EFFECT OF MACROECONOMIC VARIABLES ON THE PERFORMANCE OF AGRICULTURAL SECTOR IN NIGERIA

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00009969

No of Pages: 188

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦10000

  • $

ABSTRACT

The study examined the effect of macroeconomic variables on the performance of agricultural output in Nigeria. The work aims at investigating the effect of interest rate (INTR), inflation rate (INFR), exchange rate (EXRT), government agricultural expenditure (GAEX) and trade openness (TOPN) on agricultural output  (AGDP) in Nigeria from 1981 – 2020.  The data set used for the study consists of annual time series obtained from Central bank of Nigeria Statistical Bulletin, National Bureau of Statistic and World Bank Development Indicator covering the period of the study.  Autoregressive Distributed lag (ARDL) form of Ordinary Least Square method was used for purposes of estimation. The independent variables that include interest rate, inflation rate, exchange rate, government expenditure, trade openness and agricultural credit guarantee loan (the control variable) were regressed against the agricultural output (predictor variable). The result of the stationarity test showed that all the variables were stationary at levels. The co-integration test revealed an evidence of long-run relationship between the selected macroeconomic variables in the study. The findings showed strongly that the independent variables positively influenced the criterion variable and therefore the model was fit for estimation. The result further revealed significant relationship between agricultural output and some macroeconomic variables (interest rate, exchange rate, trade openness and agricultural credit guarantee loan) while inflation and government expenditure showed insignificant impact on the criterion variable of agricultural sector performance. Based on these findings, the study recommended that Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) should make a single digit interest rate a policy for loans in the agricultural sector; government should take advantage of rising exchange rates in the country by encouraging export promotion strategies that will improve the sectors performance; government should improve the budget and the policy-making process that will enhance expenditure on the agricultural sector and also support farmers through the provision of inputs, subsidy and infrastructural development for increased agricultural production; government at all levels (Federal, State and Local governments) should prioritized agricultural spending which include investment in infrastructure, irrigation, research and development, modern machineries and equipment. This incentive, if adopted, will increase agricultural output and profitability, reduce food prices, and alleviate poverty; government should adopt measures and programmes that will ensure that its export products compete favourably with those of other countries, particularly producers of similar commodities globally.

 





TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page                                                                                                                                i

Certification                                                                                                                           ii

Declaration                                                                                                                             iii

Dedication                                                                                                                              iv

Acknowledgements                                                                                                                v

Table of Contents                                                                                                                   vii

List of Tables                                                                                                                          xii

List of Appendices                                                                                                                  xiii

Abstract                                                                                                                                  xiv

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION                                                                                       

1.1           Background of the Study                                                                                            1

1.2           Statement of the Problem                                                                                           9

1.3           Objectives of Study                                                                                                    13

1.4           Research Questions                                                                                                    14

1.5           Research Hypotheses                                                                                                  14

1.6           Scope of the Study                                                                                                      15

1.7           Significance of the Study                                                                                           16

1.8           Limitations of the Study                                                                                             17

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW                                                                          

2.1       Conceptual Framework                                                                                              19

2.1.1    Macroeconomic variables                                                                                          19

2.1.2    Selected macroeconomic variables                                                                            19

2.1.3    Relationship between macroeconomic variables and agricultural output              28

2.1.3.1 Interest rate and agricultural output                                                                           28

2.1.3.2 Inflation and agricultural output                                                                                 32

2.1.3.3 Government expenditure and agricultural output                                                       33

2.1.2.4 Exchange rate and agricultural output                                                                        35

2.1.2.5 Trade openness and agricultural output                                                                     37

2.1.4    Agricultural policy framework                                                                                   39

2.1.4.1 Colonial periods                                                                                                         40

2.1.4.2 The post-colonial periods                                                                                           42

2.1.4.3 Present day                                                                                                                 49

2.1.5    Impact of agricultural policy measure                                                                        51

2.1.5.1 Performance of Nigeria agriculture                                                                            51

2.1.6    Agricultural finance scheme   in Nigeria                                                                    53

2.2 Theoretical Framework                                                                                                    61

