{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026487600939236012, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008161044613710556, 'mean_word_length': 5.2085333333333335, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 6, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
POLICY ON PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP AND ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE IN NIGERIA: LESSON FROM LEKKI/EPE CONCESSION COMPANY

This research paper assesses Nigeria's policy on public-private partnerships and road infrastructure in Nigeria: a lesson from Lekki/Epe Concession Company. The public sector has long been the primary provider of basic services and infrastructure around the world. Huge fiscal deficits, on the other hand, have hampered governments' ability to meet rising infrastructure needs and have become a significant impediment to member countries' efforts to improve their investment environment. To supplement scarce public infrastructure capital, the private sector must be encouraged to participate by establishing an enabling environment for expanded private sector participation. Via Public-Private Partnerships, most developed countries governments have turned to the private sector to finance infrastructure growth. Nigeria, on the other hand, needs sound policymaking to increase the involvement of private companies in achieving the desired goals. The main instrument for this paper was sourced from secondary data which include among others; journals, textbooks, the internet, magazines, and newspapers. According to numerous studies, private involvement has aided the growth of some developing countries by providing infrastructure needs, including some parts of Nigeria such as Lagos state has benefited from partnerships with private organizations that have aided Lagos state's vision and goal as a megacity. This study concludes that the Federal Government of Nigeria should improve the PPP policy because it will dramatically reduce infrastructure borrowing while also propelling the Nigerian economy to new heights.

. Recently, the country was in recession, with annual GDP drops regularly, and the government must follow the SDG standard. It is unarguable that the country has a significant infrastructure deficit, and that the existing infrastructure is not being used to its full potential (Hauwa, et al. 2015).
During the late Umar Musa Yar,adua administration, it was publicly stated that Nigeria needs more than the US $19 trillion in infrastructure, and that the aggregate estimate for federation account receipts for the year 2009 was 4.529 trillion, which was roughly $3 billion, and that Nigeria's annual GDP of about the US $300 billion was less than 2 per cent of the world's standard for infrastructure (Hauwa, et al. 2015). Nigeria's foreign reserves increased to about $62 billion in 2008, but are now less than $40 billion, which is negligible. The World Bank recommends that developing countries like Nigeria invest 7-9 per cent of their GDP in infrastructure, especially road. The fact that Nigeria's road infrastructure is insufficient and in poor condition is concerning. According to Olufowose (2008), based on data from the African Economic Outlook in 2006, Nigeria's transport sector contributed about 2.4 per cent of real GDP in 2004, with road transport accounting for nearly 86 per cent of the sector. Just 15% of the total 193,200km of roads are paved (and about 23% of the paved roads are in poor condition), necessitating immediate rehabilitation (Olufowose, 2008, in Ikpefan, 2015 The situation is the same as it was in 2008. Given the infrastructural gaps, significant investments are needed in Nigeria, especially in the areas of road, electricity, water, transportation, and sanitation (Ikpefan, 2015). It should be noted that the exact amount spent on infrastructure per year is not known; hence, a Public-Private Partnership is needed to help the country get closer to its desired level of infrastructure growth. It should be noted that Nigeria's annual recurrent expenditure is over 60 per cent of our national budget, with less than 40 per cent allocated to capital projects is insufficient to meet the country's needs (Hauwa, et al. 2015).
However, public-private partnerships (PPPs) are becoming more common as a development tool, and they are often used in development programs around the world. PPPs are becoming increasingly popular as a way to include the private sector in infrastructure growth. It is a form of collaboration between the public and private sectors that sometimes includes third-party involvement (NGOs, trade unions) or information institutes that agree to collaborate to achieve a common goal or complete a specific mission while sharing risks and obligations and pooling resources and expertise (Obinna, 2016). This research looks at Nigeria's policy strategy on public-private partnership and road infrastructure as a panacea for long-term growth. It evaluates some of the impediments that have always stood in the way of PPP's activity in Nigeria and proposes the best way for PPP to support infrastructural needs. partnerships are defined by the partners' sharing of investment, risk, obligation, and reward (Egbewole, 2011). The Canadian Council for PPP defines a public-private partnership as a cooperative venture in which the costs involved in providing public services are shared between the public and private sectors. PPP is described as a contractual arrangement between public and private parties, according to the National Council for Public-Private Partnerships (2012). The expertise and assets of each sector (public and private) are pooled to provide a service or facility to the general public under this arrangement. Aside from sharing resources, each party shares the risks and rewards associated with providing the service and/or facility (Oluwasanmi & Ogidi, 2014).

