COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF FEDERALISM AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA AND SOUTH AFRICA (1960-2010)

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF FEDERALISM AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA AND SOUTH AFRICA (1960-2010)

---

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
A very striking feature of every federal state is the existence of diversities. Whether federations are formed by integration of previously independent entities or through differentiation of a single entity into many components, the central motive is usually to enhance political and economic benefits. The nature and dynamism of federal states are usually influenced by the structure of its internal territorial configuration. As a result, the different component units that make up the federation struggle for economic and socio-political dominance. In this struggle, the state is the major mediator and distributor of all the privileges and this role increases the value of the state. As opined by Suberu (1998:277), the line demarcating politics and economics has been erased as state power equals wealth and wealth is
the pathway to power. In this connect, Awa (1976:12), contends that one of the aims of federalism is that economic resources in various component units should be used in such a way that the entire political system benefits equitably from the economies of scale. The political system in a federal state is usually a configuration of ethnic, religious and cultural groups. Either in isolation or in combination, these groups’ identities may have some bearing on the political conduct and socioeconomic role in the society. Since most federal states are heterogenous, it should not be surprising that their internal politics are defined and characterized by their pluralities, and these different identities have remained powerful elements in their domestic politics.
Notwithstanding, federalism has had multiple significance for managing diverse societies. It is an approach to governance that may be applicable to certain countries given their pluralism in terms of culture, religion, language and ethnicity. The quest for unity in diversity in a federal state is usually achieved through the framework of rules as enunciated and implemented by the state. Thus, federalism could be conceived as a system of rules for the division of public policy responsibilities among a number of autonomous governmental agencies. These rules define the scope of authority available to the autonomous agencies and provide a framework to govern relationships between and among agencies. In most federal states, particularly in Africa, such as Nigeria, Sudan, South Africa etc, the nature of the division of powers often times constitute the major impediment to the realization of federal objectives. More so, some federal states outside the shores of Africa such as Venezuela, Malaysia and Austria are highly centralized while Switzerland and Canada are highly decentralized.  Each federal state is unique and it is this peculiarity that underscores why federal states behave differently.
One of the major challenges of federal states has been the concerted efforts of the central (federal) government to turn the component units into its administrative units. This is necessitated by the fact that federal governments are increasingly becoming involved with the distribution and management of wealth, and these include, the management of proceeds from the exploitation of natural resources while the component units are more or less instrument of this distribution. As a result, the centrifugal and centripetal forces that shape the search for equilibrium between the constituent units and the federal government find its most lucid expression on the nature of balance between centralization and decentralization of the governments. In most federations of the world, particularly, Nigeria as well as South Africa, responsibilities are divided among the governmental institutions like the legislature, executive and the judiciary; and among the various structures of the federation like the federal, state (province) and local governments. The nature and character of political structure of any federation necessarily impact on the political system. This fear was highlighted thus by Ikejiani and Ikejiani, (1986: vii)i when they argued that: It is most important for us to warn that to try under the national political structure is probably to fail. The major task is to reform our present political structures and institutions of government. The difficulties spring not from the qualities of leadership but from the fact that we are trying to solve the problems of Nigerian unity with political structures and institutions that are absolutely inappropriate. Nigeria, we dare say, will not, regardless of who is the head, or which political or military regime is in power, recover from the general malaise, disunity, instability and all the iniquities which have engulfed her until our political structures and institutions are changed. Until this is done, Nigeria will continue to have little confidence in their governments and will continue to live with policies that are inefficient and ineffective in dealing with the problems, especially the problem of… ‘revenue allocation and management of natural resources’.
Thus, the task facing Nigeria, and indeed, other federal states like South Africa is to reform the political structures and governmental institutions with a view to reducing the degree of inequity in the system. The debate is on how federalism will be able to create a feeling of satisfaction and fairness among the component units, without deepening existing conflict lines.
