Opinion
….Why a prosperous people still have a poor homeland
By Chuka Nnabuife
THE Igbo people are among Nigeria’s greatest wealth creators. They account for a remarkable number of the country’s entrepreneurs, industrialists and billionaires. Yet, paradoxically, the South-East — the homeland of the Igbo nation — remains one of the least endowed regions in terms of infrastructure, federal institutions and public investment.
From roads and healthcare facilities to educational establishments and employment opportunities, the region has long suffered structural deficits. Consequently, despite the awesome prosperity of many individual Igbo citizens, the South-East economy itself remains relatively weak. Studies indicate that the zone contributes less than eight per cent of Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), making it one of the country’s least productive geographical regions by location.
This reality carries consequences. Since economic output influences development indices and resource allocation, the South-East’s weak domestic economy inevitably affects its share of national benefits.
The irony is striking. Igbo sons and daughters own big and thriving businesses across Nigeria and beyond but most of those investments are domiciled outside their region. Taxes are paid there, jobs are created there and host communities enjoy their economic dividends. Meanwhile, the homeland receives comparatively little direct benefit from the immense wealth generated by its people.
This has become the enduring paradox of the Igbo economy: a wealthy people with a relatively poor homeland.
Over the years, governments, development experts and visionary leaders have sought ways to reverse this trend. One recurring theme has been the philosophy of Aku Ruo Uno — bringing wealth or parts of the wealth home. Successes recorded in communities that embraced the idea, comprising Nnewi and Abriba, give impressive references to its results. Yet the scale of investment has not matched the developmental needs of the region.
Today, the urgency has become even greater.
During the inauguration and retreat of the governing board of the South East Development Commission (SEDC) in Abuja earlier this year, Governor Chukwuma Charles Soludo of Anambra State reminded the region of an uncomfortable truth.
“Economically speaking, the South-East is insignificant. Our wealth is largely outside the South-East,” said Prof. Soludo.
As a globally respected economist, first-class scholar and former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Soludo was not diminishing the Igbo people. Rather, he was highlighting a painful reality: while Ndi Igbo are renowned for entrepreneurship and wealth creation, much of that wealth is invested outside the region, leaving the domestic economy underdeveloped.
His point was straightforward. Individual prosperity does not automatically translate into regional prosperity. A homeland cannot flourish if its industries, investments and taxable economic activities are concentrated elsewhere.
Speaking again at the SEDC conference in Enugu in March, Soludo advocated a coordinated economic reconstruction strategy — a kind of regional “Marshall Plan” — to address years of insecurity, infrastructure deficits, capital flight and the disruptions that have weakened the South-East economy.
Expectedly, his remarks generated debate.
An article published in Law and Society Magazine on June 4 under the title, ‘Beyond the GDP Numbers: Why Soludo’s “8 Percent” Remark Misses the Point,’ is one of the critiques. In it, the commentator Prof. Anthony Ejiofor argued that the South-East’s importance cannot be measured solely by regional GDP. He maintained that Igbo entrepreneurs drive enormous economic activity across Lagos, Abuja, Kano, Port Harcourt and other parts of Nigeria and that their influence extend far beyond the five South-East states.
He further argued that GDP figures do not adequately capture commercial networks, informal trade and investment flows, and that the spread of Igbo capital across Nigeria should be viewed as a strength rather than evidence of regional weakness.
While these arguments may scratch the surface of the matter, they do not invalidate Soludo’s central thesis.
The governor never suggested that the Igbo are economically unimportant. His concern was that the South-East itself remains economically fragile because much of the wealth created by its people is located elsewhere.
Indeed, the taxes paid by Igbo-owned businesses enrich host states of the ventures, while those communities enjoy the infrastructure, employment and multiplier effects generated by those investments. The homeland that produced many of the investors derives comparatively little benefit.
In that sense, Soludo was diagnosing a problem, not disparaging a people. Persons who chose to exploit the political correctness or partisanship in the issue may not be helping Ndi Igbo at the long run.
History offers numerous examples of societies transformed by deliberate diaspora investment. Israel, China, India, Ireland, Armenia and South Korea all benefited (benefits) immensely from citizens abroad who returned (return) with capital, knowledge, technology and global networks.
The Jewish diaspora helped finance Israel’s infrastructure and technological development. Overseas Chinese investors played a critical role in China’s industrial take-off. Indian professionals abroad contributed significantly to the country’s emergence as a global technology hub. Similar experiences can be found in Ireland, Armenia and South Korea.
The common factors behind these successes were strong identity and connection with homeland, trusted institutions, knowledge transfer and a shared commitment to future generations.
Ndi Igbo already possess many of these strengths. Entrepreneurship, global networks and communal self-help are deeply rooted in Igbo culture. Communities such as Nnewi and Abriba demonstrate what is possible when local investment is deliberately encouraged.
However, sustainable development in Alaigbo requires improved security, transparent governance and strategic investments in transportation, healthcare, education and other critical sectors. Equally important are credible frameworks capable of attracting and retaining diaspora capital.
Like the Jews and the overseas Chinese, Ndi Igbo can leverage their global presence to build a stronger and more prosperous homeland.
That, fundamentally, is the message Governor Soludo has been conveying. More importantly, he is clearly committed to putting that philosophy into practice through his Solution Government’s vision of building “a liveable and prosperous homeland” in Anambra State.
Ultimately, the South-East faces a choice: remain trapped in partisan distractions or embrace a development path that history has repeatedly shown to work.
The future of the region may well depend on which path it chooses.
***Chuka Nnabuife, author and journalist writes from Awka, Anambra State via [email protected]. 08026472357
A.I
June 7, 2026
Tags: Chuka Nnabuife