A World Bank loan-backed water project designed to improve access to clean water in Ekiti, Rivers, and Bauchi states has instead left the states burdened with debt while failing to fulfil the right to water, according to Corporate Accountability and Public Participation Africa (CAPPA).
This revelation comes as the federal government prepares to secure six new loans totalling $2.23 billion from the World Bank in 2025, adding to the country’s mounting debt as the international financial institution continues supporting economic and structural reforms.
|
|
Data from the World Bank’s official website shows that these new loans will bring Nigeria’s total approved borrowings to $9.25 billion over three years.
The funds were intended to support critical sectors such as infrastructure, healthcare, education, and economic resilience. However, a closer analysis of Nigeria’s loan approvals under President Bola Tinubu’s administration shows a significant rise in funding commitments without commensurate improvements in public services.
|
|
|
|---|
A ‘failed’ investment
CAPPA’s report, ‘Big Debt, Big Thirst: A Case Study of World Bank-Supported Projects in Ekiti, Rivers, and Bauchi States’, explains how a $250 million loan from the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) under the Third National Urban Water Sector Reform Project (NUWSRP3) failed to deliver on its promises.
In his opening remarks on Friday in Lagos, CAPPA’s Executive Director Akinbode Oluwafemi said that instead of improved water access, communities continue to face dry taps, exorbitant tariffs, and worsening infrastructure, while the Nigerian government remained locked in a 40-year debt repayment plan.
Access to water is a right, essential for life, health, and dignity. However, according to CAPPA’s findings, Mr Oluwafemi said the World Bank’s privatisation-driven approach has systematically denied millions of Nigerians this right.
Stay Ahead with Premium Times
Follow us on Google News and never miss breaking stories, investigations, and in-depth reporting.
Add as a preferred source on Google
“Take Ekiti State, for instance, where substantial investments were made in critical infrastructure like the Ero and Ureje dams under the NUWSRP3. Residents in areas such as Iworoko and Olorunsogo (Zones 1A-C, Zone 2, and Zone 4), who paid significant amounts—between N5,000 and N50,000—to obtain prepaid water meters and pipe connections to central water points in Ado Ekiti, the state capital, continue to suffer water deprivation,” he said. “When engaged, many community members nostalgically reference the 1990s as the last period when they had consistent access to potable water—ironically, a time when water utilities were publicly managed.”
He cited similar scenario in Bauchi State, North-west Nigeria, where “loan injection aimed at infrastructural upgrades and the corporatisation of the state water board has failed to resolve chronic water scarcity, primarily due to persistent electricity shortages.”
“This situation reinforces our long-held conviction that the privatisation of essential utilities, often heralded as the panacea for public sector inefficiencies, frequently proves anything but infallible,” he said.
Water supply privatisation controversy
For years, the World Bank’s approach to water sector reform that pushes for water privatisation in Africa has faced resistance from civil society groups advocating for a rights-based approach.
In 2018, about 150 civil society participants called on African governments to reject World Bank water privatisation projects.
The participants urged municipal governments to abandon the failed public-private partnership (PPP) model, which they claim has “left cities with dry taps,” and instead adopt an Alternative Roadmap for Lagos’s water sector.
Earlier in 2015, the Lagos State Water Corporation staff and some activists had criticised and protested against water privatisation in the state.
The protests led the World Bank to issue a statement announcing a breakdown in talks between its International Finance Corporation and the Lagos Water Corporation.
Mr Oluwafemi said on Friday that the failure of these projects lies in their privatisation model, which prioritises profit over public welfare.
The World Bank’s approach required state governments to commercialise water utilities, leading to higher tariffs, reduced public oversight, and deepened inequalities.
Despite the government taking loans in the name of development, Mr Oluwafemi said, many water facilities remain non-functional, forcing residents to rely on expensive alternatives like sachet water and private boreholes.
Meanwhile, the Nigerian government is left to repay massive loans for projects that failed to serve the people.
Who takes responsibility?
CAPPA’s report questions why Nigerian leaders continue to adopt foreign-imposed water policies that have repeatedly failed, not just in Nigeria but globally.
The organisation calls for an immediate halt to water privatisation, arguing that access to water must be treated as a public good, not a commodity.
To address the crisis, CAPPA urges the Nigerian government to cancel failed water privatisation schemes and return control to the public sector.
The organisation called for increased budgetary allocation to water infrastructure to ensure long-term sustainability and develop a public funding model by leveraging natural resource revenues to finance water projects.
For millions of Nigerians, clean water remains out of reach, even as the country continues to service debts for projects that failed them. As privatization deepens inequalities, the fight for publicly controlled water systems is becoming a fight for fundamental human rights.
World Bank’s water sector investments under scrutiny
Gideon Adeyemi, a Community Mobiliser at CAPPA, described the findings as further evidence of the failure of the World Bank’s neoliberal agenda.
He noted that the study adopted a robust methodology, combining qualitative and quantitative research techniques, to assess the performance of the Third Urban Water Sector Reform Project in three selected states.
Sefa Ikpa, CAPPA’s Programme Officer for Water Campaigns, explained discrepancies between the World Bank’s stated objectives and the actual outcomes of its investments.
“The World Bank’s mandate is to reduce poverty by financing projects that improve living standards. However, our findings show that these water sector investments have consistently failed to meet their objectives,” Ms Ikpa said.
The report also pointed to financial mismanagement, particularly in Rivers State, where the World Bank withdrew funding after $31 million had been disbursed.
The report said the state was required to repay the funds, along with over $1 million in interest, raising concerns about the financial burden placed on local governments.
Experts have criticised the World Bank’s financial interventions in Nigeria, arguing that its policies and loan structures are unrealistic and have failed to address the country’s economic challenges.
What’s official positions of World Bank and state actors?
The Rivers State Government, being led by a sole administrator, has yet to appoint a spokesperson.
But Bauchi State Governor’s spokesperson, Muktar Gidado, was contacted on Friday and Saturday via phone calls, text and WhatsApp messages. He neither answered the calls, returned missed calls, nor replie to the messages.
Also, the Commissioner for Information in Ekiti State, Taiwo Olatunbosun, did not answer our reporter’s phone calls, or reply text, and WhatsApp messages.
Similarly, this reporter contacted the World Bank representative in Abuja, Mansir Nasir, via his official email and text message on Friday. He promised to revert with comments on the issues raised concerning the World Bank in the CAPPA’s report. He, too, has yet to do so as of the time of filing this report on Saturday evening.
While the World Bank has yet to officially respond to the fresh concerns, the institution, through its Global Director for Climate Change, Jennifer Sara, said while responding to a question in 2022 that the institution was indifferent to ownership of water supply infrastructure as long as it is clean, safe, and delivered “at an affordable price.”
“You have a tariff for those who can pay the right amount, and a social tariff for those who can’t afford it,” the World Bank official said.
Discover more from Premium Times Nigeria
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
More News
![Victor Osimhen [Credit: NG Super Eagles on X ]](https://i0.wp.com/media.premiumtimesng.com/wp-content/files/2026/05/1003295179.jpg?fit=1004%2C656&ssl=1)