Infrastructure
Infrastructure is, without a doubt, a catch-all word for a variety of activities referred to as social overhead capital and defined by unique technological (such as economies of scale) and economic (such as spillovers from users to nonusers) characteristics (Hauwa, et al. 2015;Ikpefan, et al. 2015). Where competitive market pricing can distort behaviour or result in a loss of socio-economic benefits, it has been argued that infrastructure should be funded by the government. However, history indicates that the state will do so in one of two ways: either directly or through facilitating private-sector provision (through taxation, tax subsidies, or other incentives, or contract) (Ikpefan, et al. 2015). There is no precise definition of infrastructure, but it has been described as the structural elements of an economy that facilitate the flow of goods and services between buyers and sellers (Egbewole, 2011).

Theoretical framework
Several theories apply to this area, such as public choice theory, social responsibility theory, structural theory, and so on. However, for this report, principal agency theory will suffice. Stephen Ross, who had previously proposed the economic theory of agency, and Barry Mitnick, who had previously proposed the theory of institution, both proposed it in the early 1970s before Jensen and Meckling (1976) presented it in their paper, which was later published in 1979. (Ukessay, 2017).
The principal-agent theory is a theory that focuses on the ubiquitous agency relationship in which one person (the principal) delegate work to another (Agent) who conducts work on the principal's behalf. This idea is appropriate for this paper since there is a relationship between the principal and the agents who work together to accomplish a goal. This theory clarified the relationship between public and private organizations that work together for a common goal, with private organizations carrying out duties on behalf of the government to provide services to the people. However, this theory has been criticized for failing to take risk-sharing into account. Furthermore, it is argued that if the parties maximized utility, one party could not always behave in the best interests of the other. The private organization can also use its funds to recover toll fees for a set period. Private intervention in road infrastructure can lead to long-term development in Nigeria (Ukessay, 2017).

Development of PPP
Concerns about the extent of public debt, which grew rapidly during the macroeconomic dislocation of the 1970s and 1980s, initially fueled pressure to reform the normative model of public procurement. Governments attempted to promote private investment in infrastructure, initially based on accounting flaws caused by the fact that public accounts did not differentiate between recurring and capital expenses. The notion that private infrastructure provision provided a way to provide infrastructure at no expense to the public has now been widely discredited; however, interest in alternatives to the standard model of public procurement has continued.
It has been argued, in particular, that models involving an expanded function for the private sector, with a single private-sector agency taking responsibility for most aspects of service provision for a given project, may result in a better risk distribution while retaining public accountability for critical aspects of service provision. Initially, most public-private contracts were negotiated as one-time agreements, with much of this operation beginning in the early 1990s. PPPs are arranged along a continuum of public and private nodes and needs, combining normative, although separate, roles of society, the economy, and the commons.
Allowing for these fluctuations while reinforcing the expected relationship without undermining either sector is a common challenge for PPPs. Multispectral or collaborative, partnering occurs on a scale from private to public, with varying degrees of implementation depending on the need, time constraints, and issue at hand. Even though these collaborations are now popular, it is natural for both the private and public sectors to be critical of the other's approach and methods. It is at the intersection of these fields where we see how a single alliance has an immediate impact on community growth and the delivery of public services.

