ABSTRACT
This study set out to empirically examine the
effect of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on the Nigeria Economy between 1999
and 2012. The paper makes the proposition that there exists controversies over
the effect of FDI on the economic growth of developing nations. However, the
results obtained showed that FDI has some positive spillovers on the Nigerian
economy hence the need to embark on the policies that would help to bring about
greater FDI inflows. The plan of the study shall be organized into five chapters for easy
presentations: The chapter one contains the introduction of the study which
deals with the background of the study, the problems that have hindered FDI
impact to Nigerian Economy from 1999-2012, the objectives on why the study is
being carried out, the research questions looks at various important
questions this study will be attempting
to answer on the level of the impact of FDI on the Nigerian Economy, the
methodology that is the quantitative and descriptive technique that would be
used in analyzing data collected, the statement of hypothesis to ascertain
whether there is any significant relationship between Foreign Direct Investment
and Economic growth, the areas from where the data will be sourced, a
justifications on why the research is being carried out, the scope and time
period that the project would cover. Chapter two is the literature review that
looks at the various scholars and schooling articles that have contributed
immensely to the subject in question,
Review of theories and trends of FDI that reflect the need for FDI. The chapter
three contains the Methodology and theoretical framework which gives a
descriptive and quantitative analysis of the data collected. The chapter four
involves the Empirical Results and Discussions that explains the various data
results and their implications.The chapter five gives a brief summary and
general conclusion of the results explained in chapter four and introduces some
recommendations for policy applications.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
CERTIFICATION
ii
DEDICATION
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iv
TABLE
OF CONTENT v
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE viii
ABSTRACT ix
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY 1
1.2 STATEMENT OF
PROBLEM 3
1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE
STUDY 5
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 5
1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS 5
1.6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
6
1.7 MODEL SPECIFICATION 6
1.8 SOURCES OF DATA 7
1.9 JUSTIFICATION OF
STUDY 7
1.10 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 7
1.11 LIMITATIONS OF THE
STUDY 7
REFERENCES 8
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE
REVIEW
2.0 INTRODUCTION 9
2.1 CONCEPTUAL ISSUES ON FOREIGN DIRECT
INVESTMENT 9
2.2
CONCEPT OF ECONOMIC GROWTH ON FDI 11
2.3
THEORIES OF FDI 21
2.4
GROWTH THEORIES 22
References 25
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.0
INTRODUCTION 27
3.1 THE INTEGRATIVE SCHOOL 27
3.2 METHODOLOGY 28
3.3 MODEL SPECIFICATION 29
3.4 INTRODUCTION OF
VARIABLES 29
3.5 EXPLANATION OF THE
A PRIORI EXPECTATION 30
3.6
SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF METHODOLOGY 31
3.7
CRITERIA FOR DECISION MAKING UNDER THE
REGRESSION ANALYSIS
REFERENCES 34
CHAPTER FOUR: EMPIRICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.0 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS 36
4.1 UNIT ROOT TEST 38
4.2 CO-INTEGRATION TEST 39
4.3 REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
AND FDI 40
4.3.1 REGRESSION COEFFICIENT 40
4.3.2 R-SQUARE, ADJUSTED R-SQUARE AND
DURBIN-WATSON STATISTICS
4.3.3 MODEL GOODNESS OF FIT 41
4.4 REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF DETERMINANT OF
FOREIGN DIRECT
INVESTMENT MODEL
4.4.1
CO-INTEGRATION TEST 43
4.4.2
REGRESSION COEFFICIENT 43
4.4.3 R-SQUARE, ADJUSTED R-SQUARE AND
DURBIN-WATSON STATISTICS
4.5
POLICY IMPLICATIONS 44
REFERENCES 46
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 SUMMARY 47
5.2 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 48
5.3 CONCLUSION 48
5.4
SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER FINDINGS 48
REFERENCES 48
BIBLIOGRAPHY 50
APPENDIX 59
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE
TABLE
4.0: SUMMARY STATISTICS OF THE VARIABLES 36
FIGURE
4.0: TREND IN GDP, GCF, EXPT, FDI, INFL, EXRT, DEBT
AND POLI
TABLE
4.1: UNIT ROOT TEST AT A LEVEL 38
TABLE
4.2: UNIT ROOT TEST AT FIRST DIFFERENCE 38
TABLE
4.3: JOHANSEN CO-INTEGRATION TEST 40
TABLE
4.4: STATIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS 41
TABLE
4.5: JOHANSEN CO-INTEGRATION TEST 42
TABLE 4.6: REGRESSION
ANALYSIS 43
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
TO THE STUDY
The
focus of this project is to study the effects of FDI on the Nigerian economy,
identifying factors and conditions that promote or retard development.
