ABSTRACT
The study focused on determining the degree equal access to university education is guaranteed in Nigeria under the current deregulation system. The study employed a five research questions and two null hypotheses guided the study. Descriptive survey research design was adopted for the study. A 51-item questionnaire instrument was administered to 2,444 respondents (lecturers and students) drawn from the 18 universities in the already mentioned area of the study. The researcher also employed the use of an interview scheduled which was administered to six interviewees randomly selected from both public and private universities in the area of study. The information from the interview is used to enrich the discussion of the findings in chapter five. Mean score and the standard deviation statistical tools were used to answer the research questions while the t-test statistics was used to test the null hypotheses. The finding revealed that deregulation of university education is inimical to equal access to university education. This is mainly because the policy brought about an era of prohibitive fees that makes university education too expensive to the effect that while the rich can easily afford it, the poor are priced out of it. By that token, they (the poor) are denied access to university education which they so much crave for, and they are by that token as well denied their right to equally access university education with the rich. Deregulation of education is then seen as widening the gap between the rich and the poor. The study also revealed that under deregulation of university education, university education ceases to be a public good that should be equally accessible to all, it becomes next to a commodity that could only be accessed based on one’s ability to pay. Furthermore the study showed various ways of improving equal access to university education. Among others, they include; increase in the funding of university education, removal of policies (like the quota system) that hamper equal access, involvement of the private sector in the funding of both public and private universities. Based on the findings, the researcher recommended, inter alia, that government should continually increase funding of university education so as to reduce the burden of fees on parents and thereby increase equal access; government should as well provide financial incentives to indigent students in form scholarships and or soft loans, so as to enable many, if not all, who are willing and capable to access university. The researcher also recommended that government should fund private universities so as to reduce the over dependence on tuition for its sustenance and be in position to check on excessive fees.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Deregulation is a contemporary economic theory that is majorly concerned with removal or cessation of government monopoly and control from public institutions, establishments or services. It is a neo-liberal economic policy that seeks to divest government of its control through regulations, with the result that barriers of entry and exit in the provision of such goods and services are removed. When the barriers are removed the private investor is allowed to come on board and participate in the provision of goods and services. The emphasis is on divestment, cessation or reduction of government control and the opening up of public enterprise for private sector participation where operations are determined by market force competition and not by regulations.
Historically, deregulation theory is traceable to Adam Smith’s (1723-1790) laissez-faire economic theory which is hinged on the belief that the economy works best if private industry is not regulated and markets are free (www.answers.com/laissez-faire, 2012). The theory thus rejects state intervention through measures such as protective social legislation and trade restrictions viewing them as injurious. Deregulation is therefore based on the laissez-faire theory and it is currently propagated by the Bretton Woods institutions; World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as a solution to the failed regime of government regulations in most countries. According to Olatunji and Akanwa(2004), with deregulation, it is believed that an economy would perform better and more satisfactorily if there were less government regulations and control. In line with this, Okafor (200t5) states that deregulation is anchored on an assumption that decreasing government regulations of industry creates more competitive markets that provide better services at lower costs to the consumer.
Proponents of this neo-liberal economic policy therefore advocate a paradigm shift from a public sector-led economy characterized by government restrictive control to an open and liberalized private sector – led economy characterized by emphasis on market–force driven competition, devoid of government control. This implies that public domain led economy involves the shift of assets initially held within the public sector towards more market oriented management (Jaji, 2004). The logic here according to Asogwa & Asogwa (2010), is that private sector investment in and involvement in public enterprises ensures efficient management, adequate funding, healthy competition and the likes that cannot be in government monopoly. At this point a nation’s production of wealth is based on the free operations of business and trade without direct government control. Akpotu (2005) describes this as ‘privatization of social functions and assets’. Following this, Jaji (2004) states that deregulation is predicated on the assumption of state inefficiency and “absolute” efficiency of the market. In the same vein, Wokocha (2004) admits that states are known for gross inefficiency, operating at losses, lower return on investment and a drain on public funds. Deregulation is therefore seen as a way out of the inefficiency of the state.
Sequel to this, many nations of the world in the face of dwindling economy embraced deregulation as a lee-way out of their economic problems. Many hitherto government monopolized institutions were therefore privatized and commercialized when government divested itself of monopolies in the provision of those services and goods. Nigeria was not left out in this pervading current of deregulation. So, in response to the prompting of the Bretton Woods institutions (the World Bank and IMF) as a pre-condition to access facilities, Nigeria in the mid-1980s divested herself of the monopoly of most public enterprises. This led to the privatization of the Nigerian Telecommunication Limited, (NITEL), Oil and Gas such as Nigerian National Petroleum Company, (NNPC), Nigerian Railway Corporation, (NRC) and the likes companies; corporations and parastatals. Consequently, private investors now abound in these areas, producing and supplying needed goods and services in Nigeria.