2.2.1 Exogenous theories of economic growth                                                                      61

2.2.2 Endogenous theories of economic growth                                                                    65

2.2.2.1 Physical capital based endogenous growth theories                                                  66

2.2.2.2 New economic growth theories (endogenous growth)                                              67

2.2.3 Summary of the theoretical framework                                                                         70

2.3 Empirical Review of Studies on Macroeconomic Policies and Agricultural Output    71

2.3.1 Summary of Empirical Review                                                                                     91

2.3.2 Summary of Literature Review                                                                                     100

 

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 

3.1       Research Design                                                                                                         102

3.2       Sources and Nature of Data                                                                                        102

3.3       Model Specification                                                                                                   103

3.4       Method of Data Analysis                                                                                            105

3.5       Description of Model Variables                                                                                 106

3.5.1    Control variable                                                                                                          109

3.5.2    Apriori expectations                                                                                                   109

3.6       Technique for Data Estimation                                                                                  110

3.6.1    T-test                                                                                                                           110

3.6.2    Unit root test                                                                                                               111

3.6.3    Co-integration test                                                                                                      112

3.6.4    Error correction model (ECM) or co-integration equation                                        113

3.6.5    F-test                                                                                                                           114

3.6.6    Coefficient of multiple determination (R2)                                                                115

3.6.7    Durbin watson test (DW)                                                                                            115

CHAPTER 4: DATA PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION                       

4.1       Data Presentation                                                                                                        116

4.2       Data Series Estimation and Analysis                                                                          118

4.2.1    Results of unit root test                                                                                                       118

4.2.2    Results of lag selection                                                                                                         119

4.2.3    Results of autoregressive distributed bound test                                                        120

4.2.4    Results co-integration test                                                                                          121

4.2.6    Results of Stability tests                                                                                             122

4.3       Hypotheses Testing                                                                                                    123

4.3.1    Test of Model Significance – F-ratio test                                                                   124

4.3.2    The hypotheses that test the impact of macroeconomic variables

 on the performance of agricultural output in Nigeria                                                125

4.4       Autoregressive Distributed Lag Regression Result                                                   126

4.5       Test of Individual Hypotheses                                                                                    128

4.6       Discussion on Findings and Result                                                                            130

4.7       Implication of the Result                                                                                             133

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1       Summary of Findings                                                                                                135

5.2      Conclusion      136

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                                      136

3.4       Contribution to Knowledge                                                                                        138

            References                                                                                                                  140

            Appendices                                                                                                                 153

 

 



 


LIST OF TABLES


                                                                                   

2.1: Summary of Literature Relevant to the Macroeconomic Variables and the

       Performance of Agricultural Sector                                                                                92       

3.1:  Apriori expectations                                                                                                       109

4.1   Selected Macroeconomic variables                                                                                117

4.2:  Summary result of unit root test                                                                                     118

4.3:  Bound Test                                                                                                                     121

4.4:  Co-integration Test                                                                                                         122

 

4.4:  Summary of the ARDL Regression Estimation Results for the Hypotheses on the Relationship between macroeconomic variables and the performance of Agricultural output in Nigeria.                                                                                            125

 

 

 

           

                                               


 

LIST OF FIGURES


      2.1 :    Visual Representation of conceptual framework                                      60

       4.1:     Akaike information criteria                                                                      119

                   4.2:      Test of stability result                                                                              123

