Epistemics in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol.2 , No.

1 , 2012, 55-61

WebsJournals

Epistemics in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol.2 , No.1 , 2012, 55-61

Epistemics in Science, Engineering and Technology

Okeola and Salami

A Pragmatic Approach to the Nigerias Engineering Infrastructure Dilemma

O. G. Okeola and A.W. Salami Department of Civil Engineering, University of Ilorin, P.M.B 1515, Ilorin, Nigeria. drogokeola@gmail.com
Abstract The poor performance of public utility services in Nigeria has been a subject of considerable discussion. Nigeria is faced with the challenge of sustenance and maintenance of inadequate infrastructure due to years of under investment and poor maintenance culture. The paper gives an overview of status of nations infrastructure, the causes of it deterioration and effects on the socioeconomic, industrial development, and private sector development. The need to recognize critical infrastructure, interdependencies, and vulnerability to cascade failures is emphasized. The paper explores best practices in the developed and transition economies to guide in proffering pragmatic solution to the backwardness of the nation infrastructure. The paper calls for paradigm shift from general lamentation which has become the lexicon of poor level infrastructure service to action. Continue consolidation on PPP, declaration of state of emergency, fight against corruption, good governance, establishment of National Infrastructures Commission, best practices emulation and engineers involvement in politics are recommended as a way forward. Key words: Infrastructure, service, deterioration, economy, failure

1. Introduction The poor performance of public utility services in Nigeria has been a subject of considerable discussion (Ariyo and Jerome, 2004). The inadequacy and continue deterioration of Nigeria infrastructure pose acute challenges to Nigeria leadership of African. It is of utmost importance to government, business, and the public at large that the flow of services provided by nations infrastructure continues unimpeded in the face of a broad range of natural and manmade hazards (Little, 2007). The United States has acutely aware of the importance of civil infrastructures and their criticality to the nations economy and quality of life (Baker, 2007). The consequences of infrastructure failure can range from benign to the catastrophic. The geographical location favour Nigeria from exposure to catastrophic failure from natural hazard such as tsunamis, earthquake, landslides, hurricane, etc. However, the nation is grasping with the benign consequences of gradual deterioration of infrastructure. The manifestation is the deepening poverty, reduce production and reduce life expectancy, eroding patriotism, corruption and public discontent. 2. The element of Infrastructure The definition of infrastructure within the context of economy includes services from (World Development Report, 1994): (1) Public Utilities power, telecommunications, piped gas, water supply, sanitation & sewerage, solid waste collection and disposals (2) Public Works roads, major dam and canal works for irrigation, urban drainage. (3) Other transportation sectors railways, urban transport, ports and water-ways, and airports. The most common characterization of an individual element of infrastructure level is as shown in Table 1. Table 1. Infrastructure levels 1. 2. 3. 4. Institutional: Regulatory (state & federal), government (local, state, & federal), economic, social, cultural, etc. Organization: Executives, managers, designers, operators, company procedures (normal & emergency), standards, etc Cyber/Control: Communications, computers, controls, operating procedures, etc. Physical: Physical structures, plants, pipes, valves, facilities, etc

Source: Willingham and Bigger (2007)

Epistemics in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol.2 , No.1 , 2012, 55-61

Okeola and Salami

3.

Infrastructure Interdependencies

The sustainability of infrastructure services delivery is further complicated by the obvious and subtle existences of dependencies. The governments of developed economies have become more acutely concern about cascading infrastructure failures and are developing strategies at controlling and mitigating them. Such infrastructure is regarded as Critical Infrastructure (CI). One key aspect of CI is their interactions and interdependencies. Infrastructure services underpin many aspects of economy and social activity and, as a consequence, infrastructure failures can have a wide spread impacts across the community (Clough, et al., 2004). Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the infrastructure upstream and downstream linkages respectively (Willingham and Bigger, 2007).

