Ibrahim Muhammad

THE IMPACT OF NIGERIAN BOARDER CLOSURE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: A CASE STUDY OF JIBIA BOARDER OF KATSINA STATE,- BY ISYAKU NUHU SCE/17/INR/00516 BEING A RESEARCH WORK SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND ADMINISTRATION, SCHOOL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION, BAYERO UNIVERSITY KANO, NIGERIA. IN PARTIAL FUFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. SUPERVISOR: DR. SURAJ YAHAYA MUHAMMAD JANUARY, 2024 DECLARATION I hereby declare that this work is the product of my own research effort, undertaken under the supervision of Dr. Suraj Yahaya Muhammad. All sources have been duly acknowledged. _____________________________________________ ISYAKU NUHUDATE SCE/17/INR/00516 APPROVAL PAGE This research project entitled “The Impact of Nigerian Boarder Closure on Economic Development: a case study of Jibia Boarder of Katsina State,-”, has been read and approved as meeting the regulation governing the award of Bachelor of Science in International Relations. -------------------------------------                                       ----------------------------- DR. SURAJ YAHAYA MUHAMMAD SIGN & DATE (SUPERVISOR) -------------------------------------                                       ------------------------------ DR. KABIR IBRAHIM SIGN & DATE (H.O.D) -------------------------------------                                       ----------------------------- DR. FLORENCE N.B. SIGN & DATE (LEVEL COORDINATOR) DEDICATION I dedicated this effort to my parents Alh. Nuhu Siliki Abdullahi and Hajiya Maimuna Adamu May Allah rewards them with JANNATUL FIRDAUS, Amin. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Surely all praise is due to Allah (S.W.A) Who endowed men and women with well-developed mental faculties, spiritual of inspiration as well as power of actions. The Beneficent, the Merciful, the Greatest, the most High, may His peace and blessings be upon the Holy Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) Amin. I am very grateful to Almighty Allah who granted me the opportunity, the good health and preserving lecturers, that enable me to pass through the memorable period of the course successfully. I hereby specially thanks and acknowledge with gratitude and respect, the guidance, encouragement and contributions given to me by supervisor in person of Dr. Suraj Yahaya Muhammad, who spared his time despite his tight engagements and attended to me in more ways than one throughout the period of my research work. May Allah reward him abundantly and continue to help him in all his affairs, Ameen. My immensurable gratitude goes to my mentors (Muhammad Adamu Sunusi, Danladi Dodi Jana and Danazumi Sule) and my wife Lubababu for their cares, motivating, prayers, supports and encouragements, both morally and financially in our academic pursuit right from early beginning up to our studies at School of Continuing Education, Bayero University Kano. May Almighty Allah Bless them all. I also acknowledge the motivation and contribution I got from all of my lecturers of the Department of Social Science and Administration such as Mal. Nura Iro Ma’aji, Dr. Abubakar Salihu, Dr. Sani Ali, Dr. Sani Umar, Dr. Umar Faruq Usman, Dr. Abdulwahab Kabir, Mal. Muktar Bello, Dr. Mustapha Isiyaku, Dr. Tasiu Magaji, Dr. Baba and Dr. Abdulaziz Zango. May Allah reward them. Moreover, I cannot conclude without thanking my great and unforgettable friends and colleagues (Dalhatu Umar Musa, Bala Abdullahi Turaki, Abubakar Adamu, Bashir Gero and Binta Isah) who immensely contribute towards the success of my studies in one way or the other in the School of Continuing Education, Department of Social Science and Administration, Bayero University Kano. TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents DECLARATIONii APPROVAL PAGEiii DEDICATIONiv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSv TABLE OF CONTENTSvi ABSTRACTviii CHAPTER ONE1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION1 1.1 INTRODUCTION1 1.2 STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM3 1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION4 1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY4 1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY5 1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY5 1.7 METHODOLOGY5 1.7.1 Research Design6 1.7.2 Population of the Study6 1.7.3 Sample Size6 1.7.4 Sampling Technique6 1.7.5 Method of Data Collection6 1.7.6 Method of Data Analysis7 1.8 SCHEME OF CHAPTERS7 CHAPTER TWO8 LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK8 2.1 The Concept of Border Closure8 2.2 Development10 2.3 Socio-Economic Development11 2.4 Challenges of the Border Closure Policy in Nigeria.13 2.5 Theoretical Framework15 CHAPTER THREE19 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY AREA19 3.1 INTRODUCTION19 3.2 GEOGRAPHY OF JIBIA19 3.3 ECONOMY OF JIBIA19 3.4 IMPACT OF BOARDER CLOSURE OF JIBIA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA19 CHAPTER FOUR26 DATA PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS26 4.0 INTRODUCTION26 4.1 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS26 4.1.1 BIOGRAPHY OF RESPONDENTS26 4.1.2 What are the impact of Jibia Boarder closure on the people of Katsina State?27 4.1.2.1 Positive Impact of Border Closure on Nigeria and Nigerians28 4.1.2.2 Negative Impact of Border Closure on Nigeria and Nigerians29 4.1.3 What are the challenges faced of security personal due to Jibia Boarder closure?31 4.1.4 What are the ways on how to ensure effective boarder closure?34 CHAPTER FIVE38 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS38 5.1 Summary38 5.2 Conclusion38 5.3 Recommendations39 REFERENCES41 ABSTRACT This research examined the impact of Nigerian boarder closure on economic development: a case study of Jibia boarder of Katsina state,-. The study used content analysis as a method of investigation is adopted in this study. This involves reading meaning into materials that are collected for the purpose of achieving reliable and verifiable conclusion. The study adopts Elite theory to form the theoretical basis of analysis. The study found that , the closure of borders has both positive and negative impacts on the socio-economy of the country, the border closure which commenced in August, 2019 has noticed a remarkable achievement in terms of saving huge amounts of U.S. Dollars spent on subsidies by the Federal Government of Nigeria. Notwithstanding, the border closure has positively helped the local rice Millars in all states of the federation and Nigeria markets are full of local rice produced in Nigeria. The study concludes with suggestions for possible solutions to the problem, The policy of border closure should always consider the poor people who are about 87 million in Nigeria and became subjects of hardship following the closure of cross-border trade. Concerted effort should be made to strengthen, improve and integrate national civil registration systems, especially the integrity of identity and travel documents. Develop and improve cross-border infrastructure corridors that include telecommunications internet, roads railways, waterways and airways. Member states should put in place legislative policies and other mechanisms to guarantee the protection and promotion of labour rights of migrants and address as use of migrant labour, unethical recruitment and human trafficking. CHAPTER ONE GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1.1 INTRODUCTION Borders globally, are actually fundamental elements of human lives and at the same time elements of relations between individuals and society. From the time immemorial, ingredients of humanity have always been separated and also connected by a network of borders at all territorial levels (Kolossov, 2012). Therefore, the realization that borders characterize complex social and territorial phenomena has definitely had a profound impact on the study of borders. Trans-border commerce between Nigeria and her neighbouring states usually remains mutually beneficial. In August 2019 the Nigerian government imposed a ban (border closure) on the movement of all goods and persons from and to countries with which Nigeria shares a land border. The motivation for this according to the Nigeria Custom Service (2019), was to curb the menace of smuggling goods such as rice, tomatoes and poultry in order to enhance Nigeria’s agricultural sector. However, this drastic move has attracted quantum criticism from many quarters, including Nigerian citizens and those in neighbouring countries, premised on the fact that the decision is against the concept of “free trade” between African Countries (Punch Newspaper, March 3, 2020) it was, however, reported that this drastic move was taken without consultation with the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to the effect that business owners in the various affected countries could not load vehicles with goods (including perishable items) heading for Nigeria (Punch Newspaper, March 3, 2020). The Nigeria-Benin-Niger and Cameroon border closure in August 2019 was unexpected and made without any formal communication with government officials of these neighbouring countries. The aim was to stop all movements of goods, except oil, from import to export. The closure was part of Nigeria’s economic strategy to tackle the smuggling of goods across the border, to increase local production and protect local producers, as outlined in its- Economic and Recovery Growth Plan. Smuggling activities across the Nigerian-Benin border account for about 110 billion naira ($303,614,300 United States dollars) in trade revenue loss every year (Liedong, 2019). Meanwhile, historically, Nigeria lies between latitudes 4° and 14°N and longitudes 2° and 15°E. Nigeria is attributed as possessing a total area of 923,768 km2 (356,669 sq mi), making it the world's 32nd-largest country. It shares a 4,047 kilometres (2,515 mi) border with Benin (773km), Niger (1497km), Chad (87km), Cameroon (1690km), and has a coastline of at least 853 km. Nigeria’s claim to territorial sea (offshore space) rose from 3 miles of continental shelf and about 200 miles on exclusive fishing zones from 1958 to 1978 as a country signatory to conventions on continental shelf despite its inability to determine its extent of claim (Prescott, 1975). However, smuggling is nothing new along these borders, with historical roots from British and French colonial authorities, when colonial rivals implemented trade policies to protect local industries from external competition, which exacerbated illicit trade activities across the border. Activating a prolonged trade restriction to solve the recurring issue of smuggling will have a negative economic effect on Nigeria and puts a damper on Africa's much-anticipated intra-regional trade investment agreement, the African Continental Free Trade Area, known as AFCFTA, slated to begin in July 2020. It is to be noted that Nigeria recently joined and signed compact with African Continental Free Trade aimed at increasing GDP of African members. However, Nigeria acted just three months after it had signed the African Continental Free Trade Agreement. With 55 member countries, a combined GDP of $2.4 trillion and a total population of 1.2 billion, the agreement will create the world’s largest free trade area. Its aim is to promote intra-Africa trade, which is abysmally low at 16% (Tahiru, 2019). The African Continental Free Trade Area (AFCFTA) projected to add a combined gross domestic product (GDP) of more than $3.4 trillion USD to Africa's economy focuses on creating a single continental market for goods and services, with free movement of business, persons and investments, and thus pave the way for accelerating the establishment of the Continental Customs Union and the African Customs Union. It also intends to expand intra-African trade through better harmonization and coordination of trade liberalization and facilitation. The border closure has spiked food prices, causing inflation to increase to 11.24 