Introduction: The Two Words That Should Alarm Every Nigerian
There is a sentence that should stop every Nigerian educator, policymaker, and parent cold. It is not found in a government report or an academic journal. It is the casual, unremarkable reply that a parent received when she expressed shock at being asked to pay an unofficial ‘logistics fee’ at her child’s West African Senior School Certificate Examination centre: ‘That’s normal.’ Two words. And in those two words lives the full weight of Nigeria’s education crisis.
It is not the alleged collection of three or five thousand naira that should terrify us most. It is the normalisation — the quiet surrender of a society that has learned to accept exploitation as routine. When wrongdoing becomes normal, it ceases to provoke outrage. And when outrage dies, reform becomes nearly impossible. The corruption of Nigeria’s examination system is no longer shocking to the people it most directly harms. That is the crisis within the crisis, and it demands the most serious attention of our educational leadership.
This article is a frank, evidence-based, and ultimately hopeful examination of that crisis. It draws on the most recent data from the West African Examinations Council, the National Examination Council, and a range of research from Nigerian and international sources to argue that Nigeria is not merely facing an examination management problem. It is confronting a national values emergency — one that begins in secondary school examination halls, migrates to university lecture theatres, and ultimately determines the quality of the engineers, nurses, accountants, civil servants, and leaders who will govern, heal, build, and manage the Nigeria of tomorrow. And it proposes, with practical seriousness, what Nigeria can learn from the education systems of Finland, Singapore, South Korea, and our more progressive African neighbours about how to pull back from the edge.
I. The Numbers That Cannot Be Ignored
Let us begin with the data, because the data is damning enough without embellishment. In August 2025, the West African Examinations Council released the results of the West African Senior School Certificate Examination for that year, and what it revealed was the worst performance in a decade. Of the 1,969,313 candidates who sat the examination across 23,554 schools, only 754,545 — representing 38.32 percent — obtained a minimum of five credits in core subjects including English Language and Mathematics. This was a catastrophic drop from the 72.12 percent pass rate recorded in 2024, when 1,332,089 of 1,805,216 candidates cleared the same benchmark. The decline of 33.8 percentage points in a single year was not a statistical blip. It was a national alarm.
WAEC’s head of the Nigeria National Office, Dr. Amos Dangut, explained the decline largely by reference to the Council’s new anti-malpractice strategy: the serialisation of objective test papers in core subjects such as Mathematics, English, Biology, and Economics. By individualising question papers so that adjacent candidates could not simply copy from one another, WAEC had, in effect, stripped away the scaffolding of organised cheating that had been artificially inflating pass rates for years. The 2024 pass rate of 72 percent was not, in the candid light of 2025, a celebration of genuine learning. It was, in significant part, a celebration of the efficiency of Nigeria’s cheating networks.
The malpractice data reinforces this interpretation. In 2025, WAEC withheld the results of 192,089 candidates — approximately 9.75 percent of all who sat — for alleged involvement in various forms of examination misconduct. The previous year, 215,267 results had been similarly withheld, representing 11.92 percent of the cohort. The National Examination Council withheld 12,030 results in 2023 and 8,437 in 2024. The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board has not been spared either. These are not fringe numbers. They represent hundreds of thousands of young Nigerians whose educational futures are entangled in a system that has made dishonesty structurally convenient. And those are only the cases that were detected and acted upon.
The broader infrastructure picture compounds the problem. The National Bureau of Statistics reported in 2024 that over 55 percent of public secondary schools lacked any form of Information and Communications Technology facility. Nigeria’s 2026 education budget stands at N3.52 trillion — a figure that appears large in naira terms but represents only 6 percent of the total national budget, and only approximately 3 percent of GDP. UNESCO recommends that countries direct between 15 and 20 percent of their national budget — or at least 4 to 6 percent of GDP — toward education. Nigeria’s own National Policy on Education historically referenced the 26 percent benchmark. At 6 percent of budget, Nigeria is not merely below international standards. It is investing in its children at a fraction of what a functioning commitment to national development requires.
II. The Logistics Fee and What It Teaches
Return now to the logistics fee.