Critical infrastructure (CI): The management of engineering infrastructure has attained new status of security and part of national interest in USA, EU countries and transition economies. The US government through the USA Patriot Act of 2001 defined and promulgated Critical Infrastructure. In UK, the Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) was defined while the EU also has a similar definition and promulgation. The functioning of one CI often depends on the functioning of another (dependency), for example mobile phone transmitter requires electric power and sometimes they can be mutually dependent (interdependencies). The services can therefore be coupled by (1) function (2) Resources (3) shared or common sub-services. The propagation of failure can lead to cascade of rapid escalation of damage. In addition, the services are implemented across a range of contractual, organizational, commercial, legal and political boundaries thus giving rise to a complex set of ownerships and responsibilities (Bloomfield, et. al., 2009). Figure 3 shows illustration of infrastructure complexity, interconnectivity and

interdependency.
4 4.1 Engineering Infrastructure in Nigeria An assessment

The foregoing gives credence to understanding infrastructure as a cornerstone to the citizenry overall well being. It is the prerequisite requirement for all other virtual infrastructures which support quality of life such as healthcares, science, education, insurance, recreation etc. It also chronicles the attention and the commitment of the governments of the developed economies place not only on sustaining infrastructure but include focusing on the vulnerabilities of infrastructure to cascade failures from natural hazards and terrorism. Nigeria is faced with the challenges of sustaining and maintaining inadequate infrastructure. Government ownership and operation of public utilities does not have to result in inefficient operation and low level of service, but it has always been. Consequently, the

Epistemics in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol.2 , No.1 , 2012, 55-61

Okeola and Salami

relevance of private sector involvement in infrastructure for sustainable service has been significantly noted in the last decade.

Figure 3: Illustrative infrastructure interdependencies (Peerenboom, et. al., 2001) Many years of underinvestment and poor maintenance have left Nigeria with a significant infrastructure deficit that is holding back her development and economic growth. The government realized the needs to make massive investments beyond their means to close the yawning infrastructure gap. In 2008, the government disclosed through Minister of State for Finance (Mr Remi Babalola) that Nigeria requires about $100 Billion (N11.70trillion) to address only four infrastructure areas considered critical: Power-US$1820Billion; Rail -US$10Billion; Roads US$14billion; and Oil and Gas -US$60Billion. In addition, Lagos State alone according to the Governor needs: US$2billion for expansion and modernization of its water supply network in the next 20years; and US$715m for road networks in the next 5years amongst many others. Infrastructure has been identified as the key constraint to private sector development. The poor state of electricity supply imposed huge costs on the business sector. A large percentage of the firms and most respondents ranked power and voltage fluctuations as major infrastructure problem in Nigeria (Adenikinju, 2005). A severity index in matrix order (SIMO) model was applied to empirically rank the severity of causative factors. The study found the following factors as critical to the causes of infrastructure and service delivery failures in order of severity: corruption, misallocation of investments, inadequate maintenance, lack of transparency and accountability, insufficient funding for infrastructures, lack of supportive institutions, inconsistent political, social, & economic policies, and the lack of suitable technical & managerial skill (Omoregie et al., 2006). Despite the huge investments made by successive governments on reform, it has not brought the much needed rapid socio-economic and industrial developments due to (Ibrahim and Musa-Haddary, 2010): inadequate institutional and legal framework, weak implementation and enforcement procedures, technological constraints and because government-sponsored activities have been beset by vices of corruption, mismanagement, dependence on treasury funding, poor services, arrogance and insensitivity, parasitism and inequities, etc.

Epistemics in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol.2 , No.1 , 2012, 55-61

