Migration, in theory, is movement; a forward march toward opportunity, safety, and better life chances. But in Nigeria, and much of Africa, the story of migration policy reads more like a slow drift into institutional inertia. For a nation of over 216 million people, with vibrant diasporas, a dynamic labour force, and complex displacement patterns, the failure to fully harness migration as a strategic asset is both baffling and costly.
In Nigeria, migration governance is still treated as an ad hoc emergency, a soft power function for diaspora praise-singing or donor appeasement.
The 2015 National Migration Policy (NMP) was a historic blueprint, seeking to coordinate everything from border security to diaspora engagement. But nearly a decade later, it has become a ceremonial document, rolled out for international forums. Even the 2025 revised version, launched with flair, has shown little traction beyond policy statements, as the details are yet to be made public.
In spite of the existence of institutions like the National Migration Working Group and NIDCOM, migration governance in Nigeria has been undermined by a stark bureaucracy.
Understanding the real challenges
Despite the existence of well-crafted policies and institutional frameworks, critical pillars of migration governance remain underdeveloped.
Migration monitoring and regulation suffer from systemic fragmentation. Data is collected in silos across ministries and agencies, with no real-time or interoperable systems to reflect actual migration flows. Decision-making is often reactive, not data-driven, because the necessary infrastructure simply doesn’t exist.
This leads directly to the second failure: data infrastructure. Nigeria lacks a centralised, open-access migration database. As a result, policymakers operate with limited visibility, navigating conflicting statistics and redundant reports. The absence of a single source of truth continues to undermine both planning and accountability.
While Nigerians abroad send home an impressive $19.5 billion annually in remittances, their role in national development remains ceremonial. Engagement is typically limited to diaspora day events and diplomatic niceties, without offering real political inclusion, voting rights, or structured investment platforms. The diaspora is seen as generous but not strategic.
Border management remains one of the country’s most glaring vulnerabilities. Nigeria’s land borders are porous and under-secured, manned by overstretched personnel with limited technological tools. This leaves the nation exposed to transnational crime, human trafficking, and unchecked irregular migration.
Even more alarming is the state of migrant and IDP protection. With over 3 million internally displaced persons, many living without access to healthcare, education, or legal identity, Nigeria faces a growing humanitarian crisis. Meanwhile, Nigerian migrants abroad frequently suffer abuse and exploitation, with bilateral agreements offering little more than vague promises of support.
Lastly, the community-based organisations that work directly with displaced persons and vulnerable migrants are rarely funded or empowered. Their participation is lip service consultation, but they are never truly included in the policy design or implementation process.
Key shortcomings of the 2015 National Migration Policy
Though the 2015 National Migration Policy was seen as a bold attempt to provide structure to Nigeria’s complex migration landscape, it ultimately fell short where it mattered most: implementation. Despite its promise, the policy lacked the essential machinery to bring its vision to life.
There were no binding mandates to enforce collaboration between the various ministries and agencies tasked with managing migration, leaving coordination to chance rather than obligation. It also failed to establish a clear budgetary framework, making execution dependent on ad hoc funding or external donor support.
At the subnational level, the policy barely existed; migration management was not devolved to state or local governments, even though these jurisdictions often bear the brunt of internal displacement and cross-border movement.
Equally troubling was its silence on the integration of migration into national development frameworks, particularly in education, labour, and urban planning. The absence of robust legal protections for vulnerable groups—asylum seekers, climate-displaced persons, and the stateless—remained unaddressed in both law and policy.
In the end, the 2015 NMP became a blueprint conceived in good faith but delivered with insufficient tools.
Time for the Federal Government to meaningfully take action
While countries like Ghana and Rwanda forge ahead with AI-powered migration systems and diaspora voting frameworks, Nigeria remains trapped in a policy rehearsal loop.
To truly move forward, the federal government must establish a legally empowered Migration Implementation Taskforce not just to monitor progress but to drive it. Migration data must be digitised and integrated across all agencies, creating interoperable systems that provide real-time insight and coordination.
Diaspora engagement must evolve beyond remittance roundtables and cultural celebrations to include political inclusion and strategic investment partnerships. Our borders must be managed by trained professionals, equipped with modern biometric tools and backed by a culture of accountability. In the same vein, grassroots civil society actors, particularly those working on the frontlines of displacement, youth advocacy, and livelihood, must be adequately funded and structurally included in migration governance.
Migration is not a crisis to be managed in silos. It is a powerful lever for national development, foreign policy, and economic transformation; hence, the government must offer clear direction, protection, and voice.
Nduneche Ezurike, PhD, is an Opt-in member of the Harvard Business Review Advisory Council. He wrote in from Lagos
