Various forms of consumer energy subsidies^[1] are implemented in Nigeria. Three energy products are particularly subsidized: gasoline (Premium Motor Spirit –PMS), household kerosene (HHK), and electricity. In the case of petroleum products (PMS and HHK), government provided subsidies by paying petroleum products marketers the difference between the market rate and the government approved retail price^[2]. For electricity, the government required state utility companies to charge tariffs below the costs of electricity production, then it reimbursed as part of a lump sum and by under-charging the electricity sector for the cost of natural gas^[3].While petroleum (fuel) subsidy has increased, other forms of energy subsidies (such as kerosene) have relatively fallen over the years. Notably, the proposed study focuses on petroleum subsidies in Nigeria, as it weighs most heavily on the Nigerian economy and the welfare of the citizens^[4].

As in the case of most energy subsidizing countries, the main rationale for energy subsidies in Nigeria is to protect consumers from the negative effects of increases in petroleum prices, while promoting industrial growth. Also, in line with most oil-exporting countries, the provision of petroleum subsidies in Nigeria is driven by socio-political reasons – the perception that cheap petrol prices are an entitlement for citizens of an oil-wealthy country. However, despite the poverty alleviation justification for providing subsidies, there is strong evidence that Nigeria’s experience with subsidies has been marred with economic, structural, and political challenges, among others.

 This report is the third in the series of benchmarking exercise reports produced by the Nigeria Natural resource Charter (NNRC); carried out to provide an assessment of governance of Nigeria’s petroleum wealth. The first two exercises were conducted and published in 2012 and 2014 respectively. It uses the NRC framework, developed by a diverse set of internationally renowned experts on natural resource management to conduct the assessments. In 2016, the framework was revised to aid a more contextual and detailed approach in obtaining results so as to ensure accurate analysis of the resource sector. This revised framework is the basis for the 2017 edition of the exercise. It analyses the governance of petroleum wealth in Nigeria and identifies crucial changes that have taken place in the sector since the last benchmarking exercise was conducted.For the 2017 edition, the NNRC entered into a partnership with a consortium of organisations.

CSEA contributed to four precepts in the report:

• Precept 5: Local impacts:The government should pursue opportunities for local benefits and account for, mitigate and offset the environmental and social costs of resource extraction projects.

• Precept 6: State-owned enterprises:Nationally owned companies should be accountable, with well-defined mandates and an objective of commercial efficiency.

• Precept 7: Investing for growth: The government should invest revenues to achieve optimal and equitable outcomes, for current and future generations.

• Precept 8: Stabilizing expenditure:The government should smooth domestic spending of revenues to account for revenue volatility.

The study aims to clarify the potential roles of food reserves (FR) in enhancing food and nutrition security in developing countries and analyze the substitutability and complementarity between FR and other tools. The study is based on a review of the existing literature (both theoretical and empirical) and ten case studies analyzing experiences in Asia (Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Philippines), South America (Brazil) and Africa (Burkina Faso, ECOWAS Regional Reserve, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Senegal and Zambia).

In Nigeria, a majority of the adult smoking population (15 years and above) consume tobacco primarily in the form of cigarettes. Nigeria has about 6 million adult smokers, or 5.6 percent smoking prevalence (GATS, 2017). Smoking prevalence is significantly higher for men (at 10 percent) relative to women (1.1 percent), and 18 percent of Nigerian youths between the ages of 13 to 15 years smoke (GATS, 2017). A total of 920 million cigarette packs were consumed in Nigeria in 2015 (GlobalData Plc., 2016), of which 74 percent is domestically produced (NCS, 2015). Tobacco related diseases are responsible for about 17,500 deaths per year (about 207 men and 130 women per week) and about 250,000 cancer diagnoses (Tobacco Atlas, 2015). Economic losses in the form of medical treatments and loss of productivity from tobacco-related diseases is estimated at US$ 591 million in 2015 (Tobacco Atlas, 2015).

Over the years, several attempts have been made to boost farmers’ productivity, among which are supplying farm inputs (such as improved seeds, agrochemicals and fertilizers) at subsidized prices to the farmers. Various domestic and imported fertilizer production costs are subsidized to lower prices to farmers. A historical review of Nigerian fertilizer policies indicates an inconsistency of government fertilizer distribution and subsidy policy over the years. The fertilizer subsidy programs ranged from conventional subsidies to “market-friendly” subsidies. Conventional fertilizer subsidies include the following key features: government importation and distribution of fertilizer, the sale of fertilizer to subsidized pan-territorial prices via state-owned enterprises, and universal program availability to all categories of farmers. The key features of market-friendly subsidies are the use of a targeting mechanism such as input vouchers to target poor farmers, and delivery of the subsidized fertilizer via the private input distribution system.