The perception of inequality, marginalization and intimidation of one such group by another as it concerns the allocation of governmental resources and management of natural resources is usually measured on the basis of group/regional identity. As a result, the management of natural resources is a contentious issue, particularly, in federal societies that are characterized by pluralistic tendencies, fear of marginalization and domination among others.
Therefore, the politics of natural resource management is a very contentious issue because of the problem associated with different groups and their contributions to the federation vis-à-vis the distribution of resources. The contentious problems that every federal or plural state has to contend with include the problem of what should be the institutional form of the government? How can all sections of the country work in harmony and none feel excluded or dominated by the others? (Kew and Lewis, 2010). And most importantly, how can economic, political and financial resources, etc be distributed or allocated to eliminate any perceived feeling of marginalization or domination of one section by the other? In fact, the bane of every plural society is the national question, particularly as it concerns the distribution of resources, particularly, revenue allocation between the tiers of government and among the component units. In this context, it is the state that is the purveyor, enunciator and distributor of these resources, and hence the struggle to control the apparatus of the state for the authoritative allocation of these resources adds dynamism to internal politics of federal states.
This is necessary because of low development of the productive forces, which increases the use of the state power as an instrument in the hands of the dominant class. The peculiarity of the states in Africa manifest not only in its relative autonomy, but more importantly in its role as a means of production. This was aptly buttressed by Ake (1985: 3), when he asserted that the unique feature of the socio-economic formation in post-colonial Africa, and indeed in contemporary periphery formations generally is that the state has very limited autonomy. The degree of autonomy of the state is usually a consequence of the level of the development of the productive forces. As a result of lack of autonomy of the states in Africa, the state became an instrument in the hands of the dominant class, particularly, the hegemonic dominant class. This dominant class uses the state and its apparatuses for primitive accumulation of the resources of the people, particularly, through governmental policies that seek to protect their interest. Consequently, all policies, including those relating to the access, exploitation and management of natural resources are formulated to suit the interest of the dominant class. As a result, the state which is constituted to play a regulatory and mediating role in the allocation and distribution of power and resources becomes an instrument in the hands of the dominant class, and indeed, serves as a means of production. But this ought not to be so, particularly in a federal state because of its inherent devices by which federal qualities of society are articulated and protected (Livingstone: 1956).
This study therefore attempts to determine how the practice of federalism impacted on revenue allocation and natural resource management in Africa’s two most important countries: Nigeria, Africa’s most populous state, and South Africa, Africa’s wealthiest and most developed state (Sodaro, 2001). Both Nigeria and South Africa share a lot of similarities, yet, they are radically different in many ways. Accordingly, Kan-Onwordi (2007:56) avers that in 1991, South Africa contributed just 4% of Africa’s global export trade, but by 2007 it had become the continent’s largest economy while Nigeria because of its huge population remains the continent’s biggest consumer nation. Politically, both Nigeria and South Africa are sub-regional powers in West Africa and Southern African respectively, and continentally, both are powerful countries.
Both have also experienced different types of dictatorship, typified in Nigeria by over thirty years of military dictatorship and in South Africa, by over thirty-three years of apartheid regime. Notwithstanding these similarities, both Nigeria and South Africa are significantly different from one another in many other ways. While Nigeria has a population of 140 million according to 2006 estimates, South Africa has a population of 44 million. The difference also manifested at the economic level. While the GDP and Per Capita Income of South Africa are put at S187.3 billion and S12, 200 respectively, Nigeria’s GDP and Per Capita Income are put atS77.33 billion and S1, 400 respectively (Kan-Onwordi, 2007: 57). However, according to 2009 estimate, the Per Capita Income in South Africa was S10, 000, while that of Nigeria is S2, 400. It is equally important to observe that while Nigeria is a mono-product economy with agriculture and oil contributing over 70% of GDP with services contributing a meager 27%, the South African economy is grossly dependent on services, which contributes almost 70% to GDP while other sectors contribute the remainder.
The economies of the two countries are further defined by the fact that Nigeria’s economy has a huge informal sector; that of South Africa has a large formal sector.
Nigeria is endowed with vast and largely untapped natural resources including such
