Prince Chris Azor.
From Lagos Trade Fair to Ariaria, Onitsha Main Market, Alaba, Kano and other commercial centres, a familiar complaint is becoming louder: foreign traders and imported goods are taking over markets that Nigerians should control.
Sometimes the complaint is directed at Chinese traders. At other times, it is about Indian, Lebanese, Turkish or other foreign businesses. The names may change, but the underlying frustration is the same.
Nigerian traders and manufacturers want to know why it is becoming increasingly difficult to compete in their own country.
That is a legitimate citizen concern.
But if we are serious about solving the problem, we must look beyond the nationality of the trader and examine the economic conditions behind the competition.
A Nigerian businessman who borrows money at a very high cost, generates his own electricity, pays for transportation, deals with foreign exchange pressures, faces multiple charges and still has to compete with cheaper imported products is not starting the race from the same position as a competitor operating within a more developed production and supply system.
Nigeria’s private sector itself continues to identify high operating costs and increasingly intense competition as major constraints on business performance.
This is why telling foreign traders to leave may provide an emotional response without addressing the economic problem.
If every foreign trader left Nigeria tomorrow, the cost of credit would still be high. Electricity challenges would remain. Logistics would still cost too much. Ports and customs would still need reform. Local manufacturing capacity would still be inadequate in many sectors. Nigerians would still need the products that the departing traders supplied.
The visible competitor would have disappeared, but the underlying weakness would remain.
The better question, therefore, is not simply how to keep foreign competitors out. It is how to make Nigerian businesses strong enough to compete fairly with them.
That requires a different conversation.
Nigeria should certainly enforce its laws. Foreign businesses operating here should comply with immigration, taxation, customs, company registration, consumer protection and other applicable requirements. Smuggling, counterfeiting, under invoicing, tax evasion and other unfair practices should be dealt with firmly, regardless of whether the offender is Nigerian or foreign.
But enforcement must be based on the law, not nationality.
The same principle should apply to Nigerian businesses. Protection should not become a licence for inefficiency, poor quality or exploitation of consumers. Nigerian consumers also have rights. They deserve affordable, safe and reliable products.
The citizen therefore has two legitimate demands: protect fair competition and protect the consumer.
The experience of countries that have built competitive industries offers useful lessons.
South Korea did not become a major industrial economy simply by keeping foreign products out. Its development involved targeted industrial support, access to finance, infrastructure, technology development and an aggressive export orientation. Importantly, industrial support was linked to performance and export objectives rather than being treated as an entitlement. The IMF’s review of industrial policies has similarly highlighted South Korea’s performance based approach while warning that poorly designed subsidies can waste resources and distort competition.
Vietnam offers another instructive example. Its industrial development relied heavily on export oriented manufacturing, foreign investment, industrial zones and integration into global production networks. Research comparing Vietnam and Ethiopia shows how both countries used special economic zones and industrial policy to attract investment and develop manufacturing capacity.
Ethiopia also invested heavily in industrial parks as part of its attempt to attract manufacturing investment and connect domestic production to international markets. The results have been mixed and the model has faced significant challenges, but the important lesson is that infrastructure, investment facilitation and industrial clustering were treated as deliberate economic policy rather than left entirely to individual businesses.
Even closer to home, countries such as Benin are attempting to move beyond exporting raw materials by creating integrated industrial zones that connect local production with processing and international markets.
These experiences do not provide a ready made formula for Nigeria. They do, however, demonstrate an important principle: successful countries do not merely tell their businesses to compete. They create conditions in which businesses can become competitive.
Nigeria needs to do the same.
We need more affordable and transparent financing for productive enterprises. We need reliable electricity for industrial and commercial clusters. We need better roads, ports, rail and logistics. We need predictable taxation and regulation. We need stronger local supply chains and greater access to technology.
We also need to help small Nigerian businesses achieve scale.
A trader buying small quantities individually will struggle to obtain the prices available to a large international buyer. But hundreds of traders can form purchasing cooperatives, aggregate orders and negotiate directly with manufacturers. That can reduce costs without closing the market.
Government can support this process without simply handing out money.
Development finance institutions can provide targeted financing. Industrial parks can provide shared infrastructure. Export promotion agencies can help Nigerian producers reach regional and international markets. Universities and technical institutions can strengthen skills and product development.
And public support must come with accountability.
If government provides subsidised credit, tax incentives, grants or infrastructure support, citizens should be able to know who benefited, what was produced, how many jobs were created and whether the programme achieved its purpose.
This is where Civil societyy and citizens have an important role.
The Open Government Partnership principle of transparency and citizen participation should not stop at government budgets and procurement. It should extend to major economic programmes that use public resources. Citizens should be able to follow the money and measure the results.
There is also a need to change our understanding of foreign investment.
A foreign investor who brings capital, technology, skills, jobs and productive capacity can contribute to Nigeria’s development. A foreign business that simply imports, sells and repatriates profits without meaningful local value creation raises different questions.
The answer to both should be effective regulation, not hostility.
Nigeria should welcome legitimate competition, but it must also build the capacity of its own people to participate meaningfully in that competition.
This is ultimately about more than traders.
It is about the young Nigerian who wants to manufacture something but cannot obtain affordable finance. It is about the woman whose small business spends too much on electricity. It is about the manufacturer whose costs make imported alternatives cheaper. It is about the consumer who wants affordable products but also wants Nigerian businesses to create jobs.
It is about whether an ordinary Nigerian can build a viable business in Nigeria without being unnecessarily disadvantaged by the very environment in which that business operates.
So, when citizens ask why foreign businesses appear to be doing better in some Nigerian markets, government should not dismiss the question. But neither should the answer simply be to send foreigners away.
The more fundamental question is this:
What must Nigeria change so that a Nigerian business can compete successfully against any legitimate competitor, from China, India and Turkey to Europe, Asia or anywhere else?
That is the real economic challenge.
Nigeria does not need to close its doors to the world. It needs to become stronger within the world.
We should enforce our laws, protect consumers, tackle unfair trade and insist on local value creation. At the same time, we must reduce the structural costs that make Nigerian businesses less competitive.
The ultimate measure of economic policy should therefore not be how many foreigners we drive away.
It should be how many Nigerians are able to build competitive businesses, create decent jobs, produce quality goods, serve consumers and compete successfully at home and abroad.
That is the citizen’s interest.
And that is where the conversation should begin.
Prince Chris Azor is a Citizen advocate, and Non State Actors’ Co-Chair, Open Government Partnership (OGP) Anambra State.