Developing countries are in a dilemma arising from the desire for foreign
capital for internal economic development, yet there is the fear that foreign
investors (which are already said to be at commanding heights of some sectors
of the economy) may wrest complete control of the international economy and
render it an appendage of the western economic hegemony.
However,
most of the economic blueprints that have been recommended for developing
economics are in agreement on the need for foreign capital. Thus, a developing
country may have to determine the actual sectors which have to attract foreign
private investment and also determine the optimum level of foreign investment
that is necessary in order to supplement its internal resources. Thereby,
maintaining a balance between economic development and economic independence.
(IMF, 2009).
The
impact of foreign direct investment has never been as important as it is now in
the early 21st century, nations are more linked through trade in
goods and services flow of money and investment. Owing to the enormous benefit
accrued, most countries strive to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) as it
is a proven tool of economic development. African and Nigeria in particular
joined the rest of the world in seeking FDI as evidenced by the formation of
the New partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), which has the attraction
of foreign investment to Africa as a major component (Funke and Nsouli
2003).
In the literature of Caves (1996), it was
observed that the rationale for increased efforts to attract more FDI stems
from the belief that FDI has several positive effects. Among these are
productivity gains, technology introduction of new processes, managerial skills
and know- how in the domestic market, employee training, international
production networks and access to markets.
An agreed framework definition of foreign
direct investment (FDI) exists in the literature, that is, FDI refers to the
net inflows of investment to acquire a lasting management interest (10percent)
or more of voting stock) in an enterprise operating in an economy other than
that of the investor. It is the sum of equity capital, reinvestment of equity,
other long- term capital, and short-term capital as shown in the balance of
payments. It usually involves participation in management, joint- venture,
transfer of technology and expertise. There are two types of FDI: Inward
foreign direct investment and Outward foreign direct investment; resulting in a
net FDI inflow (positive or negative) and "stock of foreign direct
investment”, which the cumulative number for a given period.
FDI an indispensable factor to the
economic growth of an economy is evident in the United States which is the
world's largest recipient of FDI and is consequently the world's strongest
economy. In the last 6 years America has benefited from the FDI through the
establishment of over 4000 new projects and 630,000 new jobs have been created
by foreign companies, resulting in .close to $314 billion in investment.
Foreign companies has in the past supported an annual US payroll of billion
with an average annual compensation of $68,000 per employee (UNCTAD, 2010)
Sub-Saharan Africa as a region now has to
depend very much on FDI for so many reasons, some of which is amplified by
Asiedu (2001). The preference for FDI stems from its acknowledged advantages
(Sjoholm, 1999; Obwonba, 2001, 2004). The effort by several African countries
to improve their business climate stems from the desire to attract FDI. In
fact, one of the pillars on which the New partnership for Africa's development
(NEPAD) was launched was to increase available capital to US$64billion through
a combination of reforms, resource mobilization and a conducive environment for
FDI (Funke and Nsouli 2003).
Recently, TNCs from developed and transition economies have
increasingly been investing in Africa over the past few years. They accounted
for 22 percent of flows to the region over the 2005-2008 period, compared to 18
percent in 1995-1999 investors from China. Malaysia India and the Gulf
Cooperation Council (GCC) are among the most active-although Africa still makes
up only a fraction of their FDI. Investors from Southern Africa and North
Africa have also raised their profile in the region. These new sources of
Investment not only provide additional development opportunities, but are also
expected to be more resilient than traditional ones, providing a potential
buffer against crises (UNCTAD, 2009).
Nigeria receives the largest amount of FDI in Africa. FDI inflows
have been on the increase over the course of the last decade; from
USD$1.14billion in 2001 and USD$2.1billion in 2004, Nigeria’s FDI reached
USD11billion in 2009 according to UNCTAD, making the country the nineteenth
greatest recipient of FDI in the world.