percent, the highest level since June 2019, and it is expected to rise even higher if continued. Presently, Nigeria produces about 6.9 million metrics tons of rice annually, but the country has to import rice worth $4 billion USD to meet the rising consumer demand. By and large, Nigeria’s 2017 Economic Recovery and Growth Plan aimed at deepening investments in agriculture and increase the sector’s contribution to economic growth from 5% in 2017 to 8.4% by 2020. The idea is to revive domestic farming and save on food imports (over $22 billion a year). It is this national plan that precipitated the border closure. The government wants to protect domestic farmers from cheap imported foodstuff. While Nigerian rice farmers are happy about their government’s actions, there are concerns about whether domestic food production can meet domestic demand. In 2017, demand for rice in Nigeria reached 6.7 million tons, almost double the 3.7 million tons produced domestically and this has presently led to unprecedented hardship among Nigerian citizen as the border closure has led to hike in prices of food particularly rice. For instance, since the border closure, the price of a 50 kilogram bag of rice has increased from 9,000 naira to 30,000 naira while local rice has risen from 5,000 naira to 26,000 which is, extremely hard for the poor masses to afford (Tahiru, 2019). Consequently, it is against this backdrop that this study interrogates the impacts of the recent land border closure policy on socio-economic development with a view of bringing out the challenges and prospects therein. This study therefore, examines implications of Nigeria boarder closure, a case study of Jibia Local Government, Katsina State 1.2 STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM Having the largest economy on the African continent, Nigeria became the latest country to close its borders in recent months, following Kenya, Rwanda, and Sudan (Ogunwusi, Nzeako, and Utulu, 2019). No nation can produce everything its people need, so countries engage in international trade. A country conducts international trade and corresponding financial transactions to provide commodities it lacks in exchange for commodities it produces in abundance. This type of transaction, in conjunction with other economic policies, generally contributes to the improvement of a nation's standard of living. The closure of borders is not a new phenomenon in Africa. Nigeria's actions raise serious concerns about the seriousness and prospects of regional integration in Africa. Since the closure of Nigeria's borders in August 2019, there have been concerns regarding the validity and essence of the Economic of West African States (ECOWAS) Treaty, which permits the free movement of people and goods across West Africa (Akinkuolie, 2020). With its founding in 1975 by Nigeria and Togo, ECOWAS has grown into a model regional organization whose institutions include the ECOWAS Parliament, ECOWAS Court, ECOWAS Passport, and ECOMOG Regional Force. There have, however, been many challenges along the long road to regional integration. Infractions of the ECOWAS Treaty on the movement of goods and people, such as the smuggling of firearms and drugs, human trafficking, and trans-border insurgency, among others, have posed grave threats to the peace, stability and economies of member states, with Nigeria receiving the brunt. It has been suggested that the use of a security fence as a means of combating smuggling and crime might be a daunting challenge, especially in Africa, where the long porous borders are inhabited by ethnic communities, which survive on trans-border trade and smuggling (Akinkuolie, 2020). Trans-border commerce is mutually beneficial between Nigeria and her neighbors. Nigeria imports grains, tubers, vegetables, and livestock from the Niger, Benin, and Chad Republics to supplement its deficits, and manufactured household products and building materials are exported from Nigeria to these countries. An important part of the economy is the global exchange of goods and services. As a result of these commercial exchanges, there is no need to shut down the entire system, as the closure of the border would seem to imply. 1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION The following are the research questions of this study: 1. What are the impact of Jibia Boarder closure on the people of Katsina State? 2. What are the challenges faced of security personal due to Jibia Boarder closure? 3. What are the ways on how to ensure effective boarder closure? 1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The following are the research objectives of this study: 1. To find out the impact of Jibia boarder closure on the people of Katsina State. 2. To find out the challenges facing the security personnel due to Jibia Closure. 3. To recommend ways on how to ensure effective boarder closure. 1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY Since independence, Nigeria and Niger maintain stable economic relations with the view to improving the lives of their citizens. This has a great impact on the economy of two countries especially on the basis of their proximity (They share Border) as they maintains trade routes and economic exchange for trading goods and exchange of various resources. Despite this long existing economic relations between Nigeria and Niger, they are still yet to find a profound solutions towards sustaining and developing their economies specifically as intends to give an overview of Nigeria and Niger Relations from 2020 to 2023 with particular emphasis on factors that influence Nigeria – Niger economic relations either positively or negatively. Fundamentally, the study is aimed at assessing the economic relations between Nigeria and Niger with the view to understand the positive and negative impacts of the relations. In addition how Nigeria and Niger economic relation can be improved especially to enhance the economic status of their citizens. 1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY There are many aspects of relations that exist between Nigeria and Niger Jibia Boarder i.e economic, cultural political relations. This study will only assessment of Nigeria boarder closure, a case study of Jibia Local Government. This is perhaps because of the importance and benefits that could be derived from this relations to both Nigeria and Niger Jibia boarder and because economic relation is the major relation among the relationship between Nigeria and Niger. This study will also cover the period of 2019 – 2022 as the limitation of the study. 1.7 METHODOLOGY The research methodology gives the description of the various steps involved in carrying out a research to ensure the validity and reliability of the study. The research methodology this study is structured into; research design, population of the study, method of data collection, and document analysis. 1.7.1 Research Design Asika (1991), defines a research design as the structuring of investigation aimed at identifying variables and their relationships to one another designing a research is an assurance against failure. The research design is further viewed the framework or plan for a study that is used in collecting and analyzing a set of data. Content analysis as a method of investigation is adopted in this study. This involves reading meaning into materials that are collected for the purpose of achieving reliable and verifiable conclusion. A writer like Selltiz define content analysis as a research techniques for the objective, systematic and qualitative description of the manifest content of communication (Selltiz 1977) Kelinger (1973) defined content analysis as the method of studying and analyzing the bilateral relation objective and qualitative manner for explaining variables. Since the study involved the analysis of some variable in written words and other documented materials. 1.7.2 Population of the Study The population size of this study is the total population of Jibia, and the sample was taken from this population. According to the 2022 National Population Commission protection, Jibia Local Government has 167,435 residents with a 2022 projection population of 299,200 (NPC, 2006). 1.7.3 Sample Size This is the number of respondents who have been chosen to reply to the questionnaire questions. This study's sample size will be taken from the population, and the anticipated sample size will be 100 participants, with only 100 questionnaires delivered to them. 1.7.4 Sampling Technique The research will employ cluster sampling as a sample strategy. In this example, five wards will be chosen to reflect the population, and ten questionnaires will be sent to respondents in each ward. Bugaje, Farfaru, Faru, Gangara, Jibia A are the wards. 1.7.5 Method of Data Collection In this research work, secondary data is relevant in achieving the objectives of the research, the use of secondary source of data is the main method of data collection adopted in this research work, this method is adopted due to intrinsic values. The secondary source in this study includes material like; Newspapers, Magazines, Textbooks, Internet, Journals Government Publication, official documents etc. which help me to gain An insight into the assessing Nigeria boarder closure, a case study of Jibia Local Government. The questionnaires were exclusively given to residents of Jibia local government, as this was a case study. The researcher will administer and collect the surveys on his or her own. People's norms, beliefs, and values will be respected, and attempts will be taken not to violate people's morals and ethics. 1.7.6 Method of Data Analysis In this study, the data collected will be analysed and presented in a tabular form for easy understanding. Also simple percentages will be used for further analysis. 1.8 SCHEME OF CHAPTERS Chapter one of this work focuses mainly on the introduction of the research, such as scope of the study, significance of the study, objectives of the study, assumption of the study and methodology. Chapter two of this work is the literature review, the historical and geographical background of Nigeria and Niger Republic. Chapter three of this work will look at the historical background of Jibia Local Government. Chapter four covers data presentation and analysis. Chapter five covers summary, conclusion and recommendations of this work. CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 2.1 The Concept of Border Closure There is not a coherent or unified body of theory explaining border relations and dynamics, therefore most of the theoretical work on borders draws from different disciplines such as geography, international relations, political economy, economics, public administration, etc. and our work is not the exception. Most studies of international relations traditionally use borders as a proxy for geographic proximity, typically as a control variable, to explain conflict and war (Starr and Thomas 2005). The degree to which borders between two states are officially open or closed relates to their historical context, level of economic integration or dependence, and other more localized border factors, such as urban settlements and categorizations of border populations living in border regions. Our approach thus incorporates social, economic, and political dimensions, as suggested by the work of Oscar (1994), who conceptualizes borderlands classified by four categories. Closed borders reflect hostility between two states and there is little movement across the international boundary (e.g. North and South Korea, India and Pakistan, and East and West Germany before unification). When tensions have lifted but relations are not close, states may share a co-existent borderland (e.g. Iran and Iraq; Greece and Turkey). If states share warmer relations at a higher level of interaction, then they may share either an interdependent (e.g. US–Mexico) or integrated borderland (e.g. European Union). The difference between the last two categories is that the quantity and quality of movement of people and