The story, as many Nigerians have encountered it in various forms, is this: a student registered to sit a public examination at a recognised centre is asked, through a chain of informal intermediaries, to pay an unofficial sum — sometimes described as covering ‘logistics’, sometimes framed as a ‘processing fee’, sometimes offered without any explanation at all, simply with the understanding that those who pay receive certain unspecified considerations and those who do not pay may find themselves in certain unspecified difficulties. The parent asks whether this is legal. She is told that it is normal.
The forensic significance of this story lies not in any single alleged transaction but in what it reveals about the ecosystem in which Nigeria’s examinations now take place. The examination centre, instead of being a temple of integrity where merit is objectively assessed, has in too many documented and alleged instances become a market where outcomes are partially negotiated. The supervisor or invigilator — often poorly paid, sometimes working on casual or contract terms without the job security that might embolden them to resist pressure — becomes a participant in a system of informal extraction whose proceeds are distributed through opaque channels.
Why does this happen? The answers are structural rather than simply personal. Many examination centres and the schools attached to them operate under severe financial pressure, arising directly from the chronic underfunding of public education. Schools that lack textbooks, laboratories, adequate classrooms, functioning toilets, and reliable electricity are schools whose operational culture has been corroded by institutional neglect. When no one in the system is reliably paid enough or accountable enough, the system finds its own equilibrium — and that equilibrium is frequently exploitative of the most vulnerable participants: the students.
The deeper consequence, however, is what this teaches. Children are extraordinarily observant institutions. They absorb the unspoken curriculum — what adults actually do — far more deeply than the official one, which is what adults say. A student who is told in a civic education class that Nigeria is a nation of laws, and then watches an examination supervisor pocket an unofficial fee with complete impunity, does not conclude that the civic education lesson was accurate. She concludes that the examination hall lesson is the real one: ‘Rules are for public performance. Money is the actual operating principle.’
This lesson, absorbed at sixteen or seventeen years of age, does not stay in the examination hall. It migrates with the student into the university, into the workplace, into professional life, and eventually into governance. The engineer who learned at secondary school that enough money removes obstacles will not suddenly discover a commitment to safety standards when he is certifying a building. The nurse who learned that merit is negotiable will not abruptly develop a conscience about pharmaceutical procurement. The civil servant who was taught by the system that compliance is optional will not be astonished when his supervisor suggests that public contracts require private facilitation. The corruption of the examination hall is the nursery of the corruption of the nation.
III. The Continuum from Secondary School to University
The problem does not begin and end at WAEC. It is a continuum — a coherent, if unplanned, educational architecture that takes a young person from secondary school examination malpractice into a university system where, in too many documented cases, the same logic operates at higher stakes and higher cost.
Across Nigeria’s tertiary institutions, the practice of monetising academic outcomes has been reported, documented, and in some cases adjudicated upon for years. Part-time degree programmes — evening and weekend classes that serve working adults, business owners, and family caregivers who cannot attend full-time — are particularly vulnerable. The combination of time-pressured students who cannot attend every lecture, revenue-dependent institutions for whom the part-time programme is a significant income stream, and weaker monitoring structures on evening campuses creates conditions in which informal financial arrangements between students and certain academic staff can take root.
The scenario is not difficult to reconstruct from widely reported accounts. A working student misses a significant proportion of lectures due to professional obligations. When examinations approach, she discovers that her attendance record disqualifies her from sitting. An intermediary approaches her with a solution — unofficial, financial, discreet, and effective. She pays. She sits. She passes. And somewhere on the same campus, a student who attended every lecture, submitted every assignment honestly, and refused to participate in any informal arrangement — that student receives the same certificate at the same convocation. What does either of them learn from this experience?
The most honest answer is that the honest student learns something dangerous: that integrity is a disadvantage. And the student who paid learns something equally dangerous: that in Nigerian institutions, systems exist not to enforce standards but to be navigated around, and that the navigation is financial. Both conclusions are corrosive. Together, they explain something that employers across Nigeria consistently note but rarely say publicly: that a university certificate from a Nigerian institution increasingly tells them little reliable about what a graduate actually knows or can actually do.
This is not an indictment of every lecturer, every department, or every institution.
Thousands of Nigerian academics work under extraordinarily difficult conditions — delayed salaries, inadequate research funding, crumbling infrastructure, and the constant humiliation of a system that undervalues intellectual work — and they do so with remarkable professional integrity. The problem is not the ethics of the majority. The problem is that the minority that compromises academic standards operates in an environment where consequences are rare, enforcement is inconsistent, and the culture of silence among colleagues makes exposure unlikely. Systemic misconduct is sustained not only by those who commit it but by the institutions whose silence permits it.
