Three years into President Bola Tinubu’s economic reforms, the gap between macroeconomic indicators and ordinary Nigerians’ lived experiences remains considerable. Households struggle with food and transport costs, while businesses face expensive energy, credit and essential inputs. For many citizens, recovery remains a government claim rather than an improvement they can feel. Acknowledging this hardship does not invalidate reform. It underscores the difficulty of sustaining public confidence when the gains of economic adjustment remain disconnected from the welfare of those bearing its costs.

The central question is whether reversing the reforms would offer a more sustainable route out of Nigeria’s longstanding economic difficulties. Recent indicators point to improvement in some areas, although broadly shared prosperity remains elusive. The World Bank’s October 2026 Nigeria Development Update reports that real GDP grew 4.2% in the first half of 2026, up from 3.9% and 3.5% in the corresponding periods of 2025 and 2024. The current-account surplus rose to US$12 billion, or 7.1% of GDP, from US$8.6 billion a year earlier, partly reflecting higher oil prices. These figures suggest greater macroeconomic resilience, but they do not establish that household welfare has recovered.

Inflation illustrates this distinction. The National Bureau of Statistics reported that headline inflation declined from 15.39% in August 2026 to 14.63% in September, while food inflation remained around 19.6%. Slower inflation means prices are rising less quickly, not that they have fallen or become affordable. For families whose incomes have been eroded by successive price increases, this distinction matters enormously. The government cannot equate disinflation with restored purchasing power while essential goods remain beyond the reach of many households.

Yet hardship should not obscure the structural weaknesses that made adjustment necessary. Nigeria’s dependence on petroleum revenues, costly fuel subsidies and a distorted foreign-exchange regime constrained public investment for decades. Although these arrangements offered immediate benefits, their cumulative costs restricted resources for infrastructure, public services and productive investment. Subsidy removal and changes to foreign-exchange management sought to address these distortions, but their implementation transferred substantial costs to households and businesses. The task now is to ensure that these sacrifices yield lasting improvements in productivity and living standards.

The fiscal figures make this responsibility more urgent. According to the World Bank, gross federation revenues increased by 69% in real terms between 2023 and 2025, while aggregate state revenues rose by 93%. States’ capital expenditure share increased from 46% to 61% of total expenditure. Yet higher revenue does not automatically improve public welfare. Education’s share of state expenditure fell from 14.9% in 2021 to 12.1% in 2025, while health spending remained around 7%. Social protection’s share rose from 1.4% to 4.4%. The challenge is to translate these fiscal gains into better schools, functioning hospitals, reliable infrastructure and meaningful support for vulnerable citizens.

Citizens also need assurance that additional revenues are being managed responsibly. Transparent budgets, independent audits and public reporting of completed projects can help connect increased revenue with tangible improvements in daily life. This accountability matters particularly when households continue to bear higher living costs. Visible improvements in public services can strengthen confidence in difficult policies, while the failure to deliver better services risks deepening distrust and undermining their legitimacy.

Nigeria’s January 2012 experience offers a historical warning. Under President Goodluck Jonathan, petrol subsidy removal raised the pump price from ₦65 to ₦145 per litre, triggering nationwide protests and a general strike. On 16 January, the government announced a reduction to ₦97. The episode showed how a policy defended on fiscal grounds could become politically unsustainable when citizens distrusted its rationale or questioned how the resulting savings would be used. In effect, economic necessity alone cannot secure public acceptance when people believe they bear the costs without receiving a fair share of the benefits.

The lesson, however, is not that difficult reforms should be abandoned whenever they provoke opposition. Reversal may offer immediate relief without resolving the structural problems that made adjustment necessary. Restoring costly subsidies or returning to unsustainable fiscal and foreign-exchange arrangements without a credible alternative would defer rather than eliminate their costs. Those costs could reappear through mounting public debt, weaker investment, deteriorating services or another abrupt adjustment under even less favourable conditions. Abandoning reform without addressing its causes risks postponing the reckoning and leaving a heavier burden for the next generation. Young Nigerians should not inherit today’s unresolved economic weaknesses alongside the debts accumulated in managing them.

International experience reinforces the need for caution. Under President Carlos Andrés Pérez, Venezuela introduced a stabilisation programme in 1989, when GDP contracted by 8.6%, before growing by 6.5% in 1990 and 10.4% in 1991. This recovery suggests that an initial contraction need not determine a country’s longer-term trajectory, but it does not guarantee lasting success. Outcomes depend on institutional capacity, implementation and the distribution of costs and benefits.

Ghana provides a closer regional comparison. Following a severe economic and debt crisis, it secured a US$3 billion IMF programme in May 2023, combining fiscal adjustment and debt restructuring with measures to protect vulnerable households. Inflation fell from 54.1% in December 2022 to 23.2% a year later. The government expanded its Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty cash-transfer programme, introduced inflation indexation and strengthened support for school feeding and health insurance. Nevertheless, extreme poverty reached 29.5% in 2023, an increase of 3.1 percentage points from the previous year. In December 2025, the IMF reported that inflation had returned to the Bank of Ghana’s target range for the first time since 2021. Ghana’s experience shows that stabilisation can coexist with social distress and that targeted assistance may not fully offset the immediate costs of economic crisis.

Nigeria must therefore move beyond the choice between defending every aspect of reform and demanding its wholesale reversal. Social-protection programmes need to become more transparent and effective. The government’s agricultural investment should strengthen domestic production, storage and distribution, while improved energy infrastructure and public transport can reduce costs for households and businesses. Also, state governments should show how increased revenues are improving education, healthcare, water supply, infrastructure and employment. In essence, public expenditure should be judged by results rather than allocations, and the federal government should communicate progress honestly while acknowledging persistent difficulties.

The World Bank projects average annual growth of 4.4% between 2026 and 2028, with inflation declining towards 12% by 2028. These are projections, not guarantees. Their realisation depends on sustained reform, productive investment, job creation and better public services. Continuing reform should mean correcting policy failures, strengthening accountability and ensuring that the burdens of adjustment do not fall disproportionately on those least able to bear them.

The pain Nigerians experience is real, and the evidence of economic progress deserves recognition, but neither cancels the other. Nigeria cannot afford to return uncritically to the structural weaknesses that made adjustment necessary, nor can the government expect statistics alone to sustain public confidence. Abandoning reform without a credible alternative could postpone difficult choices only to make them more costly for future generations. The ultimate test is whether today’s adjustment produces a more productive economy, accountable government and visible improvements in ordinary lives. Reform is not an end in itself. Its lasting justification lies in its capacity to build shared prosperity and a more secure future for Nigerians.