Is there a Pattern of Distribution of State Capitals across the Senatorial Zones and Geopolitical Zones of Nigeria?
Historical Background of State Creation in Nigeria
Following the end of the British colonial rule in Nigeria and the attainment of political, economic and territorial independence, series of events took place. The First Republic ushered in by the democratic government of Sir Tafawa Balewa as the Prime Minister and Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe as President was brought to an unfortunate end by the 1966 coup d’etat led by Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu [1]. The dictatorial military regime also suspended and eventually dissolved the regional government that has been practiced pre-independence. Another legacy of the old military-led administration is the creation of new states from the ruins of the dissolved regional governments [2]. The reasons for state creation, according to studies, were to bring governance and its benefits closer to the masses [3] and, to address the fears of minority and sub-state groups over the overwhelming influence of their more ethnically populous neighbors [2].
The first states creation project was undertaken by General Yakubu Gowon, who, in 1967, restructured the old regions into twelve states. This was built on by another military Head of State, General Murtala Muhammed, who added seven more states, in 1976, mostly through partitioning of the existing states, bringing the number of states to nineteen. Further states creation exercises were embarked upon by successors of ousted military administrations. General Ibrahim Babangida added an additional eleven states between 1987 and 1991, while Sani Abacha created the final six states in 1996 [4], bringing the total number of states to the thirty-six that we know today.
This piece isn’t about the events that preceded the Fourth Republic or the motivations behind the breakage of the nation into several entities. Rather, it is about an often overlooked but relevant phenom, which is the location of state capital cities. Ideally, the capital city should be strategically and rationally situated, serving as a representative hub where every citizen feels adequately represented. Each state has three senatorial districts, except for FCT that has one, and within one of the senatorial districts is located the state’s capital. In this article, we explored the distribution of the capital cities across the senatorial districts and geopolitical zones and, perhaps, the reasons behind the choice of location.
Distribution of Capital Cities Across Senatorial Districts and Geopolitical Zones
A capital city is referred to as the locus of political authority within a territorial unit, functioning as the seat of the legislature and the headquarters of the executive branch. It also holds the responsibility of overseeing and coordinating local administrations, ensuring cohesive governance across the territory [5]. Beyond its administrative functions, it symbolises the unity and identity of a state, serves as a central node for diplomatic relations, economic activity, and cultural exchange, contributing to the overall development. Moreover, a well-positioned capital fosters political stability and enhances the efficiency of state operations.
Seasoned researchers at the Sydani Institute for Research and Innovation (SIRI) have made intriguing observations regarding the distribution of capital cities across Nigerian states. Based on the structure of senatorial districts, nearly half of Nigeria’s capital cities—fifteen in total—are situated within central senatorial districts, accounting for approximately 42% of all state capitals nationwide. Furthermore, seven capital cities are located in northern senatorial districts, representing 19% of the total, making them second only to the central districts. Additionally, six capital cities, accounting for roughly 17%, are situated in southern senatorial districts. This reveals that the central senatorial districts host more capital cities than the northern and southern districts combined. Together, these three senatorial districts contain twenty-eight capital cities, which represent nearly 78% of all state capitals in the country. The remaining eight capital cities are spread across other senatorial districts. Three are located in eastern senatorial districts, two in the western districts, and one each in the northwest, southwest, and northeast districts.
An analysis of the capital cities’ locations across the six geopolitical zones reveals notable diversity. In the northern region, the North-Central zone stands out with the most even distribution, hosting six capital cities spread across the northwest, west, central, north, south, and east senatorial districts. In contrast, the North-West zone, which has the highest number of state capitals, exhibits an uneven distribution, with five out of its seven capitals concentrated in central districts and the remaining two in the north and southwest districts. Similarly, in the North-East zone, capital cities are concentrated within the central, north, and south districts, with two capitals in each. Unlike the balanced distribution in North-Central, the North-West and North-East zones tend to cluster their capitals within certain senatorial districts.
Table 1: Distribution of capital cities across geopolitical zones and senatorial districts
|
| Geopolitical Zones |
| |||||
North-Central | North-East | North-West | South-East | South-South | South-West | Total | ||
Senatorial Districts | Northwest | 1 |
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
West | 1 |
|
|
|
| 1 | 2 | |
Central | 1 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 15 | |
North | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 7 | |
South | 1 | 2 |
|
| 2 | 1 | 6 | |
East | 1 |
|
| 1 | 1 |
| 3 | |
Southwest |
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 1 | |
Northeast |
|
|
|
| 1 |
| 1 | |
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
| 36 | |
The southern region, like the northern region, is divided into three geopolitical zones. The South-South zone has six capital cities with a distribution similar to the North-Central zone. Two of these capitals are located in the south senatorial districts, while the remaining four are spread across the central, north, east, and southwest senatorial districts. The South-West zone also comprises six capital cities, with four situated in the central senatorial districts, and the remaining two in the west and south senatorial districts. The South-East zone contains five capital cities. Their distribution resembles that of the South-West, with capitals concentrated in a few senatorial districts: two in the central and north districts, and one in the east district.
