From stagnation to reform? Comparing Tinubu’s northern Nigeria policies with Buhari’s legacy after two years-Aminu Abdullahi Ibrahim
By Aminu Abdullahi Ibrahim
As President Bola Ahmed Tinubu completes his second year in office, it is only fitting to evaluate the impact of his policies on Northern Nigeria, one of the most socio-economically challenged and politically significant regions of the country.
Tinubu inherited a Nigeria grappling with insecurity, economic decline, and institutional fatigue, especially in the North. His tenure so far has shown a blend of bold reforms and strategic missteps. While there is still much work to be done, it is clear to me that Tinubu’s approach to leadership, though controversial in some areas, is more dynamic, practical, and reform-oriented than that of his predecessor, Muhammadu Buhari.
One of Tinubu’s notable strengths has been his commitment to revamping the agricultural sector. Northern Nigeria, often described as the country’s food basket, has benefited from the administration’s renewed focus on farming.
The Dry Season Farming Initiative—supported by the African Development Bank—targeted over 500,000 hectares of farmland in northern states, aiming to improve food production and stabilize prices. Similarly, the establishment of the National Agricultural Development Fund (NADF) has made funding more accessible to smallholder farmers, which is essential in a region where farming is largely informal.
Read Also: SCORECARD: Evaluating Nigeria’s digital economy in Tinubu’s first year
Moreover, Tinubu’s administration launched the Special Agro-Industrial Processing Zones (SAPZ), with initial phases covering states such as Kano and Kaduna. This initiative seeks to reduce post-harvest losses, improve value chains, and promote agro-processing, key for economic diversification in the North. These investments have generated employment and boosted local economies, even if the full benefits will be long-term.
Another strong point is Tinubu’s focus on youth empowerment. Northern Nigeria suffers from high youth unemployment and a staggering out-of-school children population. The 3 Million Technical Talent (3MTT) programme and Presidential Youth Enterprise Clusters were rolled out to address the digital skills gap and encourage entrepreneurship. Additionally, the reactivation of the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) has provided hope to many young Northerners who would otherwise have no access to higher education.
Security, arguably the most pressing issue in the North, has seen mixed results under Tinubu. On the one hand, his administration introduced strategic initiatives like the Pulako Initiative, designed to provide social and economic support to Fulani communities in banditry-prone areas such as Zamfara, Katsina, and Niger. Defense spending has increased, and efforts have been made to modernize the military and improve intelligence gathering.
However, the results have been inconsistent. While there has been a decline in high-profile attacks in some areas, terrorism and rural banditry remain prevalent, especially in parts of Borno, Plateau, and Benue States. Many displaced persons have not been resettled, and communities still live in fear. A more robust, community-based security approach is required, alongside conflict resolution and disarmament efforts.
Read Also: SCORECARD: Has Nigeria’s education sector fared well under Mamman, Sununu’s leadership?
One area where I strongly disagree with the administration’s approach is the removal of fuel subsidies. While the decision may be economically sound in theory, its execution was abrupt and lacking in proper cushioning mechanisms—especially for vulnerable Northern populations. The North relies heavily on road transport, and the removal caused transport fares and food prices to skyrocket. Inflation has hit poor households the hardest, exacerbating already existing economic hardship.
Coupled with the naira devaluation policy, which caused further inflation and foreign exchange instability, the North—where many people live below the poverty line—has suffered disproportionately. Unfortunately, social intervention programs meant to mitigate these effects have either been delayed or insufficient in reach.
Despite these challenges, it is important to acknowledge why I believe Tinubu’s leadership is an improvement over Muhammadu Buhari’s.
First, Tinubu has shown greater political will and decisiveness. Buhari’s government, though led by a Northern president, was often characterised by policy inertia and indecisiveness. Major reforms were avoided or delayed out of political fear or regional sentiment. Tinubu, on the other hand, has tackled subsidy reform, the FX market, tax reform, and power sector challenges within his first year—decisions Buhari hesitated on for eight years.
Second, Tinubu’s policies are more inclusive and development-driven. While Buhari’s administration leaned heavily on political patronage and was criticized for favoring certain northern elites, Tinubu has shown a more technocratic and pragmatic approach. He has appointed professionals to key positions, regardless of region or political affiliation, and has demonstrated a willingness to engage stakeholders across Nigeria.
Read Also: SCORECARD: Evaluating Nigerian Senate performance in the last one year
Third, in terms of youth and technology, Tinubu is miles ahead. Buhari presided over a government that did little to embrace digital transformation or support tech-based initiatives for youth. Tinubu’s tech-forward policies, including digital skills training and support for innovation hubs, are better suited to the modern economy and have given hope to a generation that felt neglected under Buhari.
Nevertheless, Tinubu’s government must learn from the missteps of the past two years. Implementation remains a weak link. While many of his policies are well designed, delays, bureaucracy, and corruption often blunt their impact. Northern Nigeria, in particular, needs more targeted social programs to support the rural poor, especially in times of economic reform.
The President also needs to deepen engagement with traditional and community leaders in the North. These local structures are essential in tackling insecurity, promoting education, and addressing cultural barriers. Policies imposed from Abuja without local participation often fail to resonate or achieve their goals.
Finally, regional inequality must be consciously addressed. Even with good national policies, the North’s historical underdevelopment means it requires affirmative investments in education, health, infrastructure, and job creation.
In conclusion, President Tinubu’s two years in office have been a mixed bag for Northern Nigeria. On the positive side, there have been serious efforts to revive agriculture, empower youth, and confront insecurity. On the negative side, some economic reforms have caused widespread suffering, and security gains remain fragile.
That said, Tinubu has displayed a leadership style that is more reform-oriented, inclusive, and proactive than that of his predecessor, Muhammadu Buhari. He has taken bold steps where Buhari hesitated, and his administration has laid the groundwork for long-term change. If these reforms are sustained and backed by compassionate governance and strong implementation, Northern Nigeria could begin to see the development it has long been denied.
What the region needs now is not just policies, but purposeful execution, grassroots engagement, and genuine empathy from the government. Tinubu has started the journey. Whether he finishes well depends on what he does in the next two years.
Ibrahim, a Journalist and Political analyst writes from Kano.
Comments are closed.