PPP Policy in Nigeria
In terms of PPP, Nigeria has adopted a variety of policies. It is concerning that, despite extensive policy support for PPP, PPP has yet to gain traction in Nigeria. Under the late President Musa Yar'adua, a policy was implemented in 2005 to collaborate with private organizations because the country's annual GDP was insufficient to rehabilitate bad roads. There was an agreement with the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC) to accelerate investment in national infrastructure through private sector funding by assisting the Federal Government of Nigeria and its Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) in implementing and establishing successful Public-Private Partnership (PPP) procurement mechanisms. The policy called for the involvement of the private sector in financing the construction, production, operation, or maintenance of Federal Government infrastructure or development projects through concession or contractual arrangements, as well as the establishment of the Commission to oversee, track, and supervise infrastructure or development contracts. The Federal Government's PPP program is focused on the development of new infrastructure as well as the extension and refurbishment of existing facilities at the federal level. When formal president Goodluck Ebele Jonathan took office, the administration also committed to a PPP regime in which the private party could recoup its expenditure with returns and the public was not short-changed in any way. According to him, if Nigeria wants to attract private sector investments to improve our infrastructure, we must uphold the rule of law and the sanctity of contracts as enshrined in the ICRC Act and other related laws. Namadi Sambo, Nigeria's then-vice president stated that the Public-Private Partnership will continue to be a key solution to infrastructure investment and that we should continue to improve our PPP structures and broaden the PPP market in Africa. One thing we all agree on, according to Dr Ngozi Okonjo Iweala, the formal Nigerian Finance Minister, is that the government will never be able to collect the money needed to close the infrastructure gap in Nigeria. Solid, long-term PPPs, with the private sector serving as a regulator, can be beneficial. Infrastructure, according to the World Bank, provides substantial investment opportunities for long-term investors, even in times of global crisis. It is critical for both economic recovery and long-term growth.
Initially, there was a policy to rehabilitate the faulty roads under the leadership of President Muhommodu Buhari, with the ministry of works budgeting a large sum in 2017. Fashola, the minister of Housing, Power, and Works, clarified how the federal government has prioritized highway projects across the country. However, out of the N564.2 billion proposed, the road works received N311.5 billion. Even the combined budgets of the three ministries were insufficient to rehabilitate Nigeria's highways. After several legislative sessions, almost half of the budgeted funds were cut. The existing capital investment in the country is insufficient to embark solely on road construction in Nigeria; therefore, private organizations must step in. There was PPP in some of these highways, but it was not totally in control, and there is still a government overbearing tendency on the projects Ikpefan et al (2015).
Despite the change in government, policy in Nigeria lacks a strong pillar. What has always been a source of contention is that private organizations have been operating at deficits as a result of a new government with a new policy, which has always impacted agreements between the federal government and private organizations in Nigeria Ikpefan et al (2015).

Reasons for PPP in Nigeria
i. According to Egbewole (2013), public-private partnerships (PPPs) can be commissioned for (or any combination of) financial, developmental, performance, ideological, and political reasons. He went on to describe them further as follows: ii.
Financial reasons (risk diversification): PPP can be used when the government lacks the money to complete a project on its own. Risk diversification may also be a motivator for implementing PPP because it promotes investment in projects that would not have been carried out otherwise due to high product/market risks. iii.
Developmental reasons: another justification to implement is to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), Vision 20:2020, or certain international standards.
iv. Causes for inefficiency: this can be seen from two perspectives: business failure and government failure. • Market failure occurs when private companies struggle to innovate and ensure continuous improvement in product and process production because it is not profitable. Failure of government means that the government fails to ensure transparency between policymakers and industry/economic players. v.
It must be value for money (VFM), economical, reliable, and accurate. vi.
Ideological/political reasons: changes in the socio-political and industrial climate may often promote PPP initiatives, especially when the project is internationally funded.

Features of PPP
According to Egbewole (2011), allocating sizable and, at times, major elements of risk to the private partner is critical in separating the PPP from the more conventional public sector model of public service delivery. PPPs are classified into two types: contractual and institutional. While institutional PPP has been very effective in some cases, particularly in countries with well-developed institutional and regulatory capacities, contractual PPP is much more common, particularly in developing economies.
Although there is no general agreement about how to define public-private partnerships, the following characteristics generally describe a PPP: The private partner pays for the infrastructure or service in full or in part. Risks are shared by the public and private partners and assigned to the group best qualified to handle each risk. PPP is a complicated structure with many parties and relatively high transaction costs. PPP is a procurement tool in which the focus is on payment for effective service delivery (the performance risk is passed to the private partner) (Oluwasanmi and Ogidi, 2014). According to Oyedele (2013), the following is the basic features of PPP: i. The Legal Framework must be sound due to the various interests of the parties. ii.
Costing must be efficient and accurate. The costing must take into account all of the risks involved. iii.
The source of financing must be reliable, available, and long-term. iv.
All parties must have technical knowledge of the facilities under development, though at varying levels. Oyedele (2013) defined the following PPP model types: i. Build, Run, Transfer (BOT); in this scenario, the private investor faces the challenges of building risk, operational risk, and social and environmental risk, seeks to make a profit, and then transfers ownership to the government at the end of the contract duration. In this model, the contractor may be a developer and financier who will build and own the property with the understanding that the client will eventually own it. This model is typically applied to specialized facilities such as hospitals, colleges, and housing.