goods is deeper and official most overtly between two states in the latter type. We assume that the free movement of people across state boundaries is related to friendlier relations and varying levels of integration. Thus, documentation requirements, a panoptical filter, capture the tradeoff of the potential benefits from bilateral economic interactions and the costs of associated with maintaining national security. We treat entry requirements as an ordinal category rather than as a dichotomy. The most closed states may prevent entrance altogether or at least impose stricter threshold filters and demand both a passport and a visa. We should expect this of states in the closed and coexistent border categories. The requirement of visas is typical to at least gain special permission or government review to enter the most closed states. For this reason, the most isolated states are not specifically conceptualized as special cases. Borders may not be just demarcated zones or containers separating peoples but instead spaces shared by a political community. Socially and economically, people may be informally integrated by varying degrees without the explicit plan of their national governments. Such residents will likely put pressure on their own state governments not to invoke policies that disrupt localized interactions (Ajayi, 2006). In other words, the cross-border flows (i.e. flows whose origin and destination are local) may be more important than bi-national flows that do not need a border location and are ubiquitous (Charisma, 1998). We earlier hypothesized that a higher income state would be more closed to its lower income neighboring state; therefore, the greater the differential of development between neighboring states the more closed will be the richer to the poorer. However, the degree of restriction can be mitigated by the weight border regions have in the respective national economies; the presence of urban settlements or cities within borderlands should capture the weight or importance of border regions. Urban settlements at the borders shift policy from abstract constructs, such as “national security” or “national interest,” to concrete interactions such as trade, investment, and environment that take place in a real time and space. In summary, the geographical adjacency of structural differences (Charisma, 1998) creates an arbitrage economy that intensifies flows of goods and people in both directions, making the richer state in a dyad slightly more open to its poorer neighbor than otherwise would be the case. However, Nigeria’s 2017 Economic Recovery and Growth Plan aimed to deepen investments in agriculture and increase the sector’s contribution to economic growth from 5% in 2017 to 8.4% by 2020. The idea is to revive domestic farming and save on food imports (over $22 billion a year). It is this national plan that precipitated the border closure. The government wants to protect domestic farmers from cheap imported foodstuff. While Nigerian rice farmers are happy about their government’s actions, there are concerns about whether domestic food production can meet domestic demand. In 2017, the demand for rice in Nigeria reached 6.7 million tons, almost double the 3.7 million tons produced domestically, and this shortage has the potential of plunging Nigeria into food crises that can lead to degeneration of the country (Unah, 2019). By and large, Borno through its 12 official borders has about 440, 800 traders who transacting across the borders. Jigawa through Maigatari border has about 20, 630 traders while Katsina with 9 official borders has about 185, 730 traders who were cross border traders across boundary. On the other hand, Kebbi has 7 official borders whereby about 280 000 traders engaged in cross border trading. Sokoto state in its 3 official borders has about 60 000 traders across borders while Yobe state through 4 borders estimated to be having 220, 000 traders across borders which made the estimate to the tune of 1, 207, 160 across the Nigeria – Niger Border. This is quite huge individuals trading across the international boundary. Thus, when a border is closed many individuals will lose their jobs. For instance, closing the Nigeria – Niger Border will cause about one Million people to lose their jobs (Gordon, Moore, Park & Richardson: 2009). Finally, the researchers see Border Closure as the policy of the government meant to stop or checkmate the movement of goods and services across the borderlines or boundaries of one country and another. It is therefore on the interest of the national government to restrict these movements or close its borders in order to encourage home production/ goods and services. But the fact remains that such national government must create a conducive environment to cushion the effect of border closure on its citizens before such policy is embarked upon, otherwise, the pains of such policy will surpass its gains and therefore expose the citizens and the economy to an untold hardship in the country. 2.2 Development Rodney (1972) explains that development implies "increasing capacity to regulate internal and external relationships". As he further points out, that development is many sided or multinational process. For the individuals, he opines that it implies increased skill and capacity, greater freedom, creativity, self discipline, responsibility and material well-being. By this definition I believe that development starts from the individuals. It is when the inhabitants of a state are developed that the country can be developed. So it is essential for the people to develop so that it can reflect on their environment and nation. Rostow (1971) explains development as a process of evolutional succession in stages, where human societies leave a rudimentary model until they arrive at a western industrialized civilization consumption model, which is considered unique and universal. To Perroux (1978), defines development as "the combination of mental and social changes among the population which decide to increase its real and global products, cumulatively and in sustainable manner." According to Drewnowski "development is a process of qualitative change and quantitative growth of the social and economic reality which we can call either society or economy. According to Mabogunje (1995)", there are four main ways in which the term development has been used: development as economic growth, as modernization, as distributional justice and as socio-economic transformation. He argues for a long time following the Second World War, development was seen simply as economic growth, it implied a rapid rise in per capita productivity and a changed in economic structure. Mabogunje (1980) goes on to distinguish between 'development and modernization', the latter being seen as the social transformation of a nation. This is second way in which the world 'development' has been used. It still in sense of economic growth came to be seen as part of a much wider process of social change described as modernization. 2.3 Socio-Economic Development Although there are limited scholarly definitions on the concept of socio-economic development, an attempt was made to give an understanding of what the concept is all about. Socio-economic development is the process of social and economic development in a society. It is measured with indicators, such as GDP, life expectancy, literacy and levels of employment. Changes in lesstangible factors are also, such as personal dignity, freedom of association, personal safety and freedom from fear of physical harm, and the extent of participation in civil society. Socio-economic development is considered a key concept central to any problem of change in the socio-economic sphere. Its significance is aptly expressed by Tayebwa, (1992) who states that “the concept of development functions as both, a product of an optimistic vision and an articulation of social interests, and a tool of analysis”. In principle, the concept of development rests on that of change. Change is a transition from one state of affairs to another. In this approach, development can be defined as a series of changes characterized by such properties as irreversibility, spontaneity, and a monotonic character and directionality (Chojnicki, 1989). Without going into the details of those properties, or formulating any basic (ontological) definition of development, I shall pass on to a characterization of socio-economic development, but still keeping in mind the fundamental sense of development. The definition of socio-economic development as a series of changes involves stating what characterizes those changes and what determines them. In other words, we have to determine what changes count as socioeconomic development. To present the specific nature of socio-economic development, we must refer to the character of processes and goals of changes making up this type of development, since there is much arbitrariness in understanding and using them effectively. The concept of socioeconomic development can also be seen as activities involving both social and economic factors which result in the growth of the economic and societal progress and is measurable in both economic and social terms e.g. growth in the number of jobs created and reduction in the level of poverty etc. Socio-economic development like development emphasizes progress in terms of economic and social factor within a geographical unit. Economic development is the process of raising the level of prosperity through increased production, distribution and consumption of goods and services. Social development on the other hand refers to the complexity of social dynamic (the interplay of social structures, processes and relationships) and focused on the following: the social concerns of the people as objectives of development. People-centered, participatory approach to social development is about inclusiveness, social justice and the common good. Indicators of social development provide comparative information about areas such as income, poverty, employment, employment security, education, health, crime and civic participation. 2.4Challenges of the Border Closure Policy in Nigeria. Violation of African Continental Free Trade Agreement among AU. Nigeria acted just three months after it had signed the African Continental Free Trade Agreement. With 55 member countries, a combined GDP of $2.4 trillion and a total population of 1.2 billion, the agreement will create the world’s largest free trade area (Tahiru, 2019). Its aim is to promote intra-African trade, which is abysmally low at 16%. To restrict trade flows so shortly after this momentous agreement is a major blow to integration efforts in Africa. It also shows how unprepared African countries might be for free trade. It’s hard to see how the free trade deal can increase intra-Africa trade to 60% by 2022, as projected , when it is being undermined from the start. In other words, the border closure policy will not only affect Nigeria, but also the entire African nations that are still managing to come out of poverty many of its members have found themselves. Low Flow of Foreign Direct Investment Foreign investment inflow, particularly foreign direct investment (FDI) is perceived to have a positive impact on economic growth of a host country through various direct and indirect channels. It augments domestic investment, which is crucial to the attainment of sustained growth and development. Thus, when borders are closed it disrupts the smooth flow of FDI. Moreover, the volatile policy of border land closure is not favourable to investors who have invested huge amount of money which takes long time to become profitable. A good example is for those who invested in Agriculture, Machinery, Storage or Transport Facilities which require amortisation over long period of years. Hence, the closure disrupts these kinds of investments especially if the said investments were meant for Cross Border Trade. The policy is by this reason a disruptive one. Increase in Illegal smuggling of goods Nigeria