Financing Education in Nigeria: Implications and Options for National Development

Abstract

p> The future of any country lies in the quality of its education. Education remains the major tool for national socio-economic development, individual socio-economic empowerment and poverty reduction. Unfortunately, one of major problem now facing education in Nigeria is the issue of underfunding. We have, in the last decades, witnessed a gradual degradation in infrastructure, in manpower development and access to qualitative education. Precisely, the federal government spending on education is below 10 percent of its overall budget. This is largely due to the fall of the oil market, and the need to reduce the huge and raising debt service obligations. This study critically examined the past and present situation of financing education in Nigeria, the implications of inadequate funding and possible strategies of funding education. Thus, it was suggested among others that all stakeholders, parents and guardians, the society in general, the private sector and non-governmental agencies must become involved in the financing of education in Nigeria. </p

Full text

World Journal of Educational Research
ISSN 2375-9771 (Print) ISSN 2333-5998 (Online)
Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer
227
Original Paper
Financing Education in Nigeria: Implications and Options for
National Development
Rowell E. Ubogu1* & Money O. Veronica1
1 Institute of Education, Delta State University, Abraka, Nigeria
* Rowell E. Ubogu, Institute of Education, Delta State University, Abraka, Nigeria
Received: June 6, 2018 Accepted: June 24, 2018 Online Published: June 26, 2018
doi:10.22158/wjer.v5n3p227 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/wjer.v5n3p227
Abstract
The future of any country lies in the quality of its education. Education remains the major tool for
national socio-economic development, individual socio-economic empowerment and poverty reduction.
Unfortunately, one of major problem now facing education in Nigeria is the issue of underfunding. We
have, in the last decades, witnessed a gradual degradation in infrastructure, in manpower development
and access to qualitative education. Precisely, the federal government spending on education is below
10 percent of its overall budget. This is largely due to the fall of the oil market, and the need to reduce
the huge and raising debt service obligations. This study critically examined the past and present
situation of financing education in Nigeria, the implications of inadequate funding and possible
strategies of funding education. Thus, it was suggested among others that all stakeholders, parents and
guardians, the society in general, the private sector and non-governmental agencies must become
involved in the financing of education in Nigeria.
Keywords
financing, education, budget, national development
1. Introduction
In Nigeria, the demand for education is so high because education is not only an investment in human
capital but it is also a pre-requisite for economic development (Ubogu, 2011). Thus, education has
remained one of the most challenging of the Seven-Point Agenda enunciated by the late UmaruYar’
Adua administration on assumption of office in 2007. The administration met an educational sector that
was in comatose. In spite of the reforms carried out by the immediate past government, there was
reality nothing on ground to inspire confidence in that very vital segment of our national economy
(Nwosu, 2009). The universities and other institutions of learning were in a state of decay with most

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
228
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
teaching staff leaving the country in droves in search of greener pastures abroad. Apart from the impact
of inadequate funding on the quality of the teaching and learning process in our institute of education,
student support is now inadequate (Ubogu, 2011). It was therefore, not surprising that the late Yar’
Adu’s administration had to be confronted by labour unions in the educational sector with long lists of
demand on what should be done to uplift the sector. The unions, one after the other, had to go on strike
to press home their points. The ensuing face-off-between the Federal Government and Academic Staff
Union of Universities (ASUU) resulted to the shutting of the universities for close to four months.
Adewale, Ajayi and Enikanoselu
(2006)
were
of
the opinion that education in Nigeria has been
experiencing financial crises. There is less money to spend on primary, secondary and tertiary
education. There are increasing complaints about the underfunding of the educational sector while the
government accuses
the sector of inefficient utilization of available resources.
The donor argues
that public spending on education should be reduced. However, the fact remains that education in
Nigeria has he en experiencing loss of facility, deterioration of equipment and plans, and uncompleted
projects
as
a result of the financial crises facing the system.
2. An Overview of Financing Education in Nigeria
Education funding comes from different sources. The major one at all levels of government is public
revenue from taxation. Education funds are reported to be distributed among primary, secondary and
tertiary educational levels in the proportion of 30%,
30%
and 40% respectively, Balurni (2003). The
public funding includes direct government expenditures in the form of subsidies to households such as
lax reductions, scholarships, loans and grants. It also includes payment from Education Tax Funds
(ETF) mainly for capital expenditure. At present, private sources account for about 20% of total
national donors. Particularly in the form of loans (Adewale et al., 2006).
The underlying rational for public funding of education is to equip people with the requisite knowledge,
skills and capacity to enhance the quality of life and increase productivity and capacity to gain
knowledge of new techniques for production so as to be able to participate evocatively in the
development process.
With education regarded as “free” goods by the provider, the demand for it soared to such an extent
that by the end of the 1980s, government could hardly cope. Of course, while the quantity of education
increased dramatically, the quality nose-dived to an unprecedented level. Hinchiliffer (2002)
highlighted that federal budgetary allocation to education in nominal terms rose from N 6.2 million in
1970 to N 1,051.2 million in 1976. Thereafter, it declined to N 667.1 million in 1979, rose again to N1,
23.5 million in 1980, declined in succeeding years before rising to N 3,399.3 million in 1989. It
dropped further to N 1, 553, 3 million in 1991 before rising gradually to N 9,434.7 million in 1994.
Thereafter, the declining trend continued.
Precisely, the Federal Government spending on education is below 10 percent of its overall budget (see
Table 1). Overall, the shares have varied between 9.9 and 7.6 percent and the trend has

