In 2023, the total fertility rate in children per woman in Nigeria amounted to 4.48. Between 1960 and 2023, the figure dropped by 1.88, though the decline followed an uneven course rather than a steady trajectory.

In 2025, there are six countries, all in Sub-Saharan Africa, where the average woman of childbearing age can expect to have between 5-6 children throughout their lifetime. In fact, of the 20 countries in the world with the highest fertility rates, Afghanistan and Yemen are the only countries not found in Sub-Saharan Africa. High fertility rates in Africa With a fertility rate of almost six children per woman, Chad is the country with the highest fertility rate in the world. Population growth in Chad is among the highest in the world. Lack of healthcare access, as well as food instability, political instability, and climate change, are all exacerbating conditions that keep Chad's infant mortality rates high, which is generally the driver behind high fertility rates. This situation is common across much of the continent, and, although there has been considerable progress in recent decades, development in Sub-Saharan Africa is not moving as quickly as it did in other regions. Demographic transition While these countries have the highest fertility rates in the world, their rates are all on a generally downward trajectory due to a phenomenon known as the demographic transition. The third stage (of five) of this transition sees birth rates drop in response to decreased infant and child mortality, as families no longer feel the need to compensate for lost children. Eventually, fertility rates fall below replacement level (approximately 2.1 children per woman), which eventually leads to natural population decline once life expectancy plateaus. In some of the most developed countries today, low fertility rates are creating severe econoic and societal challenges as workforces are shrinking while aging populations are placin a greater burden on both public and personal resources.

Abstract

The main objectives of the 2018/19 NLSS are: i) to provide critical information for production of a wide range of socio-economic and demographic indicators, including for benchmarking and monitoring of SDGs; ii) to monitor progress in population's welfare; iii) to provide statistical evidence and measure the impact on households of current and anticipated government policies. In addition, the 2018/19 NLSS could be utilized to improve other non-survey statistical information, e.g. to determine and calibrate the contribution of final consumption expenditures of households to GDP; to update the weights and determine the basket for the national Consumer Price Index (CPI); to improve the methodology and dissemination of micro-economic and welfare statistics in Nigeria.

The 2018/19 NLSS collected a comprehensive and diverse set of socio-economic and demographic data pertaining to the basic needs and conditions under which households live on a day to day basis. The 2018/19 NLSS questionnaire includes wide-ranging modules, covering demographic indicators, education, health, labour, expenditures on food and non-food goods, non-farm enterprises, household assets and durables, access to safety nets, housing conditions, economic shocks, exposure to crime and farm production indicators.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Households

Universe

The survey covered all de jure households excluding prisons, hospitals, military barracks, and school dormitories.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

SAMPLING PROCEDURE The 2018/19 NLSS sample is designed to provide representative estimates for the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja. By extension. The sample is also representative at the national and zonal levels. Although the sample is not explicitly stratified by urban and rural areas, it is possible to obtain urban and rural estimates from the NLSS data at the national level. At all stages, the relative proportion of urban and rural EAs as has been maintained. Before designing the sample for the 2018/19 NLSS, the results from the 2009/10 HNLSS were analysed to extract the sampling properties (variance, design effect, etc.) and estimate the required sample size to reach a desired precision for poverty estimates in the 2018/19 NLSS.

EA SELECTION: The sampling frame for the 2018/19 NLSS was based on the national master sample developed by the NBS, referred to as the NISH2 (Nigeria Integrated Survey of Households 2). This master sample was based on the enumeration areas (EAs) defined for the 2006 Nigeria Census Housing and Population conducted by National Population Commission (NPopC). The NISH2 was developed by the NBS to use as a frame for surveys with state-level domains. NISH2 EAs were drawn from another master sample that NBS developed for surveys with LGA-level domains (referred to as the “LGA master sample”). The NISH2 contains 200 EAs per state composed of 20 replicates of 10 sample EAs for each state, selected systematically from the full LGA master sample. Since the 2018/19 NLSS required domains at the state-level, the NISH2 served as the sampling frame for the survey. Since the NISH2 is composed of state-level replicates of 10 sample EAs, a total of 6 replicates were selected from the NISH2 for each state to provide a total sample of 60 EAs per state. The 6 replicates selected for the 2018/19 NLSS in each state were selected using random systematic sampling. This sampling procedure provides a similar distribution of the sample EAs within each state as if one systematic sample of 60 EAs had been selected directly from the census frame of EAs.

