agencies, reducing the number of Ministries, and streamlining operations to enhance efficiency. The creation of a new Ministry appears to contradict this commitment. Why is the President speaking from both sides of his mouth? Why promise to implement the Oronsaye Report, which aims to reduce the number of agencies, only to establish a new one? This apparent inconsistency raises serious concerns about the Government’s dedication to its reform agenda, and its ability to follow through on its promises.
Furthermore, the financial implications of establishing a new Ministry cannot be ignored. Nigeria is currently experiencing economic strain due to declining oil revenues, increasing public debt, and other economic pressures. In this challenging economic environment, the creation of a new Ministry appears particularly imprudent. The Government’s financial resources could be better utilised by revitalising and streamlining existing Ministries, improving public services, and addressing more immediate issues such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure. Adding another layer of bureaucracy could divert resources away from these critical areas, and exacerbate the country’s financial challenges.
Establishing a new Ministry entails significant costs, from salaries to infrastructure. In an economy facing multiple challenges, allocating resources to a new Ministry seems financially imprudent. Nigeria’s high public debt and dwindling Government revenue exacerbate financial strain, leading some to label this move as a “political juxtaposition and financial misadventure”.
Increased bureaucratic overheads, can also lead to inefficiencies. Effective governance requires streamlined administration, and adding another Ministry may complicate policy implementation and coordination. This concern is particularly pertinent, given Nigeria’s already bloated bureaucracy and its inefficiencies.
Integrated agricultural policies are essential, for effective land use planning and conflict resolution. Separating livestock development could fragment these policies, leading to disjointed solutions. Policies regarding land use and resource management, must be coordinated between the Ministry of Agriculture and the new Ministry of Livestock Development to avoid conflicting directives.
The global trend in agricultural management suggests that integrating livestock and crop production within a broader framework, is more effective than creating separate Ministries. Countries like India, Brazil, and Australia manage livestock within their broader agricultural policies, ensuring a cohesive and integrated approach. Nigeria could benefit from adopting a similar model, which would avoid the fragmentation of policies, and enhance overall agricultural management. Fragmented approaches, such as creating a new Ministry solely for livestock, risk creating disjointed policies that may fail to address the complex and interconnected issues facing the agricultural sector.
Technological advancements could also play a crucial role in addressing the violence perpetrated by armed herders. Investments in satellite imaging, drones, and digital platforms for communication and conflict resolution could provide valuable data-driven insights and enhance resource allocation. These technologies could help monitor grazing patterns, prevent encroachment on farmlands, and facilitate better communication between farmers and herders. Integrating technological solutions into agricultural management could offer more effective and sustainable approaches, to addressing the security challenges and improving overall productivity.
In addition to technological solutions, addressing the immediate security challenges should be a top priority. Effective law enforcement is essential for combating the terrorism perpetrated by armed herders. This includes strengthening security forces, enhancing surveillance, and ensuring that perpetrators are held accountable for their actions, not creating a new Ministry for them. The Government must focus on practical measures that directly address the violence and provide justice for victims, rather than creating additional bureaucratic layers that do not contribute to immediate security solutions.
Engaging local communities in dialogue and decision-making processes, is also crucial for sustainable conflict resolution. Policies and interventions should be culturally sensitive, and widely accepted by the affected communities. Integrating traditional conflict resolution mechanisms with formal legal systems, can provide comprehensive solutions and promote long-term peace. Encouraging economic diversification in rural areas can reduce dependence on farming and herding, providing alternative livelihoods, and reducing competition for land. Promoting agro-processing industries and other rural enterprises, can create jobs and boost local economies.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while the establishment of the Ministry of Livestock Development aims to address critical issues, it raises significant concerns about bureaucratic redundancy, financial strain, and fragmented policy implementation. The Government should prioritise practical and effective measures to combat the terrorism inflicted by armed herders, and streamline existing structures to ensure efficient governance.
The creation of a new Ministry, as it stands, risks deviating from the principles of reform and efficiency. Nigeria needs a cohesive, well-coordinated approach to governance that integrates livestock development within the broader agricultural framework, leverages technological advancements, and engages local communities. Only through such an approach, can the country address its security challenges and pave the way for sustainable development. The Government must ensure that its interventions are inclusive, equitable, and transparent, to build trust and foster national unity.
Emmanuel Onwubiko, Head, Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA); former National Commissioner, National Human Rights Commission of Nigeria