ISSN 2581-5148
Vol ii. Design, Build, Finance, Own (DFBO); in this model, the venture is entirely owned by the private sector. The problem here is one of regulatory risk, project risk, and taxation creep. It is a Public Finance Initiative (PFI) in which a private sector company conceptualizes a development concept, designs it, builds it, operates it, and owns it in perpetuity. iii.
Plan, Construct, Operate, and Transfer (DBOT): In this model, the private investor is tasked with designing a project, building it, operating it within an agreed-upon time frame, and then transferring ownership title and operations to the government. Build, Own, Operate and Transfer (BOOT); This is similar to the DBOT model, except that the private sector partner will have full control for a set period, during which it will direct the enterprise's affairs without intervention from the public sector. iv.
public facilities, operate them for an agreed-upon period, and then transfer control to the government at the contract's end. v.
Joint Development Agreement (JDA); this model allows the private and public sectors to collaborate and fund the creation of a project from the ground up. Following completion, both parties retain stakes in the management and operation of the project. vi.
Operation and Maintenance (OM); in this model, the project's current operation and maintenance role are contracted to the party with the expertise, capital, and technology to carry out the function, while ownership and management remain with the initiator. vii. formalized viii. Management/Lease Contracts; Management and lease contracts include a private company taking over management and control of a public entity for a set period while the facility remains owned by the public sector. The public sector will continue to bear the burden of financing fixed-asset investments. In the case of management contracts, the government still funds the jobs. ix.
Outsourcing; Billing, postal, stationary equipment, metering, transportation, and cleaning are examples of services that the government outsources to the private sector. x.
Leasing Contract; In a leasing contract, private developers build infrastructure and lease it to the government on finance or operating lease basis. xi.
Greenfield projects; In Greenfield projects, a private company or a public-private partnership construct and maintains a new facility for the duration of the project contract. After the contract term, the facility can be returned to the public sector or retained under private ownership. xii.
Divestiture; Another form of private infrastructure involvement is divestiture, in which a private company purchases an equity interest in a State-Owned Enterprise through an asset sale, public offering, or mass privatization. In a nation where the majority of people are impoverished, whatever model is chosen should prioritize the welfare of the citizens. xiii. Concession; a concession is a joint arrangement between a government and a private developer(s) to design and build facilities with the help of a group of partners that includes financiers, contractors, and consultants. The developers may or may not be the project's financiers (Ugwu, 2012).

ISSN 2581-5148
Vol Based on the reviews above, we can infer that the majority of scholars' viewpoints are similar; they all agree that PPP can facilitate growth in any nation as long as regulations are in place. It is a reality that if the government is left to its own devices, Nigeria will be unable to meet all of the people's infrastructure needs, especially in the area of metropolitan road construction. As a result, there is a need for private organizations to join the government in providing social and economic welfare to the people, as this will lead to long-term growth in Nigeria.

Nexus between PPP policy and Road infrastructure in Nigeria
Without a doubt, Nigeria is Africa's most populous nation, as well as the continent's largest infrastructure sector (NPC, 2006). Road construction is the backbone of any country's infrastructure growth. According to UKCG (2009), the construction industry is a driver of growth in other sectors due to its dependence on a large and diverse supply chain. According to Hauwa et al. (2015), for any country to experience sustainable development, there must be consistent or efficient road infrastructure.
They also claimed that good roads encourage business transactions from one neighbouring country to another, which in turn promotes the country's economic development. Infrastructure via PPP has a positive effect on jobs, according to Yong (2010). According to him, one of the most difficult problems confronting developing countries is the unemployment rate, which will be increased with the aid of private participation, as this will ultimately accelerate the country's economic growth (Yong 2010).
To shift Nigeria towards sustainable development, the government must improve its collaboration with private organizations in providing services to the people, which will increase the jobs of unemployed youth and reduce poverty in Nigeria. According to Oyedele (2013), the emphasis of PPP is on results and standards, rather than procedures, as is the case with conventional contracting. PPP offers the highest efficiency and value for taxpayer dollars. He cites an example of how the transition toward cost-reflective pricing that occurs under PPP agreements usually leads to a more sustainable level of jobs than public infrastructure provision. The effect on absolute levels of employment is not completely clear. In the case of the lekki road concession of PPP projects, the impact on employment is positive.

