Introduction

On 5^th May, 2025, the Federal Executive Council approved the ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy (referred to in this document as the ‘’Policy’’), directing the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation to prepare an executive order for its enforcement.  This Policy, which bans all government Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) from procuring foreign goods and services that can be sourced locally, marks a renewed push toward economic independence, industrial growth, and national self-reliance. It is not Nigeria’s first attempt at import substitution, but arguably one of the most direct, enforceable, and potentially impactful.

This policy analysis critically assesses the feasibility and potential impact of the ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy by examining its underlying rationale, implications for import-dependent businesses, and the opportunities it presents for local manufacturing and service sectors. It explores both the advantages and potential drawbacks of the policy, particularly in relation to implementation challenges, consumer behaviour, and the possible responses from international trade partners. The paper underscores the importance of a coordinated and strategic approach, emphasising stakeholder engagement, robust infrastructure development, effective quality and standards enforcement, and comprehensive capacity building. Key to this coordination is the role of the Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade, and Investments, which must work to align trade policy with the nation’s industrial ambitions. Furthermore, drawing on lessons from prior domestic initiatives and international models such as the United States’ Buy America policy, it advocates for a phased and adaptable implementation plan. In addition, it recommends that the policy be anchored through formal legislation by the National Assembly to ensure statutory legitimacy, institutional continuity, and broad-based national ownership. This legislative backing will strengthen legal clarity, minimize the risk of policy reversals, and embed the initiative within Nigeria’s long-term economic development framework. Ultimately, this analysis aims to guide policymakers, businesses, and other stakeholders in aligning efforts to ensure compliance, sustain momentum, and achieve the policy’s intended economic transformation. 

7 Provisions you need to know about the ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy

Mandatory Local Procurement by MDAs: All MDAs must prioritise locally produced goods and services in their procurement processes.

More Government Support for Local Industries: Government to lead the initiative by investing in Nigerian industries and people, changing how it spends, procures and builds.

MDAs to Update their Procurement Policies: MDAs are now required to review their procurement policies and plans, align them with the ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy, and submit updated frameworks to the Bureau of Public Procurement (‘BPP’).

BPP to Maintain Register of Local Manufacturers: The Bureau of Public Procurement is directed to maintain a regularly updated register of high-quality Nigerian manufacturers and service providers to be used as primary reference for procurement decisions.

Written Waiver for Procurement of Foreign Goods: Any deviation from local sourcing must be backed by strong justification and a written waiver by the BPP.

Leveraging Foreign Contracts for Local Capacity Building: Contracts for unavoidable foreign goods and services must include mechanisms for local participation, be it through technology transfer, job creation and skills development

Consequences of Non-Compliance: Sanctions for non-compliance include termination of contracts, financial sanction and other disciplinary actions, signalling the government’s seriousness about the initiative.

Benefits and Drawbacks Assessed

At its core, the ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy is a reaffirmation of the principles enshrined in the Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry Content Development (Local Content) Act, 2010. That landmark legislation pushed for Nigerian content across every aspect of the oil and gas value chain, compelling operators to prioritise local services, workforce, and materials. Sections 2 and 3 of the Act particularly mandate the inclusion of Nigerian goods and personnel in project execution, while Section 41(2) requires that at least 50% of the equipment used by international oil companies must be owned by their Nigerian subsidiaries.

The Nigeria First Policy is not an entirely new initiative. In 2016, the “Buy Nigeria, Grow the Naira” campaign was introduced with similar goals to encourage consumption of Nigerian goods but ultimately failed largely due to poor implementation strategy, weak monitoring mechanisms, and the absence of a clear development plan to scale local production. Infrastructure and energy challenges persisted, while regulatory bodies like Standard Organisation of Nigeria (SON) and National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) lacked the capacity and support to enforce quality standards effectively. Compounding these issues was the inconsistent behaviour of the political elite, many of whom continued to import luxury goods, thereby undermining the campaign’s credibility. Consumer confidence in Nigerian products remained low, driven by perceptions of inferior quality compared to foreign alternatives, particularly in areas such as food, electronics, and fashion. Without meaningful incentives for manufacturers or public sensitization to shift consumer attitudes, the policy quickly lost traction. Nigerians, for example, were encouraged to reject imported rice, yet many remained loyal to foreign brands due to better taste, packaging, and branding.

While these policies collectively represent a shift in national economic thinking from foreign dependency to domestic empowerment, the structural weaknesses that hampered the 2016 policy still haunt the economy today. Nigeria remains a nation paradoxically rich in natural and human resources, yet crippled by an overwhelming reliance on imports, from refined petroleum to simple items like toothpicks. Local industries struggle under the weight of erratic electricity supply, poor roads, high interest rates, and limited access to credit. While notable strides have been made, such as the Abia State government’s partnership with Innoson Motors to promote indigenous automobile production, issues of capacity of the production sector and accountability persist. In fact, Innoson Motors was recently taken before the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (’FCCPC’’) over allegations of delivering vehicles below contracted specifications. This incident underscores a broader concern as to Nigeria’s production sector’s capacity in term of quality and quantity.