IV. The Funding Crisis at the Root
Any honest examination of Nigeria’s education integrity crisis must acknowledge that the roots of the problem run deep into the soil of chronic underfunding and institutional neglect. Corruption rarely thrives in well-resourced, well-monitored, well-remunerated systems. It flourishes in the gaps left by institutional abandonment.
Nigeria’s Federal Government allocated N3.52 trillion to education in both 2025 and 2026 — the highest nominal allocations in the nation’s history, and genuinely significant in absolute terms. But as a share of the total national budget, education received only 6.1 percent in 2026, compared to UNESCO’s recommendation of 15 to 20 percent and the aspirational benchmark of 26 percent that appears in Nigeria’s own National Policy on Education. A more adequate 2026 education allocation, by UNESCO standards, would have been between N8.7 trillion and N11.6 trillion. The gap between what Nigeria spends on education and what it should spend is not a rounding error. It is the difference between a functioning public education system and the dysfunctional one that has produced consecutive generations of underprepared students and corrupted examination outcomes.
What does chronic underfunding produce? It produces schools without laboratories where science is taught as a theoretical exercise, producing students who can recite chemical formulas but have never conducted an experiment. It produces mathematics classrooms without textbooks, where teachers improvise for decades. It produces invigilators and examination supervisors who earn wages so inadequate that a N3,000 unofficial fee represents a meaningful supplement to their daily survival. It produces university lecturers whose salaries are delayed for months, whose research funding is nominal, and whose professional standing in a merit-indifferent system provides no obvious incentive to resist the informal economies that have grown up around them. Poverty of the system produces the conditions in which individual corruption becomes structurally rational, even as it remains morally indefensible.
South Africa, by contrast, allocated 19.75 percent of its national budget to education in 2022 — surpassing even the previous year’s commitment. The difference in educational outcomes between Nigeria and South Africa is not primarily a difference of talent. Nigerian students who migrate to South Africa, the United Kingdom, Canada, or the United States consistently perform at the highest levels. The difference is a difference of institutional investment, which is a difference of political choices, which is ultimately a difference of what a nation’s leaders have decided that its children are worth.
V. The Expo Culture and Its Consequences for National Development
Nigeria has developed what many education observers now call an ‘expo culture’ — a term that encompasses the broad informal ecosystem of examination assistance that has evolved over decades in parts of the country. This ecosystem involves question paper leakage, impersonation, organised in-hall assistance networks, financial inducements to supervisors and invigilators, and digital cheating through mobile phones and wireless communication devices hidden on candidates’ persons. WAEC’s head of the Nigeria National Office specifically cited the use of banned mobile phones in examination halls and the rise in organised cheating in some schools as key concerns in announcing the 2025 results.
This ecosystem is not merely a moral problem. It is an economic one of the most serious kind. An education system’s fundamental purpose is to certify competence — to tell society, reliably, that a person holding a particular qualification has demonstrated particular knowledge and capability. When that certification process is systematically corrupted, it fails at its foundational purpose. Certificates become signals of having navigated a corrupt system successfully, not evidence of having developed genuine capability. Employers receive graduates who cannot perform the roles their certificates suggest they are qualified for. Universities receive entrants whose school examination results do not reflect their actual preparation. The entire downstream economy of knowledge work — medicine, engineering, architecture, law, accountancy, public administration — is built on foundations that the corrupted examination system has quietly hollowed out.
The consequences are visible everywhere in Nigeria’s institutional landscape. They appear in collapsed buildings certified by engineers who purchased their qualifications rather than earned them. They appear in misdiagnoses by medical personnel whose clinical training was compromised by the same informal financial logic they absorbed in secondary school. They appear in public sector inefficiency driven by civil servants whose genuine competence was never rigorously assessed at any stage of their educational progression. These are not hypothetical future risks. They are present-tense realities that cost Nigerian lives and Nigerian livelihoods every year.