minerals as oil, limestone, tin, columbite, silver, coal, gypsum, shale, zircon, zinc, iron-ore, and natural gas to mention but a few (Anyanwu, 1997: 3). Nigeria has long possessed a high potential for developing into a regional and global superpower with its abundant human and natural resources. However, the Nigerian economy is heavily dependent on crude petroleum export as the main source of foreign exchange earnings and government revenue. For decades, revenue from oil accounted for over 90 percent of export earnings. The over dependence of the Nigerian economy on oil has had its own effects. For instance, by 1980, the oil sector which accounted for 22 percent of GDP provided 80 percent of government revenue and over 96 percent of export earnings (Anyanwu, 1997: 5). Even with the oil boom of the 1970s, the government could not properly harness the enormous revenue into productive use. As a result, starting from the mid 1981, when the world oil market began to collapse due mainly to oil glut, the Nigerian economy witnessed a very serious crisis. This crisis resulted in the adoption of the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) in 1986. Even more important is that the year 2008 witnessed yet another boom in the oil sector as the world oil market experienced the highest ever increases in the prices of crude oil. In all these, the centrality of the role of the state is never in doubt. On the other hand, South Africa is abundantly endowed with gold, coal, platinum and diamond etc. She has the strongest economy in Africa. As a result of the lifting of sanctions and the good will generated by the transition from apartheid to non-racial democracy in 1994, the South African economy turned around and grew by an average of 3 percent in 1994 and 1995 with a Per Capita GNP in the 1990s of about S3, 500. Much of South Africa’s infrastructure and economic development were built on mining, especially gold and diamond (Sodaro, 2001).
Meanwhile, it is important to state that revenues from mining alone are insufficient to carry South Africa in the twenty-first century, which necessitated a reform agenda by the government that brought about diversification of the economy. It is in fact these similarities and differences as noted above that necessitated a comparative study of federalism and the management of natural resources in both countries with a view to ascertaining how the two states employ the proceeds from natural resource exploitation to impact on the standard of living of its citizens defined within the context of provision of basic social amenities. The study situates the discourse within the context of the centrality of the state in understanding how federal states manage their natural resources.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
There is a plethoral of literature on the nature, structure and dynamics of federalism.
Particularly of note in this regard are the works of Dietze (1960), Wheare (1964), Awa (1976), Amuwo et al (1998), Agbese (2003) and Elaigwu (2007) among others. Notwithstanding these avalanche of scholarly works in this regard, the concept appears to be shrouded in controversy. Essentially, federalism is a device by which plural societies can best be governed, yet, the controversy that it generates as a result of its nature, structure and dynamics are better imagined.  Federal states are formed either by a process of differentiation of a unit into component units, or  through integration of various independent units into one federal polity. One of the principles of federalism is that economic resources in various component units should be used in such a way that the entire political system benefits equitably from the economies of scale (Awa, 1976: 12). And since federalism is the method of dividing power so that the central and the component units are both coordinate and independent; the manner of this division and the structure of a federal state has very serious implications on allocation of the benefits from the economies of scale. Accordingly, Bryce (1997:1) contended that the problem confronting federal states is how to secure an efficient central government and preserve national unity, allowing independence of the various component units.
Nevertheless, Hanson and Perloff (1965) argue for centralization of fiscal responsibilities, alluding that unless the state fiscal systems are centrally planned, the quest for economic development would be undermined. On the other hand, Bauer (1961) and Scot (1965) argue for decentralization of fiscal responsibilities believing that it would accelerate the pace of economic development more than is anticipated. Also there is the problem of vertical fiscal imbalance among the three tiers of government, which is due to minimal revenue-raising abilities of the sub-national units’ vis-à-vis their expenditure responsibility. For Ibeanu (2005:53), the issue of
practicing unbalance federalism has led ethnic minorities to organize stiff opposition against the militarist state and petrobusiness. Generally, scholars like Mbanefoh and Egwaikhide (2003: 213), Enyi (2005:295) among others believe that the equitable allocation of resources between the central government and that of the various tiers of government, together with the allocations among the various component units is the hallmark of every federal state. The gap that appears to emerge from the above is the
revenue generation capacity of the different tiers of government. This however was aptly articulated by Elaigwu (2007:5) when he opined that fiscal federalism deals with the generation and distribution of scarce but allocatable resources, as federations attempt to create equality among its citizens and component units.