Nonetheless, the ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy arrives with potential benefits that cannot be overlooked. By directing government spending towards local suppliers, the policy can stimulate industrial activity, generate employment, and strengthen the naira by conserving foreign reserves. Reducing reliance on imports protects the economy from global supply shocks and inflationary pressures. If effectively managed, the policy could help Nigeria transition from a consumer economy to a producer economy. Manufacturers and Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) in sectors such as agro-processing, textiles, and automotive (e.g. Innoson Motors, Dangote) stand to benefit from increased government demand. Additionally, the policy could encourage skilled Nigerians abroad to return as local industries grow, reducing brain drain. It also supports economic diversification, lessening Nigeria’s dependence on oil exports and imports. The increased local production would lead to higher tax contributions, boosting government revenue. Moreover, the policy promotes both micro and macro industrial growth by encouraging vertical and horizontal integration in agriculture and manufacturing value chains.

While the push to prioritise local procurement is commendable, it must be approached with caution. An outright and immediate ban on foreign goods, without a realistic assessment of Nigeria’s current production capacity, could lead to unintended economic setbacks. Instead, a more balanced strategy like the United States’ Buy America policy offers a valuable model. Under this framework, the U.S. government requires that at least 50% of products used in public procurement be domestically sourced, while still allowing exceptions where local alternatives are either unavailable or not up to standard. This hybrid approach supports domestic industries without sacrificing functionality or efficiency. Nigeria can learn from this by adopting a phased implementation model. Setting an initial requirement such as 50% local sourcing allows time to strengthen local industries, build supply chains, and invest in workforce development, with the long-term goal of full localization.

Crucially, the U.S. model goes beyond where a product is assembled; it also considers the origin of its components. A product is only considered domestic if at least half of its input is locally sourced and if the substantial transformation occurs within the country. Nigeria could apply a similar rule to ensure real value addition happens locally, promoting skill development and job creation.

The U.S. system also allows room for flexibility as exceptions are made where domestic options are too costly or fall short in quality. This is a practical clause Nigeria must adopt to prevent bottlenecks in critical sectors. In essence, the success of the Buy America policy lies in its clear definitions, gradual enforcement, and flexible structure, which Nigeria can tailor to suit its unique economic landscape. By adopting a similar, measured approach, Nigeria can grow its local industry without disrupting essential services or trade obligations.

Another critical concern is Nigeria’s existing bilateral and multilateral trade agreements.  Implementing a strict import ban could breach international trade commitments, potentially leading to disputes or retaliatory actions from trade allies. Such an approach, if not carefully managed, risks isolating Nigeria economically. Rather than adopting an outright ban, the government should proactively engage in diplomatic renegotiations with its trade partners, clearly communicating its developmental goals and the need to prioritise local industrial growth. In the interim, imposing higher tariffs on non-essential luxury imports, such as designer goods, high-end vehicles, and refined sugar could serve as a more balanced strategy. The revenue generated from these tariffs should be channelled into subsidies, grants, or infrastructural support for local manufacturers to boost competitiveness and capacity.

Conclusion

The ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy represents a bold and necessary shift toward economic self-reliance and industrial renewal. It carries the promise of transforming Nigeria from a heavily import-dependent economy to one driven by local innovation, production, and value addition. However, this promise will only be fulfilled through deliberate and inclusive implementation and not just executive endorsement. It demands coordinated action across all levels of government, robust private sector participation, and strong institutional support. The journey to industrialization is gradual, requiring strategic patience, sustained investment, and a commitment to fixing core structural challenges like infrastructure, regulation, and capacity gaps. A phased, flexible approach rooted in clear benchmarks and guided by national interest will be essential. If implemented with integrity and foresight, the ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy could become the cornerstone of a resilient, productive, and globally competitive Nigerian economy.

Key Takeaways and Recommendations

To successfully implement the ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy, organisations engaging in government contracts should pivot towards manufacturing, collaborate with local producers, and prioritise import substitutes. They are encouraged to register with the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP), review procurement policies to align with the new directive, and obtain waivers where the use of foreign goods is unavoidable.

Government should adopt a phased ban approach; Implement a 50% local procurement threshold for MDAs at first, gradually increasing over time as local industries build capacity. This phased approach allows time for strengthening the domestic supply chain and workforce, mitigating any shocks to industries that are not yet fully self-sufficient. This transition should be accompanied by a careful review of existing bilateral trade agreements to allow for the phased localization to avoid potential sanctions and ensure continued trade diplomatic engagement.

Government should offer strong incentives for local production including higher tariffs on non-essential luxury goods (e.g., exotic wine, cars, furniture, sugar) with proceeds reinvested as subsidies or grants for domestic industries. In addition, tax breaks, low-interest loans, and technical support should be extended to businesses adopting local supply. For example, South Korea’s government imposed high tariffs on imported non-essential goods, to protect nascent local industries. At the same time, it enforced strict quality standards on imports, which protected domestic consumers from substandard foreign products and encouraged the development of local alternatives. Similarly, Brazil’s National Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES) offers subsidized loans to boost production in strategic sectors, allowing manufacturers to expand capacity and improve competitiveness. Brazil also provided tax exemptions and subsidies to its automotive industry, stimulating local production while reducing the reliance on imported vehicles and parts. 