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
229
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
been largely downward. Typically, between 70 and 80 percent of expenditures are for recurrent
activities.
However, in 2002, the capital allocation increased to 45 percent of the total, in line with the overall
large increase in capital expenditure in Federal Government’s budget (Amaghyonyeodiwe & Osinubi,
2006).
Table
1.
Federal Government Expenditures on Education As Share of Total Federal Expenditure,
1997-2002 in Percentage
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Recurrent 12.3 12.0 11.7 9.4 9.5 9.1
Ca
p
ital 6.1 7.5 5.0 8.5 6.0 6.0
Total 9.9 9.6 9.0 9.0 7.6 8.0
Source: Federal Government of Nigeria, annual budget (various years).
While each tier of education has at various times been the concurrent. (Joint) responsibility of both
Federal and state governments, the former has historically been much more involved at the post
secondary level.
Table 2 presents the shares of Federal Government recurrent and capital expenditures by level of
education between 1996 and 2002. Over the period, the share for the (24) Federal universities has
varied between roughly 40 and 50 percent of total Federal expenditures while those for the (16)
polytechnics and (20) colleges of
education have
remained fairly constant (apart from one year) at
around 17 percent and 11 percent respectively. Overall, during the whole period, the tertiary education
sub sector has received between 68 percent and 80 percent of the total federal expenditures for
education.
Table 2. Federal Government Expenditures Shares by Level of Education, 1996-2002 in
Percentages
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Tertiary 79.9 78.9 68.4 69.0 75.8 68. 1 76.9
Universities 52.5 44.6 39.4 39.9 41].3 39.6 51.2
Polytechnics 16.2 23.2 17.0 18.5 17.0 16.6 16.0
Colle
g
es of 11.2 J 1.1 12.0 10.6 9.6 11.9 9.7
Education
Secondary 10.4 11.3 14.6 18.7 15.3 15.5 15.6
Primary 9.7 9.8 16.9 12.2 8.9 16.4 7.5
Source: Federal Government of Nigeria, annual budget (various years).