PPP and Sustainable development in Nigeria
In general, the state of road infrastructure provision and availability in Nigeria is deplorable. The services given are subpar, and the funding mechanism for road infrastructure expansion, maintenance, and repair is insufficient. Rapid urbanization exacerbates these issues. Effective and reliable road networks and service providers are critical to achieving environmental sustainability and, more broadly, sustainable growth. Nigeria's road infrastructure must be improved to meet the needs of more people. Improved service delivery is critical for long-term growth, development, and poverty reduction. It raises people's living standards and leads to long-term growth.
The public sector's provision of these services, on the other hand, has proven insufficient and unsustainable due to factors such as the nature of the public sector. Until recently, the sector was characterized by inefficiency and lack of effectiveness, resulting in poor results. This, in turn, can be attributed to many closely related and self-reinforcing characteristics of the sector, such as political interference; unclear objectives; limited operational autonomy; inadequate managerial skills in comparison to technical, human, conceptual, and design skills; inadequate accountability and transparency; heavy and cumbersome bureaucracy, and so on. As a result, PPP exists as a panacea to an interdisciplinary issue.

PPP and road infrastructure in Nigeria: a lesson from Lekki concession company and Lagos state government
The goal of LCC is to provide high-quality road infrastructure and related services along the Lekki Peninsular of Lagos, Nigeria, and to be recognized as a leader in changing the way road infrastructure is provided throughout the country. LCC is a 30-year Public-Private Partnership 19 between Lagos State and LCC to address historical issues of heavy "go slow" traffic along the Lekki-Epe Axis. Phase 1 -Expansion and upgrade of 49.4km of Ozumba Mbadiwe Avenue/Lekki-Epe Expressway, Phase 11 -Development of 20km of Coastal Road with an option to do the Southern Bypass, Operation and maintenance of new road infrastructure over a 30-year concession period.
The cost of the project is being funded by LCC and will be recovered primarily by tolls. LCC is currently executing Nigeria's first PPP Toll Road Concession, which has reached a financial close, including the successful securing of an N43.6 billion (US$370 million) long-term financing package on ground-breaking terms for Nigeria. LCC is a major shareholder in Macquarie Bank through its African Infrastructure Investment Fund. LCC is a project of the Asset Resource Management Group, which has a large goal of developing major infrastructure projects in Nigeria and West Africa. The success story of Lekki Toll Road Concession can be attributed to the following: a well researched and structured project is backed by reputable, seasoned players, so it can attract the requisite funding. It has dedicated supporters, an experienced concession and project manager, government support and engagement, as well as enabling legislation (2004 Lagos Roads Law), a financial structure (debt/equity and tenor currency), financial advisors and arrangers (robust financial model), technical and engineering skills (feasibility, tolling policy, surveys, and design), and legal and regulatory expertise. The progress in infrastructure development seen today in Lagos State can be attributed to the Lagos State Government of Nigeria. (the State) enacted the Lagos State Roads, Bridges, and Highway Infrastructure (Private Sector Participation) Development Board Law (the infrastructure Law) to provide a legal basis for private-sector financing of such infrastructure (Ikpefan, et al. 2015).

The legal framework between LCC and Lagos state government
The Lagos state government's agreement was focused on developing, run, and move (BOT). There was a legal agreement between the parties that specified that the LCC would fund, develop, and operate the contract for ten years before handing it over to the Lagos state government. LCC, on the other hand, derives its profits from tolls, which means that the company receives fees from any car that travels through the road for the agreed-upon duration. However, there was a dispute between residents of the Lekki/Epe axis when the company raised the toll rates, necessitating the government to provide an alternate road.
The following is an overview of toll charging in LCCs in Lagos state.
This is the first time in Nigerian history that a government has passed legislation to control private sector funding for infrastructure construction and maintenance. Though the private sector may have participated in the financing and provision of infrastructure, particularly in the power sector through independent power projects, this was done without any clear set of regulations or laws regulating the transactions and the selection of concessionaires or other private financiers wishing to participate in infrastructure growth.