Deriving from the above is that there is a substantial amount of scholarly work done on the nature, structure and dynamics of federalism in Nigeria and South Africa, yet, surprinsingly, very little efforts have been directed at the impact of structures of federalism on revenue allocation, particularly, to the component units. But more importantly, no serious effort has been made by scholars to empirically demonstrate with quantifiable evidence the nexus between unbalanced federal structure and inequitable revenue allocations.
On issues relating to natural resource management in federal states in Africa, contemporary literature like the works of Roberts and Oladeji (2005), Etekpe (2007), Ikein (2010) among others, are replete with plethora of evidence that countries with abundance of natural resources, particularly, non-renewable resources like oil, gold, diamond, platinum, etc, have had low economic growth and are incapable of providing basic social amenities to its citizens in comparison with countries without the abundance of these resources. Among other countries with abundance of natural resources are Nigeria, Sudan, Zimbabwe etc, and they tend to have more internal conflicts, lack adequate tax mechanism, are affected by dutch disease, that is, an economic phenomenon in which the revenue from natural resource export damage a
nation’s productive economic sector by causing an increase of the real exchange rate and wage increase, engage in excessive borrowing, with revenue volatility, lack the capacity of diversification among other undermining variables http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse.
As a result, these resources, instead of being a blessing have become a curse. Scholars like Obi (1998), Bannon and Collier (2003), Omoweh (2005), have also contended that the reasons for this paradox of plenty are not unrelated to corruption of the leaders, government mismanagement of resources, volatility of revenue from the natural resource sector due to exposure to global commodity market swing and a decline in the competitiveness of other economic sectors, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse. Moreover, the World Bank has argued as it did during SAP in 1986, that good governance defined in the context of sound economic policies will provide resource-rich countries the road to growth and development http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse.
Notwithstanding the above proposition, it should be expected that if a unitary state
becomes a victim of natural resource mismanagement because of its over-centralization of power and authority, a federal state is more suitable to turning its natural resources to blessing because of inherent devices by which federal qualities of society are articulated and protected (Livingston: 1956).
Essentially, revenue from oil and gas come from royalties, licence fees, profits from state oil companies, and export taxes, etc. Royalties and licence fees are associated with ownership of the resource and are typically the major source of revenue from oil and gas(http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:bIsm5u6ubIE). In most federations of the world, particularly, USA, Canada and Australia, onshore resource ownership is normally with the component states, but in Nigeria, it is owned and controlled by the federal government, while in South Africa, the federal government guarantees access to private ownership of natural resources. Again, every government requires funds to embark on developmental programmes. In all countries of the world, whether there is the abundance of natural resources or not, development is usually engendered by the level of financial resources available in such country.
Nigeria and South Africa do not only rely on taxes to generate its revenue; they relied heavily on proceeds from natural resources, which provide substantial revenue to the government of the two states.
Scholars are unanimous that revenue from natural resources is the mainstay of Nigeria
but not South African economy. Particularly of note are the works of Obi (1998: 261),
Adegbulugbe and Akinbami (2006: 190), and Anyanwu (2007: 176) among others who contend that over 80% of all federal revenue and 90% of all foreign exchange earnings come from oil. On the other hand, South African economy is grossly dependent on services, which contributes almost 70% to GDP while other sectors contribute about 30%. The economies of the two countries are further defined by the fact that Nigeria’s economy has a huge informal sector; that of South Africa has a large formal sector. Notwithstanding these scholarly contributions, there is little emphasis on quantification and systematic analysis of existing divergences in revenue allocation and natural resource management in both Nigeria and South Africa. In fact, no serious effort has been directed on the impact of the proceeds from natural resources on the provision of basic social amenities in both Nigeria and South Africa. Again, scholars have not adequately established the implications of the role of the state in resource access and management vis-à-vis conflicts. It is therefore consequent upon these apparent lacunas that we pose the following research questions:
1. How does the structure of federalism impact on the pattern of revenue allocation
among the constituent units in Nigeria and South Africa?
2. Do the proceeds from natural resource exploitation in Nigeria and South Africa
adequately enhance on the provision of basic social amenities?
3. Does the role of the state in Nigeria engender conflict in resource access and
management in contradistinction to the role of the state in South Africa?