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
230
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
In five out of the seven years, the allocation to secondary education has been above that for primary.
The average shares have been 14.5 percent for secondary schooling and 11.5 percent for primary
schooling. Federal Government expenditures on secondary schooling are basically for the Federal
Government Colleges (Unity schools), usually three of which are established in each state and the
federal secondary technical colleges. Allocations for primary schooling have been more adhoc resulting
from specific initiatives (Amaghyonyeodiwe & Osinubi, 2006).
Table 3. Disbursement Allocation to Educational Sectors between 1995-2004 (in Million)
Year
Allocation to Fund disbursement
Cup
between 2
education (2) to educational and 3
sector (3)
1995 12,816,400.000.00 12,816,400.000.00
-
1996 15,357,700.000.00 15,357,700.000.00
-
1997
16,841,200.000.00 16,841,200,000.00
-
1998 23,668,100.000.00 23,668,100.000.00
-
1999 27,7 L3,500,000.00 27,713,500,000.00
-
2000 64,514,932,711.00 28,030,664,196.00 36,484,268,520
2001 72.950,836,443.00 44,031,814,544.00 28,919,021,900
2002 72.950,836,443.00 85,075,701,873.00 2.981,260,900
2003 78,952,003,053.00 72,261,755.174.00 6,690,247,880
2004 93,767,856,839.00 77,975,091,275.00 15,792,795,560
2005 11,641,315,112 9,341,341,551 2,299,973,561
2006 116,600,000,000 30,486,000,000 86,114,000,000
2007 154,361,300,101 56,941,411,310 9,741,988,790
2008 109,341,341,010 79,564,341,911 2,977,999,099
2009 113,246,777,000 87,546,477,494 25,699,299,506
..
Sources: Federal Ministry of Education, Abuja.
Furthermore, Table 3 presents the Federal Government disbursement allocation to education sectors
between 1995 2009 (in million).
There was disparity between the funds allocated and funds disbursed to educational sectors during the
period of study. The disparity was widest in year 2000 when only N.T 28,030.7 million was disbursed
as against N 64,514.9 million that was allocated. The disparity created in the year was N 36,484.3
million which is 56.55% of the allocation. Between 1995 to 1999, however, the exact amount allocated
was disbursed to education sectors while in 2002, fund disbursement was in excess of the allocated by

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
231
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
2.981.3 million which presents only 3.63% of the amount allocated. For the period between 2000 and
2004, a total of N 87,886.3 million allocated was not disbursed.
Furthermore, the Britain-Nigeria Educational Trust Fund (2009) has reported that the educational
sector which suffers from inadequate funding at all levels, has not utilized the sum of N 22.6 billion
allocated by the Education Trust Fund covering the period 2002-2007. It was to be made· available to
universities, polytechnics, State Ministries of Education and the Universal Basic Education Boards.
Lists of the beneficiaries, which are being made public by the ETF, included 25 Federal and State
universities, 24 Federal and State Polytechnics, 14 Federal and State colleges of education, 11
monotechnics, 17 State Ministries of Education and 21 State Universal Basic Education Boards. Top
on the list of the universities which have total of N 6,343,000,000 yet to be accessed is the Federal
University of Petroleum Resources, Effurun, Delta State, that has N 552 million; followed by
Universities of Port Harcourt and Abuja with N 302.3 million and N 278.7 million unclaimed
respectively.
Adedigba (2017) highlighted that the only 7.04% of the 8.6 trillion budget was allocated to the
education sector. The total sum allocated to the sector is N 605.8 billion, with N 435.1 billion for
recurrent expenditure, N 61.73 billion for capital expenditure and N 109.06 billion for the Universal
Basic Education Commission. The allocation is lower than the 7.4 percent the government gave the
education sector in the N 7.4 trillion 2017 budget. The breakdown of the N 550 billion allocated in
2017 was N 398 billion for recurrent expenditure, N 56 billion for capital expenditure and N 95 billion
to UBEC. Although the N 605 billion allocated to the sector this year is higher in naira terms than the
N 550 billion allocated in 2017, there is a decrease in percentage terms.
Table 4. Decrease in Percentage Terms
YEAR CAPITAL
EXPENDITURE
RECURRENT
EXPENDITURE
UNIVERSAL
BASIC
EDUCATION
TOTAL
EDUCATION
TOTAL BUDGET EDUCATION
% OF TOTAL
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
53,667,933,553
25,011,595,911
55,056,589,106
20,149,501,008
50,781,035,231
23,520,000,000
35,433,487,466
56,720,960,147
61,730,000,000
193,418,320,500
304,392,631,274
345,001,448,176
367,575,116,850
373,532,005,037
392,563,784,654
367,734,327,223
398,696,819,418
435,010,000,000
44,341,401,504
54,324,643,050
68,232,000,000
72,245,000,000
70,420,000,000
68,380,000,000
77,110,000,000
15,181,395,583
100,060,000,000
293,422,655,563
390,810,171,335
468,585,667,413
400,761,307,118
414,783,180,268
484,263,384,654
450,278,314,660
550,507,184,148
605,800,000,000
4,079,654,724,257
4,226,191,559,254
4,740,101,000,000
4,924,604,000,000
4,605,100,000,000
4,493,363,957,158
6,060,677,358,227
7,441,175,486,758
8,600,000,000,000
7.19
9.32
9.86
10.15
10.54
10.28
7.92
7.40
7.04
The picture that emerges from the foregoing is that underfunding of education has led to a