has porous borders, and therefore, the government’s policy on border closure has helped to escalate the smuggling of goods into Nigeria markets and thereby leading traders to escape excise duties and tariffs and fuel illegal smuggling. To reduce fuel smuggling, customs officials last month banned the supply of petroleum products to filling stations within 20km of the borders. Perhaps, Nigeria is losing millions of naira to smugglers who do not pay various taxes they supposed to pay to the government. A friend was narrating his experience over this recent border closure imposed precisely at Seme Border. According to him, “Nigeria is shooting itself on the leg by this border closure and further argued that Nigerian government has opened a large means of money making to the security agents attached to these borders. According to him, once it is mid night the security agents will collect money from the prospective merchants and open the borders for them to pass. They will continue this till early in the morning and they will now close the borders again”. Thus, these are the monies that are supposed to be paid to the government for common good of the people. The recent inflation report released by the National Bureau of Statistics also revealed that Nigeria’s inflation rate rose by 11.61% year on year in October 2019, the highest in about 18 months. The rise was largely attributed to an increase in the cost of food items following the closure of the borders to cheaper imported goods. Increase in Inflation Rate Since the border closure announcement and its immediate implementation in August, inflation has been on the rise. For instance, the latest consumer price index (CPI) report released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) in November 2019 proved that the year-on-year food inflation rate increased from 13.2% in August 2019 to 13.51% in September 2019 and then from 13.51% in September 2019 to 14.09% in October 2019. This was a 1.33% month-on-month increase – with rice, poultry products, frozen fish, cooking oil/fats and bread/cereals recording the highest increase in cost prices nationally. The rise was largely attributed to an increase in the cost of food items following the closure of the borders to cheaper imported goods. Moreover, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that local demand for rice in Nigeria alone is at 7.3 million metric tonnes. Currently, local production stands at 4.8 million metric tonnes yearly (Abia, 2019). This suggests that the inability of domestic supply to meet local food demand will cause an inflation of food prices when and if food imports are proscribed. Loss of Job and Employment among the Border Communities Another major disadvantage border closure is the loss of job/employment among the host communities. This is because border closure policy has negative effects on informal trade that take place across the land borders. It is almost impossible to estimate the value and volume of the informal trade that takes place across the land border since there is no available data but without doubt, this will run into several millions of naira on a daily basis providing several thousand with a daily means of livelihood. The importance of this informal trade must not be underestimated as it is the major source of funds for many and the Federal Government is not able to provide enough jobs or opportunities to reduce the adverse effect of the land border closure. Increase in Prices of Staple Foods Another challenge of the land border closure on socio-economic development include increase in the price of staple foods in Nigeria especially rice which is one of the most popular foods in the country. It is a known fact that many states in Nigeria are yet to implement the minimum wage for workers and any increase in staples or any other product for that matter will make many Nigerians worse off. Even where the minimum wage has been implemented, it is unfortunate that the #30,000 minimum wage is not even capable of taken home a bag of rice presently in Nigeria let alone other fundamental human needs. Also, local farmers were not particularly ready for the sudden increase in demand that came about as a result of the land border closure and have not been able to react fast enough to take advantage of it. 2.5 Theoretical Framework Elite Theory: The framework of analysis is anchored on Elite Theory of the state. The theory was adopted because of its explanatory adequacy to study the state’s policy making. Elite theory’s origins lie most clearly in the writings of Gaetano Mosca -), Vilfredo Pareto -), and Robert Michels -). Other classical elite theorists are C.Wright Mills, John Porter, Lowell Field and John Higley among others. Although the elite profounders have their different route of reaching their destination, but their central point remain the same. The theorists have sought to prove that there may exist in any society a minority of the population which takes the major decisions in the society”. According to them, every society is ruled by a minority that possesses the qualities necessary for its succession to full social and political power against the majority group of the masses. Thus, the theory contends that the society is divided into two groups – those who have power and those who do not. The theory reflects the pluralist view concerning the distribution of power in the society. Consequently, they further argued that it is possible to divide the population into two broad categories; the first category according to him are those who excel at whatever task they have undertaken while the second category, ‘the majority’, would be those whose performance we would consider “average”. In other words, he categorized them as the governing elites and non-governing elites. Finally they also contend that in all societies – from societies that are very meagerly developed and have barely attained the dawning of civilization, down to the most advanced and powerful societies – two classes of people exists; a class that rules and a class that is ruled. The first class, always few, performs all political functions, monopolizes power and enjoys the advantages that power brings, whereas the second, the more numerous class, is directed and controlled by the first, in a manner that is more or less legal, now more or less arbitrary and violent, and supplies the first in appearance at least, with material means of subsistence and with the instrumentalities that are essential to the vitality of the political organism. In a nut shell, they categorized them as thus; “the ruling class and class that is ruled”. Assumptions of the Elite Theory Dye (1987), identified the assumptions of the elite theory as thus: a The society is divided into two unequal parts – a few who have power and many who do not. b Only a small number of persons allocate value to the society – the masses do not decide public policy. c The few who govern are not typical of the masses that are governed. Elites are drawn in appropriately from the upper socio-economic strata of the society. d Non-elites movement to the elite’s position must be slow and continuous in order to maintain stability and avoid resolution. Only non-elites who have acquired and accepted basic elite consensus can be enlisted into governing aids. e Elite share a consensus on the basic values of the social system and the preservation of the system. f Public policy does not reflect the demands of the masses but rather the prevailing values and preferences of the elite. Changes in society are usually incremental rather than revolutionary in order not to alter the status quo. g Active elites are subject to relatively little direct influence from apathetic masses. Elites influence masses more than masses influence elites. The above assumptions of the elite theory clearly implied that changes and innovations in public policy are the result of definitions and redefinitions by elites of their own values. Thus, public policy follows downward from the elite to the masses. Relevance of the theory to the study Generally, the theory recognizes “elites” as the organizing category for exercising power in the society. Those who excel in whatever they do and control the ownership of the means of production constituted themselves into the ruling or dominant class. In doing so, the rest of the society (the masses) is compelled to obey and toil under the leadership and control of the elites. The ruling class especially the type we have in Nigeria resorts to exploitation of the dependent class through several policies and programmes that they may be targeted towards achieving very little but more to their own personal interest. The implication is that it is in the interest of the elite class to maintain the existing social lack, exploitation, and poverty of the dependent class to avoid being challenged through excessive circulation of the elite. Indeed, the elites who mainly control the means of social production, distribution and exchange in a capitalist state like Nigeria are firmly entrenched through several measures to deprive the “majority ruled class” of the opportunity to move from their lower class to the upper class to avoid confronting them. However, the poor masses are being deceived by these hollow policies that in the end bring very little or no positive results in their lives. The implication of the elite theory is that public policies do not reflect the demands of the people contrary to David Easton’s input-output analysis. Therefore, public policy or policy outputs constitute the preferences and value of the ruling elite in every society. Thus, elitism views the masses as largely passive, apathetic and illinformed; mass sentiments therefore, are more often manipulated by the sentiments of the elites; and for the most part, communication between elites and masses flows downward. Thus, looking at the public policies in Nigeria, we see clearly a situation where government efforts, in terms of policy making and implementation, seem to be continually made with little or no results. Governments usually formulate and implement policies without involving r seeking for the opinion of the people they make these policies for in order to give them an ample opportunity to make an input. This can be attested to the failure of numerous public policies in Nigeria, hence poverty and underdevelopment. It is in the same spirit that the present administration of President Muhammadu Buhari has ordered the closure of land borders across the bordering states in Nigeria without considering the feelings and livelihood of the border communities whose major source of living depends on businesses being done on the border areas. In sum, the problem of the elite theory is that it is conservative and tends to defend the status quo. According to Dahl (1995), the theory is a mere attempt to divide the society into two classes. Irrespective of this problem, the elite theory stands most germane in explanation of this study because the elites dominate and determine the course and direction of national decisions. Consequently, the masses are usually helpless and powerless since policy choices are defined and determined by the elites. CHAPTER THREE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY AREA 3.1 INTRODUCTION Jibia local government area is situated in Katsina state, Northwest Nigeria. The LGA shares borders with the Batsari, Kaita, and Batagarawa LGAs and with parts of Zamfara state and the Niger Republic. Towns and villages that make up Jibia LGA include Daddara, Jibiya, Tudun wada, Magama, Faru, and Matso-matso. The estimated population of Jibia LGA is put at 179,313 inhabitants with the area mainly populated by members of the Fulani ethnic group. The fufulde language is commonly spoken in the area while Islam is the widely practiced religion in the LGA. Notable landmarks in Jibia LGA include the Jibiya Dam and the General Hospital Jibia. 