When Akinwumi Adesina, the president of the African Development Bank (AfDB), declared that Nigeria is worse off economically than it was in 1960, it was bound to provoke controversy. Many critics immediately pounced on the statistical claim that Nigeria’s GDP per capita has declined from $1,847 in 1960 to $824 today, pointing out that these figures are likely inaccurate and overlook the complexity of economic measurement.
And they are partly right; the specific numbers Adesina cited are contestable. But if we spend all our energy debating decimal points, we will miss the forest for the trees. Adesina’s statement is less about statistics and more about national trajectory, and on that front, he is painfully, provocatively correct.
Nigeria’s economic progress
Paradox of growth and underdevelopment
Let us start with the facts. Nigeria’s nominal GDP in 1960 was $4.2 billion, with a population of roughly 45 million, yielding a per capita figure of just $93, not $1,847 as quoted. As of 2025, Nigeria’s nominal GDP stands at $188.3 billion, the fourth highest in Africa, behind South Africa ($410.3 billion), Egypt ($347.3 billion), and Algeria ($268.9 billion). Her per capita GDP has certainly increased on paper.
But here is the paradox: her people feel poorer. Why? Because wealth is not reaching them. The promise of independence was not to merely increase the size of the national cake, but to ensure every Nigerian could get a fairer slice.
Adesina’s critics argue that GDP per capita is a poor tool to assess well-being, and that is true. But that argument cuts both ways. If we reject GDP per capita as a sufficient measure of progress, we must also reject nominal GDP growth as proof of success. The truth lies in between.
Beyond metrics: A reality check
Dr. Adesina’s speech should be seen not as a technical presentation, but as a moral provocation, a challenge to Nigeria’s leadership class and policy elite.
He asks us to compare Nigeria not just to its past, but to its peers. In 1960, South Korea had a lower GDP per capita than Nigeria. Today, it exceeds $36,000. That comparison is jarring not because South Korea is a perfect model, but because it exposes how Nigeria has squandered decades of potential.
“Underdevelopment should not be accepted as our destiny,” he said. “We must break free from this pattern.”
In that one sentence, Adesina captures what most Nigerians feel but often cannot articulate: Nigeria’s underperformance is not inevitable; it is the result of choices.
What Adesina got right
Despite questions around his numbers, Adesina rightly pointed to the five pillars for structural transformation:
1. Electricity access
2. Infrastructure
3. Industrialisation
4. Innovation
5. Agricultural productivity
These are not new ideas, but Nigeria has consistently failed to pursue them with seriousness. As Adesina noted:
“We need to invest in technology, infrastructure, and innovation. We must become Africa’s industrial powerhouse.”
This is not hyperbole. Nigeria cannot thrive on consumer imports and crude exports. We must produce, and produce competitively, if we are to reduce poverty at scale.
He also highlighted the importance of private sector-led transformation, citing the Dangote Refinery as an example of industrial ambition. He encouraged the mobilisation of pension funds, diaspora capital, and local financial markets to finance large-scale development. These are all pragmatic, sensible recommendations.
Defending the wake-up call
Critics point to improved telecom access, expanded road networks, and a growing middle class as signs of progress, and they are right. Nigeria is not where it was in 1960. But progress should not be an excuse for complacency.
We cannot afford to pat ourselves on the back for expanding mobile phone access while 19 percent of the region’s extremely poor live within our borders. We cannot claim victory when more than one in seven of the world’s poorest people live in Nigeria. Nor can we ignore the fact that Nigeria has one of the highest numbers of out-of-school children globally, with over 10 million children currently denied access to basic education. These figures are not just statistics — they are a sobering call to action.
The issue is not whether Nigeria has made progress, it has. The issue is whether that progress is anywhere near our potential. On that count, Dr. Adesina is not only justified, he is restrained.
As a former U.S. president, Lyndon B. Johnson once said: “Doing what’s right is not the problem. It’s knowing what’s right.”
Adesina told us what’s right. Now, we must act.
In conclusion, we need to learn to listen to the message, not just the math. This moment should not be wasted in a sterile debate over statistics. We must embrace the deeper truth that Adesina’s speech attempts to convey: Nigeria needs a radical, deliberate economic transformation, not just incremental change. Yes, let us be precise with data. But more importantly, let us be honest about our trajectory and courageous enough to chart a new course. Our economy is too big to be this poor, and our people are too talented to be so trapped. Adesina may have misquoted some figures, but he did not miss the moment.
John Onyeukwu, is a lawyer and public policy analyst with interdisciplinary expertise in law, governance, and institutional reform. He holds an LL.B (Hons) from Obafemi Awolowo University, an LL.M from the University of Lagos, and dual master’s degrees in Public Policy from the University of York and Central European University. He also earned a Mini-MBA. John has managed development projects on governance, public finance, civic engagement, and service delivery. He can be reached on john@apexlegal.com.ng
The art of doing nothing: Nigeria & The World