A fresh listing of households was conducted in the EAs selected for the 2018/19 NLSS. Throughout the course of the listing, 139 of the selected EAs (or about 6%) were not able to be listed by the field teams. The primary reason the teams were not able to conduct the listing in these EAs was due to security issues in the country. The fieldwork period of the 2018/19 NLSS saw events related to the insurgency in the north east of the country, clashes between farmers and herdsman, and roving groups of bandits. These events made it impossible for the interviewers to visit the EAs in the villages and areas affected by these conflict events. In addition to security issues, some EAs had been demolished or abandoned since the 2006 census was conducted. In order to not compromise the sample size and thus the statistical power of the estimates, it was decided to replace these 139 EAs. Additional EAs from the same state and sector were randomly selected from the remaining NISH2 EAs to replace each EA that could not be listed by the field teams. This necessary exclusion of conflict affected areas implies that the sample is representative of areas of Nigeria that were accessible during the 2018/19 NLSS fieldwork period. The sample will not reflect conditions in areas that were undergoing conflict at that time. This compromise was necessary to ensure the safety of interviewers.

HOUSEHOLD SELECTION: Following the listing, the 10 households to be interviewed were selected from the listed households. These households were selected systemically after sorting by the order in which the households were listed. This systematic sampling helped to ensure that the selected households were well dispersed across the EA and thereby limit the potential for clustering of the selected households within an EA. Occasionally, interviewers would encounter selected households that were not able to be interviewed (e.g. due to migration, refusal, etc.). In order to preserve the sample size and statistical power, households that could not be interviewed were replaced with an additional randomly selected household from the EA. Replacement households had to be requested by the field teams on a case-by-case basis and the replacement household was sent by the CAPI managers from NBS headquarters. Interviewers were required to submit a record for each household that was replaced, and justification given for their replacement. These replaced households are included in the disseminated data. However, replacements were relatively rare with only 2% of sampled households not able to be interviewed and replaced.

Sampling deviation

Although a sample was initially drawn for Borno state, the ongoing insurgency in the state presented severe challenges in conducting the survey there. The situation in the state made it impossible for the field teams to reach large areas of the state without compromising their safety. Given this limitation it was clear that a representative sample for Borno was not possible. However, it was decided to proceed with conducting the survey in areas that the teams could access in order to collect some information on the parts of the state that were accessible.

The limited area that field staff could safely operate in in Borno necessitated an alternative sample selection process from the other states. The EA selection occurred in several stages. Initially, an attempt was made to limit the frame to selected LGAs that were considered accessible. However, after selection of the EAs from the identified LGAs, it was reported by the NBS listing teams that a large share of the selected EAs were not safe for them to visit. Therefore, an alternative approach was adopted that would better ensure the safety of the field team but compromise further the representativeness of the sample. First, the list of 788 EAs in the LGA master sample for Borno were reviewed by NBS staff in Borno and the EAs they deemed accessible were identified. The team identified 359 EAs (46%) that were accessible. These 359 EAs served as the frame for the Borno sample and 60 EAs were randomly selected from this frame. However, throughout the course of the NLSS fieldwork, additional insurgency related events occurred which resulted in 7 of the 60 EAs being inaccessible when they were to be visited. Unlike for the main sample, these EAs were not replaced. Therefore, 53 EAs were ultimately covered from the Borno sample. The listing and household selection process that followed was the same as for the rest of the states.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Two sets of questionnaires – household and community – were used to collect information in the NLSS2018/19. The Household Questionnaire was administered to all households in the sample. The Community Questionnaire was administered to the community to collect information on the socio-economic indicators of the enumeration areas where the sample households reside.