3.2 GEOGRAPHY OF JIBIA Jibia LGA sits on a total area of 1037 square kilometers and has an average temperature of 34 degrees centigrade. The area witnesses two distinct seasons which asre thye dry and the rainy seasons with the dry seasons in the LGA often characterized by extremely hot weather. The average wind speed in Jibia LGA is 11km/h. 3.3 ECONOMY OF JIBIA Farming is an important economic activity in Jibia LGA with crops such as wheat and rice grown in the area. A number of markets are also found in Jibia LGA and these markets offer the inhabitants of the area veritable platforms for the exchange of a variety of goods and services. Other important economic activities in Jibia LGA include hunting, pottery and the rearing of a variety of animals. 3.4 IMPACT OF BOARDER CLOSURE OF JIBIA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA The continued closure of Nigeria-Niger border at Jibia town, Katsina State by the officers of the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) despite President Muhammadu Buhari’s directive for its reopening is not yielding any positive results as smuggling of contrabands into Nigeria remained a daily occurrence at the border town. On December 31, 2020, Buhari approved the immediate reopening of all land borders in Nigeria following the earlier reopening of Seme, Illela, Maigatare and Mfum after 15 months of outright closure that stoked stern criticism across Africa. While the President directed immediate reopening of the land borders, he did not approve the importation of rice, vegetable oil, second-hand clothes and other contrabands, but the items are discreetly smuggled into the country via illegal routes at the border towns in Katsina under the cover of darkness. Buhari’s directive was conveyed in a three-paragraph circular issued by the Comptroller General of Immigration Service (CGI), Mr. Muhammed Babandede and addressed to all comptrollers of Immigration in all Border States of the federation, including Katsina. The circular christened, “Presidential Directive on Reopening of all Land Borders and Submission of Status reports on its Implementation”, was received by the Katsina State Comptroller of Immigration, Abdulrazak Mu’azu on January 13, 2021. It reads: “I am directed to convey the approval of His Excellency, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on the reopening of all land borders with effect from 31st December, 2020 following the earlier reopening of the four land borders (Seme, Illela, Maigatare and Mfum). “Consequently, all comptrollers of Immigration Service in all border states as well as Officers in Charge of all border control posts (Mega, medium and mini) are hereby directed to work in close synergy with other relevant agencies towards the successful implementation of the President’s directive. You are further required to forward a report of immediate compliance with this directive”. Consequently, there was ceremonial reopening of the Nigeria-Niger border on January 14, 2021 which was well-attended by traders within and outside the country, including the Deputy Comptroller of Immigration in charge of the border, DCI H. Ibrahim, customs officers and police at the frontier of the border in Jibia town. However, investigation by THISDAY revealed that officers and men of the Nigeria Customs Service stationed at the frontier of the border have flouted the presidential directive by closing the border few hours after it was reopened by the Immigration boss. The flouting of Buhari’s directive also affected three other recognised border posts with Niger Republic Kongolom in Mai’Adua, Babban Mutum in Baure and Dankama in Kaita Local Government Areas of the state, while smuggling of counterfeits still persists in the areas. THISDAY uncovered the contravention of the directive during a visit to Jibia border post in Jibia Local Government Area of the state, with residents alleging that the customs officers closed the border to continue their illegal activities in the area. During the visit to the border town, THISDAY also observed that the officials of the Customs service restricted human and vehicular movement across the border post while its main entrance was under lock despite the directive of the president. Investigation further revealed that the operatives of the Service denied traders and travellers entry and exit at the border town, including selling of fuel in communities close to the border post. There was restriction of movement as checking of goods and vehicles remained in place at the more than 30 checkpoints mounted by armed customs and police officers along Katsina-Jibia highway. The customs service, however, justified its action on the ground that it had not received a formal directive from its supervising ministry to reopen the border. An official of the customs service, who spoke privately with THISDAY, said security agencies at the border post were still expecting official directives to reopen the border. Concerned about the conflicting directives, some traders in separate interviews in Jibia lamented endless extortions by Customs officers, insisting that the officers closed the border to continue with their illegalities in the area. They claimed that smugglers were being aided by security personnel, including policemen, Customs and Immigration officials, who allegedly collected money from the smugglers to allow a free passage at checkpoints between Jibia and Katsina metropolis. One of the traders, Tijjani Kabiru lamented that the border closure had contributed negatively to the socio-economic imbalance of the state and the country in general, calling for its reopening for business to thrive. He said residents and traders of the border town, who were rejoicing when the border reopened, were disappointed at the action of the Customs Service. He said: “Immigration officers came to Jibia Thursday morning; that was on January 14, 2021 where they announced the official reopening of the Nigeria-Niger border and directed us to commence commercial activities with our brothers in Niger. Unfortunately, around 2pm that same day, some heavily armed customs officers came and locked the gate of the border. As I speak to you, the frontier of the border is under lock and key. The officers are even threatening to kill us if we go there”. Another trader, Jamailu Muhammad, alleged that the prevailing extortion by customs officers and other security personnel was detrimental to trade facilitation and ease of doing business and also crippled the economy and impacted negatively on residents of the state. He said: “There are more than 30 checkpoints between Jibia to Katsina being manned by officers of the NCS, the Nigeria Police, the Nigeria Immigration Service and the Nigeria Security and Civil Defense Corps. But they are doing nothing but extortion that is why they don’t want to reopen the border”. However, despite the closure of the border by the Customs officers, smuggling still remains a booming business in the state as smugglers have resorted to the use of illegal routes to ferry in bags of foreign rice, bales of second-hand clothing and other contrabands. Findings by THISDAY revealed that while strict compliance appears to reign at the main border post between the two countries, illegal businesses still thrived at some bush paths and sundry illegal entry points where “unscrupulous” security operatives, work hand-in-glove with smugglers to smuggle contraband goods into the country. Some of the illegal routes the smugglers used to ferry in the contrabands from Niger Republic to Jibia Local Government Area includes Bayan Bariki, Government Day Secondary School, Magama, Dan Arau, Rainin Wayo, Alele , Korama, Gadirge, Sabon Garin Magama, Makada and Mai Dabarau. These illegal routes also served as bypass for Nigeriens coming into Nigeria. The smugglers go through the laborious route of offloading the contrabands from trailers few meters away from the official border security post and use J-5 buses, Gulf 4 and 5 vehicles and motorcycles to ferry the items from their hideouts into Jibia for onward transportation to their warehouses in Katsina, Kano, Kaduna, Zamfara, Jigawa States and some other parts of the country. The smugglers are sometimes seen in large numbers or individually, passing through longer routes to evade Customs officers. Instead of going through the Jibia-Katsina road, they move to Batsari Local Government before linking Katsina to deliver the smuggled rice on request. Some of them who go directly to Katsina from Dan Faru or Dan Issa in Niger Republic, using Peugeot cars popularly called Gwarama by locals, charge between N1,500 to N2, 000 to deliver a bag of rice to shops and depots. Most times they drive through farmlands to get to Katsina town. Sadly, women are not left out in this illegal trade. They employ several tactics to smuggle rice. For instance, they divide a bag into three or four places and back them, using their Hijabs to conceal it and pass security checkpoints along the 30km Jibia Katsina road in commercial vehicles. Meanwhile, at Kongolom border town, Maiadua Local Government Area, most smugglers of rice are using local routes from Maimaje, Botsotsuwa, Tsatsumburum and Yekuwa settlement, all in Niger Republic, to ferry their commodities into the country, using motorcyclists. In Dankama, a border town in Kaita local government, rice is smuggled through farm lands from MaiKani village. It was observed that youths in the area are paid N6,000 for a five kilometer trip to ferry rice from the said village, using Peugeot J5 buses and Golf cars. While in Babban Mutum, (Baure LGA) most of the shops are not displaying foreign rice but sells on request to customers. The goods are usually delivered to customers’ houses for fear of harassment by security, particularly officers of the Nigeria Customs Service. But one of the smugglers, who pleaded anonymity, told THISDAY that those of them engaged in the business understood the risks and dangers involved but affirmed that they would not encounter any problem unless they refuse to cooperate with security operatives at the checkpoints. He said: “Unless one refuses to pay the bribe for each category of items or when it is time for the officials to sacrifice you to prove that they are working. That is when they will arrest you in the name of smuggling”. The source, who is into smuggling for four years, said business had been booming for them because they do convey a bag of rice from Maradi (Niger Republic) to Katsina at the cost of N4,000 each. “We used to charge rice merchants N4,000 for each bag of rice carried from Maradi to Katsina State. Although, we do follow bush paths and sometimes custom officers do arrest us. But once we give them some monies, they allow us to pass even though some of them are very stubborn,” he added. THE NIGERIA CUSTOMS SERVICE (NCS) HAS ADVISED JIBIA BORDER COMMUNITIES IN KATSINA TO UTILISE THE BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES IN THE AREA, FOLLOWING THE RECENT REOPENING OF THE BORDER, JUNE 23, 2022. The Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) has advised Jibia border communities in Katsina to utilise the business opportunities in the area, following the recent reopening of the border. The NCS zonal coordinator in charge of Zone ‘B’ Kaduna, ACG Umar Garba, gave the advice on Wednesday during a familiarisation visit to Nigeria-Niger border in Jibia local government area. The Jibia border was reopened on April 25 after its closure in August 2019. Mr Garba explained that the reopening of the border had made a lot of businesses booming in the area, adding that many residents were now benefiting. “I wish to advise the people of the communities around this border to think of legitimate businesses since the border has now opened. Doing so will assist in improving the economy of the area, the state and the country in general,” stated the customs official. “Like I told them, the government doesn’t want anything illegitimate such as smuggling, child trafficking, proliferation of small and light arms.” Mr Garba further disclosed that a process was underway to provide modern scanners on the way to ensure that other illegal items were not transported into the country. He further expressed satisfaction with the existing good relationship among the border communities, customs officials, other security agencies and also the Niger Republic’s officials. Jibia LGA secretary Mohammed Lawal commended President Muhammadu Buhari’s regime for reopening the border. He said since its reopening, many collapsed businesses were gradually returning across the communities. Mr Lawal further appealed to customs to assist the people of Jibia who were displaced by bandits.  