The latest figures from the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF) show that the 36 states of the federation shared a total of N8.66 billion as Ecology Fund for July 2025, disbursed in August 2025.
However, the allocation pattern has sparked debate over the fairness and transparency of the criteria used in determining the distribution.
According to the document titled “Account Allocation Committee for the Month of July 2025 Shared in August 2025,” Kano State received the highest total ecology fund allocation of N362.08 million, comprising N350.91 million as Gross Statutory Allocation and N11.17 million as Exchange Gain Allocation.
This figure places Kano far ahead of several oil-producing states grappling with severe environmental degradation linked to oil exploration and industrial activities.
By contrast, Rivers State, which hosts major oil infrastructure and the Ogoni region long associated with ecological devastation, received N246.18 million, while Bayelsa State, another major oil-producing state, got N201.98 million.
Northwest and Northern States dominate top recipients
The data also reveals that many northern states dominated the top ten recipients.
Following Kano are Borno (N283.65 million), Katsina (N280.60 million), and Bauchi (N273.05 million), all states contending with desertification, soil erosion, and deforestation.
Southern states, including Delta (N231.78 million) and Akwa Ibom (N229.51 million), which have historically suffered oil spillages and flooding, received comparatively less.
In total, the federal government shared N8.39 billion in gross statutory allocations and N267.12 billion as exchange gain, bringing the aggregate Ecology Fund disbursement to N8.66 billion for July.
Public outcry over allocation criteria
The distribution has drawn sharp criticism from economic analysts and social media commentators, questioning the methodology used in sharing the Ecology Fund.
Economic analyst Kalu Aja, reacting to the allocation via his verified handle on X (formerly Twitter), queried why Kano received a larger share than Rivers State, despite the latter’s environmental burden from oil production.
“Kano gets more than Rivers, which has Ogoni and pumps the oil. Yes, Kano has its ecological issues with desertification, but what are the criteria to share ecological funds? Please don’t tell me it’s the same FAAC formula?” Aja wrote.
Another X user, referencing industrial pollution in Ogun State, also criticized the fairness of the allocation: “Cement and many other factories in Ogun State make their environment uninhabitable. Sango/Ota alone in Ogun has more factories than Kano, but Kano got almost twice the ecological fund. Fiscal federalism indeed,” the user stated.
Environmental disparities highlight federalism debate
The growing scrutiny reflects Nigeria’s long-standing debate over fiscal federalism and the management of special intervention funds.
While Kano faces desert encroachment and drought challenges, oil-producing states contend with gas flaring, flooding, and soil contamination.
Environmental advocates argue that an equitable ecology fund should consider actual ecological damage and risk intensity, not population or landmass.
Experts suggest that without a transparent needs-based framework, the fund risks deepening regional distrust and undermining the goal of environmental remediation.
Breakdown of allocations
Other notable allocations include:
- Lagos State – N305.80 million
- Kaduna State – N299.09 million
- Benue State – N256.00 million
- Sokoto State – N251.57 million
- Oyo State – N256.03 million
States with the least allocations include Bayelsa (N201.98 million) and Ebonyi (N204.22 million).
Calls for review and transparency
Policy watchers are calling for a comprehensive review of the ecology fund sharing formula to ensure allocations align with environmental realities rather than general fiscal criteria.
Barrister Ralph Udo, the Principal Partner at Ralph Udo Chambers, called for a comprehensive review of the ecology fund framework, insisting that allocations must reflect the actual level of environmental degradation, risk, and vulnerability.
“Unless there is transparency in how these figures are derived, the Ecology Fund will remain a political slush fund rather than a tool for environmental justice,” Udo warned.
Analysts warn that unless the disbursement model is restructured, Nigeria risks perpetuating environmental injustice that leaves the most affected communities underfunded.
In the words of the legal practitioner, “It’s a fiscal absurdity wearing an ecological mask.”
What you should know
The Ecology Fund was established to provide dedicated financing for managing ecological problems such as flooding, desertification, erosion, oil spills, and other environmental disasters across Nigeria.
The fund is part of the monthly Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) for disbursements, managed by the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF).
However, the precise criteria used to determine how much each state receives remain opaque.
Critics argue that it follows the same population- and landmass-based formula as regular FAAC allocations, rather than actual ecological need, a view seemingly reinforced by this latest distribution.
Overall, the current distribution raises fundamental questions about whether Nigeria’s ecological funding system truly addresses environmental realities or simply mirrors its broader fiscal imbalance.
Until there’s reform and transparency, regions most impacted by environmental degradation may continue to be underfunded.
