North vs South: The student loan divide

As I reflect on the recent figures from the Nigerian Education Loan Fund, I’m struck by the stark reality of a regional divide that left me questioning the very fabric of our education system. The numbers are jarring: over 300,000 student loan applications from the North, compared to just 173,000 from the South. The North-West zone alone accounted for 167,639 applications, while the South-East lagged with fewer than 30,000.

How did we get here? The government’s bold and praiseworthy investment in student loans was meant to widen access to higher education, but the figures (as of May 2025) reveal a sharp northern concentration, raising concerns about equity and access in national education financing. Needless to say that in Nigeria, education remains a pathway to social and economic advancement.

NELFUND was created to widen access to higher education through interest-free loans. Though conceived in the early 2000s by the Olusegun Obasanjo government, the policy stalled until the enabling legislation in 2023. The government earmarked N50bn to reach 1.2 million students yearly across universities, polytechnics and colleges of education.

The loans cover tuition, books and living costs, with repayment set to begin two years after national service, contingent on employment. Applicants must provide a guarantor and proof of enrolment conditions that determine who can benefit.

But let’s look more critically at the distribution data, which shows sharp regional imbalances: North-West 167,639 applications, North-East 134,359, South-West 104,079, South-South 39,774, and South-East 29,097. The two northern zones made up more than half of the total applications, while the entire South-East, as I said earlier, lagged with fewer than 30,000. Yet, school size does not fully explain this pattern.

Nigeria has 63 federal universities, many in the north, but southern institutions host larger student bodies. A simple check showed UNN usually houses about 60,000 students, UNILAG 33,779, compared with ABU Zaria’s 35,000 and UNIMAID’s 8,504 fresh admits in 2024/25.

For clarity, it must be stated that the Nigerian government has not met its target. Instead of 1.2 million beneficiaries, only about 475,000 applications were recorded nationwide. This suggests that the surge in the north reflects more than population; factors like awareness, outreach, socio-economic pressures, and application behaviour may be shaping uptake.

Now, let’s analyse this disparity.

NELFUND’s outreach has perhaps been stronger in the north, where community networks and targeted campaigns possibly boosted participation. Economic realities are also a factor: studies showed northern families, with fewer means to self-finance, are more likely to seek interest-free loans, while many southern households may rely on private channels or self-funding.

Also, universities with active student affairs structures likely helped students navigate the process, while weaker support in others could have limited uptake. We can view the disparity, therefore, as being less about numbers on campus and more about a combination of awareness, economic need and institutional engagement.

And yet, this has always been the pattern with many national programmes, where northern participation consistently outweighs that of the south.

Of course, there has been a persistent regional tilt in government programmes.

Federal education initiatives in Nigeria have long leaned towards the North, reflecting historic gaps in school enrolment and literacy.

Programmes such as the Universal Basic Education Commission’s Universal Basic Education scheme, launched in 2004, channelled more funding to northern states like Kano, Kaduna and Borno to tackle higher out-of-school numbers.

The Girls’ Education Project, backed by the Department for International Development between 2003 and 2015, also began with six northern states and later expanded nationwide, boosting girls’ enrolment by up to 40 per cent in targeted areas.

Reports from UNICEF and the Tertiary Education Trust Fund confirm that other major interventions, from the Education Trust Fund to Millennium Development Goals education projects, likewise prioritised northern states through scholarships, infrastructure and teacher training.

A similar pattern emerged in agriculture. The government’s e-Wallet Fertiliser Distribution scheme and related subsidies have heavily concentrated production in the North.

The 2018 assessment by the International Fertiliser Development Centre and African Fertiliser and Agribusiness Partnership for Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa found most of the country’s 33 blending plants in northern states, with Kano alone hosting five. By contrast, the entire south has only seven, three of them in Rivers State.

Poverty alleviation programmes have followed the same regional tilt. The National Poverty Eradication Programme and the National Social Investment Programmes, including Conditional Cash Transfers, N-Power and the National Social Safety Net Programme, have focused heavily on the North, where poverty rates exceed 80 per cent in states such as Sokoto, Gombe and Jigawa. During the 2020 Conditional Cash Transfer round, Katsina alone recorded over 140,000 beneficiaries while Lagos had fewer than 7,000.

These patterns reveal a consistent policy trend as federal interventions, from education to agriculture to poverty relief, have historically concentrated resources in the North, often leaving the South comparatively underrepresented.

In a country where access is uneven, what do I recommend?

The concentration of NELFUND in northern states highlights a deeper concern about equity in access to federal opportunities. When one region consistently benefits more from national schemes, inequalities in education and economic advancement become more entrenched. For students in the underrepresented areas, this creates a sense of exclusion and reinforces existing disparities.

This uneven uptake also raises questions about the inclusiveness of government policies. Federal initiatives, from student loans to social protection schemes, risk being perceived as skewed when they disproportionately favour certain areas.

If such patterns persist, the long-term impact could be damaging. Disparities in education financing and other welfare initiatives will deepen structural divides, fuelling resentment and mistrust in the government. History shows that when development is uneven, the result is not national progress but cycles of exclusion and stalled growth.

For NELFUND to truly expand access, more attention must be given to regions that remain underrepresented. Awareness campaigns should go beyond northern campuses to reach southern universities with large student populations, using student unions, campus radio, and community networks to close the gap. Economic realities also matter: many households remain cautious about loans, preferring informal or self-financed options. Financial literacy and advisory support would help demystify the process and build trust.

Although this challenge is not about loans alone. The uneven uptake mirrors a broader problem in federal programmes, from education to welfare, which too often fail to reach all regions equally.

The question is: will we act to address this divide, or will we continue to perpetuate a system that’s stacked against certain regions?

Unless deliberate efforts are made to involve universities, communities, and households in bridging these gaps, government interventions risk entrenching the very inequalities they were meant to reduce. What is needed is a deliberate, inclusive strategy that ensures every Nigerian student, regardless of region, has a fair chance at opportunity.

The future of our nation depends on it.

•Written By Marcel Mbamalu