THE FORMER GOVERNOR OF KATSINA (AMINU MASARI) SEEKS REOPENING OF KATSINA JIBIA-NIGER BOARDER. February 3, 2022. Governor Aminu Bello Masari of Katsina State has appealed to the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) to consider reopening the Nigeria/Niger border in Jibia Local Government Area, since its closure has not been able to end smuggling and other illegal commercial activities in the area. According to Dr. Mustapha Muhammed Inuwa, the Secretary to the Government of the State SGS, who represented the Governor at the event, ” the Customs Service should understand that they are supposed to serve the people and make border areas to be to be able to genuinely improve the economy. “Let’s be realistic, go to the borders and see, people keep coming in and going out with goods. So, the borders should be reopened and measures should be taken to ensure that law and order in the borders are strictly adhered to.” Recall that the Federal Government on August 20, 2019 had to shut down Nigeria’s borders with neighbouring countries, setting up a Special Task Force which comprises of security personnel drawn from the Army, Air Force, Customs, Immigration and the Department of State Services (DSS) to suppress the activities of smugglers. However, While the federal government had since reopened other land borders across the country, the Jibia border is yet to be opened, causing untold hardships to traders and commuters in the state. The Governor’s representative, however commended the efforts of the Area Comptroller, DC Dalha Wada Chedi, saying that “things are gradually normalizing under his leadership.” He urged citizens in the state to cooperate with the Nigeria Customs Service by doing what is in the best interest of the state and the country at large. CHAPTER FOUR DATA PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS 4.0 INTRODUCTION This chapter entails the presentation and analysis of data collected during this research. In the process of gathering data a total number of one hundred (100) questionnaires were distributed to the respondents in order to obtain their opinion on the impact on Nigerian boarder closure on economic development from- DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS An earlier stated the information gathered will be presented in a tabular in a tabular form except some few that need more elaboration and description. In this case section A will be presented first which comprises personal information of the respondents, followed by section B contain Interview interpretation and Discussion. However, the researcher administered total number of one hundred (100) questionnaires to the respondents, out of which eighty two (82) were completed and returned while the remaining eighteen (18) were not filled and returned. This is one of the challenges encountered during the field work. SECTION A: 4.1.1 BIOGRAPHY OF RESPONDENTS Table 4.1 Gender Distribution of the Respondents Gender Frequency Percentage Male 53 64.6 Female 29 35.4 Total 82 100 Table 4.1 above show the gender distribution of the respondent were 64.6% are male and 35.4% are female, this show that, majority of the respondents are male. Table 4.2: Age Distribution of the Respondents Age Range Frequency Percentage- and above 17 20.7 Total 82 100 Table 4.2 show age range of the respondents were 15.9% are within the age range of 18-27, 45.1% are within 28-37, 18.3% are within 38-47, 18.3 are within 38-47 years and 20.7% are within 40 and above years. This show majority of the respondents in the study area are millennial. Table 4.3: Occupation Distribution of the Respondent Occupation Frequency Percentage Farming 19 23.2 Business/Trade 38 46.3 Civil Servant 16 19.5 Fishing 6 7.3 Others 3 3.7 Total 82 100 Table 4.3 above show occupation of the respondents were 23.2% are farmers, 46.3% are Businessmen/traders, 19.5% are civil servant, 7.3% are fishermen. This show most of the people in Jibia are businessmen. SECTION B: 4.1.2 What are the impact of Jibia Boarder closure on the people of Katsina State? Negative Impact Table 4.4 Negative and Positive Impact of Boarder Closure Response Frequency Percentage High cost of living 78 95.1 Increase in Insecurity 66 80.5 Poor agricultural production 24 29.3 Low rate of transportation 67 81.7 Employment opportunities 6 7.3 High rate of agricultural production 34 41.5 High rate of transportation 12 14.6 Table 4.4 above show the positive and negative impact of boarder closure in Jibia Local Government were 95.1% said high cost of living, 80.5% said increase in insecurity, 29.3% said Poor agricultural production, 81.7% said low rate of transportation, 7.3% said employment opportunities, 41.5% said high rate of agricultural production and 14.6% said high rate of transportation. This result indicates highest percentage of negative impact of border closure to the people of Jibia local Government. An interview with the one of the respondent in Jibia said most importers of perishable goods, valued at millions of naira, have had their consignment of goods trapped in Niger, for several months now because the Jibia border were closed without warning. As expected, the prices of common food consumed by the people of Katsina and Nigerians at large have hit the roof. Food items, such as Dates have gone up by 65 per cent. The price of foreign parboiled rice also went up almost by 300 per cent from N17, 000 to N52, 000 per bag. The demand for local rice in the absence of foreign rice drove the price of local rice up from N15, 000 to N92,000 per bag. The situation has left many people questioning the wisdom in shutting the borders against rice imports, whereas Nigeria has not been able to produce enough to meet local demand. The volume of local rice production in the country is put at 3.7 million tonnes per annum, while consumption is almost 7 million tonnes. The wide gap between the production and consumption of the item is filled with imports. But the Federal Government had decided that spending the sum of $35bn on the importation of food annually was not healthy for the economy. Yusuf, the LCCI chief said it is important to reckon with the costs, supply chain disruptions and losses that business and individuals have suffered as a result of the closure. Corporates, large number of informal sector players and individuals doing legitimate businesses across the borders have become victims of the border closure. This poses a dilemma. The government means well, but there are many innocent casualties. The closure of borders has both positive and negative impacts on the socio-economy of the country on one hand and on the general public on the other hand: a) Positive impact of the border closure, and b) Negative impact of the border closure. 4.1.2.1 Positive Impact of Border Closure on Nigeria and Nigerians The border closure which commenced in August, 2019 has noticed a remarkable achievement in terms of saving huge amounts of U.S. Dollars spent on subsidies by the Federal Government of Nigeria. Ghins and Heinrigs (2019) stated that it has been recorded that 20% decrease in fuel imports reduced the Nigerian state’s hefty fuel subsidy bill. In addition to the above, Bouillon (2019) pointed out that the sales of gasoline also in Nigeria has fell by 12.7% after the border closure. This by extension indicated that, millions of subsidized litres are being secretly smuggled and taken abroad for re-sale at the neighbouring countries of Nigeria. Thus, the reduction in consumption, if sustained could lead to subsidy savings of about 13.5 billion Naira equivalent to 37 million U.S. Dollars monthly and 162.1 billion Naira annually which is equivalent to 444 million U.S. Dollars. Moreover, suppliers of Nationally produced goods and agricultural-related commodities such as Olam, Family rice, Onya rice and Quarra rice have recorded huge patronage and higher profit from the local processing and Millig companies. This positive and remarkable achievement was as a result of border closure which prevented the smuggling and import of rice and Agro Allied chemicals and other agricultural tools and inputs (Bouillon, 2019). Notwithstanding, the border closure has positively helped the local rice Millars in all states of the federation and Nigeria markets are full of local rice produced in Nigeria. Not only that, the border closure has created positive progress with regard to the value chain of Rice production, particularly on production. Processing, packaging, marketing and storage of both processed rice and paddy ones. 4.1.2.2 Negative Impact of Border Closure on Nigeria and Nigerians The border closure is badly affecting the livelihood of people living in border communities and local areas relied on border markets for their survival and earnings. Becauwe thousands of householders and farmers were similarly affected by the closure of the border. For instance, residents of Seme border between Nigeria and Benin Republic out-cried seriously. The outcry was a result of losing their principal sources of income and their means of living (Bouillon, 2019). Bouillon further explains that, in Ibadan alone, the capital city of Oyo State Nigeria which has over three (3) million inhabitants experiences an increase in the price of rice by 9% as a result of the border closure. Hence, 80% of average householder’s budgets approximately spent on food due to the higher increase in food prices. In addition to the above, the general inflation especially on food stuff was recorded to be increased to 150% following the land border closure through which the majority of the foodstuff, items and grains were being imported to Nigeria through Niger and Benin Republics. As a result of the land border closure, Lagos and coastal borders remain the port of entry for goods and other commodities. Unfortunately, Bouillon (2019) discovered that Lagos Port became congested and operates very slowly to clear imported goods. Therefore, one has to pay too many bribes to get his or her good out in good time. However, it contradicts the effort of the current government which claimed to be fighting corruption. Moreover, the volatile policy of Border Land closure is not favorable to investors who have invested huge amounts of money which takes a long time to become profitable. A good example is for those who invested in agriculture, machinery, storage or transport facilities which require amortization over a long period of years. Hence, the closure disrupts these kinds of investments especially if the said investments were meant for cross-border trade. The policy is for this reason a disruptive one. In Nigeria, it was recorded by Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations that from 2010 to 2016, the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) recorded twenty-three (23) changes in Nigeria’s food import regulations with particular reference to inconsistencies in tariff rates and bans (the policy of contraband). This inconsistency and policy summersault does not speak well of Nigeria and is a considerable factor by foreign investors either to invest in Nigeria or otherwise. Basically, 10% to 20% of the goods manufactured in Nigeria such as pasta, cosmetics and plastics are sold to West African countries through informal routes of cross-border trade. Thus, the closure by extension has negatively affected the manufacturers and industrialists who produced and export their products to neighbouring countries such as Niger Republic Cameron and Benin Republic. To this end, the policy of land border closure has undermined the contemporary trend of an interconnected world on the basis or model of Comparative Advantage whereby a given country can explore what it can not sufficiently provide for its citizenry. By extension, keeping borders closed. Especially the land border largely affects the economic growth and development of not only Nigeria but other developing economies. 