                 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION


1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

In recent years, most of the discussions on macroeconomic policy in Nigeria have been on the effect of the dynamics of the macroeconomic variables on agricultural sector performance. This is because agriculture has been the pillar of the Nigerian economy and has contributed significantly to the national economy. The key impacts of the agricultural sector on Nigeria’s economy include the provision of food; contribution to the gross domestic product (GDP); provision of employment; provision of raw materials for agro-allied industries; provision of employment to a large number of educated, uneducated, and unskilled labour and generation of foreign exchange through the export of agricultural products. Thus, it will be appropriate to place greater emphasis on the output of the agricultural sector. Nigeria’s agriculture is made up of four sub-activities: Crop Production, Livestock, Forest and Fishing. The agricultural sector is the backbone of the Nigerian economy; it provides the basic ingredients for mankind and raw materials for industries. Cocoa, peanuts, sesame, kolanuts, palm oil, corn, rice, sorghum, millet, cassava (tapioca), yam, rubber, cattle, fish and timber are among the agricultural commodities produced in the country (Central Intelligence Agency,2019). Agricultural progress is required to improve the supply of raw materials for agro-based industries, particularly in our developing country. Agricultural performance is a measure of output per unit of input that allows more to be produced while maximizing the use and impact of scarce resources. Improved output in agriculture lowers the cost per unit of output, helping producers succeed in the current competitive business cycle and enabling agricultural-food systems to provide foods for consumers at lower prices (Global Agricultural Productivity, report, 2016). For an increase in agricultural output, the key factors are innovation, farm management systems, investment in new techniques, and research and development. Recently, agriculture remains an important part of the national economy for the increasingly growing populace with the challenge of providing both food security and safety and sustainable development and wealth creation. Notwithstanding the overall economic growth of a nation, it accelerates the growth of the industrial and services sectors.

The improvement in agriculture through policies has been fair despite the different agricultural programmes in Nigeria. Since the 1970s, different programmes have been presented and executed by the government to improve the sector. These programmes were introduced to encourage mechanized, large-scale farming by the federal and state governments. They include: the National Accelerated Food Production Programme (1972); Operation Feed the Nation (1976); River Basic and Rural Development Authority (1976); Green Revolution Programme (1980); the National Fadama Development Programme (1990) and the National Special Programme on Food Security (2002). The agricultural sector has witnessed remarkable policy changes since the Nigerian Vision 20: 2020 (NV20:2020) was launched in 2009. The first implementation plan (2010-2013) was ongoing when the Agricultural Transformation Agenda (ATA) came on stream in 2011 and lasted till 2015. In August 2016, the Agriculture Promotion Policy (otherwise known as the Green Alternative) was launched and is reshaping the direction of agricultural development in the country. As the nation experiences these different phases of strategic planning, there has been no systematic framework for reviewing the performance of the sector holistically to provide evidence to guide policy decisions and development strategies (Olamola and Nwafor, 2018).

Macroeconomics deals with the performance, structure, behaviour and decision-making of an economy as a whole. Usually, the performance of the national economy is implemented through two sets of macroeconomic policy tools: monetary and fiscal policy. Monetary policy is described as a deliberate action by the monetary authority to control the supply of credit to achieve certain broad economic objectives, which include price stability; maintenance of the balance of payments equilibrium; promotion of employment and output growth and sustainable development (Falade and Folorunson, 2015). Fiscal policy involves the use of parameters such as taxation, budgets, and quotas that will influence government revenue and expenditure with a view to achieving macroeconomic objectives. The changes in macroeconomic variables directly come from the implementation of monetary and fiscal policies that affect agricultural output. Such changes are observed through their influence on the exchange rate, inflation rate, net export, interest rate, government expenditure, and money supply (Kadir and Tunggal, 2015). Contractionary monetary policy decreases the supply of money available in circulation, thus increasing the interest rate and decreases the accessibility of credit, causing relative prices of agricultural products to increase, while expansionary monetary policy increases the supply of money available in circulation, which lowers or drives down the interest rate. By implication, lower interest rates reduce the cost of borrowing money for short-term farm inputs such as fertilizer, seed, and chemicals and long-term capital investment, which includes machinery and land. An expansionary fiscal policy increases the level of aggregate output and demand for agricultural products as government expenditure increases through reductions in taxation. An increase in aggregate demand drives up agricultural production in the economy and thus leads to an increase in employment, profitability, and investment. While contractionary fiscal policy increases tax rates and decreases government expenditure. Thus, changes in macroeconomic policy have become increasingly significant within the agricultural sector, such that it has become more dependent on macroeconomic indicators and more vulnerable to variations in interest rates, inflation rates, exchange rates, government spending and international growth rates ( Eyo, Nwaogu and Agenson,2020; Awolaja and Okedina, 2020; Abubakar, 2019; Adekunle and Nduka, 2018 and Anowor, Ukweni and Martins, 2013).