Okeola and Salami

4.2

Remedial measures

Alfaro et al., (1997) cites some fundamental reasons which are highly applicable to Nigeria general infrastructure poor level of service delivery. The most relevant is the lack of a residual claimant or senior managers whose income is strongly performance-determined. This also means there is no one with a strong incentive to vigorously resist political plunder of the utility, through patronage employment, appeasement pricing, or corrupt procurement and billing practices. The government dual roles as a provider and regulator compounded infrastructure problem and the poor service delivery. Subsequently, the FG embarked on various reforms since 1999 towards a good governance and creation of enabling environment for provision of services in line with emerging global trends. The efforts culminated in the passage of the Infrastructure Concessions Regulatory Commission Act 2005 with a mandate to develop guidelines, policies, and procurement processes for Public Private Partnership (PPP). The core principle of any PPP is the allocation of risk to the party best able to manage it at least cost. The aim is to optimize rather than maximize risk transfer to ensure that best value is achieved (Ibrahim and Musa-Haddary, 2010). Following the passage of the ICRC Act in 2005 and its inauguration in 2008, a national policy statement was developed which identifies the key objectives of PPP comprising economic, social and environmental. It also sets out the various frameworks for the effective implementation of PPP which include if necessary review the legal and regulatory framework created under the following existing legislations: The Privatization and Commercialization Act 1999; The Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (Establishment) Act 2005; The Fiscal Responsibility Act 2007; The Public Procurement Act 2007; and Other relevant legislation.

In 2009, the ICRC disclosed that Nigeria needs $15 billion annually over the next five to six years to finance its infrastructural deficits. With around 20% expected to come from the private sector, this suggests at least $3 billion per year. Shonibare (2010) suggests this financing should come from: local project sponsors; international project sponsors; local banks; international banks; local institutional investors; international institutional investors; multilateral finance organizations. The results of PPP applications across the world remains mixed. While many infrastructure projects that had been developed through PPPs even in countries with relatively long history of PPP applications have failed or did not even materialize several others are successful (Ibrahim and Musa-Haddary, 2010). 5. The Way Forward

General lamentation has unfortunately become the lexicon of poor service delivery from the nation infrastructures by even the policy makers, high government officials, and the helpless citizenry. Alarming cost estimates are reported at various levels of government, nongovernmental organization, and international financial institutions as required to close the gap in infrastructure deficit. It is time to move from intimidating figures and lamentation to a pragmatic action as enumerated thus: 5.1 State of emergency

There is need to declare a state of emergency on the nation infrastructure. This will enable the government to address the problem with novel innovation and pragmatic approaches. The expected bipartisan legislation will foster the consensus needed to enact bold proposals necessary to ensure the viability of nations infrastructure. The nation infrastructure is not vulnerable to catastrophic event, but the chronically poor infrastructure has imposed huge socioeconomic burden on the populace. The bombing incidences in the country and vandalization of petroleum pipelines is a wake-up call and corroborate the need for state of emergency. The nation infrastructure is essentially a collective national interest and security. 5.2 Implementation of public private partnership (PPP)

The Nigerian populace already adopted various coping mechanism in response to poor service from public utility. As such averting expenditures are incurred for example on standby generator, fuel, boreholes, and table water etc. It is not surprising that several studies (Sule and Okeola, 2010; Madhoo, 2007; World Bank, 2002, etc) reported that

Epistemics in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol.2 , No.1 , 2012, 55-61

Okeola and Salami

the citizenry are willing to pay for improved services. The role of the government is to ensure that services are provided and not necessary to provide services. It is imperative to involve private sector in infrastructure development and service delivery to exploit this willingly-to-pay (WTP). Enormous consideration on externality issues, non-excludability of some services and the suggestions by Rivera, (1996), Ibrahim and Musa-Haddary, (2010) etc are required in PPP implementation. The reality today despite recorded failures of some PPP projects, it offers one of the greatest potentials of resolving infrastructural inadequacies in many societies and meeting internationally accepted development goals (Omagbitse, 2010). 5.3 National infrastructure commission (NIC)

The executive organ of Nigeria government should sponsor a bill to establish NIC which will replace ICRC and retain all the roles and responsibilities therein with some amendment listed as followed: Commission membership to be appointed by the President and Senate Member would be required to have experience in one or more of the following fields; economics, public administration, civil engineering, public investment financing, construction and related design professionals. Commission is to develop a study of all matters relating to the state of infrastructure in the country. Commissions would be required to develop recommendations on various approaches for improving and maintaining infrastructure. Any other amendment deem fit by executive and legislative arms. 5.4 Good governance

