By Dr. Sulaiman Abdulwahab Sulaiman, CNA

A State’s wealth is not measured only by the revenue it collects every month. It is also measured by the land, buildings, infrastructure, equipment, investments, intellectual property, mineral resources and other assets that it owns and controls.
This simple principle provides a compelling justification for the proposed Nasarawa State Asset Management Authority (NaSAMA) Bill currently before the Nasarawa State House of Assembly. The proposed law deserves serious public attention because it represents an attempt to address an aspect of public-sector management that has historically received less attention than taxation, budgeting and expenditure: the professional management of government-owned assets.
The fundamental question is straightforward: Does Nasarawa State know exactly what it owns, where those assets are, what they are worth, what condition they are in, who is responsible for them, whether they are being properly utilized and how much economic value they can generate for the people? If the answer is not an emphatic “yes”, then the proposed legislation is not only relevant; it is potentially transformative.
A government building that is properly maintained and productively utilized can provide public services or generate revenue. A parcel of government land can support investment, housing, infrastructure or commercial development. A properly managed public facility can create employment and stimulate economic activity. Conversely, an abandoned building, illegally occupied government property, idle land, unrecorded equipment or improperly disposed public asset represents a potential loss to the citizens.
This is why the proposed NaSAMA Bill is important. The Bill seeks to establish a centralized framework for identifying, registering, valuing, protecting, maintaining, accounting for and commercially utilizing State assets. It also proposes a Centralized Digital Asset Register containing information about assets, including location, custodian, acquisition details, depreciation and net book value. That is more than record keeping. It is an attempt to establish a system of public-wealth management.
This is not an entirely new idea. One argument sometimes raised against creating a specialized institution is: Why should government establish another agency to manage its property? The experience of advanced economies provides an important answer. Sophisticated governments have recognized that public property and other public resources are too valuable and too complex to be managed effectively through fragmented administrative arrangements alone.
The United Kingdom
The United Kingdom (UK) provides a particularly relevant example. The UK has an Office of Government Property, which provides government-wide leadership on property management. It is responsible for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government property, improving property data and professional capability and helping government make better use of public assets.
The UK also has the Government Property Agency (GPA), an executive agency of the Cabinet Office. It manages significant government property and seeks to improve utilization, reduce costs, enhance commercial expertise and improve the quality and transparency of asset data.
The significance of this example is clear. The UK does not treat government property merely as administrative possessions. It treats public property as an economic and strategic resource requiring professional management. Indeed, the UK Government Property Function states that the central government property estate is valued at approximately £496 billion. That illustrates the enormous economic importance that public assets can acquire when systematically identified and professionally managed.
The United States provides another important lesson
The United States (U.S.) has also developed a sophisticated federal system for managing government real property. The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) has a Real Property Policy Division responsible for government-wide policy oversight concerning the acquisition, construction, utilization, management and disposal of federal real property. It also supports a centralized government-wide real-property inventory system.
The GSA’s asset-management framework includes the Federal Real Property Profile Management System, which provides a government-wide inventory of federal real-property assets and supplies information needed for asset-management decisions, including decisions about properties that are no longer required.
Again, the lesson is not that Nasarawa State should copy the American system. The lesson is that accurate information about public assets is considered essential to effective government in advanced economies. A government cannot make sound decisions about assets that it cannot accurately identify and monitor.
Australia provides perhaps an even closer policy lesson
Australia has established a Commonwealth Property Management Framework covering government-owned and leased property. The framework is designed to promote value for money through effective planning, efficient use of property, transparent decision-making, risk management and compliance with public-resource requirements.
Australia also maintains an Australian Government Property Register containing information on Commonwealth-owned property. Government entities are required to review and update their property information, including at least annually in relevant circumstances. The Australian Department of Finance is responsible for policy and support relating to Commonwealth property, including acquisition, ownership, management and disposal.
Put together, that is the real meaning of modern asset management. The UK experience demonstrates the importance of government-wide property leadership and professional management. The United States demonstrates the importance of a centralized property inventory and data-driven decision-making. Australia demonstrates how property-management frameworks can combine accountability, transparency, efficient utilization and value-for-money principles.
Nasarawa State can learn from these experiences while developing a system suited to its own economic, institutional and legal circumstances. The message for Nasarawa State is therefore straightforward: Professional management of public assets is not a luxury of developed economies. It is part of modern public financial management.
What, therefore, can NaSAMA do differently for Nasarawa State?
The proposed Authority could provide Nasarawa State with a structured institutional mechanism through which government assets can be: identified, registered, valued, protected, maintained, utilized, commercialized where appropriate, monitored and reported. This is precisely where the proposed Bill becomes economically significant.