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The broad objective of this study was to comparatively determine how the practice of
federalism impact on revenue allocation and natural resource management in Africa’s two most important federal states, Nigeria and South Africa. However, our specific objectives are as follows:
1. to determine how the structure of federalism impact on the pattern of revenue
allocation among the constituent units in Nigeria and South Africa;
2. to ascertain whether the proceeds from natural resource exploitation in Nigeria and
South Africa adequately enhance the provision of basic social amenities;
3. to explore whether the role of the state in Nigeria engender conflict in resource
access and management in contradistinction to the role of the state in South Africa.

1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
It is contended that countries with abundance of natural resources are characterized by
low economic growth, lack the capacity to diversify its economy and are prone to internal conflicts, hence, the resource curse thesis. Yet, the two most important countries in Africa, Nigeria and South Africa, with abundance of natural resources show varied indices of the consequences of this abundance. It is therefore on this premise that this study becomes very significant both for its theoretical relevance and practical utility.
At the theoretical level, the study has increased the general storehouse of knowledge. In particular, it has discovered the impediments that have constituted a clog in the wheel of progress in Nigeria’s struggle for equitable resource management formulae. More so, it has contributed immensely to a better understanding of why the abundance of natural resources in South Africa has not led to the type of mayhem being experienced in Nigeria. In fact, the major theoretical significance of this study is its contribution in filling the academic gap that was identified in the existing body of knowledge. Above all, this study also serves as a reference material for future
researchers who may be interested in extending the frontiers of human knowledge as it concerns the management of natural resources.
The practical significance of this study cannot be over-emphasized as it serves as a
reference material to help solve the predicaments that abundance of natural resources has brought to Nigeria, and help South Africa to consolidate and improve on its present conflict-free management of its natural resources. Specifically, the study serves as a guide to politicians, administrators and policy makers towards discovering the undermining variables in resource access, exploitation and management with a view to formulating policies that can resolve permanently the problems associated with natural resource management.