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
232
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
decline in the quality of the education system.
Specifically, Isa (2012) revealed that the state universities of the federating states in Nigeria are not
spared either. They are also casualties of underfunding.
The approved Capital Grant Allocation released for the year 2012 below succinctly capture the degree
of underfunding of Nigerian universities. The sum of N 9,605,691,837 was release to universities out of
the N 18,335,921,415 capital grant appropriated for 2012. The releases only amounted to 50% of the
aforementioned capital earmarked for appropriation to the universities for year 2012. Again in 2013,
only N2,185,839,031 was release to universities out of N 4,347,000,000 capital grant appropriated in
the First Quarter Releases (January 2013-March 2013). The release in the first quarter of 2013 was less
than 16% of the original sum earmarked for the first quarter of 2013.

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
233
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
Figure 1. Capital Grant
Source
: The Vanguard, vol. 25, pp. 43-44, No. 61920. Retrieved from
http://www.vanguardngr.com

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
234
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
Figure 2. Approved Capital Grant Allocation and Releases for the Year 2013
S
ource
: The Vanguard, vol. 25, pp. 43-44, No. 61920. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.vanguardngr.com
Isa (2013) again disclosed that in spite of 2009 FGN-ASUU Agreement and the subsequent
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) duly signed by FGN and the aforementioned document have
not been implemented:
 The injection of N 100billion intervention fund since 2009 which will gross up to N 400 billion
in the next three years.
 FGN Assistance to state universities.
 Progressive increase in Annual Budgetary Allocation up to 26% between 2009 and 2020 and the
need to place education on the “First line charger” on the federation Account by the Revenue
Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC).
 Setting up research and development unit by companies operating in Nigeria.
The phenomenon of allocating and disbursing a fraction of below 2% of the GDP to education in a
country like Nigeria poses a serious danger to the country’s long term growth and development. Below
is a Table 5 for some countries where data are available for Government spending, percent of GDP.

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
235
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
Table 5. Funding of Education As a % of GDP of Various Countries
Country Funding of Education % of GDP
Lesotho 35.33
Cuba 32.21
Saudi Arabia 30.00
Oman 27.44
Namibia 27.04
Sweden 25.98
Denmark 25.69
Finland 24.38
France 23.78
Canada 21.03
UK 19.38
Italy 18.94
Australia 18.14
Poland 18.00
U.S.A 14.44
India 10.32
Ethiopia 9.01
Guinea 8.60
Nigeria 5.94
Sudan 4.58
Source: The Work Bank, 2015.
From Table 5, the highest value was in Lesotho: 35.31 percent while Nigeria 5.94 and Sudan 4.58
percent respectively where among the lowest values. Evident from the above is that the funding
mechanism for education in Nigeria, as other countries, needs to be developed for the country to
achieve the vision 2020 dream.
3. Implication of Education Financing in Nigeria
In the last three decades, education in Nigeria has witnessed a significant growth in terms of expansion
of access through increase in enrollment and establishment of additional institutions. However, it is sad
to note that many of the indices that can guarantee qualitative education are not taken into
consideration in the country’s quest to meet quantitative target. It has been found that political factors
are the main motives behind many of the expansion polices especially, in the university system
(Ekundayo, 2008). In fact, capital projects to meet the expanding programmes could not take off and