Hence, since FDI is seen a promising device for driving the
economy to desired heights, it is only rationale for Nigeria to increase her
revenues by increasing her efforts in attracting more of it.
1.2 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Unfortunately, the efforts of
most countries in Africa to attract FDI have been futile. This is in spite of
the perceived and obvious need for FDI in the continent, the development is
disturbing, sending very little hope of economic development and growth for
these countries. Nigeria as a nation has not been able to fully tap from her
resources.
Recent report has shown that
Nigeria due to her over-dependency on oil is fast loosing its leading role in
terms of attracting FDI in Africa to Egypt and South Africa, which were
successful in attracting FDI in diverse sectors of their economies (UNCTAD,
2009).
Nigeria’s
poor FDI record can be further adduced due to the following reasons:
Uncertainty: One of the reasons why
foreign investors are reluctant to invest in Nigeria, despite its enormous
profitable opportunities, is the relatively high degree of uncertainty in the
region, which exposes firms to significant risks. Uncertainty in the Nigeria
manifests itself in three different ways:
• Political instability: The region is
politically unstable because of the high incidence of wars, frequent military
interventions in politics, and religious and ethnic conflicts. Sachs and
Sievers (1998) have also argued that political stability is one of the most
important determinants of FDI in Africa. Example is the Bokoharam and Niger
Delta menace which have been reported to scare away investors (World Bank
2011).
• Macroeconomic instability: Instability
in macroeconomic variables as evidenced by the high incidence of currency
crashes, double digit inflation, and excessive budget deficits, has also
limited the regions ability to attract foreign investment. Recent evidence
based on African data suggests that countries with high inflation tend to
attract less FDI (Onyeiwu and Shrestha, 2004).
• Lack of policy transparency: In Nigeria
it is often difficult to tell what specific aspects of government policies are
in operation. This is due in part to the high frequency of government as well
as policy changes in the region and the lack of transparency in macroeconomic
policy. The lack of transparency in economic policy is of concern because it
increases transaction costs thereby reducing the incentives for foreign
investment.
Inhospitable regulatory environment: The
lack of a favourable investment climate also contributed to the low FDI trend
observed in the region. In the past, domestic investment policies––for example
on profit repatriation as well as on entry into some sectors of the
economy––were not conducive to the attraction of FDI (Basu and Srinivasan,
2002).
GDP growth and market size: Relative to
several regions of the world, growth rates of real per capital output in Africa
are low and domestic markets are quite small. This makes it difficult for
foreign firms to
exploit economies of scale and so
discourages entry. (Elbadawi and Mwega ,1997), show that economic growth is an
important determinant of FDI flows to the region.
Poor infrastructure: The absence of
adequate supporting infrastructure: telecommunication; transport; power supply;
skilled labour, discourage foreign investment because it increases transaction
costs.
Furthermore poor infrastructure reduces
the productivity of investments thereby discouraging inflows. Asiedu (2002b)
and Morrisset (2000) provide evidence that good infrastructure has a positive
impact on FDI flows to Africa.
Other factors that account for the low FDI
flows to the region but are rarely included in empirical studies––presumably
due to data limitations–– include:
High dependence on commodities: Several
African countries rely on the export of a few primary commodities for foreign
exchange earnings. Because the prices of these commodities are highly volatile,
they are highly vulnerable to terms of trade shocks, which results in high
country risk thereby discouraging foreign investment.
Corruption and weak governance: Weak law
enforcement stemming from corruption and the lack of a credible mechanism for
the protection of property rights are possible deterrents to FDI in the region.
Foreign investors prefer to make
investments in countries with very good legal and judicial systems to guarantee
the security of their investments.
Poor and ineffective marketing strategy:
In the past, African governments set up agencies to promote foreign investment
without taking adequate steps to lift the constraints on foreign direct
investment in the region. It is therefore not surprising that investment
promotion activities in the region have not been as successful as expected. For
example, in Nigeria, FDI promotion in the 1990s was accompanied by increased
political risk: frequent and abrupt changes in government; religious and ethnic
conflicts and border disputes. Also, FDI flows to
Nigeria fell to $6.1billion (N933.3billion) in 2010, a decline of 29% from the
$8.65billion (N1.33trillion) recorded in 2009 due to security treat in Niger
Delta (World Bank, 2011).
