Jolaade Ifeoluwayimika

In 1987, the Brundtland Commission, also known as the World Commission on Environment and Development, put forward a definition of sustainable development that has gained worldwide acceptance. They described it as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The concept of sustainable development, as the Commission laid it out, revolves around a three-part framework: economic viability, social inclusion, and environmental preservation—where each element works together to promote fairness across generations. Given this theory, it is necessary and fundamental to assess various development initiatives, including national educational loan programs, to see if they align with the core principles of sustainability.

The Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND), recently established to provide financial support to students in higher education, prompts important questions about how well it fits with this global definition. It aims to provide interest-free loans to Nigerian students attending public tertiary institutions. The main goal of this initiative is to break down the financial barriers that keep many young Nigerians from pursuing higher education. By offering this kind of support, the fund seeks to make education more accessible and boost the country’s human capital.

Yes, the importance of this goal stands out, especially in a world where socioeconomic inequality keeps many young people from accessing quality education. NELFUND steps in to tackle this issue by helping students, particularly those from less privileged backgrounds, pursue their academic dreams without the burden of upfront costs. This aligns well with the first part of the Brundtland definition, which emphasises meeting the current needs of society.

That said, to truly assess sustainable development, we need to look beyond just the immediate results. The second part of the Brundtland definition highlights the importance of ensuring that our actions today do not jeopardise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This calls for a closer look at the long-term effects of the loan program, especially when it comes to how repayments are structured, the economic realities graduates face after finishing their studies, and the overall socioeconomic landscape they will be stepping into.

While NELFUND offers interest-free loans with repayment expected only after securing a job, it assumes that graduates will easily find employment to manage their loan repayments without too much hassle.

Job Market Challenges

However, this assumption cannot hold up against the current employment statistics in Nigeria. The country has been struggling with high rates of youth and graduate unemployment for years. With a significant number of graduates entering the job market that simply cannot absorb them all, many students who benefit from NELFUND could find it tough to land a decent job right after graduation. The pressure to pay back loans in an uncertain economy can really hold people back from planning and investing in their futures, which could undermine the whole idea of fairness between generations. When job opportunities are delayed, it can lead to ongoing financial struggles, making it tough for beneficiaries to pursue further education, start their own businesses, or save for things that are essential for both personal growth and societal progress.

Mental and Financial Stress

On top of that, while NELFUND aims to make education more accessible, it might unintentionally add stress both mentally and financially to those who receive it. The thought of having to repay a loan after graduation can be daunting, especially in a job market that is tight and living costs are on the rise. Even though the debt is interest-free, it can still cause anxiety for students who are not sure what their future holds. This pressure might push graduates to focus on finding stable jobs right away instead of exploring creative or risky opportunities that could pay off in the long run.So, while the program is designed with good intentions, it could end up having some unexpected effects that go against the long-term goals highlighted by the Brundtland Commission.

Will NELFUND Last?

Moreover, we also need to think about how sustainable the loan fund is. NELFUND’s future relies on consistent funding, smart management, and effective ways to recover loans. If repayments are delayed or missed because of unemployment or underemployment, the fund might struggle to support new students down the line. This situation raises important questions about the fairness and continuity of the program.

And if the fund cannot keep going, future generations might miss out on the benefits that today’s students enjoy. In this scenario, the program would struggle to fulfill the goals of sustainable development, as its advantages would not be reliably passed down through generations.

Another important factor to consider is the overall educational framework in which NELFUND operates. Achieving sustainable development in education goes beyond just providing financial access; it also encompasses the quality of teaching, the relevance of the curriculum, and the availability of essential resources like labs, libraries, and technology.

If these supporting areas do not see improvements, simply offering loans might not lead to significant educational achievements. Graduates could end up with degrees that do not hold much weight in the job market, making it even harder for them to repay their loans and contribute effectively to the economy.

Therefore, we need to evaluate the sustainability of educational development not just in terms of access, but also in terms of content and outcomes.

A Bigger Picture Needed

To truly align with the Brundtland Commission’s vision, NELFUND should be integrated into a more comprehensive approach to educational and socioeconomic development. This means weaving the fund into broader strategies focused on job creation,vocational training, entrepreneurship, and industrial growth.

It is necessary to create a synergy between education financing and economic planning to ensure that graduates leave not only with academic credentials, but also with practical skills and real opportunities for employment or self-employment.

Moreover, implementing protective measures like income-contingent repayment plans, loan forgiveness for those in public service, and increased support for underdeveloped sectors could further strengthen the sustainability of the initiative.

However, not all students view NELFUND through a critical lens. For some, it offers a necessary and timely solution to a very present problem. Boluwatife Ayilara, a 300-level Philosophy student, did not apply for the loan himself, but expresses strong support for the initiative. “What about those who don’t have the money to pay now?” he inquired . “At least NELFUND settles the immediate burden. It gives them the chance to stay in school, and that is important.” He described the scheme as a good initiative, pointing out that repayment only begins two years after NYSC. In his words, he said, “I believe that the government will provide jobs for students in order to pay back the loans, so NELFUND balances both the present and the future.”

Ita , a 400 level English Student, also believed it is a good advantage to students. “The loan seems beneficial, since it is interest free and it is made available for students.” To Ita, she believes it is worth it.

This is a hopeful outlook—one shared by many students eager to believe in a better post-graduation future. However, data from the National Bureau of Statistics paints a more complex picture. With youth unemployment still alarmingly high, and past government job schemes often falling short of expectations, questions remain about the feasibility of relying on state-led employment as a repayment pathway. Even if jobs are created, the concern shifts to whether those job opportunities offer sufficient income to balance both the repayment of loans and basic living expenses. Thus, while NELFUND may bridge an educational gap, it potentially opens an economic one further down the road.

The Final Verdict

All these being said, the Nigerian Education Loan Fund is the right approach for tackling the educational challenges faced by young Nigerians. However, for it to truly align with the 1987 Brundtland Commission’s vision of sustainable development, several key factors listed need to be considered. These factors include the current job market, the psychological and economic effects on those who benefit from the fund, the sustainability of its operations, and the overall quality of educational outcomes.

If these aspects are overlooked, there is a high chance that the program could hinder future generations from fulfilling their own needs, ultimately missing the mark on sustainability. To genuinely reflect the ideals of sustainable development, NELFUND should serve not just as a funding source, but as a driving force within a broader, and forward-thinking educational and economic strategy.