4.1.3 What are the challenges faced of security personal due to Jibia Boarder closure? An interview with one of the respondent one of the Nigeria Custom Service in Jibia Local Government about the challenges they are facing due to the Jibia boarder closure, lamented that; The Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) has attributed the continued closure of Nigeria’s border with Niger Republic at Jibia, Katsina State, to lack of residents’ compliance with the protocol involved in transit of goods and trade facilitation. The Francis Sardauna explained that the Jibia border and other borders in the state would remain closed by the federal government until residents of the border communities and traders adhere to the protocol of transiting goods and trade facilitation. The acting Comptroller of the Katsina Area Command of the NCS, Dalha Wada Chedi, told journalists after a meeting between NCS and the community consultative forum held at the command headquarters in Katsina, that the level of compliance with border rules in the state is poor. Participants at the meeting, who were drawn from traditional and religious institutions, traders’ associations, civil society organisations (CSOs), human right organisations, government officials and residents of border communities, resolved to avert skirmishes between the NCS personnel and residents to boost economic development. Chedi explained that the inability of the citizens to comply with the ease of doing business and guidelines issued by the federal government for reopening of borders has made it cumbersome for the government to open the borders despite their economic benefits. He said: “The compliance level in Katsina is very poor and this makes it difficult for the federal government to consider Katsina in terms of reopening its borders. That is why it is difficult for the government to reopen the borders despite their economic benefits. “Jibia border in particular is highly volatile because people, including smugglers, are inciting the public against the customs officials in the state.” He said the NCS and other security agencies in the state are working in synergy to forestall bandits and other criminal activities within the border communities. He, however, announced the seizure of 1,000 jerricans of fuel suspected to be on their way to the bandits in their enclaves in adjoining forests in the state. He added that the command also intercepted 11 vehicles, as well as other contraband with duty paid value of N50,665,860.00 in border communities across the state. He said the items seized included 187 bags of foreign rice, 24 jerricans of vegetable oil, 549 cartons of foreign spaghetti, 29 cartons of Macaroni, 12 cartons of foreign tea pots, 236 packs of foreign black tea, 84 jerricans of petrol. Other contraband, he said, were 14 motorcyles, 205 USB chargers, 350 bags of beans and seven bags of Tigger nuts, totalling N50,665,860.00. Although the dynamics and complexity of the growing spate of insecurity in Nigeria are not new, as they predate the transition to civil rule in 1999, their intensity and spread have grown exponentially thereafter. With a little over two decades of liberal democratic experience, Nigeria continues to be overwhelmed by insecurity arising from various groups with different ideological orientations and goals defined by their variegated framings of the Nigerian state. The security challenges in Nigeria are not only dynamic but multifaceted and are reinforcing each other such that the state is muzzled and struggling to breathe. To back up this claim, one of our respondents notes that: The realities of security challenges in Jibia Local Government are multiple and overlap today. The intensity of insecurity has also increased in terms of its spread across the six geopolitical zones of the country. We are witnesses to security threats posed by the farmer-herder conflict in the North-Central zone, Biafra separatist agitation in the South-East, the Boko Haram insurgency in the NorthEast, banditry in the North-West, and sea-marine tension in the coastal states within the South-South zone. These security threats cannot be compared with what was available in the 1990s and late 2000s. However, across the breadth and length of Nigeria, activities of cultists, kidnappers, bandits, ritual killers and pirates continue to grow in intensity and spread (interview with a security expert, Jibia, August, 2023). The implication of migration securitisation in Nigeria Securitisation has made immigration primarily a security concern and given birth to speech that is anti-immigrant, racist, and xenophobic. The securitisation of migration has led to increased border controls and land border closures to reduce security threats. The securitisation of migration harms national security because it labels migrants as carriers of foreign threats. The securitisation of migration shifts attention away from the government’s failures in security service delivery. The securitisation of migration undercuts the benefits that cross-border connections offer for collaborating nations’ social and economic growth. The securitisation of migration puts to the test the ECOWAS ideals that promote the movement of people and goods throughout the region. Due to the securitisation of migration, other strategies are needed to get past border restrictions against migrant flows and associated criminal activities. The protection of basic rights, human rights, and the rule of law is hampered by border security. The securitisation of migration by externalising internal security challenges does not deter border crossing. To lower security threats, effective border governance is needed. The growing spate of insecurity in Nigeria today continues to exert a significant impact on the country’s national security governance. Generally perceived as conforming to the nature and character of the post-colonial state, Nigeria’s security governance architecture has remained in the doldrums. As observed by another respondent (a notable academic), “Nigeria as a country in post-colonial Africa has many challenges. The challenges are rooted in security, political, economic, nationality, and citizenship questions, which combine to aggravate the security challenges in the country” (interview with a political scientist, Jibia, August, 2023). The afore-listed issues have continued to serve as the key enablers of terrorism, militancy, separatist agitations, and farmer-herder conflicts in Nigeria. The causes of these security challenges are both internal and external. According to one of our respondents (a security expert based in Jibia), the internal factors include the nature and character of Nigerian politics, governance failures, how the Nigerian state responds to grievances, marginalisation and exclusion, and issues of basic social service provisioning. On the other hand, he identified the external factors, including the inflow of small arms and light weapons, the influx of fighters and terrorists who stream(ed) into Nigeria through the Sahel, and the increase in border porosity. According to him, even though there are both internal and external factors, Nigeria’s security challenges are primarily enabled by governance failure in Nigeria (interview with a security expert, Jibia, November 2023). Despite that poor governance fuels ethnic, religious, and regional animosity in Nigeria, the federal government has continued to associate security challenges with foreigners especially migrants who enter the country without proper documentation (Agbakwuru, 2021). According to one of our respondents, the linking of insecurity in Nigeria to foreigners is a flawed externalisation. Externalising security is an attack on Nigeria’s sovereignty; rather than providing internal security and defending the country against external security threats, the government has chosen to profile migrants for the calamities that have befallen Nigeria and its people (interview with a political scientist, Jibia, November 2023). These views derive from the assertion made by President Buhari during an exclusive interview with Arise TV on January 8, 2019, where he reinvented his earlier interaction with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, in April 2018. In the Arise TV interview, President Buhari stated as follows: But the problem is even older than us. It has always been there but is now made worse by the influx of gunmen from the Sahel region into different parts of the West African sub-region. These gunmen were trained and armed by Muammar Gaddafi of Libya. When he was killed, the gunmen escaped with their arms. We encountered some of them fighting with Boko Haram (Arise News, 2019, online). 4.1.4 What are the ways on how to ensure effective boarder closure? According to Ghins and Heinrigs (2019), the Nigeria Authorities have justified the fundamental reasons upon which it closed the land borders of the country. Basically, there is a need to support the domestic Agricultural sector and accelerate the National Production Growth thereby reducing the smuggling rate for goods and fundamentally curbing illegal inflows of foreign rice. In addition to this, the government as part of her justification for the border closure includes preventing the exporting of subsidized fuel to the Niger Republic, Benin and Cameroon. Hence, the need for border closure is enforced by the government of Nigeria. Following the policy statement made and fully implemented on Nigeria’s borderland closure since August 2019 by the Federal Government of Nigeria through the Nigeria customs service as entrenched in the circular Reference No. NCS/ABS/058/S.24 dated 20th August 2019 stipulate and order the total closure of all land borders and that the closure is to ensure that, goods and services are not traded or moved through the said borders and that the border security agents were categorically warned in the letter (circular) to ensure strict compliance (Nigeria Custom Service, 2019). Figure 1: Nigeria Land Boarder Closed Source: The Punch Newspaper, 2021 The above policy for border closure was a result of the fact that the Council for the Regulation of Freight Forwarding in Nigeria (CRFFN) as Kunle Folarin (2019) proclaimed, Nigeria discovered that its immediate Neighbour Benin Republic has a population of 12 Million people only but Benin Republic is the 5th importer of Rice in the world. That in 2018 alone, Benin Republic imported rice with 996 million US. Dollars whereby 98.2% of these imported rice by Benin are then exported to Nigeria from Benin Republic without payment of appropriate custom duty, tax and so on rather through smuggling through porous borders. These served as sabotage to Nigeria’s economy (Nigeria Customs Service, 2019). However, it is pertinent to note that, there are thirty-six (36) official land borders as ports of entry to or from Nigeria to Niger Republic. These borders of Entry to Niger from Nigeria are Kebbi, Sokoto, Katsina, Jigawa, Yobe and Borno States. The land borders in each state are as follows: Table 1: Land Border between Nigerian States and Niger Republic State in Nigeria Official/formal Borders with Niger Republic Number of Borders Borno State Gashagar, Damasak, Malam Fatori, Baga Doro Wulgo, Gambore Ngala, RigalJilbe, Kunshe, Bank in Kirawa and Ashiqashiya Twelve (12) borders Jiqawa State Maigatar One (1) border Katsina State Jibiya-Magama, Jibiya-Maje, Mai-AduaYardaji, Kongolom Babban Muhum, Zanga, Birnin Kuka and Dankam Nine (9) borders Kebbi State Bagudo, Maje, Lolo, Dole-Kaina, Kamba, Kangiwa and Bachaka Seven (7) borders Sokoto State Illela, Gada and SabonBirni Three (3) borders Yobe State Nguru, Machina, TeloTulao and Geidam Four (4) borders Source: Nigeria Customs Service Land Border