Apart from the idea that promotion
activities in Africa started earlier than necessary, there is also the problem
that Investment Promotion Agencies (IPA) created by domestic governments were
highly bureaucratic, expensive to maintain, and have not been successful in
reversing the declining trend in FDI flows to Nigeria.
1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE
STUDY
The broad objective is to examine the effect of FDI on economic growth
in Nigeria.
The specific objectives are to:
1.
Examine the nature and trend
of FDI in relation to the Nigerian economy.
2.
Verify the impact of FDI on
the economic growth in Nigeria.
3.
Investigate the effect of
some macro-economic indicators on
FDI
4.
Identify the constraints
inhibiting the flow of FDI, and how to alleviate these problems.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.
What is the nature and trend of FDI in
Nigeria?
2.
Has there been a positive or
negative impact of FDI on economic growth in Nigeria?
3.
How has the macroeconomic
indicators affected the level of FDI?
4.
What are the factors
inhibiting the flow of FDI in Nigeria?
1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
H0: There is no significant relationship between Foreign Direct
investment and Economic Growth in Nigeria.
H1: There is no significant relationship between Foreign between
positive or negative impact of FDI on economic growth in Nigeria?
H2: There is no significant difference between macroeconomic
indicators and how it affects the level of FDI?
1.6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The quantitative technique
that will be adopted in analyzing the data collected is ordinary least square
(OLS) method using economic view package (E-View) to analyze the impact of
Foreign Direct Investment on Economic Growth in Nigeria. Multiple regression
equations will also be adopted because multiple equations provide a better
representation of the real world which is relatively richer than a single
equation model.
Descriptive analysis, will in
this research work also be adopted in analyzing the trend of the different
variables mentioned above over the time period specified.
1.7 MODEL SPECIFICATION
The following model would be
adapted.
GDP = µ0 + µ1 INV + µ2 EXP + µ3 FDI + µ4 INF + U1t . . . (I)
FDI = bo + b1 GDP + b2
EXR + b3 EXD + b4 PI + U2t . . . (II)
Where,
GDP = Growth
Rate of GDP
INV = Domestic Investment Growth
(Proxy for Domestic Capital Stock)
EXP = Exports Growth
FDI = Foreign Direct Investment Growth
INF = Inflation Rate
EXR = Exchange rate
EXD = External debt
PI = Political Instability (dummy variable: 1 for democratic rule,
0 for militarily rule)
U1t = Error term for model 1
U2t = Error term for model 2
The a priori expectation patterns of the behaviour of the
independent variables in terms of their parameters to be estimated are:
µ1>0, µ2>0, µ3>0 and µ4<0
b1>0,
b2<0, b3>0 and b4<0
1.8 SOURCES OF DATA
Data used in the course of
this work will majorly be sourced from secondary sources of varied
organizations and individuals. Some of the sources include:
-
The Central Bank of Nigeria, which is the apex
bank in the country, relevant information will be gathered here.
-
UNCTAD, OECD and IMF
publications.
-
World Bank Reports
1.9 JUSTIFICATION OF STUDY
The observation of dwindling
Foreign Direct Investments and its impact on the economy over the years are the
major reasons why this study is pertinent and therefore a justification for
embarking on it.
The reasons are as
follows:
-
Policy makers will know the level of damage done
-
They will then know the
importance of effective policy making, knowing that lack of it is what has led
us to where we are today.
-
The awareness that the need
for conducive environment for FDI to thrive in, helps to bring about
development.
-
Finally, the realization that
development often comes through the diversification of the productive capacity
of the economy.
1.10
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This project will have as its
scope and time period, the years between 1970-2010 because 1970 marks the
beginning of the oil boom period (Anyanwu 1998) which had a serious impact on
the Nigerian economy. For the years 1970-2010, we will be looking at the
development plans, policies, programmes and reforms that have been in place and
how the economy has responded in these varying times.
1.11 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
One of the major constraints
is the problem of consistent and accurate data. Another, is the problem of
making assumptions which are necessary building blocks for any model to derive
logical conclusions but may not conform to reality, example is the dummy
variable assigned to political instability in the model.
Login To Comment