The 2024 Zonal Intervention Projects (ZIPs)—commonly referred to as constituency projects—shed light on how Nigeria’s 469 Federal Lawmakers intend to channel resources toward grassroots development. Spread across 13 States—Abia, Adamawa, Akwa Ibom, Anambra, Bauchi, Bayelsa, Oyo, Plateau, Rivers, Sokoto, Taraba, Yobe, Zamfara—and several unnamed locations, these projects span agriculture, education, infrastructure, empowerment, health, and water resources. Yet, beneath the surface lies a system fraught with duplication, misaligned priorities, vague implementation strategies, and inequitable resource distribution.
In many States, agriculture dominates the ZIP allocations through training, input distribution, and irrigation support. Education projects include the construction of classrooms and distribution of learning materials. Infrastructure projects feature boreholes, road repairs, and widespread installation of solar streetlights. Empowerment programs—mainly targeting women and youth—range from vocational training to distribution of “empowerment items,” often without clear descriptions or defined outcomes.
State-level breakdowns reveal varying focus areas. Akwa Ibom’s ₦5.7 billion ZIP allocation is largely spent on repetitive fishery and empowerment projects. Abia’s ₦4 billion ZIP plan includes an eyebrow-raising ₦1.8 billion judicial complex, raising questions about cost justification. Oyo places significant weight on empowerment, while Adamawa emphasizes solar infrastructure with little investment in health. Some states, such as Sokoto, Taraba, and Zamfara, lean heavily toward agriculture and water projects, but with noticeably lower budgets—₦1.3 to ₦2 billion—compared to southern states. Meanwhile, projects with vague or unspecified locations, such as a ₦750 million transport initiative, raise serious concerns about transparency.
A recurring pattern of project duplication—such as repeated installation of solar lights or ambiguous empowerment programs—points to weak coordination and poor planning. Several projects are assigned to agencies outside their operational scope; for example, agricultural agencies implementing construction tasks. This lack of coherence hinders effectiveness. Furthermore, the dominance of new projects over ongoing ones suggests a disregard for continuity and sustainability.
To fix this, Nigeria must adopt a centralized tracking system for ZIPs to prevent duplication and ensure equitable distribution. All projects should have detailed descriptions, clear locations, and defined beneficiaries. Oversight must be strengthened through an independent body to ensure transparency and value for money. Finally, allocation should be guided by population size, poverty levels, and developmental gaps—not politics.
ZIPs, when well-executed, can bridge critical service delivery gaps. But without reform, they risk becoming tools for patronage instead of engines for development.
— Uadamen Ilevbaoje, Founder Monitng