The federal government of Nigeria has renamed the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway to the President Bola Ahmed Tinubu Coastal Highway [1].
The decision marks a significant shift in the branding of major national infrastructure, sparking a debate over the personalization of public assets. While the government views the move as a tribute to the president's leadership, critics argue that naming state-funded projects after sitting officials is inappropriate.
The highway serves as a critical southern corridor, spanning the distance from Lagos to Calabar [1]. Government officials said the renaming is intended to honor President Tinubu’s vision for the project [1]. The highway is designed to enhance connectivity across the southern region, facilitating trade and transport between key coastal hubs.
This move follows a pattern of naming public assets after the current administration. The highway is the sixth public facility renamed after President Tinubu [2]. Other major public facilities now bear the president's name, though the government has not provided a comprehensive list of all such assets [4].
Opponents of the renaming process suggest that the practice creates a legacy of individualism rather than national service [2]. They argue that public infrastructure should remain neutral or be named after historical figures who represent the collective identity of the nation. Despite these criticisms, the federal government has proceeded with the rebranding of the coastal route [1].
The project continues to be a centerpiece of the administration's infrastructure agenda. The government said the highway will stimulate economic growth in the coastal states by reducing travel time and improving access to markets [1].
“The highway is the sixth public facility renamed after President Tinubu”
The renaming of the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway reflects a broader trend within the current Nigerian administration to tie major infrastructure achievements directly to the president's personal brand. By designating the sixth public facility in his name [2], the government is prioritizing a legacy of individual leadership. This strategy may alienate political opponents and the public who view the personalization of state assets as a departure from traditional democratic norms regarding public property.
