That Dubious Invitation To WEF By Finance Minister
The Minister of Finance's invitation of the authors of the recently released Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) rankings of the country to advise the government on how to improve the country's ranking should be condemned by Nigerians. The GCI rankings are done by the World Economic Forum (WEF).
Mr. Olusegun Aganga's invitation was sequel to the GCI rankings for the 2010-2011 in which a very unimpressive ranking was given to Africa's most populous nation. Nigeria was ranked 25th out of the 35 nations covered on the African continent, coming behind smaller and more impoverished countries such as Ethiopia, Rwanda, Gambia, Benin, Botswana, Cameroun, Tanzania and Swaziland.
"We take these things seriously and as a result, we have organized for the World Economic Forum, the author of the Survey, to come to Nigeria in November… to work with government in terms of identifying the reasons for this poor ranking, what other countries have done to improve their ranking and what can Nigeria as a country do to improve its ranking," said Aganga, trying hard to justify another round of waste of public funds to invite so-called foreign experts to teach us how to improve our GCI ranking, as if that was what Switzerland, Sweden and Singapore did to occupy the top three spots respectively.
It is another way that Nigeria wants to influence the WEF to improve the ranking of country in their next report. There is nothing that Nigerian leaders cannot corrupt. That was how, a former Minister of Information Professor Jerry Gana, under the very corrupt and kleptomaniac Obasanjo administration corrupted the Nigerian media, with a jamboree media tour of states in which states were ranked in their performance according to how much they could afford to lavish on the visiting journalists that Gana took round the country. And what a perfidy! At the end of the questionable tours, dubious trophies were awarded to the state governors. And to the shame of the organizers of the media tour and the participants, who lend their credibility to it, the same award recipients were also those who looted their states' treasury dry and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the ICPC are still battling to recover their states' funds in their possession.
The world Economic Forum should not allow Nigerian government to drag its name to the mud. Because that is what they would get if they succumb to Nigeria's pressure and honour the invitation to come and teach the country how to do the right thing. The offer surely is tempting to the authors of the GCI, after-all they will be rewarded handsomely for such a consultancy job.
The government of Nigeria should be told to keep its economic house in order.The criteria for the rankings of the competitiveness of nations whether done by the World Economic Forum that does the GCI rankings or by the prestigious Swiss business school, International Institute for Management Development (IMD), that produces the annual World Competitiveness Yearbook, are very clear.
The field of research called the "the competitiveness of nations" takes into account that business operate in a national environment that can enhance or hinder those businesses, ability to compete within their own countries or internationally. There are many factors that affect the environment in which businesses operate-including the domestic economy and fiscal policy, regulations, infrastructure (from transportation to universities to hospitals to Internet access), the education of the workforce, and many others.
Some other factors include hard data, such as GDP and miles of paved roads, or soft data, such as the attitudes and values of managers and workers.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) defines national economic competiveness as "the set of institutions, policies and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country." Its GCI index is calculated from both publicly available data and the Executive opinion survey, conducted with its network of partner institutes (leading research institutes and business organizations). According to the WEF, the report "assesses the ability of countries to provide high levels of prosperity to their citizens. This in turn depends on how productively a country uses available resources. Therefore the GCI measures the set of institutions, policies, and factors that set the sustainable current and medium term levels of economic prosperity." The global competitiveness report ranks economies that are separated into three stages, according to where they are in their development, factor-driven economies (stage 1), efficiency-driven economies (stage 2) and innovation-driven economies (stage 3).
In the factor-driven stage countries compete based on their factor endowments, primarily unskilled labour and natural resources. Companies compete on the basis of prices and sell basic products or commodities, with their low productivity reflected in low wages. To maintain competiveness at this stage of development, competitiveness hinges mainly on well-functioning public and private institutions, appropriate infrastructures, a stable macroeconomic framework and good health and primary education.
As wages rise with advancing development, countries move into efficiency-driven stage of development, when they must begin to develop more efficient production processes and increase product quality. At this point, competitiveness becomes increasingly driven by higher education and training, efficient markets and the ability to harness the benefits of existing technologies.