Household Questionnaire: The Household Questionnaire provides information on demographics; education; health; labour; food and non-food expenditure; household nonfarm income-generating activities; food security and shocks; safety nets; housing conditions; assets; information and communication technology; agriculture and land tenure; and other sources of household income.

Community Questionnaire: The Community Questionnaire solicits information on access to transported and infrastructure; community organizations; resource management; changes in the community; key events; community needs, actions and achievements; and local retail price information.

Cleaning operations

CAPI: The 2018/19 NLSS was conducted using the Survey Solutions Computer Assisted Person Interview (CAPI) platform. The Survey Solutions software was developed and maintained by the Development Economics Data Group (DECDG) at the World Bank. Each interviewer and supervisor was given a tablet which they used to

Abstract

The Service Delivery Indicators (SDI) are a set of health and education indicators that examine the effort and ability of staff and the availability of key inputs and resources that contribute to a functioning school or health facility. The indicators are standardized allowing comparison between and within countries over time.

The Education SDIs include teacher effort, teacher knowledge and ability, and the availability of key inputs (for example, textbooks, basic teaching equipment, and infrastructure such as blackboards and toilets). The indicators provide a snapshot of the learning environment and the key resources necessary for students to learn.

Nigeria Service Delivery Indicators Education Survey was implemented in 2013 by the World Bank and the Research Triangle Institute International. The survey implementation was preceded by consultations with stakeholders in Nigeria to adapt instruments to the country context while maintaining comparability across countries. In addition, the implementation was done with close collaboration with the Universal Basic Education Commission, and in close coordination with the relevant state authorities (i.e. State Ministries of Education, and the State Universal Education Boards where they existed). Data was collected from primary schools in four states (Anambra, Bauchi, Ekiti, and Niger) using personal interviews and provider assessments. A total of 760 randomly selected public and private schools (190 per state) were surveyed, with 2,435 and 5,754 teachers assessed for knowledge and effort respectively. The sample was selected to make the survey representative at the State level, allowing for disaggregation by provider type (private/public) and location (rural/urban).

Geographic coverage

Four states: Anambra, Bauchi, Ekiti, and Niger.

Analysis unit

Schools, teachers, students.

Universe

All primary schools.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling strategy was designed aiming to produce state representative estimates and estimating a proportion with an absolute error of three percentage points for a variable proportion of 0.5 (i.e., has highest variance) with 95 percent degree of confidence per state (equal number used for state).

The strata were constructed according to ownership, urban/rural, and socioeconomic poverty status. The allocation was made in proportion to size for each sub-stratum within public and private. Within strata, simple random sampling was used. Finally, replacement schools were preselected, with a predetermined replacement order within strata.

A total of 190 schools were sampled from each of the four states (Anambra, Bauchi, Ekiti, and Niger).

The target population is all public primary-level school children. Since parts of the school questionnaire were administered to teachers and pupils at the grade four level, all public schools with at least one grade four class formed the sampling frame. The sample frame was created using the list of public schools from UBEC (Universal Basic Education Commission) and private schools from states.

Sampling deviation

None.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The SDI Education Survey Questionnaire consists of six modules:

Module 1: School Information - Administered to the head of the school to collect information on school type, facilities, school governance, pupil numbers, and school hours. It includes direct observations of school infrastructure by enumerators.

Module 2a: Teacher Absence and Information - Administered to the headteacher and individual teachers to obtain a list of all schoolteachers, to measure teacher absence and to collect information on teacher characteristics (this module was not included in this dataset).

Module 2b: Teacher Absence and Information - Unannounced visit to the school to assess absence rate.

Module 3: School Finances - Administered to the headteacher to collect information on school finances (this data is unharmonized).

Module 4: Classroom Observation - An observation module to assess teaching activities and classroom conditions.

Module 5: Pupil Assessment - A test of pupils to have a measure of pupil learning outcomes in mathematics and language in grade four.

Module 6: Teacher Assessment - A test of teachers covering mathematics and language subject knowledge and teaching skills.

Cleaning operations

Data entry was done using CSPro; quality control was performed in Stata.