To stimulate sustainable industrial growth, the Nigerian government must aggressively pursue Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), strengthen the enabling business environment, and significantly enhance investments in research and development (R&D). South Korea’s rapid industrialization is a prime example of this approach. The government actively partnered with private investors to develop critical logistics infrastructure such as ports, railroads, highways, and industrial parks which drastically reduced transportation and production costs for manufacturers. These infrastructure projects were designed to connect industrial zones to export hubs, making it easier for domestic producers to scale and access international markets. Brazil’s investment in transportation and Logistics helped reduce overhead costs for industries and made locally produced goods more competitive both at home and abroad. In tandem, Brazil also heavily invested in R&D, especially in the agricultural and manufacturing sectors. One notable outcome was the development of Embrapa (Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation), a government-led innovation initiative that introduced new seed varieties, precision farming techniques, and climate-resilient crops. These innovations allowed Brazilian farmers to significantly boost productivity, lower dependence on imported food and farming inputs, and establish Brazil as a global agricultural powerhouse. For Nigeria to replicate such progress, the government must prioritize infrastructure development; stable electricity, functional road and rail networks, broadband internet, and access to clean water while simultaneously supporting local innovation hubs and technical institutions. These efforts should be complemented by targeted regulatory reforms to ease business registration, simplify compliance procedures, and provide tailored support for SMEs and startups, ensuring that both large and small players can thrive within the evolving local content ecosystem.

Nigeria should introduce measures to reduce production costs to control cost driven inflation. Brazil’s investment in infrastructure, particularly in energy and transportation, helped lower the cost of production for businesses. By reducing logistical bottlenecks and improving energy access, Brazilian industries saw a drop in operating expenses, enabling them to remain competitive despite rising global prices. On the other hand, South Korea managed demand-pull inflation by increasing productivity through investments in technology. By improving its industrial processes, South Korea was able to meet the rising demand for goods without inflating prices.

A successful policy roll-out also requires strategic communication and cultural change. Public awareness campaigns led by the Ministry of Information and the National Orientation Agency (NOA) should promote national pride in Nigerian-made goods and encourage citizens to buy, wear, and use local products. In South Korea, campaigns such as “Korean Products, Good Products” played a pivotal role in fostering national pride in locally manufactured goods. The government’s focus on raising awareness about the quality and value of Korean-made products led to a significant shift in consumer behaviour, with more people choosing local products over imported ones.

Compliance must be enforced through tighter border control and effective inter-agency collaboration between the Nigeria Customs Service, SON, NAFDAC, and relevant regulators. Smuggling, product dumping, and import violations must be addressed firmly, with consistent standards enforcement and penalties where necessary.

Implementation should be gradual, measurable, and inclusive. Evaluation mechanisms should be built into the policy to allow periodic reviews and adjustments based on evolving realities.

Most importantly, leadership must set the tone. Political leaders, civil servants, and public figures should lead by example and embrace local products over foreign luxuries to build public trust and legitimacy for the policy.

Also, the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment must take a central coordinating role in the implementation of the ‘’Nigeria First’’ Policy by conducting comprehensive sector-wide capacity assessments to establish realistic benchmarks for localization, while also promoting Nigerian exports and expanding market access through targeted trade incentives and strategic partnerships. In collaboration with the BPP, SON, and NAFDAC, the Ministry should work to strengthen domestic supply chains and enforce quality standards across industries. Additionally, it must actively attract foreign direct investment by showcasing Nigeria’s potential in local production, and engage key stakeholders including chambers of commerce, manufacturers’ associations, and labour unions to address implementation challenges and build widespread support.

While the “Nigeria First” policy has rightly been backed by a directive to the Attorney General of the Federation to draft an executive order, its long-term credibility and effectiveness cannot solely rest on administrative instruments. A policy of such national significance, impacting trade, procurement, labour, and industrial regulation must be anchored in a formal, transparent legislative framework. To ensure durability, legal clarity, and nationwide buy-in, the government must urgently transition this initiative from a top-level directive to a fully articulated national industrial policy. This should involve thorough documentation, rigorous debate, and passage through the National Assembly, not only to confer statutory legitimacy but also to create room for broad stakeholder engagement including manufacturers, trade associations, labour unions, civil society, legislators, and academia. Successful models like the Rwanda industrial policy project, 2022, Ethiopia Industrial Park Development Project and Tunisia industrialisation and innovation strategy, 2022 show that inclusive consultation fosters clarity of purpose, practical implementation strategies, and long-term commitment from all economic actors. Without this foundation, even the most well-intentioned policies risk weak enforcement, political resistance, or operational failure. Embedding “Nigeria First” Policy into a legislatively backed framework with clear goals, timelines, accountability mechanisms, and stakeholder feedback loops is essential to realising its transformational promise.

Overall, with unified commitment across all levels of government and active support from the wider society, the ‘’Nigeria First Policy’’ has the potential to evolve from a bold vision into a catalyst for national development.