The Independent Media and Policy Initiative (IMPI) has stated that no government since the return of democratic rule in 1999 has committed as much as $8 billion to capital expenditure in a single fiscal year, until the administration of Bola Tinubu.

In a policy statement signed by its Chairman, Dr Omoniyi Akinsiju, the policy think tank maintained that years of inadequate investment in capital projects have significantly deepened Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit, noting that the country would require at least $14 billion in annual spending over the next decade to close the gap.

According to him, prolonged underinvestment in key sectors including roads, electricity, rail transport, healthcare, education and housing has widened Nigeria’s infrastructure gap and slowed economic growth.

The group added that consistent infrastructure investment remains essential for boosting productivity, attracting investors and improving living standards. It noted that countries pursuing rapid economic growth often commit substantial resources to long-term projects that drive industrialisation, create jobs and strengthen regional connectivity.

The group also linked Nigeria’s slow infrastructural development to poor implementation of capital budgets and the continued dominance of recurrent expenditure in public spending, stressing that successive administrations failed to sustain adequate capital investment despite periods of strong oil revenue.

According to IMPI, federal capital budgets between 2000 and 2020 mostly ranged between $2 billion and $12 billion, with implementation levels in many years falling below 70 per cent. The think tank noted that during years of oil windfalls, actual releases for infrastructure projects remained relatively low, worsening the nation’s development challenges.

The organisation, however, acknowledged improvements in infrastructure funding during the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, largely driven by increased borrowing for capital projects. It added that the trend accelerated under President Bola Tinubu, whose administration it said surpassed the long-standing annual infrastructure spending benchmark of about $14 billion for the first time.

The statement further argued that the administration’s debt-for-infrastructure approach offers a viable pathway for stimulating economic growth, expanding productive capacity and attracting long-term foreign investment.

The group noted that the 2026 budget significantly increased allocations to infrastructure and capital expenditure, describing it as a major shift in Nigeria’s fiscal direction toward aggressive infrastructure development.

“Over the last 25 years, since 2000, no federal administration has budgeted more than $14 billion for capital spending in a single year, despite three oil booms between 2000 and 2014.

“In 2000, for instance, total federal government projected capital expenditure was $3.62 billion, but only the first quarter was fully disbursed, with lower disbursements recorded in the second quarter to the last. Though the 2001 fiscal year was marked by high oil revenues and windfall gains (excess proceeds), the capital budget was $3.87 billion, but only the first-quarter allocation was fully disbursed.

“In 2002, the total capital expenditure appropriated was $2.7 billion. Still, only about 38% of the capital budget was implemented, with appropriated capital expenditure declining to $2.25 billion in 2003 and recording a marginal increase to $2.6 billion in 2004.

“Though capital spending increased to $ 4.6 billion in 2005, it was still a far cry from KPMG’s $14.2 billion suggested benchmark per annum, especially given that it marked the year of the oil windfall, when projected crude oil sales reached $37.7 billion. But only 55% of the budget was implemented by December, 2005. The trend of low capital appropriation continued in 2006, with total federal infrastructure spending cited at $4.5 billion.

“In 2007, however, the capital budget ballooned to over $5 billion, propelled by an oil sale boom, but actual spending was about $3.9 billion. The same basic, relatively high capital budget appropriation was recorded in 2008, another oil price surge year, when about $6.7 billion was appropriated, with yet again a low implementation threshold. In 2009, approximately $7 billion was budgeted for capital expenditure, but only about 54.26% was released.

“In tandem with the oil boom of 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013, appropriated capital expenditure increased to about $12.3 billion, $10.42 billion, $8.2 billion, and $9.9 billion, respectively. However, all the appropriated expenditures were reported to have performed below 70 per cent.

“We note that, beginning in 2014, after the global oil price upswing, capital expenditure returned to the $6 billion range. By 2015, however, earnings from crude oil had crashed, and that reflected in a reduced capital budget allocation of about $3.2 billion.

“Nevertheless, as of September 2015, only about $1 billion had been spent on capital projects. In 2016, there was a relative increase in both allocation and implementation, with about $3.95 billion released for capital projects.

“Paradoxically, the year of the oil crash recorded the highest capital release for infrastructure in the country’s history up to that point. The budget was successfully implemented through loans and related debts.

“About $2 billion was specifically injected to revive abandoned projects in the year. In 2017, proposed capital expenditure was roughly $7.3 billion; however, about $4.5 billion was released. In 2018, capital expenditure was quite ambitious at about $9.42 billion, again with about $4.4 billion released.

“This was replicated in 2019 when total capital expenditure released was roughly $3.9 billion out of the approved capital budget of $6.6 billion. In 2020, budgeted capital expenditure was about $5.0 billion,” he said.