VI. What the World’s Best Education Systems Teach Us
Nigeria does not need to navigate this challenge without reference points. Across the world, education systems that have successfully built cultures of integrity, examination reliability, and genuine learning offer instructive lessons — not to be mechanically copied, because context always matters, but to be thoughtfully adapted.
Finland is arguably the world’s most-studied education success story, and its lessons begin with a paradox: Finland has virtually no standardised examinations until the age of 18 or 19. The entire architecture of Finnish education deprioritises high-stakes testing in favour of deep learning, teacher autonomy, and the development of critical thinking.
Finnish teachers are drawn from the top third of university graduates, receive rigorous professional preparation, and are treated as trusted professionals rather than managed as low-grade workers. Because learning rather than test performance is the dominant objective, there is no incentive structure within Finnish education that makes cheating rational. You cannot bribe a teacher to give you a higher grade when grades are not the primary currency of educational success.
Finland consistently ranks among the highest performers in the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment, not because its students are taught to pass tests but because they are taught to think.
Singapore offers a contrasting model with equally instructive lessons. Singapore’s curriculum is among the most rigorous in the world, with high-stakes examinations and intense academic expectations — a system closer in structure to Nigeria’s own than Finland’s is.
But Singapore has built an integrity culture through a combination of transparent meritocracy, consistent enforcement of examination rules, well-remunerated and highly trained invigilators, and a genuinely functional relationship between examination performance and life outcomes. When merit is reliably rewarded — when the student who works hardest genuinely gets the best opportunities — the incentive to cheat diminishes substantially. Singapore also invests heavily in teacher welfare, ensuring that the professionals responsible for student preparation are neither desperate nor resentful. The lesson for Nigeria is clear: examination integrity is sustainable only when the systems surrounding examinations are trustworthy and the professionals managing them are adequately supported.
South Korea, despite its famously intense examination culture and the extraordinary pressure placed on students by the suneung national university entrance examination, has built remarkably robust integrity systems through several mechanisms. These include sophisticated question paper security involving multiple levels of encryption and controlled distribution, a nationwide network of examination supervisors who are fully independent of the schools whose students they invigilate, and severe legal consequences for examination fraud that are consistently enforced. The cultural embedding of meritocracy — the Korean conviction that examination success represents genuine achievement — also serves as a social reinforcer of integrity norms that Nigeria’s expo culture actively undermines.
In the broader African context, Ghana — Nigeria’s immediate Western neighbour and fellow WAEC member — has made measurable progress in reducing examination malpractice through a combination of school-based accountability systems, real-time monitoring during examinations, and community-level reporting mechanisms that empower parents and civil society to flag irregularities. Rwanda’s nationally led education quality reform programme, which has transformed one of the continent’s most traumatised education systems into one of its most improving, demonstrates what is possible when political will, institutional investment, and consistent accountability are genuinely aligned.
The common thread running through all of these success stories is not primarily technological. It is cultural and structural. Examination integrity is not principally a CCTV problem or a digital paper problem. It is a question of whether the institutions managing examinations command the public trust that comes from demonstrable commitment to fairness, from adequate resource investment, from meaningful consequences for misconduct, and from treating the examination not as a transaction but as a sacred covenant between the state and its young people.
VII. A Framework for Reform: What Must Be Done
The analysis presented in this article leads inevitably to a framework for reform that must operate simultaneously at the level of immediate intervention, medium-term institutional restructuring, and long-term cultural and funding transformation. The problems are deep enough that surface measures will not suffice. But they are not so deep as to be irreparable, provided that leadership at every level makes the choice to act.
At the most immediate level, WAEC and NECO must be supported and indeed required to extend their anti-malpractice technology reforms — the serialisation of objective papers, the deployment of CCTV monitoring in examination halls, and the use of electronic reporting channels — across the full breadth of the examination system. WAEC’s 2025 experience demonstrated that when malpractice is made more difficult, the true level of preparation becomes visible. The dramatic drop in pass rates was not a failure of reform: it was the beginning of honesty. It revealed what was actually happening beneath the artificially inflated numbers of previous years, and that revelation is a prerequisite for genuine improvement. The Federal Ministry of Education should deploy independent monitoring teams for surprise inspections of examination centres, establish anonymous reporting channels with meaningful whistleblower protection, and publish sanctions for proven misconduct transparently and promptly.
