Introduction

Nigeria exemplifies the epitome of the development-climate paradox of middle-income nations that are heavily dependent on fossil fuels. Despite its large reserves of hydrocarbons, more than 82 million Nigerians lack access to reliable electricity and the national grid provides 4,000 to 6,000 MW of power daily, compared to installed capacity of approximately 12,500 MW, leading to 12 major collapses in 2024 alone. Households and micro-enterprises compensate for this by installing an estimated 40,000 MW of fossil fuel generators, which cost them an estimated US$14 billion a year in diesel and petrol costs, which are six-fold the scale of grid electricity. This dependency increases energy poverty, contributes to carbon-intensive path dependencies as well as constraining fiscal space. It is within this framework that the best climate policy of such a typical kind of situation like that of Nigeria is a polycentric clean energy transition strategy that focuses on a decentralized renewable energy (DRE) system with gradual fossil fuel subsidy reform and industrial policy as the side wings. This strategy is a compromise between development and decarbonization that fits the federal system of governance in Nigeria, avoiding path dependence within institutions, and reducing the welfare cost of transition.

Structural constraints and the failure of conventional instruments

Nigeria’s climate issue cannot be addressed without referencing the political economy. The federal dependency on hydrocarbon revenues in the form of fiscal aid creates powerful incentives not to phase out fossil fuels very quickly. In the meantime, the 36 states and 774 local government areas in Nigeria have a lot of leeway in land use and infrastructural development in a constitutional system which disaggregates electricity governance. This renders top-down, centralized instruments vulnerable to politics.

The conventional carbon tax would not only be retrogressive economically but also unsustainable politically. In his explanation of the concept of climate clubs and the idea of differentiated responsibilities, Nordhaus (2015) emphasizes the existence of binding development constraints in developing countries that implies policy sequencing that is welfare-trade-off sensitive. In Nigeria, where people already spend disproportionate shares of their disposable income on generators, hiking fossil fuel costs without raising access to clean energy would exacerbate energy poverty and result in social unrest, as witnessed during the 2012 and 2023 subsidy removal crises (Gbadebo, 2025; Houeland, 2020). Equally, the expansion of the centralized grid is structurally inefficient: the Transmission Company of Nigeria is only able to serve a part of the installed capacity and the distribution companies suffer severe technical losses and tariff deficits (Federal Ministry of Power, 2024). Any postponement of scaling up renewables until there is centralized reform would impose decades of delay on climate action.

The policy proposal: decentralized renewables as the anchor

The most practical forward-thinking climate policy places DRE systems (solar mini-grids, home systems and distributed energy resources) at the heart of a broader policy portfolio. Nigeria has high solar irradiance, but installed solar capacity is only 385.7 MWp as of end-2024, which is only providing 1.6% of the energy mix (Africa Solar Industry Association, 2024; Rocky Mountain Institute, 2024). The Nigeria Electrification Project, implemented by the Rural Electrification Agency, has demonstrated progress in expanding electricity access through decentralized energy systems. 87 mini-grids had been constructed and were providing electricity services to communities as of 21 October 2022. Separately, the 243 mini-grid projects with signed grant agreements were expected to benefit approximately 1.1 million people (World Bank, 2022).

This policy is based on the concept of polycentric governance popularized by Elinor Ostrom (2010), which holds that collective action issues that cut across multiple scales must be addressed by more than one governing authority that exercises independence in a nested space. DRE in the federal system of Nigeria balances institutional power with the capacity to implement: the state and the community have the land and social legitimacy, and the technical know-how and capital are supplied by the private developers and distribution companies. Ostrom (2009) made it very clear that total trust in national efforts to solve climate change should be reconceptualized as multi-scale interventions that could enable experimentation and learning. The implementation of mini-grids as a component of state-level strategies and community-level energy committees will assist Nigeria to avoid the coordination failures that have been crippling centralized projects since the country gained its independence in 1960.

Additionally, the proposal directly confronts the processes of carbon lock-in that are defined by Unruh (2000) and Seto et al. (2016) as the main aspects of inertia in energy transformations. The web of techno-institutional spaces in Nigeria, comprising subsidized petroleum, generator supply chains, gas-based power and fiscal institutions that are almost entirely subservient to oil rents, develops mutually reinforcing lock-in. This is only avoidable through short-term flexible investments as compared to long-term centralized assets. The flexibility of decentralized renewables is precisely that: modular installations do not have the fifty-year commitment to assets, and distributed deployment creates constituencies that are interested in the growth of clean energy.

Complementary instruments: subsidy reform and industrial policy

Nigeria has several layers of constraints which cannot be solved with a single instrument. In line with the logic of policy portfolios in the climate economics literature, and consistent with recommendations on the necessity of a combination of mixed regulatory instruments in the context of complex markets, DRE must be supplemented by an appropriately phased subsidy reform and targeted industrial policy (van den Bergh et al., 2021; Fankhauser et al., 2010).

Nigeria currently spends approximately ₦10 trillion of the federal budget on fuel subsidies, a quarter of the federal budget, which is a fiscal anchor and a source of carbon lock-in (Gbadebo, 2025). Their abrupt elimination in 2023 has led to an inflation rate of more than 25 percent and widespread opposition. A gradual, premeditated reform trajectory, indexed to concomitant DRE growth, can transform subsidy savings into mini-grid viability gap funding and social protection for large numbers of vulnerable households. This sequencing ensures that the use of fossil fuel is minimized by substitutes rather than by punitive price shocks.

