Nigeria’s textile, apparel and footwear manufacturers operated at just 53.05 percent of installed capacity in 2025, leaving nearly half of their productive potential idle and highlighting the deepening structural crisis in one of the country’s once-thriving industrial sectors.
BusinessDay analysis of the First Quarterly Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN/NBS bulletin shows that the sector’s capacity utilisation improved marginally from 50.72 percent in 2024 to 53.05 percent in 2025.
However, the industry remained below 55 percent capacity throughout the year, underscoring the difficulty manufacturers face in restoring production to sustainable levels.
Capacity utilisation stood at 52.07 percent in the first quarter of 2025, rose to 54.99 percent in the second quarter, fell to 52.01 percent in the third quarter and recovered slightly to 53.12 percent in the fourth quarter.
The figures mean textile manufacturers left about 47 percent of their installed production capacity unused last year, despite renewed government efforts to rebuild the sector and growing calls for greater protection against imported textiles.
The capacity crisis comes as the Senate pushes for a total ban on textile imports, arguing that restricting foreign products would create room for domestic manufacturers to expand production, create jobs, stimulate cotton farming and reduce Nigeria’s dependence on imports.
But experts warn that an import ban without first rebuilding domestic production could worsen the crisis by creating shortages, raising prices and encouraging smuggling.
Import ban risks creating supply vacuum
Adesoji Adesugba, investment promotion and economic development expert and former managing director of the Nigerian Export Processing Zones Authority, said the Senate was right to prioritise the revival of the textile industry but cautioned against an immediate import prohibition.
He argued that Nigeria’s remaining textile mills do not currently have enough capacity to meet domestic demand.
“The Senate is right that our textile industry must be revived. But an immediate import ban would hand the market to smugglers and repeat thirty years of costly failure. There is a better way,” Adesugba said.
According to him, a sudden ban would create a gap between supply and demand that smugglers would quickly exploit.
“A ban, in other words, does not protect Nigerian factories. It protects the smuggler’s margin. It turns ordinary traders into criminals, denies the treasury its revenue, and enriches our neighbours’ ports,” he said.
He added that the consequences would extend beyond manufacturers to tailors, designers, garment makers and consumers who rely on affordable and readily available fabrics.
The warning comes against the backdrop of Nigeria’s long history of interventions in the textile industry, including the Textile Development Fund, the N100 billion Cotton, Textile and Garment Fund, foreign exchange restrictions on textile imports introduced in 2019 and border closure measures.
Yet, despite these interventions, the sector has failed to achieve a sustained return to its former production strength.
Read also: Textile imports surge as Northern Nigeria struggles to revive cotton industry
Three decades of interventions yield limited results
Adesugba said the experience of the past three decades should force policymakers to rethink an approach centred primarily on import restrictions.
“Cotton, power, machinery, finance, borders, and policy inconsistency. A ban cures not one of them. It treats the fever and ignores the infection,” he said.
The capacity data reinforce his argument. Textile, apparel and footwear capacity utilisation averaged 38.81 percent in 2020, falling sharply during the COVID-19 disruption. It recovered to 41.84 percent in 2021 and 51.48 percent in 2022, before averaging 50.74 percent in 2023, 50.72 percent in 2024 and 53.05 percent in 2025.
Although utilisation has improved since the pandemic, it remains well below the levels needed to support a robust industrial ecosystem.
The industry also remains far from its pre-pandemic and historical potential, with many factories struggling with high operating costs, outdated machinery and inadequate access to finance.
High energy and finance costs undermine competitiveness
Majeed Dahiru, political affairs analyst, said reviving Nigeria’s textile industry would require a comprehensive industrial policy supported by significant government investment.
He identified **high energy costs and expensive capital** as major reasons Nigerian textile manufacturers have struggled to compete with producers in countries such as China and India.
“It’s a good vision to go back to that era. But it will take a very serious, concise industrial policy that will see government itself making a heavy investment,” Dahiru said.
He argued that manufacturers need access to affordable electricity and single-digit interest-rate financing to rebuild factories and expand production.
Adesugba similarly identified the collapse of local cotton production, high energy costs, obsolete machinery, expensive financing, porous borders and inconsistent government policies as the structural problems holding the industry back.
He called for a phased industrial revival focused first on rebuilding the cotton value chain, improving electricity supply, providing affordable long-term financing and modernising production equipment.
He also proposed integrated textile industrial parks where manufacturers could benefit from shared infrastructure and lower operating costs.
Industry once employed over 500,000 Nigerians
Babajide Kolade-Otitoju, media analyst, said stronger protection for local manufacturers was necessary but stressed that protection must be accompanied by substantial investment.
He recalled that Nigeria once had about 167 textile mills employing more than 500,000 people, with textile manufacturing serving as a major economic driver in cities such as Kaduna and Kano.
“Given our concern for consuming imported stuff, if we really want to help the local industries to survive, we have to protect the local industries. Protectionism is practised everywhere in the world,” he said.
He argued that countries with successful textile industries did not simply expose their manufacturers to unrestricted competition but deliberately supported strategic industries until they became competitive.