PPP and road infrastructure as a panacea to sustainable development in Nigeria
Political consistency is needed for PPP to achieve a sustainable goal through road infrastructure in Nigeria. The government of Nigeria should agree that the annual income generated cannot be used solely for road construction; there is a need to completely allow for private involvement in service delivery. For example, Lagos state had a sustainable development plan, and he was well aware that both internal and external revenue generation would be insufficient to achieve the goal. As a result, the Lagos state entered into agreements with private companies to construct, run, fund, and transfer on behalf of the government. The Nigerian government should implement the same scheme to minimize national borrowing and spending on road infrastructure. Infrastructure growth would result in adequate and affordable infrastructure, jobs, rural development, and taxation as a source of revenue for the government. PPP has been used successfully in the provision of infrastructure all over the world. According to Oyeweso (2011), Nigeria has a significant infrastructure deficit as a result of past and present leaders' irresponsibility in infrastructure provision. Governments will increase infrastructure provision by PPP. Wright (2001) believes that PPP provides local governments with alternative sources of capital funding and management capabilities for new or upgraded infrastructure, as well as new opportunities. Construction services, management, finance, and operational expertise can be combined in the private sector. Because of globalization and new technology, the direct supply of goods and services is no longer desired on a global scale, necessitating a complex and innovative form of politics in response.
PPP allows the government to focus and commit more money than it would if traditional procurement approaches were used. It's analogous to taking out a mortgage, with government entities forced to pay the true market rate for money. In exchange for assured leases, commercial companies supply the initial funding and, in principle, bear the risks associated with building and maintenance. This will allow them to cover their expenses while still making a profit. Instead of constructing new offices, schools, and IT facilities, local governments now lease them from commercial firms, ensuring a stable low income for the provider of these "asset-based services."

Challenges militating against PPP in Nigeria
Despite the above, there are several obstacles. The provision of facilities for the population is a critical feature of the government. Most Nigerians still regard the transfer of this responsibility to the private sector as gross inefficiency, especially when it is marred by controversies, as it is in Nigeria. Many commentators regard PPP as elitist, costly, and diversionary. Pricing is a significant economic impediment. Citizens are afraid that, if not curtailed, the leaders will borrow their collective future. Especially when there are no existing and/or efficient alternatives. Some pundits are very conservative, seeing PPP as a means of employing flexibility. entry into the public sector through powerful companies and multinationals motivated mainly by profit According to Oyedele (2013), PPP will always be a more costly form of financing capital projects due to the need to finance the income of private companies as well as the additional borrowing costs. This has resulted in a financial deficit for many public-sector organizations.
Furthermore, in the case of the Lekki/Epe Concession Venture, where the company raised the charges fees, this action caused severe mayhem among the populace. The Lagos state government must step in and provide an alternate path. This arose as a result of the fact that people do not necessarily agree with policy decisions. PPP has also been interpreted as an indication of the government's covert and conspiratorial relationship with large corporations. This is a face-saving arrangement for political patronage and electioneering funding. Another issue is the complexities of certain PPP agreements.
Most are built in such a way that they undermine the very foundation of democracy-government by the people, for the people.
The above concerns will only be addressed if the following recommendations are strictly followed: II.
The government requires absolute intent in terms of alliances, and private companies require complete involvement in delivering services to society. To encourage these participants to participate, the government should reduce its propensity to be overbearing. III.
Political insecurity has been a scourge in Nigeria, undermining the PPP's stronghold on the nation. The government requires a strong institution to oversee PPPs regardless of government changes. IV.
The legal/regulatory system, as well as government regulation, such as the (2004 Lagos Roads Law), must be free of any intervention. V.
Concerning PPP in Nigeria, the people are supposed to be taken along in policymaking. The case of the LCC and the residents of the Lekki-Epe toll road. There was a rise in toll fees, which made it difficult for residents of Lekki-Epe to pay the tax, and this prompted the government to create another alternative route. VI.
Proper risk control must be taken into account. There is also a need to develop capacity in both the private and public sectors.

METHODOLOGY
Exploratory and qualitative research designs were adopted. Data for the paper were gathered through secondary sources such as journals, articles, textbooks, magazines and bulletins.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO KNOWLEDGE
According to the findings of this report, a comprehensive survey on Public-Private Partnership and Infrastructural Growth was conducted in the past by scholars and social scientists, but it failed to recognize the function of policymaking in the initiation of PPP in the nation. A great policymaker is needed for every country to build infrastructure. The impact of policy on PPP in any country cannot be overstated or understated. This is the type of policy that will decide whether or not PPP is feasible. This work has thus acted as a wake-up call that policymaking is one of the determinants of PPP. It is the product of bad policymaking on the part of the government.

CONCLUSION
This paper investigated the Public-Private Partnership Policy Strategy on Road Infrastructure in Nigeria: Towards Sustainable Growth. The paper concluded that the challenge of infrastructure provision is too critical to be left exclusively in the hands of the government, highlighting the need for the private sector to play a role in infrastructure provision in Nigeria to supplement government efforts.
To succeed as a nation in improving infrastructure provision, the parties involved in the contracts must