Schools and examination centres must be required to document every examination-related fee, make those records available for inspection by parents and regulators, and transition all legitimate examination payments to cashless, traceable electronic systems. The days of opaque cash collections — whether legitimate or not — must end. Every naira collected in the name of examination administration must have a digital audit trail.
This single measure would not eliminate corruption, but it would remove the anonymity that makes corruption comfortable.
In the medium term, Nigeria must professionalise examination management as a distinct discipline. The invigilators and supervisors who sit in examination halls across 23,554 schools are among the most consequential actors in the national education system, and they are among its most neglected. They must be adequately compensated, independently deployed rather than embedded within the schools whose students they assess, and held to a professional code with genuine accountability mechanisms.
The examination supervisor who accepts a N3,000 unofficial fee does so in an environment where N3,000 represents a meaningful percentage of an inadequate income and where the probability of facing consequences is negligible. Change either of those variables — raise the legitimate income or raise the probability of consequences — and the calculus changes.
Character education must be restored to the centre of Nigeria’s curriculum, not as a peripheral subject but as an integrated dimension of learning across all disciplines and at all levels. This is not a naive proposal. It is a recognition of what Finland, Singapore, and South Korea have all understood: that academic excellence and ethical formation are not competing objectives. They are complementary ones. A student who genuinely believes that merit is rewarded, who sees adult institutions that consistently honour integrity, and who understands that the shortcuts of today produce the incompetence of tomorrow — that student has much less incentive to cheat than one who believes, correctly, that the system is indifferent to both.
At the long-term and foundational level, Nigeria must make a political decision that it has repeatedly deferred: to fund its education system at a level commensurate with the role that education plays in national development. The gap between Nigeria’s 6 percent budget allocation and UNESCO’s 15 to 20 percent recommendation is not a technical oversight. It is a political choice that reflects the relative priority that the country’s leadership has historically assigned to the wellbeing and development of its young people. That choice must be reversed. A decade-long commitment to progressively increasing the education budget allocation — with transparent ring-fencing of resources at the school level, elimination of leakages through technology and audit, and genuine accountability for headteachers and university administrators for resource deployment — would transform the environmental conditions in which examination corruption currently thrives.
Conclusion
The Generation We Are Teaching
The children who sat in examination halls across Nigeria in 2025 — all 1,969,313 of them — will be the country’s governors, engineers, doctors, teachers, business leaders, and parents of the 2050s and beyond. The lessons they are being taught right now, in those halls and in the schools and universities that surround them, are not only the lessons in the syllabuses. They are the unspoken lessons of a system: about what integrity is worth, about whether merit matters, about whether the adults who govern institutions can be trusted.
If Nigeria continues to allow the normalisation of examination corruption, it is making a choice about the character of that future generation. It is choosing to teach, through the lived experience of the examination hall, that character is optional and money is sufficient. It is choosing to send hundreds of thousands of young people into adult life having learned, at the most impressionable stage of their development, that systems exist to be gamed rather than to be trusted.
The most terrifying aspect of the 2025 WASSCE results is not the 38.32 percent pass rate. It is the question that rate implicitly poses: of the 72 percent who passed in 2024, what proportion of those passes actually represented genuine learning, and what proportion represented the successful deployment of the expo culture that the 2025 serialisation of papers dismantled? We do not know the full answer. But we know enough to understand that Nigeria has been lying to itself about the competence of its examination graduates for years, and that the moment of truth has arrived.
The response to that moment of truth must be honest, courageous, and sustained. It must begin with an acknowledgement that the crisis is real and that its roots are structural, not merely individual. It must continue with investment — in school funding, teacher welfare, examination infrastructure, and character education — at a level that reflects the actual importance of education to national survival. And it must include the kind of firm, consistent, publicly visible accountability for those who corrupt the system that sends an unmistakable signal to every examination supervisor, university lecturer, school principal, and student: that in Nigeria’s education system, the rules are real, the consequences are real, and merit, at last, is what matters.
Nigeria is a nation of extraordinary human potential. Its students, when given genuine preparation in properly resourced schools with properly remunerated teachers in systems that reliably reward merit, are capable of competing with any in the world. The task before our educational leadership is not to build new potential — the potential is there, waiting. The task is to stop wasting it. And that begins with the elementary act of ensuring that when a child walks into an examination hall, the only thing that determines her result is what she knows.