Our analysis reveals that most centrally located capital cities are found in the North-West zone, followed closely by the South-West zone, indicating they are nearer to the geographic center of their states. In contrast, central locations in other zones are less common. For instance, the North-East and South-East zones each have only two centrally located capitals, while the North-Central and South-South zones each have just one.
In addition to historical, political, and economic factors, the ethnic diversity within each geopolitical zone could have influenced the placement of Nigeria’s state capitals. Given Nigeria’s complex ethnic landscape, with over 250 ethnic groups spread across its regions, the distribution of these groups across the country’s geopolitical zones may have shaped decisions about where to locate state capitals. In zones with more varied ethnic groups, capitals are often more spread out to ensure balanced representation, whereas in more homogenous zones, capitals tend to be more centrally located.
Table 2: Distribution of States and Ethnic Groups Across Nigeria’s Geo-Political Zones
Geo-Political Zones | State | Major Ethnic Groups | |
North Central | Benue, Kogi, Kwara, Nasarawa, Niger, Plateau, Federal Capital Territory | Tiv, Idoma, Ebira, Igala, Yoruba, Hausa, Fulani, Nupe, Igede | |
North–East | Adamawa, Bauchi, Borno, Gombe, Taraba, Yobe | Hausa, Fulani, Kanuri, Shuwa, Marghi, Wurkun, Mumuye, Jukun | |
North–West | Jigawa, Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Kebbi, Sokoto, Zamfara | Hausa, Fulani | |
South–East | Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, Imo | Igbo | |
South–South | Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Cross River, Delta, Edo, Rivers | Ibibio, Annang, Ijaw, Efik, Esan, Urhobo, Isoko, Ogoni, Édo, Etsako, Esan, Ikwerre, Igbo (Anioma) | |
South–West | Ekiti, Lagos, Ogun, Ondo, Osun, Oyo | Yoruba | |
Nigeria’s geopolitical zones are characterized by varying degrees of ethnic diversity. For example, the North-Central and South-South zones contain a wide variety of ethnic groups, each with distinct languages and cultures. In contrast, the South-West and South-East zones are predominantly inhabited by the Yoruba and Igbo ethnic groups, respectively. This variation in ethnic composition could have an influence on the geographic placement of state capitals within these zones.
In the North-Central zone, where states such as Kogi and Benue are home to multiple ethnic groups, state capitals are more dispersed. This dispersion likely reflects an effort to balance representation among these diverse groups, ensuring that no single group dominates the political landscape. On the other hand, in more homogenous zones like the South-West, where the Yoruba are the predominant ethnic group, capitals tend to be more centrally located, reflecting the relative ethnic uniformity within these states.
For instance, Benue State, located in the North-Central zone, is home to the Tiv, Idoma, and Igede ethnic groups, among others. The state capital, Makurdi, is in a strategic location allowing equitable access for these diverse groups. Similarly, in Kogi State, which is inhabited by the Ebira, Igala, and Yoruba ethnic groups, the capital Lokoja is purposefully located to serve the diverse population.
In contrast, in the South-West zone, where Yoruba is the predominant ethnicity, the capitals of states like Lagos and Oyo are systematically located. This location reflects the relative ethnic homogeneity of the region, where the need to balance the interests of multiple ethnic groups is less pressing.
Determinants of Location of Capital Cities
If you are the inquisitive kind, you might wonder what factors determine the location of capital cities. It is important to note that thirty of Nigeria’s thirty-six states were established before General Sani Abacha introduced the concept of geopolitical zones in 1993 [6]. Similarly, senatorial districts were introduced with the return of the Fourth Republic and the establishment of a bicameral legislature in 1999. This strongly suggests that both senatorial districts and geopolitical zones did not influence the original placement of capital cities. This raises the question: what were the determinants for the locations of capital cities in Nigeria? Unfortunately, there is a lack of literature or scholarly materials addressing this issue.
