If Quality University Education Costs ₦1m, Who Should Pay?
By Haris Muhammad Bashir
A figure can sometimes be more powerful than a policy paper. In Nigeria’s latest debate over university funding, the figure is ₦1 million.
The amount entered public conversation in September 2026 after the immediate-past Vice-Chancellor of Lagos State University (LASU), Prof. Ibiyemi Olatunji-Bello, said public universities seeking financial self-sustainability might need to charge at least ₦1 million per student annually.
The comment immediately triggered controversy, with many Nigerians interpreting it as a proposal to impose ₦1 million tuition on students. But days later, the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) retracted its criticism, saying it had misconstrued the former vice-chancellor’s position. According to NANS, her central argument was that quality university education costs considerably more than what many public universities currently charge and that institutions need sustainable and diversified sources of revenue.
That clarification is important because it shifts the question. The debate is not simply whether educating one university student costs ₦1 million. It is who should bear that cost, and in what proportion?
Olatunji-Bello’s argument was rooted partly in the financial realities she encountered at LASU. She said the university’s internally generated revenue increased from about ₦3 billion to ₦13 billion during her tenure, but its monthly wage bill had risen above ₦1 billion. She also cited electricity, security, cleaning, diesel and other operational expenses as significant financial pressures.
These figures illustrate the structural problem facing public universities: improving academic quality requires money, but increasing the amount paid directly by students can make access more difficult.
The Nigerian government already recognises that public funding alone is not the only possible financing mechanism. Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund), for example, announced an intervention allocation of about ₦2.53 billion to each public university for 2026, alongside allocations for polytechnics and colleges of education.
Government funding, therefore, remains a major part of the equation.
But it is also important to examine the scale of the broader funding challenge. The Federal Tertiary Institutions Governance Transparency Portal shows that the budgets submitted by federal tertiary institutions rose from about ₦550.1 billion in 2022 to ₦848.7 billion in 2024, before falling to about ₦437.8 billion in 2025. The figures cover universities, polytechnics and colleges of education and illustrate the substantial resources required to operate the tertiary education system.
The wider education picture is equally concerning. A September 2026 UNICEF report found that Nigeria’s education expenditure as a share of total government spending declined from 9.3 per cent in 2015 to 3.6 per cent in 2023, below the international benchmark of 15–20 per cent cited in the report. Although the report focuses on basic education, the figures demonstrate the broader pressure on public education financing.
The implication is straightforward: asking government to finance quality education is reasonable, but the sustainability of that funding model must also be examined.
The other obvious contributor is the student or family.
Parents already pay tuition and numerous institutional charges, and many households make considerable sacrifices to keep their children in university. For families with stable incomes, higher contributions may be manageable. For low-income households, however, a sudden jump towards ₦1 million could become a barrier to university access.
That is where the distinction between cost and price becomes crucial.
If it costs a university ₦1 million to provide a year’s education, it does not automatically follow that the student must pay ₦1 million. The cost can be shared through public funding, institutional revenue, philanthropy, research grants, partnerships, endowments, alumni contributions and carefully designed student-financing schemes.
LASU’s own experience offers an example of why universities cannot rely exclusively on tuition. Olatunji-Bello said the institution expanded postgraduate programmes, digital services, consultancy and other revenue-generating activities, helping its IGR rise substantially.
That approach points to another question: what can universities do to earn more without turning students into their primary source of revenue?
Research and innovation can attract grants and industry partnerships. Alumni networks can become sources of endowment funding. Universities can commercialise legitimate expertise through consultancy, executive education and professional programmes. Public-private partnerships can support infrastructure and student accommodation.
But there is another mechanism already changing the financing conversation: student loans.
The Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) says its programme provides eligible students with zero-interest loans for institutional charges and upkeep. Its website currently reports more than 1.47 million registered students and nearly 2 million loan applications.
Yet a loan does not make education free. It changes when and how the cost is paid.
NELFUND’s published terms state that beneficiaries who participate in NYSC begin repayment two years after completing the programme, while employed beneficiaries are required to have 10 per cent of their monthly salary deducted for repayment. The terms also make borrowers personally liable for the loans received.
That means student financing can address the immediate problem of access while creating a longer-term affordability question.
A ₦1 million education cost financed through a loan may be easier for a student to access than an immediate ₦1 million bill. But after graduation, the obligation does not disappear. It follows the graduate into the labour market.
This is why the argument should move beyond the emotional question of whether ₦1 million is too much or too little.
The more important question is whether Nigeria can design a shared-financing model that protects access while giving universities enough resources to provide quality education.
Government has a responsibility to fund public education. Universities have a responsibility to improve efficiency, transparency and internally generated revenue. Families can contribute according to their capacity. Private-sector organisations and alumni can support research, infrastructure and scholarships. Student financing can help capable students who cannot pay upfront.
None of these mechanisms, on its own, is likely to resolve the funding challenge.
The September 2026 controversy has therefore presented Nigeria with an opportunity to have a more mature conversation about university financing. Quality education is expensive, but affordability is equally important.
The real issue is not simply “Who should pay ₦1 million?”
It is whether Nigeria can determine who should pay what, when and through which mechanism—without making quality education the privilege of those who can afford it.
Haris Muhammad Bashir is a corps member serving at PRNigeria. He can be reached via [email protected]