Governance, resources management and the crisis of accountability in Jigawa State

By Muhammad Bello Abdullahi

Governance remains one of the most significant obstacles to sustainable development in many societies. Where public institutions are poorly managed, resources intended to improve citizens’ welfare are often wasted, misallocated, or diverted from their intended purposes.

Advertisements

The consequences are evident in poor economic indices, weak healthcare systems, poor educational outcomes, unemployment, and declining public trust in government.

Governance is not merely about holding public office; it is fundamentally about the responsible management of public resources and the delivery of services in the public interest. When leaders fail to plan effectively, make decisions driven by personal or political interests, or neglect their official responsibilities, society as a whole bears the consequences.

Advertisements

Advertisements

Bad governance often results in abandoned projects, inflated contracts, unnecessary expenditures, duplication of government programmes, and investments that yield minimal public value.

Funds that could have been used to build schools, hospitals, roads, modern water systems, and create employment opportunities are instead expended without delivering meaningful outcomes.
Public resources are inherently limited no matter how much they are due rapidly population growth and must therefore be managed with efficiency and prudence. Waste occurs when government spending fails to deliver commensurate value or when projects are poorly conceived, executed, or maintained.

A government may allocate substantial funds to a project, yet citizens may experience little or no improvement due to weak supervision, ineffective procurement systems, corruption, or poor maintenance culture. In many cases, the challenge is not the absence of financial resources, but rather deficiencies in management, planning, and accountability.

Waste also arises when governments initiate projects primarily for political visibility rather than genuine public need. Such initiatives are often launched with significant publicity but may be abandoned or neglected once political priorities shift.

Accountability is a cornerstone of effective governance. Public officials are expected to provide clear explanations of how public funds are generated, allocated, and utilized, and to be held responsible for any misuse or mismanagement of resources.

However, accountability is often weakened when oversight institutions are ineffective, public financial records are not transparent or accessible, procurement processes lack due diligence, or citizens are discouraged from scrutinizing government actions.
In the absence of accountability, public office can become a platform for personal enrichment rather than public service.

When officials operate without fear of consequences for poor performance or financial misconduct, inefficiency and abuse of resources tend to become entrenched.

In Jigawa, this issue is particularly critical given that governments manage substantial public resources since the start of this administration due to increase of federal allocation after the removal of fuel subsidy, increase Revenue from taxation and other sources which is expected to translate into improved living standards for citizens.

Jigawa, along other states, face significant development challenges. Consequently, every naira allocated to government carries considerable importance. Citizens have a legitimate expectation to understand how public funds are allocated, which projects are being implemented, their costs, and the extent to which they achieve intended outcomes.

Budgets should not merely serve as formal documents containing ambitious figures; they should represent realistic and actionable plans for improving citizens’ welfare. Similarly, public expenditure should be evaluated not only in terms of amounts spent but also in terms of measurable outcomes and impact.

Addressing bad governance requires stronger institutions and a deeply embedded culture of accountability. Government should ensure that budgets, procurement data, financial statements, and project implementation reports are published in accessible and transparent formats.

Independent, State, Local government audit institutions and legislative oversight bodies must also be strengthened to be effective not robber stamp, while citizens and civil society organizations should be empowered to scrutinize public spending without undue restriction.

Greater emphasis should be placed on value for money. Prior to approving Billions for major projects, governments should clearly define objectives, costs, timelines, expected benefits, and robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks.
Most importantly, political leadership must recognize that public resources are not private assets. They belong to the people and must be managed strictly in the public interest.

Conclusion

Governance, resource management, and weak accountability are closely interconnected challenges. Poor leadership creates conditions that enable waste; waste reduces the resources available for development; and weak accountability allows these inefficiencies to persist.

Sustainable development is therefore not achieved merely through increased revenue or larger budgets. It requires responsible leadership, prudent financial management, transparency, effective oversight, and enforceable consequences for misconduct not just ranting.

Ultimately, government should be assessed by its tangible impact on the lives of citizens. When public resources are managed responsibly, they become powerful instruments for development. When they are mismanaged without accountability, they become a burden on society and a missed opportunity for present and future generations.

Finally, publishing budgets and audit reports is important, but accountability must not stop there.

Citizens need to know:
What was allocated to the State from FAAC on timely basis. What was borrowed for the state and what it had been done with. How much money was approved out of budgetary allocation.

How much was actually released.
Who received government contracts.?
What was delivered. What did the project actually cost. Was the project completed.

Who inspected and certified the work. What happened when government officials or contractors failed to perform.
These questions should not be regarded as attacks on government. They are legitimate questions in a democracy.

The World Bank’s experience with State’s Fiscal Transparency, Accountability and Sustainability programme shows that reforms can improve budget publication, financial reporting, procurement and citizen engagement. However, it also emphasizes that transparency must ultimately be connected to better fiscal outcomes and improved service delivery.

Muhammad Bello Abdullahi writes from Kigawa State, North Western Nigeria

Advertisements

Advertisements