Next is the third pillar, targeted industrial policy. Nigeria can harness employment benefits estimated to be around 340,000 direct jobs by 2030 through local content requirements, vocational training, and solar assembly and battery production incentives under the Energy Transition Plan (Energy Transition Office, 2022). Industrial policy enhances the political sustainability of the transition by creating domestic constituencies with economic interests in renewables.

Political feasibility and stakeholder alignment

The effectiveness of any climate policy is related to stakeholder alignment. Application of the Brugha and Varvasovszky (2000) model of stakeholder analysis reveals a fragmented but equally manageable political environment. The federal actors would like to enjoy fiscal sustainability and electoral legitimacy; the state governments would like distributable infrastructure and domestic employment; oil incumbents would not like to have stranded assets; the citizens would like affordable supply; and the private renewable developers would like regulatory assurance.

The suggested polycentric DRE approach addresses these competing priorities by engaging each in different ways: the federal agencies establish standards and financing windows, the states and communities are the sites of the installations and assume the oversight role, the distribution companies implement distributed energy resources through net metering, and the private developers compete on performance-based grants with standardized rules (Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission, 2022). By sharing benefits at these significant levels of government and society, the policy attempts to form coalitions that insulated, top-down instruments will find it very hard to maintain.

Conclusion

The problem of climate policy that is facing Nigeria is basically institutional, rather than technological. The extensive solar endowment and proven mini-grid successes testify to the fact that low-carbon supply can be achieved. The key issue remains whether the design of the policy could overcome the path dependencies, federal coordination failures and political economy constraints that continue to lock in fossil fuels. A polycentric DRE strategy with gradual subsidy reform and local industrial support is compatible with the federal architecture, establishes distributed stakeholder buy-in, and lets decarbonization and development proceed side by side, not at cross purposes. It is the best climate policy that can be proposed for Nigeria.

References

Africa Solar Industry Association. (2024). Mini Grid Solutions for Underserved Customers: New Insights from Nigeria and India. https://www.afsiasolar.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Mini-Grid-Solutions-for-Underserved-Customers-9781464820557.pdf

Brugha, R., & Varvasovszky, Z. (2000). Stakeholder analysis: A review. Health Policy and Planning, 15(3), 338-345. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/15.3.338

Energy Transition Office. (2022). Nigeria Energy Transition Plan. Federal Government of Nigeria. https://www.energytransition.gov.ng/objectives/

Fankhauser, S., Hepburn, C., & Park, J. (2010). Combining multiple climate policy instruments: How not to do it. Climate Change Economics, 1(3), 209-225. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2010007810000169

Federal Ministry of Power. (2024). Revised National Energy Policy (NEP) 2025. Government of Nigeria. https://intdev.tetratecheurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/UKNIAF-National-Integrated-Electricity-Policy-2025.pdf

Gbadebo, A. D. (2025). The political economy of fuel subsidy removal: Governance and sustainable development in Nigeria. Journal of Governance and Administrative Reform, 6(1), 109-134. https://doi.org/10.20473/jgar.v6i1.71906

Houeland, C. (2020). Contentious and institutional politics in a petro-state: Nigeria’s 2012 fuel subsidy protests. The Extractive Industries and Society, 7(4), 1230-1237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2020.05.010

Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission. (2022). Mini-Grid Regulations 2022. NERC. https://nerc.gov.ng/resource-category/regulations/

Nordhaus, W. (2015). Climate clubs: Overcoming free-riding in international climate policy. American Economic Review, 105(4), 1339-1370. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.15000001

Olaniyan, A., Caux, S., & Maussion, P. (2024). Rural electrification in Nigeria: A review of impacts and effects of frugal energy generation based on some of e-waste components. Heliyon, 10(10), Article e31300.

Ostrom, E. (2009). A Polycentric Approach for Coping with Climate Change (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5095). https://ssrn.com/abstract=1494833

Ostrom, E. (2010). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 20(4), 550-557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004

Rocky Mountain Institute. (2024). Scaling Utility-Enabled Distributed Energy Resources in Nigeria. RMI. https://rmi.org/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2024/06/scaling_utilityenabled_distributed_energy_resources_in_nigeria-2.pdf

Seto, K. C., Davis, S. J., Mitchell, R. B., Stokes, E. C., Unruh, G. C., & Urge-Vorsatz, D. (2016). Carbon lock-in: Types, causes, and policy implications. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41, 425-452. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085934

Unruh, G. C. (2000). Understanding carbon lock-in. Energy Policy, 28(12), 817-830. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(00)00070-7

van den Bergh, J. C. J. M., Angelsen, A., & van der Werf, E. (2021). Designing an effective climate-policy mix: Accounting for instrument synergy. Climate Policy, 21(4), 469-484. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1907276

World Bank. (2022). Nigeria Electrification Project (P161885) Implementation Status and Results Report. World Bank Group. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099625110212226716/txt/P161885056487d0f10a1340435258c7c851.txt

Ze-Gen & A2EI. (2026). Understanding Nigeria’s Fossil Fuel Generator Challenge. Zero Emissions Generators Initiative. https://www.ze-gen.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Ze-Gen_Understanding-Nigerias-Fossil-Fuel-Generator-Challenge.pdf