Ports are more than concrete, cranes, and containers. They are economic instruments. They determine how fast trade moves, how much goods cost, and whether a country competes or merely consumes. In Nigeria, where over 80 percent of international trade passes through seaports, these gateways function as the arteries of the economy. For decades, however, those arteries have been dangerously constricted by inefficiency, congestion, and chronic underinvestment turning strategic national assets into structural liabilities.
Nowhere has this contradiction been more visible than at Apapa and Tin Can Island ports. Long essential to Nigeria’s commercial life, they have also become symbols of unrealised potential. Chronic congestion, outdated infrastructure, and administrative bottlenecks have produced staggering economic losses. Estimates run into trillions of naira annually, driven by delays, inflated logistics costs, and lost competitiveness. For businesses, this means higher operating costs and weaker supply chains. For consumers, particularly low-income households, it means paying more for everyday goods. Port inefficiency, in effect, has become a hidden tax on the entire economy.
Part of the problem lies in the structure Nigeria inherited. The country operates a landlord port model: the government retains responsibility for navigation, safety, and channel maintenance, while cargo handling is concessioned to private terminal operators. In theory, this should balance public oversight with private-sector efficiency. In practice, that balance has been undermined by aging infrastructure, fragmented governance, and slow adaptation to global shipping realities.
Apapa Port, built nearly a century ago, and Tin Can Island Port, developed almost fifty years ago, were never designed for today’s vessels, volumes, or technologies. Both are shallow river ports with limited room for expansion. Meanwhile, global shipping has changed dramatically. Vessels are larger, turnaround expectations tighter, and automation the norm rather than the exception. Nigeria simply did not modernise at the pace required.
Its neighbours did. Ghana, Togo, Benin Republic, and Côte d’Ivoire invested earlier in deeper, more efficient ports. The paradox is striking: Nigeria has a larger population and a stronger economy than all of them combined, yet cargo bound for Nigerian markets is often discharged elsewhere because those ports work better. This is not a failure of demand. It is a failure of infrastructure, planning, and execution.
In hindsight, Nigeria’s most costly omission was the delay in building new-generation ports. That gap is now being corrected. The operationalisation of the Lekki Deep Sea Port marked a genuine turning point. Fully automated, privately financed, and naturally deep, it represents a clean break from legacy constraints and a glimpse of what Nigeria’s port future can be.
Beyond Lekki, there is a broader repositioning underway. Institutional reforms most notably the creation of a dedicated Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy reflect a growing recognition that ports are not standalone facilities but anchors of industrial policy, trade strategy, and economic growth. Rehabilitation, dredging, and capacity expansion at existing ports further suggest an understanding that competitiveness is cumulative: new infrastructure must work alongside functional legacy assets.
Yet infrastructure alone does not explain Nigeria’s port challenges. Governance failures have imposed an invisible but costly burden on trade. Multiple agencies with overlapping mandates, manual documentation processes, and discretionary enforcement have created friction at every stage of cargo movement. More damaging still has been the persistence of corrupt practices, which raise costs across the logistics chain from demurrage and insurance premiums to inventory holding costs for businesses forced to plan around uncertainty.
These inefficiencies ripple outward. Retailers hold excess stock to hedge against delays. Transporters price in unofficial payments. Ultimately, the cost is borne by consumers and the wider economy. In this sense, port inefficiency is not a sectoral issue; it is a macroeconomic one.
Encouragingly, the trajectory is beginning to shift. Digital initiatives such as electronic truck call-up systems, port community platforms, and harmonised documentation are reducing human contact, improving transparency, and cutting clearance times. Rehabilitation works have strengthened berths and improved channel access. Inland dry ports are extending maritime services to the hinterland, integrating rail and road networks, and easing pressure on coastal terminals.
More importantly, these reforms signal a shift: from ports as isolated gateways to ports as nodes within an integrated logistics ecosystem. That shift aligns Nigeria with global best practice and positions the country to take advantage of regional and continental trade opportunities.
The timing matters. Africa remains the only continent where its most populous country and largest economy does not operate its dominant port system. That anomaly cannot persist indefinitely. As continental trade frameworks deepen and global supply chains seek diversification, Nigeria’s ports will either enable growth or constrain it.
Modern ports reduce trade costs, attract investment, stimulate manufacturing, and create jobs far beyond the waterfront. They anchor industrial clusters, support exports, and determine whether a country competes on value or merely imports what others produce.
Ultimately, the story of Nigeria’s ports is a story about power and choice. Ports shape who controls trade flows, who captures value, and who sets the terms of economic engagement. For too long, Nigeria ceded that power through neglect, fragmentation, and short-term thinking, allowing its economic lifelines to function below their potential while competitors quietly overtook it.
The reforms now unfolding suggest that this long-standing era of inefficiency may finally be drawing to a close. In a recent interview, the Managing Director of the Nigerian Ports Authority, Abubakar Dantsoho, spoke of a deliberate effort to rebuild Nigeria’s ports and elevate them to global standards. Yet history cautions against equating construction with transformation. Concrete, cranes, and even deep water are necessary but they are not sufficient. True reform is measured not by what is built, but by how well it works, how consistently it is governed, and whether the systems surrounding it are designed to endure. Without these, even the most modern ports risk becoming polished replicas of old inefficiencies.
Nigeria stands at a narrow but decisive juncture. If its ports are treated merely as revenue points, congestion will return in new forms. If they are governed as infrastructure, integrated into industrial policy, trade facilitation, and regional ambition, they can redefine the country’s economic trajectory. The difference between those outcomes will determine whether Nigeria remains a market others supply or becomes a platform from which Africa trades.
Ports, in the end, do not just move goods. They move nations. Nigeria now has the opportunity to decide where its economy is going and how much power it intends to exercise in getting there.
- business a.m. commits to publishing a diversity of views, opinions and comments. It, therefore, welcomes your reaction to this and any of our articles via email: comment@businessamlive.com
Structural fundamentals Nigeria needs to accelerate growth drivers