Airports: Experts Warn Against White Elephant Projects, Urge Govs To Prioritise Viability

State governments have been warned against spending billions of naira on airports that may struggle to attract airlines and passengers while rural communities remain without functional roads and other basic infrastructure.

Aviation experts Dr James Odaudu and former Rector of the Nigerian College of Aviation Technology (NCAT), Zaria Capt. Sam Caulcrick said governments must either demonstrate the economic viability of new airport projects or focus on making existing facilities productive, rather than allowing them to become expensive white elephant projects.

Odaudu said the growing rush by state governments to construct airports amounted to a misplaced development priority where basic infrastructure such as rural roads, healthcare, water supply and schools remained inadequate.

He said although airports could improve connectivity, stimulate economic activity and attract investment, states must first establish the genuine need, economic viability and long-term sustainability of such projects.

He argued that governments struggling to provide motorable rural roads should not prioritise spending billions of naira on airports that may serve a relatively small segment of the population.

“It is difficult to justify spending billions of naira on an airport while rural communities remain inaccessible, farmers struggle to transport their produce and residents lack basic public services,” he said.

Odaudu questioned the commercial viability of many state-owned airports, citing low passenger traffic, limited airline operations, high security and maintenance costs, dependence on government subsidies and inadequate cargo facilities.

He said airports that attract few airlines and passengers but require substantial government funding could become financial liabilities rather than economic assets.

“The commercial viability of many state-owned airports remains questionable. Although airports can stimulate economic activity, their sustainability depends on passenger traffic, airline operations, revenue generation and the ability to cover recurrent expenditure.

Many state airports face challenges such as, low passenger traffic and limited commercial airline operations, high operating costs, including security, personnel and maintenance, dependence on government subsidies to sustain operations.

“Limited cargo-handling facilities and commercial activities, competition from established airports within accessible distances. An airport that attracts few airlines and passengers but requires substantial annual government subsidies becomes a financial liability rather than an economic asset.”

The aviation expert called for transparent assessment of passenger volumes, flight frequencies, operating costs, revenues, subsidies and airline interest before new airport projects are approved.

Odaudu also challenged the practice of state governments building airports with the expectation that the Federal Government could eventually take them over and reimburse the capital invested.

He said such a possibility could encourage states to undertake costly projects without fully considering their long-term financial implications.

While noting that this does not establish the motivation behind every state airport project, he said the practice could create a moral hazard and weaken fiscal discipline.

He therefore urged the Federal Government to impose stricter conditions on states seeking to develop airports.

States, he said, should provide independently verified feasibility studies covering projected passenger traffic, airline interest, construction costs, recurrent expenditure, maintenance obligations and available alternative transport infrastructure.

He added that states should demonstrate that proposed airport investments would not undermine funding for essential public services.

Odaudu further called for an end to the routine Federal Government takeover of state-owned airports and reimbursement of capital invested in their construction.

He said federal acquisition should be restricted to exceptional cases where an airport serves a clearly established national interest, backed by independent valuation and transparent financial arrangements.

““The viability of these airports should therefore be assessed through transparent data on passenger volumes, flight frequency, operating costs, revenue and government subsidies. Also, the Federal Government should discontinue the routine takeover of state-owned airports and reimbursement of the capital invested in their construction.

“The practice could encourage states to undertake projects without fully considering their financial implications, on the assumption that the Federal Government will eventually acquire the facilities.

“Federal acquisition should be limited to exceptional cases where an airport serves a clearly established national interest, with the decision supported by an independent valuation and transparent financial arrangements.

“State governments should ordinarily bear responsibility for the financial consequences of projects they initiate, rather than expecting the Federal Government to absorb the costs,” he stated.

Rather than relying mainly on public funds, Odaudu urged states to encourage private-sector participation through public-private partnerships, concessions and other investment arrangements.

He said private capital and expertise could reduce the financial burden on government, provided projects were backed by genuine commercial demand and credible business cases.

States should also consider upgrading existing aviation facilities, developing cargo-handling services and improving transport connectivity before committing scarce public resources to new airports.

Odaudu maintained that airports should not be pursued as symbols of political prestige, but on the basis of economic viability, genuine public need and measurable developmental benefits.

“The ultimate test of responsible governance is not the number of airports a state possesses, but the extent to which public investment improves the lives and livelihoods of its citizens,” he said.

Caulcrick on his own, said, regardless of the circumstances surrounding the construction of existing state airports, governments should not allow the facilities to waste away.

He argued that airports could become catalysts for regional development if governments deliberately built economic activities around them.

“I’m not against it. Airports are usually supposed to be a catalyst for development. Whether they are doing it sincerely or not, the fact that they are doing it means we should use it as a nucleus for development,” he said.

“Even if the current political leaders leave office, the airports they have built will remain and continue to exist beyond their tenure. They won’t go away with it; it will outlive them. But, on a serious note, I’m not against it.

“And the reason is this: airports are usually supposed to be catalysts for development, whether they are being built for that purpose sincerely or not. The fact is that they are being built. What the rest of us, led by journalists, should do is say,

“These governors have built it. Let’s forget about whatever they have used to build it but, we should use it as a nucleus for development.”

We all have bandits on our roads but an airport will bypass that; I think it will overfly it. That is one area.

“So, if we can focus and recalibrate the airport as a nucleus for development, we can achieve a lot. Airport development usually has a very rapid impact. Anything around it tends to develop and speed up.

“It is a model we have seen with Akwa Ibom. I can’t see why other states cannot do the same,” he stated.

He continued, the potential is huge and now, all of them are sub-nationals; they are getting more money, but they should not necessarily focus on reaching the level Akwa Ibom has attained. If it is only to start regional aviation, as it is done in America, then take a state, perhaps in the South, and develop it around that model,” he advised.

Caulcrick advocated regional aviation using smaller aircraft, saying states could develop routes that do not require the passenger volumes associated with major airports.

“If we start regional aviation, like it is in America, let’s take a state in the South and one in the North. Let’s do regional aviation that will carry 40 or 50 passengers to Sokoto, Kano and wherever,” he said.

He said such operations could strengthen connectivity while creating opportunities for the movement of passengers and goods.

“People will start moving things that they used to move by road by air. Whatever is being produced in that place, they can start moving it by air. They can also start developing tourism,” he said.

Caulcrick cited Akwa Ibom and Akure as examples of how airport infrastructure could be integrated into broader regional development, arguing that greater value could be derived from the facilities when complementary economic activities were developed around them.

He urged stakeholders to focus on making existing infrastructure productive rather than allowing political disagreements over the original decisions behind the projects to determine their fate.

“It is one thing we know that they cannot carry away. It’s enduring. So it’s for the rest of those following them to say, ‘This thing that this man built, instead of building a hospital and everything, let’s not allow it to go to waste,’” he said.

Efforts to speak with the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN), proved abortive as messages sent to the Director, public Affairs, Henry Agbebire, on viability of state governments owned airport were not responded to as at the time of filing this report