Lack of good governance principles had a devastating effect on Nigeria infrastructure. Good governance is participatory, consensus-oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law (Hukka and Katko, 2003). The provision of basic services from infrastructure is a people affair. It requires peoples of all sphere of life interaction. Such interactions are basically governed by politics, for instance the politics of resource control, revenue allocation, establishment of priorities, interaction between institutions and the involvement of those directly affected. It is therefore politically naive according to Abram (2001), to avoid the politicization of service provision. What is important is to raise the political profile of the infrastructure issue and increase pressure on politicians to be accountable for good governance. 5.5 Corruption

The endemic of corruption is known though the empirical evidence is lacking to generalize the magnitude of the problem. Experts around the world have been suggesting various ways to battle the endemic of corruption. These include viewing corruption within the context of governance, information and transparency, creation of incentives and rewards, public disclosure, law enforcement among others. The Federal government has intensified battle against corruption through the establishment of independent corrupt practices and other related offences commission (ICPC) and economic and financial crimes commission (EFCC). The two organs have since been investigating and trying high profile corrupt cases. The government can take giant step by making corruption a capital offence. The suggestion concurs with late activist; Gani Fawehimis called for a stick and sharpest sword measures in combating corruption. A dedicated tribunal and trial duration limits (inclusive of appeals) should be established for this purpose. 5.6 The Nigerian Institution of Civil Engineers (NICE) leadership

Public utility infrastructures are largely the purview of civil engineering. It therefore poses a big challenge on NICE leadership with cooperation of the Nigerian Society of Engineers. The best practices that the NICE is urged to emulate is in the involvement of American Society of Civil Engineer (ASCE) in public policy and the formulation of legislation that support improvement on the United States infrastructure through the following approaches. Congressional fellows program: The ASCE congressional fellows program has made it possible for the civil engineering community to have a voice on Capitol Hill. The program started in 1996. It offers ASCE members an opportunity to work for one year on the staff of a congressional committee or for a US Senator or House member. ASCE has sponsored over 10 congressional fellows that have gained valuable insights into how congress works while making members of the congress and their staffs aware of the interests and perspectives of civil engineers.

Epistemics in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol.2 , No.1 , 2012, 55-61

Okeola and Salami

An ASCE congressional fellowship is open to any ASCE member who is a US citizen. Factors considered by the selection committee include the attainment of advanced degree, registration as a professional engineer, career background, public policy experience, and ASCE involvement. ASCE members who are awarded a congressional fellowship receive stipend and take one year leave of absence from their place of employment. Lobbying: Lobbying is the practice of educating and influencing government on particular issue. ASCE is by law allowed to lobby within the strict dollar limit but are prohibited from engaging in any political activities such as endorsing candidates or campaign contribution. The body has made a concerted effort toward greater flexibility in its lobbying activities and direct involvement in political campaign by establishing political action committee (PAC).The objective is toward ASCE qualification for accepting voluntary contributions and then channels such contributions to candidates for federal office. ASCE report Card on Americas infrastructure: This is another novel idea. ASCE has garnered public support and raised public awareness on the nations infrastructure with the release of annual report card on Americans infrastructure. The report cards are regularly cited by the elected official when considering matters concerning the infrastructure. Fight against corruption: ASCE has been working for several years with Transparency International to fight corruption worldwide in the construction and engineering industries. In 2005, ASCEs board of direction adopted policy 510: Combating Corruption which states that ASCE supports a zero tolerance policy toward bribery, fraud, and corruption in the design and construction among other. 6. Conclusion