Port Map 2019. However, from the inquiry made it was understood that Borno through its 12 official borders about 440,800 traders were transacting across the borders. The rate fell down due to the insurgency in the state. Jigawa through Maigatari border has about 20,630 Traders while Katsina with 9 official borders has about 185,730 traders who were cross-border traders across the boundary. Thus, when a border is closed many individuals will lose their jobs. In addition to the above, Gordon (2019), Moore (2019) Park (2019) and Richardson (2019) observed that the closure of borders disrupts international trade with specific reference to cross-border trade and travel across borders. In that, closing the border is an extreme policy that might create a threat to so many individuals, especially the border communities. Not only that, the economy suffered and experiences backwardness. On the other hand, Adeola and Oluyemi (2019) stressed that, in the interest of national security, the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria embarked on the policy of Border closure. That, movement of goods and people between Nigeria and her neighbours such as Niger Republic, Benin, Chad and Cameroon tends to be informal whereby temporary clandestine workers, traders, cross borders workers, professionals and refugees are always moving from one country to another through intra-regional movement within West African sub-region is permitted without a visa due to the existing principles and provision of the economic community of West African State (ECOWAS). This made cross-border movement between Nigeria and her neighbours to be less monitored and did not attract the attention and intervention of governments. However, it is gradually becoming an issue now that needs state policy as modern mobility contributes to impact dangerously on the security of the nation (Nigeria). This propels external aggression and criminality which grows across the border. Hence, Nigeria’s government adopted the policy of border closure. Figure 2: Smuggling Continues Despite the Border Closure Source: Punch Newspaper, 2021 CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 SUMMARY The findings of this study show that, the closure of borders has both positive and negative impacts on the socio-economy of the country, the border closure which commenced in August, 2019 has noticed a remarkable achievement in terms of saving huge amounts of U.S. Dollars spent on subsidies by the Federal Government of Nigeria. Notwithstanding, the border closure has positively helped the local rice Millars in all states of the federation and Nigeria markets are full of local rice produced in Nigeria. Not only that, the border closure has created positive progress with regard to the value chain of Rice production, particularly on production. Processing, packaging, marketing and storage of both processed rice and paddy ones. The border closure is badly affecting the livelihood of people living Jibia Local Government and other border communities and local areas relied on border markets for their survival and earnings. Becauwe thousands of householders and farmers were similarly affected by the closure of the border. Moreover, the volatile policy of Border Land closure is not favorable to investors who have invested huge amounts of money which takes a long time to become profitable. A good example is for those who invested in agriculture, machinery, storage or transport facilities which require amortization over a long period of years. Hence, the closure disrupts these kinds of investments especially if the said investments were meant for cross-border trade. The policy is for this reason a disruptive one. 5.2 CONCLUSION The border closure which began in August, 2019 has noticed a remarkable achievement in terms of saving from huge amount of money spent on subsidy by the Federal Government of Nigeria. Ghins and Heinrigs (2019), stated that it has been recorded that 20 % decrease in fuel imports which reduced the Nigerian state’s hefty fuel subsidy bill. In addition to the above, Bouillon (2019) pointed out that the sales of gasoline alone in Nigeria ha fell by 12.7 %after the border closure. This by extension indicated that, Millions of subsidized litres are being secretly smuggled and taken abroad for resale at the Neighbouring countries of Nigeria. Thus, the reduction in consumption, if triumphantly sustained could lead to subsidy savings of about N13.5 billion naira equivalent to $37 million U.S. Dollars monthly and N162.1 billion naira annually which is equivalent to $444 million U.S. Dollars (Bouillon, 2019). Moreover, Suppliers of nationally produced goods and other agricultural related commodities have recorded huge patronage and higher profit from the local processing and milling companies. This positive and remarkable achievement was as a result of border closure which prevented smuggling and import of Rice and Agro Allied Chemicals and other Agricultural tools and inputs. Indeed, the border closure has positively helped the local rice millers in all states of the federation and Nigeria markets are full of local rice produced in Nigeria. Not only that, the border closure has made a significant progress with regards to the value chain of rice production particularly on Production, Processing, Packaging, Marketing and Storage of both processed rice and paddy ones. The aforementioned positive impact especially the improved value chain or value addition has keep the local farmers functional, the indigenous Rice Mills more operational which compel those Rice Mills to employ more teeming unemployed youth thereby increasing the living standard of those employed youth in the Rice Mills and related industries. 5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS In view of the above, the study recommended the following: 1) Nigeria and other ECOWAS member states should first of all come to terms with one basic reality. The reality is that the achievement of viable economic integration has to be at some cost to member-states. If they have this at the back of their mind, then the whole issue of trying to maximize their domestic interests at the expense of sub-regional interests will no longer assume prominence. 2) The Government of Federal Republic of Nigeria should engage the policy experts (both domestic and foreign) right from the inception of the policy formulation, implementation, analysis of the outcome of the policy and evaluation before its adoption. This will prevent the enactment and implementation of the disruptive policy and its repercussion affects both citizens and the economy. 3) The policy of border closure should always consider the poor people who are about 87 million in Nigeria and became subjects of hardship following the closure of cross-border trade. 4) The Nigeria Custom Services (NCS) should engage its officer and men of service in rigorous training, seminars and workshop both domestically and internationally on the tricks of manning or handling border security with modern gadgets and sophisticated equipment to the international best practice. This will drastically reduce the perennial smuggling across Nigerian’s border. 5) Concerted effort should be made to strengthen, improve and integrate national civil registration systems, especially the integrity of identity and travel documents. 6) Develop and improve cross-border infrastructure corridors that include telecommunications internet, roads railways, waterways and airways. 7) Member states should put in place legislative policies and other mechanisms to guarantee the protection and promotion of labour rights of migrants and address as use of migrant labour, unethical recruitment and human trafficking. 8) Member states should strengthen regional and national security systems including law enforcement, rule of law and public order and also their capacity to deal with national and regional security challenges of the region, if effective trade and movement of persons must be achieved. REFERENCES Abang O. (2010). “ICJ and the Arbitration of Border Crisis in Africa: The Nigeria-Cameroon Dispute over Bakassi”. In Celestine Bassey and Oshita and Oshita (eds.) Governance and Border Security in Africa. Lagos: Malthouse Press Limited. Abia, B. A. (2019). “Economic Implications of the Recent Border Closure”http://cseaafrica.org/economicimplications-of-the-recent-border-closure/ Abini, I. (2019). Rice farmers urged the Nigeria government to sustain border closure. Retrieved from https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more- news/367214-rice-farmers-urge-nigerian-govt.-to-sustain-border-closure- html/on/5/10/21. Adefeko, A. (2019). Border closure has mixed impact for Nigeria’s economy. Adeola, G. L. Olu, F. (2012). The Political and Security Implications of Cross Border Migration between Nigeria and her Francophone Neighbours in International Journal of Social Sciences Tomorrow 1(3):1-9. Adepuju, A. (2003). Migration in West Africa. Development (46): 3:37-41. Afolabi, M.B. (2015).Concept of security: Readings in intelligence and security studies, Research Gate. Ahmed, Z. (2020). President Muhammadu Buhari has ordered the immediate re-opening of four land borders. Ajayi, S.I. (2006). Foreign direct Investment in Sub-Saharan Africa: Origin, Targets and Potential AERS, Nairobi Akinkuolie, R. (2020). Nigeria’s border closure: Pros, cons and consequences. Punch Newspaper 24 January. Bashir, S. I. (2020). Challenges and prospects underpinning the Nigeria's policy of closing land border: A lesson for other African countries. Bouillon, S. (2019). Border closure has mixed impact for Nigeria’s Economy. Mail and Guardian. Available at https://mg.co.29.org/doc.view/- Accessed October 10, 2021. Charisma, J. (1998). “Foreign currency debt and the global financial architecture” in European Economic Review. vol. 44, No 4-6, May, pp. 719-720. Dahl, E. A (1995). Modern Political Analysis: India, Prentice Hall. Ghins, L. and Heinrigs, P. (2019). Nigeria’s Border Closure: Why it will not pay off. OECD Sahel and West Africa Club Secretariat. Gordon P, Moore JE, Park J & Richardson, H. (2009). The Economic impact of International Border Closure: A state-bystate Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elger. pp 341 - 374 Kolossov, V. (2012), EU borders capes: State of the Debate Report I. Available at:http://www.euborderscapes.eu/fileadmin/user upload/EUBORDERSCAPES State of Debate Report 1.pdf Mabogunje, A.L. (1995), Development process: A spatial perspective, Hutchinson University Library, London, pp. 30-37. Nigeria Custom Service Nigeria-Niger Land Border Port Map (2019). Ogunwusi, B., Nzeako, I., and Utulu, A. (2019). Closure of Nigerian borders and its impact on the economy of Nigeria and her neigbours. Independent Newspaper, 24 November. Perroux, (1978). The economics of development and planning, (39thed), Delhi, Vrinda publications (P) Ltd, p. 439. Prescott J.R.V. (1975). The Political Geography of the Oceans, (New York: John Wiley) pp.226-228. Rostow, W.W. (1971). Stages of economic growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University pressP.17. Rufin, R. J. David Ricardo (2002). Comparative Advantage in History of Political Economy. Duke University Press, Edinburg Scotland. Tahiru, A. L. (2019). Nigeria's border closure has implications for Africa's economic integration. ttps://www.bizcommunity.com.ng/Article/1 Tayebwa, O. (1992) Impact of external debt on economic growth: A case study of Tanzania, Advances in Management and Applied Economics, 3(4): 59 – 82. The Punch Newspaper, (2020). Ghanaians and Ghana officials have started rejecting Nigerian businesses in Ghana. March 3, 2020. The Punch Newspaper, (2020). Ghanaians and Ghana officials have started rejecting Nigerian businesses in Ghana. March 3, 2020. Unah, L. (2019). Nigeria border closure causes economic shock https://africanbusinessmagazine.com/region/west-africa/nigeria-border-closure-causeseconomic-shock Walter Rodney, (1972), How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Panaf Publishing, Inc, Abuja.