Initially, the education sector was not listed for deregulation in Nigeria (see appendix F for a full list of public enterprises earmarked for deregulation in 1982, page 137). However, given the ever growing demand for education and government’s confessed inability to bear the enormous financial burden of provision of education in the face of both dwindling economy and decaying structures and standard, deregulation became an inevitable option in the nation’s educational sector; just as in other countries. Thus government monopoly of the provision of education in Nigeria was jettisoned while private sector involvement in the same sector was ushered in and provided for in the 1979 constitution. Sequel to this, private schools presently abound at all levels of education in Nigeria (viz primary, post-primary and tertiary) and these schools run side by side with the public schools. The idea of deregulation or privatization of education at all levels is hinged on the belief that such action will lead to market driven-competition which ultimately promises to lower prices, improve standards and enhance quality.
Indeed, the history of universities in Nigeria started from a first era of deregulation (1948-1970) when regional government had right to establish universities, to a second era of centralism, monopoly and or regulation (1970-1979) when the federal government retained to itself the sole power to establish schools. This later gave way to a third era (1979-till date), when the power was returned to the concurrent legislative list as a consequence of which the private sector was allowed to participate in the provision of educational opportunities
Actually, the first era of the history of universities in Nigeria was consequent upon the report of the Elliot Commission in 1943 which led to the establishment of the University College, Ibadan in 1948. The school started as an affiliate college of University of London and was the first and only higher institution in Nigeria until the Eric Ashby commission of 1959. The latter commission’s report, according to Nwadiani and Igineweka (2005), led to the establishment of regional Universities in the then three regions of Nigeria. University of Nigeria, Nsukka – established in 1960 by the Eastern region, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria –established 1962 by the Northern region, University of Ife- established in 1962 by the Western region. University of Lagos – established in 1962 by the Federal government and later, in 1970, University of Benin was established by the mid-western region. Note that the university college Ibadan was raised to a full university in 1962. These six became the first generation Universities in Nigeria.
Later on in history (precisely in 1970), the Federal government adopted the six (first generation) universities thereby ushering in an era of centralism or regulation in the provision of, not just university education but, education at all levels. This was principally because after the Nigerian civil war (1967-70), education; according to Enemuo (2005), was considered a veritable instrument for national cohesion and the need to forge ahead as a nation. Thus, government took all schools away from the voluntary agencies and regional/state governments. The right to establish universities was then transferred from the concurrent to the exclusive list, following the 1972 Indigenization Decree and the 1972 federal Decree on education which made university education an exclusive reserve of the Federal government (Akpotu, 2005). None other than the federal government had right to establish Universities in this era of centralism. Thus, the six (first generation Universities) were variously adopted by the Federal government as federal universities. Later in 1975 the Gowon led military government established 12 universities to ensure that each of the 12 states had at least one University within its borders (Kosemeni, 1982). These universities established within this epoch (1970- 1980) are today referred to as the second generation Nigerian universities.
However, with the growing number of candidates desirous of university education and with government inability to solely sustain the existing universities in the prevailing hegemony of monopoly and centralism, the power to establish universities was returned to the concurrent legislative list by the 1979 constitution. This ushered in a new era of deregulation in the establishment of universities in Nigeria. Consequently, many state governments, especially the newly created states that had no universities established their own state universities. Still more, the existing universities over time kept lacking funds for maintenance yet the government could not make up for the shortfalls. This ugly scenario led to a hue and cry for private sector involvement in the provision of educational opportunities at the university level. Sequel to this, government gave approval for private sector involvement in the provision of university education having approved same at all other lower levels of the educational system in Nigeria.
Consequently, by May 1999 the first set of private universities were given licences to operate and they started academic work same year. These were: the Igbinedon University Okada; Babcock University Ileshan-Ramo, and Madonna University Okija (Osabuohien, 2005). From this point the rise in the number of private, and lately of state, owned universities was not just exponential but phenomenal; so much so that with just four (4) private universities in 1999 the number rose to twenty-two (22) in 2003 and to about fifty (50) in 2012. Currently, Nigeria has thirty-seven (37) Federal owned universities, thirty-seven (37) state universities and fifty (50) private universities fully operating (NUC, 2012), yet many others are still at various stages of approval.(see appendix G for full list of universities in Nigeria, page 138) These universities established from 1985-till date are generally referred to as third-generation Nigerian universities.
