Okereke Explains Why States Are Being Ranked On Climate Governance In Nigeria

Founder of the Society for Planet and Prosperity (SPP), Prof. Chukwumerije Okereke, has said the climate governance ranking for Nigeria’s 36 states was designed to deepen climate action awareness at grassroots level and improve implementation at sub-national level.

Okereke spoke in Abuja during a capacity enhancement programme for commissioners handling environment and climate issues across the federation. The session, themed around peer learning and impact evaluation of the sub-national climate governance ranking initiative, brought together state officials to review results and discuss what is working.

He said Nigeria cannot build strong climate resilience and mitigation outcomes through federal policy alone, adding that state-level institutions are central to practical results. According to him, national conversations on climate policy focused for years on the federal level while states received less attention.

Okereke said SPP, in collaboration with the Department of Climate Change in the Federal Ministry of Environment, introduced the ranking and rating framework to track policy, governance arrangements, implementation actions, and financing progress across states.

He said the first ranking was released in 2023 and the second was released in 2025. He added that findings showed many states are already implementing meaningful actions. The current phase, he said, is intended to help commissioners learn from each other, refine methods, and improve performance before the next ranking cycle.

Explaining how the framework works, Okereke said it uses multiple indicators, including climate policy, climate action plans, institutional structures for climate governance, legislative oversight, implementation evidence, training and capacity development, online visibility, and ability to attract climate finance.

He said implementation indicators examine practical measures such as flood defence systems, reforestation, renewable energy actions, and related interventions. He also noted that financing remains a major constraint for states, even where political will exists.

On concerns raised after earlier rankings, Okereke said the exercise is not intended to stigmatise states but to make progress visible, identify gaps, and support improvement. He said results between the first and second rounds showed broad gains, with almost all states improving their governance performance.

Chairman of the Commissioners’ Forum and Commissioner for Environment and Climate Change in Jigawa State, Dr. Nura Ibrahim Kazaure, said commissioners expected three major outcomes from the Abuja event: a tailored capacity-building programme, stronger trust-based networking among states, and wider adoption of mitigation, adaptation, and resilience measures.

Kazaure said previous disagreements were linked to limited understanding of methodology, but ongoing engagement is helping states understand the framework, sampling approach, and reporting standards. He said commissioners are now involved in reviewing the methodology so all states can agree on the template for the third ranking.

Representing the Director of the Department of Climate Change, Assistant Director Dr. Iniobong Abiola Awe said the turnout reflected broad acceptance that climate action in Nigeria must be coordinated, data-driven, and inclusive. She said states are central to implementation in areas such as clean energy, flood resilience, nature-based solutions, and waste management.

Awe said the initiative is expected to continue beyond a one-off event through technical exchanges, thematic working groups, and shared digital systems for data and knowledge management. She added that stronger peer learning can help reinforce Nigeria’s national climate architecture and improve the credibility of state actors in global climate engagement.

Okereke further said the current phase of collaboration is meant to convert policy language into measurable activity in states. He said officials are being encouraged to define timelines, assign technical responsibilities, and improve data systems so progress can be tracked with evidence instead of broad declarations.

He said one lesson from earlier rounds is that states perform better when climate governance is backed by clear institutional leadership and predictable budget support. He added that where implementation teams are weak, even well-written policy frameworks struggle to produce field outcomes.

Participants at the Abuja engagement also examined how states can standardise reporting formats to reduce disputes over scoring and increase comparability across regions. Officials discussed documentation quality, baselines, and verification standards for projects tied to adaptation and mitigation.

On the financing question, stakeholders said access to climate funds remains uneven and often depends on technical readiness, project design quality, and compliance with donor requirements. Commissioners said stronger project preparation units and inter-ministerial coordination could improve each state’s ability to secure and absorb funding.

The forum agreed that future editions of the ranking should continue to balance accountability with capacity support, so states are not only assessed but also helped to close identified gaps. Organisers said peer learning will remain central, with states expected to exchange practical templates and lessons from implementation.

Officials said this approach can help Nigeria improve policy continuity across political cycles, build stronger institutions at state level, and ensure climate commitments translate into results that are visible to communities facing heat stress, flooding, erosion, and other climate-related risks.