Nigeria's democracy is entering dangerous territory as donor support for governance and accountability programs is being withdrawn, warns development and philanthropy expert Dayo Olaide. For nearly a decade, major donor-funded programmes supported transparency and accountability in Nigeria, but most have now wound down or shifted course.
Major Programmes End or Scale Back
MacArthur's On Nigeria programme, arguably the most ambitious accountability-focused investment in the country, ended at the end of 2024. For about ten years, it supported integrated accountability efforts through criminal justice reform, investigative journalism, social and norm change, and collective action. Other donors such as Luminate, Ford, Open Society, and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) have also reduced or redirected their support, shrinking the pool of resources for work on corruption, civic space, and public sector reform.
The dismantling of USAID and sharp cuts to programmes across Africa in 2025 worsened the situation, sending a chilling signal that aid can be abruptly cut off for political reasons. The UK has set itself on a path to reduce official development assistance to roughly 0.3 per cent of national income over the next four to five years. Similar cuts are evident among European donors and multilateral agencies. In 2025, at least 17 EU member states cut aid, and 26 of 34 DAC states reduced their aid budgets.
Governance Indicators Sliding into Red Zone
This pullback in governance work is unfolding as Nigeria's governance indicators slide into the red zone. Civic space is under pressure, freedom of expression and access to information are contested, and corruption remains systemic. Political leadership remains largely organised around patronage and short-term power calculations. For many Nigerians, the promise of democracy has not translated into reliable public services, economic opportunity, or fair use of resources.
According to Olaide, governance, which serves as the mechanism for converting national wealth and policy vision into tangible benefits, is no longer a priority for many donor partners, deepening concerns about Nigeria's democratic future.
Funding Essential to Reverse Accountability Rollback
Olaide argues that funding is essential to slow and reverse the rollback of accountability. When civil society groups, investigative journalists, and public-interest lawyers lose funding, those who control public resources face less scrutiny. That quickly shifts incentives within the state, making it easier to silence critics, normalise impunity, and treat public money as private spoils. This is already visible in Nigeria.
Donor fatigue for governance-related work is understandable, Olaide notes, but governance reform does not move in straight lines and rarely fits neatly into a three to five-year project cycle. The answer to slow progress is not to exit but smarter, more politically aware, and more locally led support.
What Nigeria Needs: Four Key Investments
Olaide outlines four urgent needs for philanthropy in democracy-building in Nigeria today. First, resources are needed to cultivate a new generation of democrats. Nigeria's young population is politically aware yet increasingly disillusioned. Without deliberate efforts to strengthen civic education, nurture democratic values and leadership, and connect young people to decision-making, there is no guarantee that Nigeria's future will be more democratic than its present.
Second, funding is essential to slow and reverse the rollback of accountability. Third, Nigeria needs investments that enable innovation, movement-building and networked action. Past programmes have shown that real gains often come when organisations across sectors work together, linking communities, media, reformist bureaucrats, creatives and activists around common agendas.
Fourth, governance funding should intentionally support 'change champions' within government and public institutions. Reform-minded officials often work with limited backing and face significant personal risk. When civil society and donors partner with them on open budgeting, procurement reforms, justice-sector improvements, or digital transparency, the likelihood of lasting institutional change increases significantly.
A Dangerous Vacuum
The end of USAID as the world knew it, the contraction of European aid, and the closure of major governance programmes have created a dangerous vacuum. If no new sources of support emerge soon, whether through reconfigured international partnerships, regional funds, African philanthropy, or domestic resource mobilisation, the continent risks a wave of democratic erosion, leaving fewer defenders on the field.
For Nigeria, this is a moment of choice for both domestic leaders and international partners. Retreating from governance now may seem fiscally prudent, but it will be politically costly. The consequences are both everyday and structural – weaker institutions, deeper cynicism, and a democracy that exists more on paper than in practice. The work of salvaging governance and democracy in Nigeria demands not less funding, but better, braver, and more locally grounded funding.