The paper highlighted the causes of infrastructure dilemma in Nigeria. The need to revamp the existing and develop new infrastructure using all means available to the government is emphasized. Infrastructure in this present dispensation is a security concern and collective national interest, which calls for bipartisan legislation to address the issue. The paper raises the awareness on critical infrastructure and vulnerability to cascade failures. The way forward to sustainable infrastructure and efficient level of service delivery are suggested. This includes consolidation on PPP, declaration of state of emergency on infrastructure, emulation of best practices among other. Reference Abrams, L. 2001. Water for basic needs. WHO commissioned input to the first world water development report. http://www.thewaterpage.com/documents/basicneed.pdf (7/12/2002) Adenikinju, A. 2005. Analysis of the Cost of infrastructure failures in a developing economy: The case of the electricity sector in Nigeria. AERC Research Paper 148. African Economic Research Consortium, Nairobi Alfaro, R., V. Blanlot, R. Bradburd and J. Briscoe (1997) Reforming former public monopolies: the case of water supply.http:/rg/ESSD/essdext.nsf/18DocByUnid/8EE9EAICA924C185256B5000692751/$FILE/ReformingF ormerPublicMonopolies.pdf (26/4/2003) Ariyo, A. and A. Jerome. 2004. Utility privatization and the poor: Nigeria in focus. Global Issue Papers. No 12. Published by the Heinrich Bll Foundation Heinrich Bll Foundation. Berlin. info@boell.de www.boell.de Baker, H. B. 2007. A vulnerability assessment methodology for critical infrastructure facilities. Proceeding of 2nd annual symposium of the institute for infrastructure and information assurance. James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia. Bloomfield, R, N. Chozos and P. Nobles. 2009. Interdependency Analysis: Requirements, capabilities and strategy. Produced for CPNI, TSB and EPSRC, under contract NSIP/001/0001 Feasibility study on interdependency analysis. Adelard document reference: D/418/12101/3 Clough, P., I. Duncan, S. Doug, J. Smith and B, Layton. 2004. Sustainable infrastructure: A policy famework. report to the Ministry of Economic Development, New Zealand Peerenboom, J., R. Fisher, and R. Whitfield. 2001. Recovering from disruptions of interdependent critical infrastructures. Presentation to the workshop on mitigating the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to catastrophic failures. World Institute on Disaster Risk Management, Alexandria, Va. Hukka, J.J and T.S. Katko. 2003. Water privatisation revisited: Panacea or pancake? IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre. Delft. The Netherlands

Epistemics in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol.2 , No.1 , 2012, 55-61

Okeola and Salami

Ibrahim, D.O and Y.G. Musa-Haddary. 2010. Concept of value for money in public infrastructure development. Presentation at The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors 3-Day international workshop on public private partnership approach to infrastructure development in Nigeria. Abuja. Little, R.G. 2007. Controlling cascading failure: Understanding the vulnerabilities of interconnected infrastructures. Proceeding of 2nd annual symposium of the institute for infrastructure and information assurance. James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia. Madhoo, NY. 2007. Estimating the budgetary impact of higher willingness to pay for residential water using CVM: A case study of Mauritius. Asian Journal of Water, Environment, and Pollution. (4)2, pp 57-64 Omagbitse, B. C. 2010. Project finance issues for infrastructure provision. A presentation at The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors 3-Day international workshop on public private partnership approach to infrastructure development in Nigeria. Abuja. Omoregie, A, O.J. Ebohon and D. Radford. 2011. Modelling in ranking procedures; A case study: Infrastructure Failures In Nigeria. School of Architecture, De Montfort University, Leicester, LE1 9BH, England. http:www.irbdirect.de/daten/iconda/cib10618.pdf (Accessed: 5/6/2011) Rivera, D. 1996. Private sector participation in the water supply and wastewater sector. Lesson from six developing countries. Direction in Development. The World Bank. Washinton, D.C., USA. Shonibare, W. 2010. Encouraging sustainable investment in infrastructure through public private partnerships. Presentation at The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors 3-Day international workshop on public private partnership approach to infrastructure development in Nigeria. Abuja Sule, B. F. and O.G. Okeola. 2010. Measuring willingness to pay for improved urban water supply in Offa city, Kwara state. Nigeria. Water Science and Technology: Water Supply. (10)2, pp 933 -941. Willingham, M. G. and J. E. Bigger. 2007. Identifying, mitigating and interruptingCascading failures at critical facilities. Proceeding of 2nd annual symposium of the institute for infrastructure and information assurance. James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia. World Bank. 2002. Water resources sector strategy: Strategic directions for World Bank engagement. Draft. http://inweb18.worldbank.org/ESSD/essdext.nsf/18DocByunid/ (Accessed: 22/7/2004) World Development Report. 1994. Infrastructure for development. The World Bank. U.S.A