Finally, as countries move into the innovation-driven stage, they are only able to sustain higher wages and the associated standards of living of their business are able to compete with new and unique products. At this stage, companies must compete by producing new and different goods using the most sophisticated processes and through innovation.
In summary, the WEF's Global Competitiveness Index is based on 12 "pillars of competitiveness," divided into three "pillar groups," that emphasize different aspects of market efficiency; Basic Requirements (institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomic stability, health and primary education; Efficiency enhancers (higher education and training, goods market efficiency, labour market efficiency, financial market sophistication, technological readiness, market size); Sophistication Factors (business sophistication, innovation).
From the GCI stages of economies, you could see that Nigeria is still at the factor-driven stage, where to maintain competitiveness; the country must have a well functioning public and private institutions, appropriate infrastructure, stable macroeconomic framework and good health and primary education.
Aganga and the government he works for are well aware that our public institutions are in shambles riddled by unbridled corruption, bureaucracy and inefficiency since 1999 when the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and their military collaborators imposed them on the country. Past efforts to improve on the private institutions have also amounted to nothing. The privatization programmes of the government and the institutions to drive the process has also been cesspools of corruption and high level executive impunity that the country is yet to see the benefits of the privatization efforts.
There is no debate; primary education in the country is in shambles. Nigeria has toiled with some educational programmes, which have only served as conduit pipes to transfer money to the corrupt political leaders and their cronies. For instance, the nation launched the Universal Primary Education (UPE) in 1976, the programme failed due to lack of funds necessitated by corruption among other factors. Nigeria has again launched another Mass-oriented education programme, this time branding it the Universal basic Education (UBE). The former president Olusegun Obasanjo declared during the launching of the programme in Sokoto that the nation "cannot afford to fail this time around." However, not long after that, the federal government reported that the falling standard of education in Nigeria is caused by "acute shortage of qualified teachers in the primary school level." It is reported that about 23 percent of the over 400,000 teachers employed in the nation's primary schools do not possess the teachers' Grade Two Certificate, even when the National Certificate of Education (NCE) is the minimum educational requirement one should posses to teach in the nation's primary schools.
Aware of the short comings in the primary school education, has the PDP led government trained the required number and quality of teachers needed to successfully implement the UBE programme? Are the teachers going to be motivated to perform their duties well? Are the classrooms and seats ready, or are the pupils going to continue to sit on bare floor? Are the books and other teaching materials ready? It has been observed that in any part of the world where education has been improved on by their leaders, they first educate the educators and motivate them to perform their duties well. This lesson has not been learnt by the PDP rapacious administration holding sway since 1999. These problems facing primary education as in other sections of the education sector are well known to the government, the federal ministry of education, the UBE agencies, economists and other policy makers. The policy makers even have the solutions in the tips of their fingers but for their own collaboration with politicians in the ongoing looting spree. That begs the question, what is the WEF coming to teach us about improving the state of primary education, when we already know what to do but failed to do it.
Time and again, the Nigerian Medical Association( NMA), raises alarm about the deplorable state of health care delivery in the country. Good health care which ought to be a basic right of the people had been neglected over the years. No administration has ever given the needed attention to the health sector, including adherence to the World Health Organization's minimum recommendation that 15 percent of a country's annual budget be committed to the health sector. Aware of the poor state they have put the health sector, the leaders' jet abroad at every opportunity to treat ordinary headache.These are the same people that want GEF to compromise its standard, to give their government favourable ranking.
For the country to improve on its business competitiveness it must also improve on the state of infrastructure which presently is in very deplorable condition and is one of the reasons why many businesses have collapsed. A situation where business organizations have to provide their own electricity, water and even build roads for easy transport of their goods and services is unacceptable if we want to attract foreign investors and enable local businesses to flourish.
It is obvious that what the country needs is to address those key problems that makes doing business in Nigeria a difficult enterprise and this can be done by a sincere leadership.We don't need the authors of the GCI rankings to do that. Even South Africa, the highest ranked African country in the GCI ranking did not have to be educated by the authors. Their leaders simply did the right things and the world and the GCI ranking authors took notice.
