NERSI and the Poverty Question: Why FG Should Adopt a More Inclusive Beneficiary Framework
By Matthew Eloyi
The Federal Government’s decision to provide ₦50,000 financial support to vulnerable Nigerians under the National Emergency Relief and Stabilisation Intervention (NERSI) has reopened an important debate about poverty, economic vulnerability and the criteria for determining who deserves government assistance in a country where hardship has become an everyday reality for millions of citizens.
While the intervention is a welcome acknowledgement of the economic difficulties confronting households across the country, the decision to restrict beneficiaries to individuals identified through the National Social Register and verified national identity records raises questions about the inclusiveness of the programme.
The fundamental question is whether the National Social Register, as useful as it may be, adequately captures the growing population of Nigerians struggling to survive the country’s harsh economic realities.
In today’s Nigeria, poverty is no longer confined to a particular social class, geographical location or category of people. It cuts across professions, occupations, age groups and income levels. Civil servants, teachers, journalists, traders, artisans, farmers, private-sector employees and small business owners are all experiencing the effects of rising living costs, declining purchasing power and increasing financial obligations.
Having a job does not necessarily mean being financially secure. Earning a monthly salary does not guarantee the ability to afford basic necessities, while owning a business does not automatically translate into profitability. Many Nigerians who previously enjoyed reasonable economic stability are now struggling to meet their obligations.
For some households, paying rent, purchasing food, financing children’s education, accessing healthcare and meeting transportation costs have become increasingly difficult. Even individuals who earn regular incomes are finding it challenging to maintain their previous standards of living.
This reality calls for a broader understanding of poverty and vulnerability, particularly when designing government interventions intended to provide emergency financial relief.
The limitations of the National Social Register
According to the Federal Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Reduction, beneficiaries of the ₦50,000 NERSI grant will be selected from the National Social Register and verified national identity records, using established poverty and vulnerability criteria across the six geopolitical zones.
The ministry has also clarified that there will be no application or registration process, as beneficiary selection will be automated and cannot be influenced by government officials, agents or other third parties.
Although the National Social Register provides an important framework for identifying poor and vulnerable households, it should not be regarded as an exhaustive representation of everyone experiencing economic hardship in Nigeria.
A database is only as effective as its coverage, accuracy and frequency of updates. Economic circumstances change, sometimes rapidly, and individuals who were not considered poor when a register was compiled may have since experienced unemployment, business failure, salary erosion, increased family responsibilities or other financial setbacks.
Similarly, there are Nigerians living in urban centres, informal settlements and rural communities whose economic circumstances may not have been adequately captured by existing government databases.
The danger of relying exclusively on the register is that it could exclude genuinely vulnerable citizens simply because their names are not included or their current economic circumstances are not reflected in the available records.
The issue, therefore, is not whether the National Social Register is useful. It is whether it is sufficiently comprehensive to serve as the principal gateway to emergency financial assistance in an economy where hardship has become widespread.
Why every BVN holder deserves consideration
The Federal Government should consider adopting a more inclusive approach by extending the ₦50,000 relief intervention to every eligible Nigerian with a Bank Verification Number (BVN), rather than restricting access exclusively to individuals identified through the National Social Register.
The argument is based on the understanding that economic hardship in Nigeria is widespread and that vulnerability cannot always be determined by an individual’s previous classification in a government database.
A BVN provides an established financial identity that could help government agencies verify beneficiaries, minimise duplicate payments and facilitate direct disbursement through recognised financial service providers.
Rather than making the National Social Register the exclusive determinant of eligibility, the government could use BVN verification, national identity records and other available databases to develop a broader and more accessible beneficiary framework.
This would not necessarily mean that every Nigerian experiences the same degree of poverty or faces identical economic challenges. Rather, it recognises that the rising cost of living has affected households across different income categories and that individuals outside existing social protection databases may also require emergency support.
If the government considers ₦50,000 necessary to cushion the effects of economic hardship on vulnerable citizens, it should be prepared to examine the circumstances of a much wider population before deciding who qualifies.
