Nigeria’s push to decentralise electricity regulation has led about 15 states to establish their own power agencies under the Electricity Act 2023, gradually reducing reliance on the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC). While states like Lagos, Enugu and Ekiti are making visible progress in building regulatory frameworks and attracting investment, most are still at early stages with limited direct impact on electricity supply. The reform promises efficiency and local solutions but faces risks of political interference, weak institutional capacity and financial mismanagement. State regulators are not yet rivals to NERC, but they represent a significant step toward improving electricity access nationwide.Oke Peter writes on the progress and problems of the state regulators.
Nigeria’s electricity sector is undergoing a structural shift following the Electricity Act 2023, which empowers states to regulate, generate and distribute electricity within their territories instead of relying solely on the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission. In response, about 15 states—Enugu, Ekiti, Ondo, Imo, Oyo, Edo, Kogi, Lagos, Ogun, Niger, Plateau, Abia, Delta, Anambra and Gombe—have set up or are finalising their electricity regulatory agencies.
Enugu, Ekiti, Ondo and Imo are currently the most advanced, having assumed full regulatory oversight. Their key achievement lies in institutional control: they can now issue licences, regulate tariffs and supervise electricity operators within their states. However, the impact on electricity supply remains gradual because they still depend heavily on the national grid and existing distribution companies.
Oyo, Edo and Kogi have made moderate progress because they have established legal frameworks and regulatory bodies, creating the foundation for independent electricity markets. Their contribution to power supply is still limited, but they are opening space for embedded generation and private sector participation, which could improve supply over time.
Lagos stands out as the frontrunner with a more developed regulatory structure and stronger financial capacity, the state is actively pursuing independent power projects, captive generation and upgraded distribution systems. While residents have yet to experience uninterrupted electricity, Lagos has made the most tangible progress toward increasing local supply and reducing dependence on the national grid.
remain in transition. The agencies in Ogun and Niger are operational on paper, but practical results are still emerging. Plateau is also progressing steadily, having secured approval for regulatory transfer, though it is yet to record significant supply improvements.
Abia offers a notable example through the Aba integrated power initiative, where a ring-fenced system already delivers relatively stable electricity within a defined area. This shows that state-level efforts can yield real results when backed by consistent investment and planning.
Delta, Anambra and Gombe are still in early stages, focusing on establishing laws, institutions and operational guidelines. Their contributions to electricity supply are currently minimal, but they represent the next wave of states preparing to participate in decentralised power regulation.
Overall, most of the 15 states have advanced more in setting up regulatory systems than in boosting actual electricity supply. The common challenge is generation capacity. Without significant investment in power plants and infrastructure, state regulators cannot substantially improve supply, regardless of their legal authority.
The decentralisation effort has clear advantages as it allows for quicker decision-making, encourages innovation and enables policies that reflect local realities. States can also compete to attract investors, which could lead to better services for residents over time. However, these benefits are still emerging rather than fully realised.
In terms of competition, state regulators are not yet on equal footing with the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission. NERC remains more experienced and better equipped, with nationwide oversight and technical depth. State agencies are still building expertise and institutional strength.
Concerns about political interference are valid because these agencies are closely tied to state governments, decisions on tariffs, licensing and enforcement could be influenced by politics rather than economic realities. This may discourage private investors if not properly managed.
To be candid, power projects require large investments, and without strong transparency mechanisms, there is a risk that allocated funds may be mismanaged or diverted. This challenge is not unique to the electricity sector but remains a critical factor that could determine the success or failure of the reform.
In conclusion, the 15 states have made uneven but meaningful progress. A few—especially Lagos and the early adopters—are showing signs of real impact, while others are still laying the groundwork. The reform holds promise, but its success will depend less on policy announcements and more on execution, transparency and sustained investment in actual electricity generation and distribution.
