Akeem Lasisi
Renowned Professor of Finance & Capital Market at the Nasarawa State University, Keffi, Uche Uwaleke, has stressed the need for Nigeria to rethink its university curriculum in line with the economic functionality that obtains in developed countries such as China, Singapore, South Korea and Saudi Arabia.
Uwaleke established the link between functional tertiary education and economic development when he delivered the 50th Inaugural Lecture of the university on February 26, 2025.
The inspiring lecture was creatively titled ‘Unlocking Wealth and Leveraging Entrepreneurial Knowledge Ecosystems: Understanding Capital Harnessing Essentials, thus having the lecturer’s name, UWALEKE UCHE, as the acronym.
It was attended by many many dignitaries as well as stakeholders from the academic, finance and other sectors.
Among such were Senator Tokunbo Abiru, Chairman Senate Committee on Banking Insurance & Other Financial Institutions; Dr Emomotimi Agama, Director General, Security Exchange Commission; Ms Patience Oniha, Director General, Debt Management Office; Tope Fasua, Special Adviser to President Tinubu on Economic Affairs; and Prof Haruna Ayuba, Vice Chancellor Bingham University.
Uwaleke, who is also a former Commissioner for Finance in Imo State, underscored the importance of strong industry-academia-government understanding and partnerships, saying all needed to be connected to a nation’s economic agenda.
He, therefore, urged the Federal and state governments to sieve the mandates of tertiary institutions while also rethinking the modes of financing them.
He said, “Amid budget constraints, the government can make higher education more cost-effective by prioritising resources in favour of academic disciplines that support industrial development and which are directly tied to economic outcomes. I humbly assert, without undermining the importance of other fields, that it is by so doing that the higher education system in Nigeria can better address the country’s technological and demographic challenges. In this regard, Nigeria can draw from the experience of other countries.
“Take the case of China for example, in recent years funding for humanities and social sciences has been reduced in favour of supporting high-tech and applied science programs. The country’s Double First-Class Initiative aims to elevate select universities to global rankings by investing heavily in fields such as artificial intelligence, engineering, and natural sciences. Tax incentives serve as a significant motivator for companies to invest in universities in China. Companies that establish joint labs or fund high-tech research, may qualify for additional tax credits or be recognized as “High and New Technology Enterprises” (HNTEs). This status grants a reduced corporate income tax rate of 15% (down from the standard 25%). In this connection, Huawei has partnered with many Chinese universities to support R&D in telecommunications and AI, often funding labs and sponsoring student projects.
“Also, under its Vision 2030 initiative that seeks to diversify its economy and reduce dependency on oil revenues, Saudi Arabia has focused on investment in science, engineering, and technology programs through universities and specialised institutions with less emphasis on traditional arts and humanities to align education with national economic goals.
In the case of Singapore, Uwaleke noted, its government actively fosters entrepreneurial knowledge through a range of programs including partnering private investors to co-fund startups through agencies like the Economic Development Board (EDB) and Enterprise Singapore.
“Programmes like the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) and SEEDS Capital provide early-stage funding to help startups scale. The SkillsFuture program is a flagship initiative by the Singapore government which offers funding for companies that invest in training and skills development for students and employees. Under this scheme, companies collaborating with universities to upskill students can receive subsidies for training programmes,” he said.
The outspoken professor added that in South Korea, the government provides substantial funding for science and engineering programmes through initiatives like the Brain Korea 21 (BK21) programme, with vocational schools and universities restructured to focus more on technology-driven fields, with less emphasis on traditional arts and humanities under the Programme for Industrial Needs-Matched Education (PRIME).
He further stated, “In order to revitalise vocational education, South Korea established Meister Schools which are specialised high schools designed to prepare students for high-skilled trades and advanced manufacturing roles.
“The private sector is actively involved in fostering strong industry-academia collaboration programmes. South Korean companies, particularly in technology and manufacturing, collaborate directly with universities to develop tailored training programmes for students. These companies establish research labs and training centres on university campuses to train students in industry-relevant skills. LG Electronics, for example, sponsors labs in leading universities, focusing on electronics design and software development while Samsung partners with universities like Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) and Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH) to provide specialized training in semiconductors, AI, and engineering. Also, Airbus Asia Training Centre at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), focuses on aerospace engineering skills. Hyundai collaborates with universities on mobility technology and automotive engineering programmes.
“I submit that the South Korean and Chinese examples of strong integration of academia and industry to build entrepreneurial knowledge and unlock wealth provide a replicable model for a country like Nigeria seeking to bridge the gap between education and industry needs. To this end, governments at all levels can optimise the use of scarce resources by prioritising the funding of higher education in favour of what I call pillar courses namely Agriculture, Medical Sciences, ICT and Engineering (AMIE). Over the years, underinvestment in these areas have resulted in low enrolment of students in these fields and consequently reduced productivity. For instance, according to the National Universities Commission (NUC) Statistical digest published in 2019 (the most current at the time of this lecture), full time students in Nigerian universities totaled 1,854,261 out of which 738,616 (representing circa 40%) were enrolled in pillar courses.”
Relatedly, Uwaleke canvassed the need to link the programmes of the country’s specialised universities to wealth creation.
He said, “The big question is: what roles are universities, meant to be centres of excellence, supposed to play in helping to achieve these targets? Curiously, the NDP has not cut out any specific roles for the federal Universities of Agriculture located in Makurdi, Umudike and Abeokuta with respect to achieving self-sufficiency in food production neither does it specify any roles for the federal Universities of Technology located in Akure, Minna, Owerri and Yola with regard to driving industrialisation particularly in relation to Micro Small and Medium Enterprises. These specialised Universities should be given clear mandates and tasked to demonstrate their research and innovation in pursuit of wealth creation and national development. If anything, effective implementation of the NDP requires that these Universities receive special attention in terms of funding to be able to champion the execution of these priority areas and discharge special mandates arising from the NDP.
“Essentially, the model I am canvasing here requires that universities be funded based on a formula which factors in individual peculiarities and a desire to promote programmes in agriculture, medicine, ICT and Engineering with huge potential to positively transform Nigeria’s socio-economic landscape. To this end, the Ministries of Education, Budget & National Planning and Science & Technology should jointly draw up a list of courses and programs that are critical to the success of the NDP and mandate the Tertiary Education Trust Fund to skew interventions in favour of these courses, (even if that will require an amendment to the TETFund Act). By the same token, the National Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) should prioritize students in AMIE programs to ensure that they are all covered. Where this is not feasible, the focus can be on final year students as shown in table 4 which makes the funding more cost-effective and result-oriented.
“In order to ensure that the differentiated funding model recommended here for specialised universities produce the desired results, these universities should be made to concentrate on their flagship programs and not dissipate time and resources running programs that are unrelated to their core mandates. State governments should also key into this funding model by showing bias for critical courses run in the colleges/faculties of Agriculture, Engineering as well as Medical Sciences in Universities owned by them. As government’s resources improve, conventional universities running traditional courses may benefit from the differentiated funding model if they can show proof of restructuring their programs with a huge dose of ICT. For example, just like NSUK has done, B.Sc Statistics programme can be restructured as B.Sc Statistics and Data Analytics etc. This revolution in higher education will require a review of the current NUC minimum academic standards (CCMAS).”
