Recent data from the Nigeria Bureau of Statistics underlines the urgent need for economic diversification, as the contribution of the non-oil sector to GDP experienced a slight decrease, albeit with positive growth.

The non-oil sector contributed approximately 95.30% to Nigeria’s GDP in the last three months of the year. Key industries such as finance, telecommunications, agriculture, trade, construction, manufacturing, and real estate have been instrumental in driving this growth.

The percentage falls below the 95.66% recorded in the fourth quarter of 2022 but exceeds the 94.52% noted in the third quarter of 2023.

During the quarter in review, the non-oil sector witnessed a growth of 3.07% in real terms. Although this growth rate was 1.37% points lower than that observed in the same quarter of 2022, it was 0.32% points higher than the growth recorded in the third quarter of 2023.

On an annual basis, the growth rate of the non-oil sector for 2023 stood at 3.04%, marking a decrease from the 4.84% growth rate observed in 2022.

Drawing parallel with the economic diversification push of Saudi Arabia

Nigeria, endowed with vast natural resources, has long relied heavily on its oil sector, a dependency that poses significant risks to its economic stability.

Drawing parallels with Saudi Arabia, another oil-dependent nation, provides valuable insights into the imperative for diversification. Saudi Arabia, recognizing the vulnerabilities associated with oil dependency, began the ambitious Vision 2030 initiative to reduce reliance on oil revenues. This initiative aims to foster growth in non-oil sectors such as tourism, entertainment, technology, and renewable energy.

For instance, Saudi Arabia has invested heavily in developing its tourism industry, promoting historical and cultural sites, and hosting international events like the Formula 1 Grand Prix. Additionally, the kingdom has made significant strides in advancing renewable energy projects, aiming to generate 50% of its energy from renewable sources by 2030.

In Nigeria, the informal sector plays a crucial role in employment, with a significant portion of the population engaged in self-employment. However, challenges such as low taxation, weak regulatory frameworks, unfair competition, and disregard for standards hinder its full potential. Despite these challenges, the informal sector remains a vital component of the economy, reflecting the structure dominated by micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs).

Addressing taxation and revenue generation has been advocated as pivotal for Nigeria’s economic diversification efforts. Economists said with a low tax-to-GDP ratio, currently at 10%, there is a pressing need for comprehensive tax reforms to increase revenue streams.

The government constituted a committee for tax reforms last year, signaling its intent to bridge the tax-to-GDP ratio gap. The government’s aim to raise this ratio to 18% within the next three years aligns with broader efforts to reduce dependence on oil revenues.

But economists have also called for diversification beyond taxation, touting technology and agriculture as untapped alternative sources of revenue for Nigeria.

By diversifying its economy with a focus on tech and renewable energy, the oil-rich Saudi kingdom is setting the pace. The kingdom’s diversification endeavors offer valuable lessons for Nigeria.

Economists said that by prioritizing investment in non-oil sectors, enhancing regulatory frameworks, promoting entrepreneurship, and fostering innovation, Nigeria can mitigate the risks associated with oil dependency and stimulate sustainable economic growth. However, they noted that achieving these goals requires decisive action, strong leadership, and collaboration between the public and private sectors.

Nigeria stands at a critical juncture where economic diversification is imperative for long-term prosperity and resilience. It is believed that by learning from Saudi Arabia’s experiences, the African giant can chart a path towards a more diversified and sustainable economy, reducing vulnerability to oil price fluctuations and fostering inclusive growth for its citizens.

Intellectual property (IP) rights law is quite interesting and most times controversial: An intending husband and wife hire a photographer and pay the photographer handsomely to come and cover their wedding. By common sense, the husband and wife are right to assume that since they have paid the photographer, every picture of theirs snapped by the photographer ought to legally belong to them. But no, that’s not what the law says; the law says that though you have paid the photographer, though it is your image that was snapped by the photographer, those pictures legally belong to the photographer and not the couple.

The same goes when a family invites a photographer to come to their house and snap them family photos for their family portrait, same goes when a parent(s) invites a photographer to come and capture the images of their infant. That your family portrait, that your child’s image captured by the photographer belongs to the photographer and not you or your child. In fact, by law, before you do anything with those wedding pictures or family portraits, you need to seek the consent of the photographer or else he has the right to commence an action against you for copyright infringement. 

Cases like these have gone to court and the courts have all agreed that the photographer owns the copyright of every picture taken by him with his camera even though he has been paid for the photos. The landmark case that must always be mentioned whenever image copyright in Nigeria is being discussed is the case of BANIRE V. NTA STAR TV (CA/A/345/2017).

In the above case, Ms Banire, a photographer/videographer brought legal action against NTA Star TV because NTA Star TV used her images for outdoor advertisements on billboards mounted all around Abeokuta and Akure without her consent and authorization. This, she claimed, amounted to infringement of her copyright on those images. NTA TV stars, on the other hand, raised the defence that they acquired and paid for those pictures, although through a third party, hence, they did not infringe on Ms Banire’s copyright to the images. 

On appeal, the appellate court held that the law has afore provided in Sections 10 and 51 of the Copyright Act, that it is that it is the photographer and not the person in the image that owns the copyright to the picture. His Lordship, Justice Muhammed Baba Idris (JCA), reiterated “What is evident from the above provision is that the person who is a muse or the person in the photograph is not in fact the author and therefore he/she does not own copyright in the photograph. Rather it is the person who took the photograph that is the author.”

The only time when a person who has been snapped or who pays for the photos can own the copyright in those images is when there has been a transfer of copyright ownership in writing from the photographer to the person or when the photographer signs a release form, releasing the intellectual properties in those images to the person.