1.5 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Various theories would have captured the essence of this study, particularly, a
comparative model of analysis like the systems theory, structural-functional theory, etc, but we considered the basic propositions emanating from the Marxian Political Economy Approach to be more apt than a comparative model. This is essentially because the Marxian Political Economy Approach focuses on the reciprocity of politics and economy, derived of course from the primacy of material conditions. Since the study is on issues relating to resource (revenue) allocation by the state, and the management of natural resources; the nexus between the state and its role of authoritatively allocating values can best be captured by the Marxian Political Economy Approach. Again, though a comparative model would adequately compare both Nigeria and South Africa within the context of the study, but, the difference in the behaviour of the two states may not be better captured using the comparative model. The differences in the two states, is a function of economic condition, which reproduced itself at the political realm.
Therefore, the centrality of the role of the state in the allocation and management of natural resources can best be captured using the Marxian Political Economy Approach, hence, its adoption in this study.
Therefore, deriving from our literature review and the thrust of the study, we anchor our investigation on the basic propositions of the Marxist Political Economy approach which are applicable to the Nigerian and South African social formations. Accordingly, four essential elements characterize the Marxist Political Economy approach as follows:
1. The first element is the materialist approach to history; that is, the development of the productive forces, which is central to historical change.
2. The dialectical approach to knowledge and society that defines the nature of reality as dynamic and conflictual.
3. The third is a general view of capitalist development; that is, the capitalist mode of
production and its destiny are governed by a set of economic laws of motion of
modern society.
4. The fourth is a normative commitment to socialism; that is, all Marxists believe that a socialist society is both the necessary and desirable end of historical development.
Out of the four elements, we adopt the first two propositions of Marxist Political Economy approach in the investigation of this study. These are:
1. The materialist approach to history or what Ake (1981: 1) called the primacy of
material condition.
2. The dialectical approach to knowledge and society that defines the nature of reality as dynamic and conflictual; or again, what Ake (1981: 3) refers to as the dynamic
character of reality.
First, political economy is a method which gives primacy to material conditions,
particularly economic factors in the explanation and understanding of socio-economic and political realities. For example, economic condition is the most determining factor why the European colonialists came to Africa; it also determines why they established the types of political systems that they did in Africa, etc. The economic condition is equally important in understanding why the nationalist struggle emerged and the type of political system that was adopted at independence, etc. In fact, in every society, those who are economically privileged tend to reproduce themselves as the politically dominant groups, and are always interested in maintaining the existing social order. To be sure, an understanding of the economic condition is a pre-condition for understanding how a particular state emerges, transforms and behaves. In this context, we can align ourselves with Engels as quoted in Lenin (1976) that the: state is a product of society at a certain stage of development; it is the admission that society has become entangled in an insoluble contradiction with itself that it has split into irreconcilable opposites which it is powerless to conjure away. But in order that these
opposites, classes with conflicting economic interests, might not consume themselves and society in fruitless struggle, it became necessary to have a power seemingly standing above society that would moderate the conflict and keep it within the
bounds of ‘order’; and this power, arisen out of society but placing itself above it, and alienating itself more and more from it, is the state. The state that alienates itself from the contending social classes in any society does so on the basis of high level of penetration of commodity relations, that is, the pervasive commoditization of production relations. Accordingly, Ake (1985: 1) argues that such a state represents a specific modality of class domination, one in which class domination is mediated by
commodity exchange so that the system of institutional mechanism of domination is
differentiated and dissociated from the ruling class and even the society and appears as an objective force standing alongside society. Consequently, the state appears to be an objective force, a neutral umpire and an unbiased mediator in the society. However, behind this seemingly neutrality of the state in mediating and moderating societal conflicts is a strong congruence between the interest of the state and that of capital (economy). This position was aptly collaborated by Miliband (1977), when he opines “that a state, however independent it may have been politically from any given class, remains, and cannot in a class society but remain, the protector of an economically and socially dominant class”. With the emergence of classes in human society came struggle for survival in the social relations of production; and in this struggle the state has remained the regulator, the enunciator and the propagator of all laws that regulate the inevitable conflict in the social relations of production. In fact, right from the emergence of state in human history, its role has remained central in social production. For instance, the state determines whether access should be granted to private or public ownership of land and natural resources; it determines how the exploitation of natural resources are to be carried out; and how the distribution of revenue from the exploitation of natural resources are to be done to create a sense of equity and justice or otherwise. To be sure, the centrality of the role of the state has never been in doubt in social relation and organization of production.
Meanwhile, the degree of autonomy of the state is consequent upon the level of
penetration of commodity relations, which is dependent on the development of productive forces, which again, expresses the overall productive capacities of a society. The following constitutes the basic elements of a state that is autonomous from the contending classes:
1. The state ceases to be a means of production.
2. The state is alienated from active participation in politics.
3. The state becomes a minimal state and is therefore, retrenched from active
participation.
4. As a result of the above, the state becomes a state of no particular class but of all the classes.
5. Therefore, the various apparatuses of the state are not employed for primodial and, or primitive accumulation, and
6. Finally, the increased level of commoditization enables private initiatives to be
enhanced, which reduces primodialism defined in the context of the use of state
power for personal aggrandizement.