A city can be selected as the capital for a variety of reasons. Ibadan, for example, is the largest and the most populous city in Oyo state. It is also the commercial center of the state, with the ability to provide the much-needed revenue for state operations. Ibadan is also a city rich in history, as it was the political base and administrative headquarters of the old western region government [7]. These attributes, perhaps, made Ibadan the most viable choice among other cities. In similar fashion, selection of Kano city as the capital of Kano city would have been influenced by a combination of historical and economic factors. The city’s existence dates back to the 10th century, a period when it was a major center of the mighty Kanem-Bornu and Fulani Empires [8]. It is also one of the most populous cities in Nigeria, with a growing and vibrant economy, driven by trade, agriculture, and industry, which makes it a significant economic center. The thriving economy that can stimulate development and attract investment and the rich history would have made Kano city the realistic choice during the creation of Kano state.
Like other states, selection of Portharcourt as the capital of the oil-producing Rivers state would have been influenced by a blend of multiple factors. It is a major economic hub, primarily driven by the oil and gas industry. Its strategic location near the Niger Delta, a major oil-producing region, probably made it a center for petroleum exploration, refining, and export. Its location on the banks of the Bonny River provides much-needed access to the Atlantic Ocean, to facilitate trade and commerce. The combination of these factors would have made Portharcourt a compelling and feasible choice.
In addition to historical, political, and economic factors, the location of capital cities in Nigeria is also influenced by the ethnic composition of each region. In zones with a more diverse ethnic population, such as the North-Central and South-South regions, capitals are often more dispersed across different senatorial districts. This dispersion reflects a strategic effort to ensure that no single ethnic group dominates the political and administrative landscape, thereby promoting inclusivity and stability. Conversely, in more ethnically homogenous zones like the South-West, capitals are more centrally located, reflecting the shared cultural identity and reducing the need for geographical balancing. This approach aligns with research on federalism in Nigeria, which highlights the importance of accommodating ethnic diversity to maintain political stability and effective governance [9].
Conclusion
The major focus of this article is to demonstrate, through analytical evidence, the distribution of states’ capital cities across the senatorial districts and geopolitical zones. Our analysis revealed a concentration of capital cities in the central senatorial districts, and just three out of eight senatorial districts accounting for about 80% of all capital cities, meaning nearly 4 out every five capital cities can be found in any of these three senatorial districts. We have also showed that the geographical placement of senatorial districts did not influence the location of the capital cities, neither did the geopolitical zones, as majority of the capital cities preceded the introduction of both concepts (senatorial districts and geopolitical zones). The placement of Nigeria’s state capitals reflects on the complex ethnic composition of the country. By examining the link between ethnic diversity and capital location, we gain a deeper understanding of how Nigeria’s geography has been shaped by its diverse population. This perspective highlights the importance of considering ethnic factors in state planning, particularly in a country as diverse as Nigeria. To understand the factors influencing the location of capital cities, an exploration of a few state capitals revealed that historical significance, cultural diversity, economic viability and complex ethnic composition of the country are key determinants.
Further research is needed to better understand the influence of the geographical placement of senatorial districts and ethnic diversity on the location of state capitals in Nigeria. We encourage scholars to explore this area further, examining the socio-cultural factors alongside historical and political influences to provide deeper insights into this relationship.
- Ogbogo EI. The First Military Coup D ‘état of 15th January 1966: Lessons for Nigeria.
- Ota EN, Ecoma CS, Wambu Creation of states in Nigeria, 1967–1996: Deconstructing the history and politics. American Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2020;6(1):1-8.
- Adetoye D. The political economy of state creation and socioeconomic development in Nigeria. European Journal of Research in Social Sciences Vol. 2016;4(2).
- Adeniyi AS. Quest for states creation in Nigeria: An harbinger of development or underdevelopment. Journal of Culture, Society and Development. 2014;4.
- Spate OH. Factors in the development of capital cities. Geographical Review. 1942 Oct 1;32(4):622-31.
- Obi-Ani P, Onu A. Military Factor in Nigerian History Since 1960. Nsukka Journal of the Humanities. 2022 Dec 1;30(2):16-47.
- Ajala AS. Identity and space in Ibadan politics, western Nigeria. African Identities. 2008 May 1;6(2):149-68.
- Iwuchukwu MC. Precolonial Sokoto Caliphate and Kanem-Borno Empire and the Advent of Islam. In Muslim-Christian Dialogue in Post-Colonial Northern Nigeria: The Challenges of Inclusive Cultural and Religious Pluralism 2013 (pp. 1-13). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.
- Otinche SI. Ethnicity, Citizenship Identity and Nation Building in Africa: The Nigeria Experience. In S.O. Oloruntoba (Ed.), The Political Economy of Colonialism and Nation-Building in Nigeria. 2022. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73875-4_13​:contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}.