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
236
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
where they did take off, they had to be abandoned due to lack of funds.
Given the poor state of the country’s budget to education, the current financing trend might not be
sustained in the near future. The revenue from government allocations have to increase to meet this
rising costs or else education at all levels will suffer setbacks either in total number of staff, in relative
wage and salary increase or in capital and equipment. The fact remains that education in Nigeria has
been experiencing loss of facilities, deterioration’ of equipment and plants and uncompleted projects as
a result of financial crises facing the system.
When all this pressure does not meet with increasing revenues, the results are obvious less increase in
efficiency and productivity and diminished quality and output (i.e., teaching, scholarship and services,
diminished working and living condition for professors, staff and students alike) (Adewale et al., 2006).
In addition, in many public institutions of learning, students are found standing outside the classrooms
receiving lectures us their population has outstripped the classroom space that are available. The
implication of all these is that output from this investment process in education cannot actually achieve
the goals that were set for it.
It is a known fact that most of our institutions neither have a written or unwritten vision nor a mission
statement to guide their activities. There is widespread shortage of qualified teachers, shortage of even
classrooms, shortage of both pupils and teachers’ furniture and a dearth of required funds teaching
materials and textbooks. In a survey conducted on primary education cost, financing and management
in Federal Capital Territory, Kogi, Kwara and Niger states, it was discovered that only 9.57% of the
schools in Kwara and 27.08% of the schools in FCT had school libraries while none of the schools in
both Kogi and Niger States had any school library. It was also found that 24% of schools in Kogi state,
21% of schools in Kwara state, 40.3% of schools in Niger state and 16.75% of schools in FCT did not
use any form of wall chart teaching aids (Adulkareen & Umar, 1997). All these gaps have combined
with frequent teachers’ strikes and absenteeism in recent years to weaken the capacity of the
institutions to deliver sound education.
Thus, it becomes necessary to proffer alternative strategies for sustaining the revenue base of
educational institutions in Nigeria.
4. Possible Options of Financing Education in Nigeria
Financing education in Nigeria today is a crucial national problem. The political, social and economic
factors, which currently have significant impact on the world economy, have necessitated the need to
diversify the sources of education funding, mainly because reliance on only one source of revenue can
inhibit educational growth (Akinsanya, 2007). However, these are some possible options of financing
education:
(a). Support from federal and state governments constituting more than 98% of the recurrent costs
and 100% (if capital cost (Ogunlade, 1989)).
(b). Tuition and fees.

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
237
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
(c). Private
contributions by commercial organizations in the form of occasional grants for specific
purposes.
(d). Consultancies and research activities.
(e). Community participation, Auxiliaries (Enterprises, Licenses, Parents, Alumni Associations).
Other sources of finance to education in Nigeria include endowments, gifts and aids from international
organizations. For example, the World Bank has’ financed a US$ 120 million project titled: Federal
Universities Development Sector Operation (Odebyiyi & Ainu, 1999; Babalola, Sikwibele, & Sulciman,
2000).
In addition, the following strategies are considered as way of resourceful financing of education in
Nigeria:
4.1 Cost-Saving Strategies
Many investigations studies have shown that overall cost can be reduced if the following strategies are
adopted in the education sector. Below is a 8-point strategy:
1) Merging smaller university or, other schools of learning.
2) Designing multi-purpose accommodation in the universities as in Britain. Only few houses
should be rented outside by school authorities.
3) Adopting scientific/computer based time table for space allocation. It is interesting to note that
two universities in Britain increased utilization of teaching rooms from 60 to over 80%.
4) Taking inventory of all the material resource available in the institution and putting them to
proper use.
5) Adequate maintenance culture which would greatly minimize wastage.
6) Direct labour in executing small school projects.
7) Stringent financial management and accountability to check fraud and financial
mismanagement.
8) Increasing student/teacher ratio and reduction of number of expatriate are available locally.
4.2 Income Generating Strategies
The following 8-point strategies are considered by the author as good for generous income in all levels
of education.
1) Establishing standard nursery, primary, secondary schools which can which can generate a lot of
money for the university.
2) Establishing well stocked bookshop for commercial purposes.
3) Through consultancy service such as sandwich programmes, part-time programmes.
4) Involving faculty members in carrying out functional research. Such projects would interest
industries and other commercial enterprises that would pay for them.
5) Establish endowment funds which should be properly managed.
6) Seeking support and grants form states, local government and catchment area of the school.
7) Seeking assistance from international donors such as UNESCO, UNICEF, World Bank, etc.