Deriving from the above, it is pertinent that the economic condition does not only enable us to understand the political role of the state, but also its economic role of authoritative allocation of values. Thus, as Ake (1981: 11) noted, the state of development of productive forces decisively influence social organization, culture, the level of welfare, and even consciousness. Consequently, we can infer that the political and social-organizational styles that were adopted by African countries after independence was largely dependent on the state of development of the productive forces; and its success or failure was also a product of the level of development of the productive forces.
Meanwhile, a particular relation of production comes into being because the productive forces are at a particular stage of development. For, instance, under feudalism, productive forces were in a very rudimentary stage of development and land was the major means of production.
However, notwithstanding the development of technology and industrialization in Africa, particularly in Nigeria, land has remained very important as a means of production. The social relation of production between the government and the citizens, particularly in the areas where the bulk of government revenue is generated revolves around land and the endowment therein. But in societies that have transcended the feudal mode of production, the changes in productive forces have given rise to new relations of production, particularly, that between the capitalists and workers. This new relations enhances the pervasive commoditization of production. As a result, the increased penetration of commodity relations results to increased autonomy of the
state. In short, as the development of productive forces increase, it increases the role of the state as a regulator or mediator. That is to say, the state merely sets the rules that guide the behavior of government and citizens, etc.
It is imperative to state that African economy was at a feudal stage, particularly the
Nigerian and South African economy before the dislocation and distortion of its economic base by the colonialists. This dislocation and distortion stagnated the development of the productive forces with all the attendant consequences. As a result, the transition from feudal mode of production to capitalism was foisted on the colonial states, which to a certain degree halted the development of the productive forces. Now the low degree of the development of the productive forces affects the level of pervasiveness of production relations, which in turn determines the degree of autonomy of the state. Thus, this degree of the autonomy of the state affects the character of the role of the state in social relations. That is, whether the role of the state becomes interventionist or regulatory is dependent on the degree of the autonomy of the state, which is a product of the level of development of the productive force.  Second, the other proposition of Marxist Political Economy approach is the dialectical approach to knowledge and society that defines the nature of reality as dynamic and conflictual.
That is, it contends that social disequilibria and consequent change are due to the class struggle and the working out of contradictions inherent in social and political phenomena. Accordingly, Marxists believe that there is no inherent social harmony or return to equilibrium. This is further buttressed by stating that every thesis automatically produces an antithesis, which is synthesized to produce yet another thesis, and this process continues ad infinitum. This expresses that the faith of all created things are unstable, always becoming and never being. It is this dynamic
character of reality, this movement of opposites that leads to inevitable change in any political system.
In the application of this approach to the study, we shall be guided by the basic propositions that are relevant in understanding the topic under investigation. Essentially, we stated that the level of development of the productive force decisively influences every other thing. In other words, material condition is very essential in understanding the movement of society. In both Nigeria and South Africa, it is the economic interest of European powers that led to colonial conquest and the type of political system that was adopted. For instance, it was because of the economic conditions of the colonial period that led to the amalgamation of the Southern and Northern protectorates, essentially to cushion the administrative cost of governing
Northern Nigeria. It was also to protect the economic interest of the imperialists that was responsible for handing over power to the North at independence. Even in South Africa, it was the material condition prevalent at that time that made the British government to hand over power to the white minority. It was also the economic condition that was implicated in the adoption of apartheid policy in South Africa.
Consequently, the economic condition was one of the reasons that led to the adoption of federal systems of government in both Nigeria and South Africa. Now, because the level of the development of the productive forces was still at a rudimentary stage, the pervasiveness of commodity relations was equally at a low level. This tendentially implies that the state has low degree of autonomy. As a result, the state participates in politics, instead of moderating and regulating politics. The manner of state’s participation in politics expresses the manner of intervention, essentially to protect its economic interest. Thus, the nature of federal structures in both Nigeria and South Africa, starting from its inception to date is a product of the level of the development of the productive forces. This is implicated in the pattern of revenue allocation
principles and formulae that have been adopted over the years.
Deriving from the above, it is equally the material condition that determines the struggle over resource access, exploitation and management, but particularly, the proceeds from its exploitation, and how it is employed to provide the basic necessities of life. Accordingly, the role of the state in every social formation, which is to maintain social order and cater for the needs of the citizens, becomes imperative. How the state performs this role depends on the level of the development of the productive forces. In Nigeria, the role of the state appears to be interventionist because the level of commodity relations is very low with a corresponding rudimentary development of the productive forces; but, in South Africa, the degree of commoditization of production is pervasive, which enhances the role of the state as a regulator or mediator of societal conflicts and interests. Meanwhile, the dynamic character of reality which expresses the conflictual nature of reality explains the struggles between social forces in every society that leads to much of the inevitable change in every political system. The adoption of any political structure or revenue allocation principles and formulae automatically creates an antithesis to it. The struggle for
resource control, for example is antithetical to the government’s role of controlling such resources on behalf of the people. Therefore, in every social formation, whatever there is has its opposites, and it is the conflict between these opposites that lead to change, and thus, explains the dynamic and conflictual character of reality.