The Nigerian agricultural sector is one of the most heavily regulated sectors of the Nigerian economy. Though CBN usually regulates the rate of bank credit to the agricultural sector due to its relevance in the provision of raw materials for industries and most importantly, the provision of food for the teeming Nigerian population and also serves as a source of foreign exchange for the economy (Adofu, Abula and Audu., 2010). Onyishi, Arene, and Ifiorah (2015) show that the interest rate is an important determinant of aggregate credit volume to the agricultural sector in Nigeria. Adofu, et al., (2010) identified among other variables, that interest deregulation has a significant and positive impact on agricultural productivity in Nigeria and also enhances economic activity by bridging the gap between the savers and the investors. Kolawole (2013) stressed that agricultural output must be increased for the benefit of rural and urban dwellers alike. The possible ways forward, among others, include the provision of finance through cheap access in the form of low-interest rates from rural banks specializing in the provision of finance to small farmers. Asekome and Ikojie (2018) observed the significance of interest in agricultural investment in Nigeria. They believe that the lending rate determines the return on agricultural investment, and that because the lending rate translates into a cost of capital, the relationship has a direct impact on agricultural investment.

Agricultural input prices have increased globally over the years, and this has called for serious concerns among policymakers. Agricultural performance is sensitive to changes in prices of fuel, fertilizer, and chemicals, labour, and seeds. High prices of most agricultural inputs constrain the development of efficient farm input distribution systems and also predispose farmers to sell the output at high prices after harvest. For example, higher energy-related production costs would generally lower agricultural output, raise prices of agricultural products and reduce farm income regardless of the reason for the energy price increase (Sands and Westcoll, 2011). Also, value addition makes agricultural products more competitive in the global market as well as earns farmers the maximum returns (Muraya and Ruigu, 2017). Farmers export semi-processed agricultural products, which are often low in value, and these form a significant percentage of the entire agricultural-related exports. The relatively high production costs and inability to add value to agricultural output make exports less competitive globally.

Exchange rate or export price competitiveness is a vital component of the macroeconomic in assessing agricultural performance in Nigeria. Exchange rate devaluation stimulates exports and curtails imports, while overvaluation harms exports and stimulates imports. However, devaluation may not result in increased exports because exchange rate movements affect agricultural exports not only through their depreciation but also through their variability (Partnership Initiatives in the Niger Delta, 2017). Since most international agricultural transactions are in the US dollar, there is a need to recognize the impact of fluctuating currency on businesses and consider ways to manage the variability (risk). Exchange rate risk may be managed in two ways. First, a producer can hedge transactions in the futures or options market. Secondly, they can hedge through an exchange rate forward or options contract with a bank (Alberta, 2019). Variability in exchange rate discourages agricultural firms from undertaking investment, innovation, and trade. Also, it deters firms from entering into the export market, thereby weakening investor interest in agricultural sectors. Finally, it may raise the price of imported inputs such as seeds and fertilizers, thereby reducing the output of agricultural commodities and the income of farmers (Gatawa and Mahmud, 2017).

Government expenditure on agriculture is important for the sustainable growth of the performance of the agricultural sector in Nigeria. The government solely finances agricultural development due to the presence of externalities, high risk, and inadequacies in agricultural institutions, which discourage investment in agriculture (Mogues, Yu, Fan and McBride, 2012). Aina and Omojola (2017) noted that increased budgetary allocation to the agricultural sector improves the provision of infrastructural facilities such as a good road network and electricity to rural farmers. With more efficient targeting of government through infrastructural development, it stimulates growth in the agricultural sector, which ultimately leads to higher wages and lower food prices and hunger (Gilberto, 2012). Also, government investment in research and development, irrigation and extension services can increase the profitability of private investment. For example, when road infrastructure reduces the cost of transportation and thus the cost of agricultural inputs and output, or when investments in research and development result in crop varieties with higher yields, bringing greater revenues and profits for agricultural enterprises. In this sense, government investment can expand the opportunity set for market actors and induce more (that is, a crowd in) private investment. However, public investment can have a crowding-out effect through macroeconomic effects. An increase in interest rate raises the cost of borrowing and consequently reduces the profitability of private investment. Consequently, less private investment will be undertaken than would occur without this increase in the cost of capital (Mogues, et al., 2012).

