Former Director-General of the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) and current Group Chief Economist at Afreximbank, Dr. Yemi Kale, has explained that describing an economy as “stable” does not necessarily mean citizens are free from hardship.

In a statement on Saturday, Kale said that when economists say an economy is stable, they usually mean that it has reached a point where it is no longer experiencing major fluctuations or disruptions.

“In practical terms, it suggests macroeconomic indicators are steady, predictability and confidence where businesses, investors, and consumers feel more confident making long-term plans and there are no immediate crises,” he noted.

Kale stressed, however, that stability in economic terms is different from the lived experiences of citizens. “Inflation falling from 25% to 12% and staying steady might be seen as stability. However, prices may still be very high compared to past years, meaning people continue to struggle,” he explained.

According to him, stability is essentially about predictability in key indicators such as inflation, exchange rates, and GDP growth. But families continue to face hardship if incomes remain low while the cost of food, housing, transport, and healthcare stays elevated.

The economist identified two main reasons stability can coexist with hardship. First, after a crisis such as a currency crash or hyperinflation, stability only means “the bleeding has stopped,” but citizens may still be hurting from the high cost of living established during the crisis. Second, he said there is often a lag effect where businesses and investors benefit first before the effects trickle down to households through jobs, wages, or cheaper goods.

“So, in summary, economic stability is like stopping a boat from rocking wildly but hardships persist if the boat is still far from shore. For citizens, stability may only mean less new hardship is being added, not that life has become easier yet. But the first step to reversing hardship is stability and stopping the bleed,” he concluded.

Kale emphasized that his explanation was a “purely technical, not political view.”