1.6 HYPOTHESES
Deriving from the research questions posed in this study, we proffer the following
hypotheses:
1. The structure of Nigerian federalism negates equitability in the pattern of revenue allocation among the constituent units, while that of South Africa enhances equitability in the pattern of revenue allocation among the constituent units.
2. The proceeds from natural resource exploitation in Nigeria and South Africa do not
adequately enhance the provision of basic social amenities.
3. The role of the state in Nigeria engenders conflict in resource access and management in contradistinction to the role of the state in South Africa.

1.7 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION
This refers to the methods employed to generate the necessary evidence or proof (data) to test the hypotheses and answer the questions posed in the statement of problem. According to Cohen and Manion (1980: 26), methods are techniques and approach employed to generate data which are used as criteria for inference, interpretation, explanation and prediction. This study is essentially qualitative and therefore did not require the use of questionnaires or interviews.
Consequently, the method of data collection used in this study is the documentation method and the ex post facto research design. This involves the use of secondary sources of data collection which included books, journals, magazines, government official documents, conference papers, internet materials, etc. We employed the use of data from the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Office of the Accountant-General of the Nigerian Federation (OAGF), the World Bank Development Indicators, African Development Indicators, World Bank Human Development Index, Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the South African High Commission among others.
1.8 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS
In an attempt to investigate our hypotheses, we employed the use of qualitative deductive and, or, inductive logical method of analysis. This involved a logically consistent argument that either moved from general to specific or in reverse order. More so, we adopted content analysis as part of our method of data analysis. This involved reading meaning into available documents with a view to interpreting our data in such a way that it gave new insights to the understanding of the relationships between our independent and dependent variables, and enhanced a better understanding of the thrust of the study. However, in order to explain the hidden relationship between our explicandum and other phenomena, we also employed the Ex Post Facto Design as a guide.

BUY THIS TOPIC ON WHATSAPP

Related Project Materials

DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CHARITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (A CASE STUDY OF ZAMFARA YOUTH CHARITY ORGANISATIONS)

Overview 

Charity is a benevolent act that provides assistance to individuals in need through fina...

Read more

THE IMPACT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ON FIDUCIARY ACCOUNTING PRACTICES

THE IMPACT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ON FIDUCIARY ACCOUNTING PRACTICES

 

This study aims to (1) investigate the influence o...

Read more

THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL POLICY ON NIGERIAN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY AND OUTPUT

ABSTRACT

This research work is an empirical effort attempted to re-evaluate the impact of financial pol...

Read more

THE IMPACT OF EXCHANGE RATE ON THE NIGERIA ECONOMIC GROWTH

ABSTRACT

Exchange rate is the price of one currency in terms of another currency.Exchange rate s This exchange rate is also used to deter...

Read more

ANALYSIS OF HEAVY METALS CONCENTRATIONS IN COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE FISH FROM THE YOLA- JIMETA REGION, NORTHEASTERN NIGERIA AND PUBLIC-HEALTH IMPLICATIONS

ABSTRACT

Commercially available (farmed and wild) fish in the Yola-Jimeta region, ...

Read more

A CRITICAL REVIEW OF TEACHERS’ QUALIFICATION AND  SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT; ITS IMPACT ON JUNIOR STUDENT PERFORMANCE IN BASIC  SCIENCE

Statement of the Problem

There are contemporary problems in the teaching and learning of Integrated Sci...

Read more

THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF INSURANCE INDUSTRY TO GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (GDP) IN NIGERIA (1985 – 2010)

ABSTRACT

This work examined the contributions of the insurance industry to the gross domestic product (GDP) in Nigeria. Data for the stud...

Read more

PROBLEM AFFECTING SMALL SCALE FARMERS

Abstract

This research was carried out to determine the problems affecting small-scale farmers in Ughelli South Local G...

Read more

IMPACT OF TAX REFORMS ON ECONOMIC GROWTH OF NIGERIA

Abstract

This research examined the Impact of Tax Reforms on Economic Growth of Nigeria. Specifically,...

Read more

GEOCHEMISTRY, MINERALOGY AND BENEFICIATION OF IRONSTONE FROM BIDA BASIN, NIGERIA

ABSTRACT

The Bida Basin is a NW-SE trending inland sedimentary basin in North Central Nigeria that extends from Kontagora in the north to...

Read more