Mr. Olusegun Aganga's invitation was sequel to the GCI rankings for the 2010-2011 in which a very unimpressive ranking was given to Africa's most populous nation. Nigeria was ranked 25th out of the 35 nations covered on the African continent, coming behind smaller and more impoverished countries such as Ethiopia, Rwanda, Gambia, Benin, Botswana, Cameroun, Tanzania and Swaziland.
"We take these things seriously and as a result, we have organized for the World Economic Forum, the author of the Survey, to come to Nigeria in November… to work with government in terms of identifying the reasons for this poor ranking, what other countries have done to improve their ranking and what can Nigeria as a country do to improve its ranking," said Aganga, trying hard to justify another round of waste of public funds to invite so-called foreign experts to teach us how to improve our GCI ranking, as if that was what Switzerland, Sweden and Singapore did to occupy the top three spots respectively.
It is another way that Nigeria wants to influence the WEF to improve the ranking of country in their next report. There is nothing that Nigerian leaders cannot corrupt. That was how, a former Minister of Information Professor Jerry Gana, under the very corrupt and kleptomaniac Obasanjo administration corrupted the Nigerian media, with a jamboree media tour of states in which states were ranked in their performance according to how much they could afford to lavish on the visiting journalists that Gana took round the country. And what a perfidy! At the end of the questionable tours, dubious trophies were awarded to the state governors. And to the shame of the organizers of the media tour and the participants, who lend their credibility to it, the same award recipients were also those who looted their states' treasury dry and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the ICPC are still battling to recover their states' funds in their possession.
The world Economic Forum should not allow Nigerian government to drag its name to the mud. Because that is what they would get if they succumb to Nigeria's pressure and honour the invitation to come and teach the country how to do the right thing. The offer surely is tempting to the authors of the GCI, after-all they will be rewarded handsomely for such a consultancy job.
The government of Nigeria should be told to keep its economic house in order.The criteria for the rankings of the competitiveness of nations whether done by the World Economic Forum that does the GCI rankings or by the prestigious Swiss business school, International Institute for Management Development (IMD), that produces the annual World Competitiveness Yearbook, are very clear.
The field of research called the "the competitiveness of nations" takes into account that business operate in a national environment that can enhance or hinder those businesses, ability to compete within their own countries or internationally. There are many factors that affect the environment in which businesses operate-including the domestic economy and fiscal policy, regulations, infrastructure (from transportation to universities to hospitals to Internet access), the education of the workforce, and many others.
Some other factors include hard data, such as GDP and miles of paved roads, or soft data, such as the attitudes and values of managers and workers.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) defines national economic competiveness as "the set of institutions, policies and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country." Its GCI index is calculated from both publicly available data and the Executive opinion survey, conducted with its network of partner institutes (leading research institutes and business organizations). According to the WEF, the report "assesses the ability of countries to provide high levels of prosperity to their citizens. This in turn depends on how productively a country uses available resources. Therefore the GCI measures the set of institutions, policies, and factors that set the sustainable current and medium term levels of economic prosperity." The global competitiveness report ranks economies that are separated into three stages, according to where they are in their development, factor-driven economies (stage 1), efficiency-driven economies (stage 2) and innovation-driven economies (stage 3).
In the factor-driven stage countries compete based on their factor endowments, primarily unskilled labour and natural resources. Companies compete on the basis of prices and sell basic products or commodities, with their low productivity reflected in low wages. To maintain competiveness at this stage of development, competitiveness hinges mainly on well-functioning public and private institutions, appropriate infrastructures, a stable macroeconomic framework and good health and primary education.
As wages rise with advancing development, countries move into efficiency-driven stage of development, when they must begin to develop more efficient production processes and increase product quality. At this point, competitiveness becomes increasingly driven by higher education and training, efficient markets and the ability to harness the benefits of existing technologies.
