Nentawe’s Taraba Reflection: Why Geography Matters In Measuring Development

 

There are observations that pass with the moment and there are those that compel us to pause, reconsider familiar assumptions and look at a subject from a different perspective. The reflection offered by the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress, Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda, during his birthday celebration in Taraba belongs to the latter.

 

While explaining why he chose to celebrate his birthday with sick people in Taraba State, Professor Yilwatda drew attention to a fundamental reality that is often missing from conversations about development: the geography of a state can profoundly influence the cost, reach and visibility of governance.

 

His comparison was striking:

 

“I told him that in a state that has large local governments, it is so difficult to provide critical health infrastructure in those communities. And I gave an example of a local government in Taraba State that has over 9,000 square kilometres.

 

“Anambra State as a state is about 4,600 square kilometres. It is twice the size of a local government in Taraba State. Which means that any provision you make for the entire Anambra State is like you are covering half of a local government in Taraba State.”

 

The significance of that observation goes beyond the figures themselves. It invites us to think about what those figures mean for governance.

 

Taraba is one of Nigeria’s largest states by landmass, with more than 54,000 square kilometres, while Anambra covers roughly 4,600 square kilometres. The difference is enormous. It means that a government delivering the same number of roads, schools, hospitals or other infrastructure in both states is operating within fundamentally different geographical realities.

 

Development is often perceived through visibility. What can be seen is easily discussed, photographed and compared. In a relatively compact state, an infrastructure project can have a broad visual and social presence because communities and economic activities are concentrated within a smaller geographical space.

 

A road can be constructed hundreds of kilometres away from the state capital and remain largely unknown to people elsewhere in the state. A health facility can transform access to healthcare for an entire community without its existence being felt beyond that immediate locality. A school can change the educational prospects of children in a remote community without becoming part of the everyday experience of people living in Jalingo or other urban centres.

 

He went further in explaining the challenge, saying:

 

“Therefore, it makes it difficult for a state governor when you provide and give all your best in a state and you look at it through the same lens compared to other states. You may look at it that they are doing better because it is like they are taking one local government to provide roads, one local government to provide health, one to provide education and one to provide every infrastructure in that state, compared to what my brother is doing.”

 

The phrase “the same lens” is perhaps the most important part of his observation. It is not an argument against accountability. Instead, an argument for context.

 

Taraba must be held to the highest standards of governance. Public resources must be accounted for, projects must be scrutinised and citizens must demand results. But meaningful assessment also requires an understanding of the environment within which those results are being pursued.

 

A state of approximately 4,600 square kilometres and a state of more than 54,000 square kilometres cannot reasonably be expected to display development in exactly the same way.

 

The difference is not cosmetic; It affects the logistics of construction, the cost of extending infrastructure, the distance between communities, the delivery of public services and ultimately the visibility of government intervention.

 

This becomes even more significant when one considers the character of Taraba itself. Its communities are spread across a vast territory with diverse terrain, including difficult and mountainous areas. In such an environment, government must do more than build; it must overcome distance.

 

This is where Prof Yilwatda’s observation also offers an important perspective on the administration of Gov Agbu Kefas.

 

Gov Agbu Kefas is governing a state where the challenge is not simply to provide infrastructure but to extend the reach of government across an enormous geographical space. Every kilometre of road that connects a previously isolated community, every school that brings education closer to children, every health facility that reduces the distance citizens must travel for care and every intervention that opens economic opportunity is, in its own way, an attempt to overcome geography.

 

This is the paradox of development in a geographically large state: the larger the canvas, the more development is required before transformation becomes visually obvious across the entire landscape.

 

Consider the comparison Prof Nentawe Yilwatda presented. If an entire state the size of Anambra can fit within roughly half the landmass of one Taraba local government, then the geographical spread of infrastructure in Taraba will naturally appear different. Projects that would cover a substantial portion of a smaller state may constitute only a fraction of Taraba’s total territory.

 

That does not make the intervention insignificant; it simply means that its impact must be understood within its geographical context. This is why measuring development solely by what is immediately visible can sometimes be deceptive.

 

And this is the why Prof. Nentawe’s remarks are significant beyond the occasion on which they were made. They provide a useful reminder that development has a spatial dimension.

 

The same intervention does not produce the same visibility in every geographical environment. A compact state can accumulate infrastructure in a way that produces rapid and widespread visibility. A vast state must distribute its interventions across much greater distances, meaning that development can sometimes be substantial without being immediately apparent to those outside the communities where it is taking place.

 

Prof. Nentawe’s intervention has therefore opened a useful conversation about how Taraba should be understood and how its development should be evaluated. His comparison with Anambra does not diminish the achievements or challenges of either state. Instead, it reminds us that geographical context matters when comparing outcomes.

 

It reminds us that a project can be visible without being transformative and that another can be almost invisible to the wider public while profoundly changing the lives of its beneficiaries. Most importantly, it reminds us that governance in Taraba is a contest not only against poverty, infrastructure deficits and other developmental challenges, but also against distance itself. That is, perhaps the deeper meaning of Professor Nentawe’s reflection.

 

Taraba’s vastness may make development harder to see, but it will never make development impossible to feel under the administration of Dr Agbu Kefas. That is the lens through which Prof. Nentawe’s reflection deserves to be understood.

 

Zainab Jalingo, Esq. is the Commissioner for Information and Re-orientation, Taraba State serving under Dr Agbu Kefas.