The possession of a BVN could provide the basis for inclusion in an expanded relief framework, with appropriate safeguards to prevent multiple claims, impersonation and fraudulent payments.
Such an approach would also reduce the perception that access to government assistance depends primarily on whether an individual was previously captured in a particular social register.
The financial implications and the need for transparency
Extending the programme to every BVN holder would undoubtedly have significant financial implications. The government would need to establish the number of eligible beneficiaries, determine the total funding requirement and assess the fiscal implications of a broader disbursement.
However, the financial implications should not prevent a serious examination of the possibility of a more inclusive intervention.
If available resources cannot accommodate a universal ₦50,000 payment at once, the government could consider a phased disbursement, a broader emergency support programme or additional funding arrangements that would progressively expand coverage.
What matters is that the government should clearly communicate the programme’s financial limitations, the number of people it intends to support and the reasons for its beneficiary selection criteria.
It should also publish periodic reports showing the number of beneficiaries reached, the geographical distribution of payments, the total amount disbursed and the mechanisms for addressing complaints.
Transparency is particularly important because social intervention programmes are often judged not only by the resources committed to them but also by the credibility of their implementation.
Protecting beneficiaries from fraud
Another important aspect of NERSI is the need to protect Nigerians from fraudulent individuals seeking to exploit the programme.
The ministry has clarified that there is no application or registration process and that beneficiaries will receive SMS notifications from authorised digital financial service providers.
The approved platforms are ALAT by Wema Bank, MoMo PSB, NairaGram, OPay and Moniepoint. Beneficiaries are expected to follow the instructions contained in their notifications to give consent and access their funds through designated USSD codes.
The ministry has also warned Nigerians against paying individuals or agents to secure inclusion in the programme, stressing that nobody can influence the automated selection process.
It further advised beneficiaries never to disclose their Personal Identification Numbers (PINs), One-Time Passwords (OTPs) or Bank Verification Numbers (BVNs) to unauthorised persons.
These warnings are necessary, particularly given the vulnerability of citizens who may be desperate to access financial assistance. The ministry must, however, complement public awareness with effective complaint-resolution mechanisms and adequate monitoring of the payment process.
The official NERSI helpline, 0700-022-2222, should be accessible and responsive to beneficiaries seeking clarification or reporting suspicious activities.
Beyond temporary financial assistance
Ultimately, the debate surrounding NERSI should go beyond the distribution of ₦50,000 to selected households. It should provoke a broader conversation about the country’s social protection architecture and the need for government policies that respond to the changing realities of poverty.
Cash transfers can provide immediate relief, but they cannot independently resolve the structural problems responsible for widespread economic hardship. Nigeria needs sustained efforts to create employment, support small businesses, improve agricultural productivity, strengthen household incomes and reduce the cost of essential goods and services.
The Federal Government must therefore view NERSI as one component of a broader economic support strategy rather than a standalone solution to poverty.
The National Social Register should remain an important instrument for identifying vulnerable households, but it should not become an unquestionable boundary separating Nigerians who qualify for assistance from those who are equally struggling outside the database.
A more inclusive framework, anchored on verifiable financial and national identity records, would give the government an opportunity to reach a wider population while strengthening transparency and accountability.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s Renewed Hope Agenda places considerable emphasis on improving citizens’ welfare. For that commitment to translate into tangible benefits, social intervention programmes must be responsive to the actual economic circumstances of Nigerians.
The central issue is simple: poverty and vulnerability should be assessed based on people’s prevailing circumstances, not merely on whether their names appear in an existing government register.
NERSI offers the Federal Government an opportunity to rethink how emergency relief is delivered. Rather than allowing the limitations of an existing database to determine the reach of the programme, the government should explore ways of making the intervention more inclusive, with every Nigerian holding a valid BVN considered for support.
In an economy where the struggle to survive cuts across social and professional boundaries, government relief should reflect the realities of the people it is designed to serve.