Building a Developmental State: What Nigeria Can Learn from China’s Revolutionary Journey

By Raymond Na’anlep Delmut

Dongfang Scholar, Peking University, China
Nigerian Diplomat, Policy Analyst, and Author

Development is often measured by economic statistics, towering skylines, high-speed railways, and technological breakthroughs. Yet beneath every enduring national transformation lies something far more fundamental, strong institutions, visionary leadership, disciplined governance, and a society united around a long-term national purpose. These are the enduring lessons that emerge from China’s revolutionary history and modernization journey, lessons that hold particular relevance for Nigeria as it seeks to strengthen its institutions and accelerate national development.
Much of the global conversation on China’s rise begins with the economic reforms introduced in 1978. While those reforms undoubtedly transformed the country into one of the world’s leading economic powers, they tell only part of the story. China’s remarkable achievements were built upon institutional foundations laid decades earlier during one of the most difficult periods in its history. The experiences of the Chinese Soviet Republic, the Long March, and the revolutionary base at Yan’an created a culture of resilience, organizational discipline, strategic planning, and leadership development that would later underpin one of history’s most remarkable modernization projects.
During the PKU Dongfang Scholars Programme at Peking University, scholars from across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East examined this historical evolution through lectures, policy dialogues, field visits, and engagements with academics and government institutions. One lesson consistently emerged: sustainable development is rarely accidental. It is built patiently through institutions capable of surviving political transitions, adapting to changing realities, and maintaining a consistent national vision.
China’s transformation illustrates that modernization begins long before economic growth becomes visible. The revolutionary administration established in Jiangxi during the early 1930s experimented with governance despite extreme resource constraints. It developed systems of local administration, public health, taxation, education, agricultural management, and judicial administration while confronting military pressure and political uncertainty. When circumstances forced the revolutionary leadership to embark on the Long March, these institutions were not abandoned. Instead, they were preserved, refined, and strengthened.
The Long March itself has become a symbol not simply of endurance but of institutional survival. It demonstrated the importance of preserving leadership, protecting organizational knowledge, and adapting strategy to changing realities. The subsequent establishment of the revolutionary base at Yan’an transformed the movement into a centre of political education, leadership training, policy experimentation, and governance innovation. Many of the principles later associated with China’s modernization including merit-based leadership development, long-term planning, organizational discipline, and continuous policy learning were cultivated during this formative period.
Nigeria’s own historical trajectory has been markedly different. Since independence in 1960, the country has demonstrated enormous resilience despite periods of political instability, civil conflict, constitutional transitions, and changing development priorities. As Africa’s most populous nation and one of its largest economies, Nigeria possesses exceptional human capital, abundant natural resources, entrepreneurial dynamism, and considerable regional influence. Yet these strengths have not consistently translated into sustained institutional effectiveness or broad-based economic transformation.
The comparison between Nigeria and China is not intended to suggest institutional imitation. The two countries differ profoundly in their political systems, historical experiences, constitutional structures, and social realities. Rather, the value of comparison lies in identifying transferable principles that can strengthen governance within Nigeria’s democratic and federal framework.
Perhaps the most significant lesson concerns long-term strategic planning. China’s successive Five-Year Plans have provided continuity across generations of leadership while remaining aligned with broader national development objectives extending several decades into the future. In contrast, Nigeria has produced numerous ambitious development plans, many of which have been weakened by inconsistent implementation, shifting political priorities, and institutional discontinuity. Development becomes more sustainable when national priorities remain consistent regardless of changes in political leadership.
Leadership development represents another important lesson. China has invested systematically in preparing public officials through specialized institutions dedicated to continuous education, strategic planning, and governance. Nigeria already possesses respected institutions such as the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies, the Public Service Institute of Nigeria, the Foreign Service Academy, the National Defence College, and the Administrative Staff College of Nigeria. The challenge is not institutional absence but ensuring that leadership development becomes a continuous, merit-based process fully integrated into national governance.
Equally important is the role of institutional discipline. China’s experience demonstrates that effective governance depends upon accountability, performance evaluation, ethical public service, and administrative coordination. Nigeria has established important institutions to promote transparency and combat corruption, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, and the Code of Conduct Bureau. Continued reforms aimed at strengthening coordination, consistency, and public confidence will remain central to building a more effective state.
Infrastructure also emerges as more than an economic asset. China’s investments in transport networks, logistics corridors, industrial parks, and digital infrastructure have served not only economic purposes but also strengthened national integration and state capacity. Nigeria’s continued investment in roads, railways, ports, power, and digital connectivity can similarly contribute to economic growth while reinforcing national cohesion.
Perhaps the most enduring lesson concerns human capital. China’s sustained investment in education, science, technology, engineering, research, and innovation has enabled its transition from labour-intensive manufacturing to a knowledge-driven economy. Nigeria’s greatest strategic resource is not oil, gas, or minerals, but its youthful population. Unlocking that potential will require substantial and sustained investment in education, technical skills, research, entrepreneurship, and digital innovation.
China’s modernization also illustrates the importance of national purpose. Throughout its developmental journey, public institutions have remained broadly aligned around shared national objectives. While democratic societies naturally accommodate political competition and ideological diversity, development itself need not become a partisan issue. Nigeria’s political parties may legitimately differ in policy preferences and governing philosophies, yet education, infrastructure, industrialization, food security, healthcare, technological advancement, and youth development should remain enduring national priorities.
The broader significance of China’s experience extends beyond economics. It demonstrates that modernization is fundamentally a process of building capable institutions, cultivating effective leadership, maintaining policy continuity, and investing in people. These principles are not exclusive to any political ideology. They represent universal foundations of successful state-building.
For Nigeria, the path forward lies not in copying another country’s model but in adapting proven governance principles to its own constitutional, democratic, and cultural realities. The country’s diversity, entrepreneurial energy, diplomatic influence, and youthful population provide immense opportunities for transformation. What remains essential is the sustained commitment to strengthening institutions, promoting accountability, investing in human capital, and maintaining a long-term national development vision.
History reminds us that great nations are rarely built within a single political administration. They are constructed patiently through generations of disciplined leadership, institutional learning, and collective national purpose. China’s revolutionary journey illustrates how resilience, strategic planning, and organizational discipline can eventually produce remarkable modernization. Nigeria possesses the human and material resources to achieve comparable national transformation through its own democratic path.
The future of Nigeria will ultimately depend not on the abundance of its resources but on the strength of its institutions, the quality of its leadership, and the willingness of its citizens to place long-term national development above short-term political interests. The challenge before Nigeria is therefore not simply economic; it is institutional. Building a developmental state begins with building institutions capable of sustaining national progress for generations to come.

Raymond Na’anlep Delmut
is a Nigerian diplomat, policy analyst, Dongfang Scholar Peking University, and author of several books. His research focuses on diplomacy, governance, leadership, modernization, development policy, comparative public administration, and South–South cooperation.