Experts Raise Productivity Concerns Despite Nigeria’s ₦372.8 Trillion Rebasing

Nigeria’s rebasing of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to ₦372.8 trillion has been hailed as a landmark achievement in economic statistics, positioning the country as Africa’s largest economy. But despite the recalculated economic size, experts are flagging serious concerns over underlying productivity levels, warning that headline growth may mask structural inefficiencies threatening long-term development and inclusive prosperity.

The rebased GDP, which reflects updated price benchmarks and expanded sector coverage—including digital services, creative industries, and informal value chains—moved Nigeria past South Africa and Egypt in size and scope. Introduced in mid‑2025, the updated data integrates a broader set of economic activities, revealing previously uncounted contributions from sectors such as film, music, fintech, and informal manufacturing.

Yet analysts and policy scholars caution that the headline figure belies troubling indicators beneath the surface. “GDP size alone does not guarantee sustainable growth,” said Dr. Funke Osinowo, a macroeconomist. “Without commensurate gains in labour productivity, capital efficiency, and economic diversification, that large figure could prove illusory—an accounting artifact rather than a leap in real-life prosperity.”

Productivity metrics remain weak. Productivity per worker has stagnated, while capital productivity—output generated per unit of investment—remains low. Despite being the continent’s biggest economy in nominal terms, Nigeria trails its peers in output per worker. Investors and growth experts note that unemployment remains stubbornly high and value-add in sectors like manufacturing and agriculture is lagging, even as finance, tech, and creative sectors garner more attention.

Manufacturers complain that high energy costs, infrastructure bottlenecks, and access to affordable credit continue to stifle output. According to industry stakeholders, businesses are unable to scale or modernise production, retaining low productivity even as nominal GDP grows. Farmers similarly face weak value chains, inadequate storage, and low mechanisation—limiting yield and income despite large agricultural GDP contributions.

Private sector leaders warn that weak productivity metrics make the economy vulnerable to shocks. “A large GDP base can collapse quickly under fiscal pressure, currency devaluation, or external demand swings if underlying productivity doesn’t support real income generation,” said Adewale Ajayi, a development finance advisor. “Growth should translate into higher domestic value creation—not just bigger accounting aggregates.”

Labour productivity is further hampered by skill mismatches and low capital intensity. Much of the workforce remains in low-productivity informal jobs. Experts call for urgent investment in vocational training, digital skills, and technology adoption across manufacturing, healthcare, and agriculture to move workers into higher-productivity roles.

Policy planners say the updated GDP is a double-edged sword: while it raises Nigeria’s economic stature, it also sets a higher bar for performance. “We cannot rest on the rebased number,” said a senior official at the Office of the Special Adviser on the Economy. “Now the real task begins—converting that nominal value into real value, by lifting productivity across all sectors.”

The government has flagged plans to address these gaps through targeted interventions. A national productivity commission is reportedly being considered to monitor productivity levels and recommend policy reforms. Complementary initiatives include incentives for manufacturing, investment in energy infrastructure, expansion of digital infrastructure, and reform of industrial finance vehicles to support capital efficiency.

External partners, including multilateral development banks, have supported capacity-building and technical assistance to improve Nigeria’s statistical systems and performance monitoring frameworks. However, some experts call for deeper structural reforms: improving regulatory consistency, facilitating access to long-term capital, and enhancing governance standards in state-led enterprises.

Civil society organisations also argue for greater public access to disaggregated data. They maintain that publishing productivity indicators—such as GDP per worker by sector, capital productivity rates, and employment-to-GDP ratios—would help stakeholders hold policymakers accountable and foster evidence-based decision-making.

The broader impact of low productivity is wide-ranging: it affects tax revenue potential, fiscal sustainability, wage growth, and Nigeria’s ability to compete internationally. As inflationary shocks and exchange rate pressures strain public finances, an inability to deliver real growth leaves the economy vulnerable to income inequality and social strain.

Some analysts suggest that if productivity gains do not materialise, Nigeria may risk trading high headline GDP for low human development outcomes. “Without lifting per capita value creation, people may not feel the effects of growth,” said Dr. Osinowo, stressing that education, health, and infrastructure investment must keep pace with economic volume.

Despite the warning signs, the rebasing offers opportunity. It presents a clearer economic snapshot and incentivises reform. If policymakers seize the moment by pairing the new GDP base with structural productivity, Nigeria could transform large nominal figures into real gains for citizens.

In summary, while the ₦372.8 trillion rebased GDP marks a milestone in Nigeria’s economic narrative, experts are urging caution. The lack of productivity growth, weak industry benchmarks, and deep structural limitations remain critical barriers. Without targeted reforms to boost labour output, capital efficiency, and sectoral competitiveness, the headline number risks being a façade rather than a foundation for inclusive and sustainable development.