Finally, as countries move into the innovation-driven stage, they are only able to sustain higher wages and the associated standards of living of their business are able to compete with new and unique products. At this stage, companies must compete by producing new and different goods using the most sophisticated processes and through innovation.
In summary, the WEF's Global Competitiveness Index is based on 12 "pillars of competitiveness," divided into three "pillar groups," that emphasize different aspects of market efficiency; Basic Requirements (institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomic stability, health and primary education; Efficiency enhancers (higher education and training, goods market efficiency, labour market efficiency, financial market sophistication, technological readiness, market size); Sophistication Factors (business sophistication, innovation).
From the GCI stages of economies, you could see that Nigeria is still at the factor-driven stage, where to maintain competitiveness; the country must have a well functioning public and private institutions, appropriate infrastructure, stable macroeconomic framework and good health and primary education.
Aganga and the government he works for are well aware that our public institutions are in shambles riddled by unbridled corruption, bureaucracy and inefficiency since 1999 when the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and their military collaborators imposed them on the country. Past efforts to improve on the private institutions have also amounted to nothing. The privatization programmes of the government and the institutions to drive the process has also been cesspools of corruption and high level executive impunity that the country is yet to see the benefits of the privatization efforts.
There is no debate; primary education in the country is in shambles. Nigeria has toiled with some educational programmes, which have only served as conduit pipes to transfer money to the corrupt political leaders and their cronies. For instance, the nation launched the Universal Primary Education (UPE) in 1976, the programme failed due to lack of funds necessitated by corruption among other factors. Nigeria has again launched another Mass-oriented education programme, this time branding it the Universal basic Education (UBE). The former president Olusegun Obasanjo declared during the launching of the programme in Sokoto that the nation "cannot afford to fail this time around." However, not long after that, the federal government reported that the falling standard of education in Nigeria is caused by "acute shortage of qualified teachers in the primary school level." It is reported that about 23 percent of the over 400,000 teachers employed in the nation's primary schools do not possess the teachers' Grade Two Certificate, even when the National Certificate of Education (NCE) is the minimum educational requirement one should posses to teach in the nation's primary schools.
Aware of the short comings in the primary school education, has the PDP led government trained the required number and quality of teachers needed to successfully implement the UBE programme? Are the teachers going to be motivated to perform their duties well? Are the classrooms and seats ready, or are the pupils going to continue to sit on bare floor? Are the books and other teaching materials ready? It has been observed that in any part of the world where education has been improved on by their leaders, they first educate the educators and motivate them to perform their duties well. This lesson has not been learnt by the PDP rapacious administration holding sway since 1999. These problems facing primary education as in other sections of the education sector are well known to the government, the federal ministry of education, the UBE agencies, economists and other policy makers. The policy makers even have the solutions in the tips of their fingers but for their own collaboration with politicians in the ongoing looting spree. That begs the question, what is the WEF coming to teach us about improving the state of primary education, when we already know what to do but failed to do it.
Time and again, the Nigerian Medical Association( NMA), raises alarm about the deplorable state of health care delivery in the country. Good health care which ought to be a basic right of the people had been neglected over the years. No administration has ever given the needed attention to the health sector, including adherence to the World Health Organization's minimum recommendation that 15 percent of a country's annual budget be committed to the health sector. Aware of the poor state they have put the health sector, the leaders' jet abroad at every opportunity to treat ordinary headache.These are the same people that want GEF to compromise its standard, to give their government favourable ranking.
For the country to improve on its business competitiveness it must also improve on the state of infrastructure which presently is in very deplorable condition and is one of the reasons why many businesses have collapsed. A situation where business organizations have to provide their own electricity, water and even build roads for easy transport of their goods and services is unacceptable if we want to attract foreign investors and enable local businesses to flourish.
It is obvious that what the country needs is to address those key problems that makes doing business in Nigeria a difficult enterprise and this can be done by a sincere leadership.We don't need the authors of the GCI rankings to do that. Even South Africa, the highest ranked African country in the GCI ranking did not have to be educated by the authors. Their leaders simply did the right things and the world and the GCI ranking authors took notice.
Comments
Post a Comment