The Bill proposes the creation of a Centralized Digital Asset Register and a system of professional valuation, maintenance, accounting and monitoring. The result could be a much clearer understanding of the State’s asset base and net worth.
Perhaps the greatest economic opportunity lies in the Bill’s provisions for commercial utilization of underutilized State assets. The Bill contemplates mechanisms including leasing, renting, licensing, concessions and public-private partnerships. It identifies possible commercial assets such as vacant land, underutilized buildings, retail spaces, advertising rights, intellectual property, mineral and mining sites and surplus equipment. This could change the way the State thinks about public wealth.
The people, not the Authority, must remain the ultimate beneficiaries
There is, however, an important principle that must remain at the centre of the discussion. NaSAMA should not become the owner of the State’s wealth. The assets belong to the people of Nasarawa State. The Authority should therefore function as a professional custodian and manager, acting on behalf of the State and ultimately the citizens.
“Commercialization” should also not automatically mean privatization. Where a State asset can generate recurring income through leasing, licensing, concession or PPP while the State retains ownership that may be preferable to outright disposal. The Bill itself provides mechanisms for valuation, competitive bidding and approval of high-value commercial transactions. These safeguards are essential.
The potential gains for Nasarawa State. If properly implemented, the proposed framework could produce several important benefits.

1. Increased internally generated revenue: Commercially productive State assets can become additional sources of revenue.
2. Reduced waste: Government can identify assets that are idle, duplicated, underutilized or poorly managed.
3. Better maintenance: The Bill provides for preventive, corrective and condition-based maintenance as well as lifecycle cost analysis.
4. Greater transparency: A centralized register can make it easier to determine what government owns and who is responsible for it.
5. Better investment planning: Government will have better information when deciding whether to acquire, retain, renovate, lease, develop or dispose of an asset.
6. Investment attraction: A properly documented portfolio of public assets can make it easier to identify and structure investment opportunities.
7. Employment creation: Commercial development of underutilized government assets can create direct and indirect employment.
8. Better public services: Properly maintained government buildings, infrastructure and equipment can improve service delivery.
9. Stronger public accountability: Citizens can have greater confidence that public assets are being managed as public wealth rather than as unmonitored government possessions.

The Bill should nevertheless be strengthened. Supporting the Bill does not mean that every provision should pass without scrutiny. Indeed, because NaSAMA could potentially become responsible for assets of considerable value, the legislation should be particularly strong in the areas of transparency, professional independence, financial accountability and institutional coordination.
The relationship between NaSAMA and existing institutions such as the Ministry of Finance, Accountant-General, Auditor-General, procurement authorities, relevant ministries and other custodians of public property should be clearly defined.
If the Authority is expected to generate substantial savings and additional revenue, professional asset management requires funding, but the funding mechanism must be subjected to strict accountability, performance measurement and legislative oversight.
There should also be strong safeguards around the proposed digital asset register, including cybersecurity, data integrity, access controls and protection against unauthorized alteration. Most importantly, the Authority should be populated by competent professionals selected on merit.
Nasarawa State should think beyond revenue. The greatest mistake would be to view NaSAMA simply as another institution for generating government revenue. Its potential is much broader. The real objective should be to create a culture in which every public asset has an identifiable owner/custodian, a documented value, a known condition, a defined purpose and a measurable economic or social benefit.

A strategic opportunity for Nasarawa State. The proposed NaSAMA Bill comes at a time when States across Nigeria are under increasing pressure to improve internally generated revenue, reduce waste, attract investment and deliver better public services. NaSAMA Bill attempts to address: What resources do we already possess and are we getting the maximum legitimate public value from them?
The Bill’s proposed requirement to migrate existing State assets into the new register within 12 months could provide the foundation for a comprehensive understanding of Nasarawa State’s public wealth. If implemented properly, the exercise could reveal assets whose economic potential has never been adequately recognized.
Conclusion
The proposed Nasarawa State Asset Management Authority should therefore be viewed not merely as a proposal to establish another government agency. It should be viewed as an attempt to answer a fundamental question of economic governance: How can Nasarawa State transform the assets it already owns into better services, stronger accountability, sustainable revenue and broader economic opportunities for its citizens?
Developed economies have demonstrated that professional public-asset management, centralized property information, lifecycle management, transparent commercialization and value-for-money principles are important components of modern governance. The UK, United States and Australia all operate sophisticated systems for managing public property and assets.
The proposal is not to copy Britain, America or Australia. The lesson is that modern governments treat public assets as professionally managed economic resources. Nasarawa State can adapt that principle to its own circumstances. The proposed NaSAMA Bill therefore deserves serious consideration, constructive public debate and, where necessary, strengthening before enactment.
The ultimate measure of NaSAMA should not be how large the Authority becomes. It should be how much additional value it creates for the people of Nasarawa State from the assets they already own.

Dr. Sulaiman Abdulwahab Sulaiman, CNA
FACSA (USA), FCIFCN, FCIM, FICAN, FICEN
Former Executive Secretary, Nasarawa State Scholarship Board
19th August, 2026