SSDC Must Justify Indonesia, Other Foreign Junkets

The entire board of the South-South Development Commission (SSDC), alongside several stakeholders sponsored by the commission, has returned from the Trade Expo Indonesia 2026, with what its management describes as promising prospects for regional development. The visit appears to signal a welcome shift towards promoting industry, attracting investment and empowering the South-South region beyond the traditional interventionist approach to development.
According to the commission’s Managing Director, Ms. Usoro Akpabio, who led the delegation, the visit offered opportunities to explore the industrial potential of agricultural crops such as oil palm, cocoa, coffee and cassava, particularly their value chains.
The delegation reportedly witnessed how these crops could be transformed into high-value products, creating wealth, employment and economic opportunities. Akpabio also disclosed that discussions extended to bio-fuel, glycerin, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and sustainable aviation fuel.
Considering the South-South region’s abundance of these agricultural resources and its vast arable land, it has the comparative advantage to benefit significantly from such industrial opportunities. It is, however, a sad commentary on our development trajectory that a region so endowed must travel abroad to learn how to maximise the potential of its natural resources.
Nigeria has research institutions, universities and government agencies established to develop the commercial prospects of these crops. Unfortunately, bureaucratic bottlenecks, corruption, policy inconsistencies and poor supervision have combined to deny the country their enormous benefits.
Consequently, much of their cultivation remains at subsistence level. Several plantations have been abandoned, while rural farmers increasingly abandon agriculture. Those who remain largely sell raw produce to middlemen and exporters, who add little or no value before shipping them abroad. Nigerians subsequently pay premium prices for finished products manufactured from these same resources.
This is the economic absurdity the SSDC must be determined to reverse. Rather than allowing the region to remain a supplier of cheap raw materials to foreign industries, the commission should champion local processing, manufacturing, technology transfer and value-chain development that retain wealth and create jobs within the region.
While the Indonesia visit may offer useful opportunities, it raises legitimate questions about its cost, necessity and prudence. The resources expended on sponsoring the entire board and several stakeholders to Jakarta could arguably have supported small-scale agro-processing industries at home, creating immediate economic benefits and attracting private investment.
Much of the technical knowledge and contacts sought could also have been obtained through Nigeria’s diplomatic mission in Indonesia, the Indonesian Embassy in Nigeria, research collaborations and virtual engagements, at considerably lower cost.
We are not opposed to international exposure. No serious development agency should operate in isolation from global best practices. The question is whether the size of the delegation, the expenditure and the objectives justified the trip. Public institutions must demonstrate that overseas engagements serve clearly defined development needs rather than the privileges of public office.
More troubling is that the Indonesia trip is not an isolated incident. The commission’s board had earlier embarked on similar trips to China and other countries. This pattern makes it imperative for the SSDC to explain the objectives, costs and measurable outcomes of these foreign engagements.
The commission must not become another avenue for public officials to enjoy overseas travels at the expense of the people they were appointed to serve. Established to address decades of neglect, environmental degradation and economic deprivation in the South-South, its resources must be managed with discipline, transparency and accountability.
We therefore call on the SSDC to publish the cost of the Indonesia trip, identify the sponsored stakeholders, disclose the concrete investment or technical agreements reached and provide a clear roadmap for translating the lessons into projects. It must equally account for the outcomes of its earlier trips to China and other countries.
If these journeys were genuinely undertaken in the interest of regional development, the commission should have no difficulty demonstrating their value. If they turn out to have been little more than expensive excursions, the board must accept responsibility and consider refunding the public funds expended.
The South-South does not lack agricultural resources, human capital or entrepreneurial potential. What it needs is effective leadership, investment discipline and the political will to turn these advantages into sustainable prosperity.
The people need industries, jobs, investments and economic opportunities, not a succession of overseas junkets. The SSDC must prove that it understands the difference.