About the Author
Prof. Sarumi, a digital transformation architect and leadership strategist with over 40 years of cross-sector experience across Nigeria and the African continent, writes from Lagos.
References
1. Atlantic Post Nigeria (2025, August 8). WAEC 2025 Result Glitch: How a Tech Failure Shook Nigeria’s Education System. Available at: https://atlanticpostng.com
2. Brookings Institution (2026, April 17). USAID’s Aid Freeze, Implications for Nigeria’s Education Sector, Country Responses, and New Roles for External Partners. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu
3. BusinessDay Nigeria (2025, August 5). Nigeria’s 2025 WASSCE Scores Worst in 10 Years. Available at: https://businessday.ng
4. Cheetahs Policy Institute (2025, February 6). Reforming Nigeria’s Educational Policies: Bridging the Gap. Available at: https://cheetahsinstitute.org
5. Column Content Research (2025, July). The Hole in Nigeria’s Education Budget: How a N290 Billion Shortfall Affects the Sector. Available at: https://columncontent.com
6. Dr Amos Dangut, Head of WAEC Nigeria National Office. Official WASSCE 2025 Result Release Statement, August 4, 2025. Lagos: WAEC Nigeria.
7. Edugist (2025, August 8). WASSCE 2025: A Wake-Up Call for Nigeria’s Failing Education System. Available at: https://edugist.org
8. Edugist (2026, January 2). Why Nigerian Public Schools Remain Chronically Underfunded. Available at: https://edugist.org
9. Guardian Nigeria (2025). WAEC Withholds 192,000 Results Over Exam Malpractice. Available at: https://guardian.ng
10. ICIR Nigeria (2026, January 7). Improved Funding, Security, Other Expected Priorities for Nigerian Education Sector in 2026. Available at: https://www.icirnigeria.org
11. INDY Press, University of Ibadan (2024, December 21). 2025: Public Education and an Underfunded Budget. Available at: https://indypressui.org
12. Institute of Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka (2024). Funding of Education in Nigeria: A Focus on Public Schools. Review of Education, Vol. 36, Issue 1, 2024. Available at: https://instituteofeducation.unn.edu.ng
13. Legit.ng (2025, August 8). Mass Failure: 2025 WASSCE Stakeholders Blame Systemic Challenges, Exam Malpractice. Available at: https://www.legit.ng
14. Medium / Shades of USA Africa (2025, March 4). The State of Education in Nigeria. Available at: https://medium.com/@shadesofusafrica
15. National Accord Newspaper (2025, August 4). WAEC Releases 2025 WASSCE Results, Withholds 192,000 Candidates’ Results for Exam Malpractice. Available at: https://www.nationalaccordnewspaper.com
16. National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) Nigeria (2024). School ICT Infrastructure Report. Abuja: NBS.
17. National Examination Council (NECO). NECO Malpractice Withholding Statistics 2023–2024. Minna: NECO.
18. Nigerian Observer (2025, August 7). WAEC 2025: Between Anti-Malpractice Measures and Mass Failure. Available at: https://nigerianobservernews.com
19. OECD (2022). PISA Programme for International Student Assessment Results. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
20. Punch Newspaper (2025, August 6). CBT Fears Surge After Decade-Worst WASSCE Results. Available at: https://punchng.com
21. Successful Examples of Education Reform Around the World (2025, January 31). CUSTAT.ORG. Available at: https://www.custat.org
22. The Best Education Systems in the World: What Top Countries Get Right (2025, September 23). Ahsedu. Available at: https://ahsedu.org
23. UNESCO (2021). UNESCO Member States Unite to Increase Investment in Education. Paris: UNESCO. Available at: https://www.unesco.org
24. UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2023). Global Education Monitoring Report. Paris: UNESCO.
25. Union Citizenship (2026). Countries with the Best Education in 2026: Top 10 Ranked. Available at: https://unioncitizenship.com
26. Vanguard News (2025, September 8). Need to Tackle Exam Malpractice. Available at: https://www.vanguardngr.com
27. West African Examinations Council (WAEC) (2025). Official WASSCE 2025 Result Statistics. Lagos: WAEC Nigeria National Office.
28. World Bank (2022). The State of Education in Nigeria. Washington D.C.: World Bank Group.
29.