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
238
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
8) Establishing guest house within and outside the institution.
5. Conclusion
The fact remains that education in Nigeria has experienced loss of facilities, deterioration of equipment
and plants and uncompleted projects as a results of the financial crisis facing the system. The
phenomenon of allocating a declining fraction of below 2 percent of the GDP to education poses a
serious danger to the country’s long-term growth and development prospects. Large variances exist
between budgetary provisions and actual expenditure because budgetary pronouncement is not backed
by fund releases (Adewaleetal, 2006).
It is quite clear from the foregoing that for education in Nigeria to achieve its stated objectives, the
crucial issue of funding must be squarely addressed by education managers in Nigeria. To sustain
education in the country, the following suggestions are hereby made:
1) The present effort of the Federal Ministry of Education in collaboration with both the UNESCO and
UNDP on the creation of an educational data bank is highly commendable (FGN/UNESCO/UNDP
2003). The government should give the bank all the enabling environment required to generate and
analyze and bank the data. The institutional managers and teachers should be constantly trained and
retrained in modern data management techniques;
2) There is also the need for an entirely new approach to financial management, responsibility and
accountability that will enable the educational institutions to thrive during a period of constrained
public support and;
3) All stakeholders must become involved in the financing-parents and guardians, the society in general,
the private sectors and non-government agencies.
Reference
Abdulkareem, A. Y., & Umar, I. O. (1997). Follow-up Study on Primary education Cost,
financing
and management in
Kogi, Kwara
and Niger States and Federal Capital Territory. National
primary Education Commission Project.
Adewala, T. M., Ajayi, K. O., & Enlkanoselu, O. A. (2006). Trends in the Federal Government
Financing Education in Nigeria. Journal of Revitalization of Higher Education, 3(5), 45-58.
Arnaghyonyeodiwe, L. A., & Osinubi, T. S. (2006). The Nigerian Educational System and returns to
Education. International Journal of Applied Econometrics and Quantitative Studies, 3(1), 31-39.
Babatola, J. B., Wibele, A. I., & Suleiman, A. A. (2000). Education as aided by the World Bank: A
critical analysis of post-independence projects in Nigeria. Journal of Third world studies, 17(1),
155-163.
Britain-Nigeria Education Trust. (2009). Nigeria Digest.
Available on
Britain.nigeria@btinternet.com.
Bulurni, D. (2012). Finance of Education in Nigeria. Paper Presented at the Forum on Cost and

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/wjer World Journal of Educational Research Vol. 5, No. 3, 2018
239
Published by SCHOLINK INC.
Finance of Education
in
Nigeria, Abuja.
Ekundayo, T. A. (2008). Expanding Access to Higher education In Nigeria, The Question of Quality
Control. Journal of Reforming Higher Education in Africa, 12-36.
Federal Government of Nigeria. (1997-2002). Annual Budgets.
FGN/UNESCO/UNDP. (2003).
A
Decade of Basic Education data in Nigeria (1988-1998).
FME.
(2003). Historical Background on the Development of Education in Nigeria. In Education Sector
Status
Analysis. Published with support from UNESCO/JAPAN TRUST FUND PROJECT
532/NIR 1010.
Hinchliffe, K. (2002). Public Expenditure on Education in Nigeria. In Issues, estimates and some
implication. Washington D.C: World Bank.
Isa. (2013). Why ASUU is on Strike. In The Guardian. No. 29 No. 12621. Retrieved from
http://www.ngrguardiannews.com
Nwosu, E. (2009). ETF and Funding of Tertiary Education in Nigeria. Available on
cdn-wosu2@yahoo.com.
Odebiyo, A. I., & Aina, O. (1999). Alternative modes of financing higher education in Nigeria and
implications of university governance. Accra: Association of African universities (AAU).
Ogunlade, A. L. (1989). Locating supplemental sources of revenue to finance universities in Nigeria.
Journal of Education Finance, 14(4), 522-533.
The Vanguard. (n.d.). 25(61920), 43-44. Retrieved from http://www.vanguardngr.com
The World Bank. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.thrglobaleconomy.com/rankings/Government
Ubogu, R. (2011). Financing Higher education in Nigeria. Journal of Research in Education and
Society, 2(1), 36-45.