From an international perspective, the link between agricultural output and trade openness may suggest that trade liberalization goes along with economic development. Trade liberalization increases the availability of goods and services to consumers and also expands the opportunities for the agricultural sector by enhancing market competitiveness as well as increasing investment while raising agricultural output. Furthermore, factors of production such as capital and labour tend to be encouraged and motivated through trade policy reforms that ultimately increase welfare with the efficient allocation of domestic resources (DeSilva, Malaga and Johnson 2014). Trade openness causes domestic resources to be more efficiently used, which reduces the production of import substitutes and, finally, strengthens the production of exportable products. Through trade liberalization, new services are made available to agricultural producers in the form of new technology, new ideas and managerial skills. Domestic producers use these to bring innovation, invention and efficiency to domestic producers and thus enable them to meet foreign competition. These factors stimulate productive domestic investment and invariably maximize the welfare of the people, creating output expansion as well as an increase in export revenue and boosting growth (Alicia, Antonio, Osualdo and Richard, 2014). However, while trade openness may make agricultural exports possible, it also makes farmers' income more vulnerable to price variability (risk).

In the light of macroeconomic linkages with agricultural sector performance, some empirical evidence on the effect of interest rate on agricultural performance was documented. The results of empirical studies from sub-Sahara Africa on the effect of interest rate on agricultural output show that a high interest rate decreases the accessibility of credit, which in turn lowers the level of agricultural performance (Agunuwa Inaya, and Proso 2015; Kolawole, 2013 and Onyishi, et al., 2015). Documented evidence on the effect of a high inflation rate on agricultural output traces its findings to the effect of higher input prices on agricultural output. Input price inflation reduces agricultural output while increasing farm product prices and decreasing farm income (Dorward, 2013; Hermmiing, 2018; and Sands and Westcott, 2011). Studies on the effect of the exchange rate on agricultural output provide evidence of exchange rate fluctuation (Akinniran and Olatunji, 2018; Gatawa and Muhmud, 2017). Moreso Zia and Mahmood (2012) and Oye , Lawal, Eneogu and Ise (2018) empirically observed that exchange rate devaluation stimulates exports. Abula and Ben (2016) and Ewubare and Eyitope (2015) found a clear relation between government expenditure and agricultural output in Nigeria. In the case of the Philippines, Gilberto (2012) pointed out that the provision of rural infrastructure significantly improves agricultural performance. Regarding the effect of trade openness (which most studies look at as trade liberalization) on agricultural output, the empirical evidence varies; that is, trade openness does or does not improve efficiency in the agricultural sector (Anowor, et al., 2013; De Silva, et al., 2014; Djokoto, 2013 and Ojeyinka and Adegboye, 2017).

From the foregoing, it is apparent that there exists much literature on the effect of individual macroeconomic variables on agricultural performance. However, much attention has not been given to how these macroeconomic indicators uniformly affect the performance of the agricultural sector in Nigeria. This, therefore, raises the question of whether the low performance of agriculture is associated with macroeconomic variables that do not spur growth in the agricultural sector. The study seeks to empirically examine the effects of selected macroeconomic variables on the performance of the agricultural sector in Nigeria.

 

 

1.2      STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Agricultural performance is usually measured by trends in total agricultural production, food production and agricultural exports. Agriculture has remained the basis of Nigeria and most countries in the world as it provides the main source of livelihood. Agriculture serves different purposes in different sectors, such as the industrial and non-industrial sectors. These have, over the years, directly and indirectly, made known the importance of agriculture for any country. As for Yakubu and Akanegbu (2015), the sector accounts for approximately 40% of the gross domestic product (GDP), employs approximately 65-70% of the labour force, is a major source of foreign exchange, and provides a large share of basic food for survival and income to a large portion of the teeming population. In addition, it provides the bulk of the capital for industrial takeoff, thus serving as a forward linkage effect to output utilization. Prior to the economic recession in 2016, agriculture's positive contributions to the economy were instrumental in sustaining economic growth and stability. The bulk of food demand was supplied from domestic output, thereby solving the need to utilize limited foreign exchange resources on food importation. Also, stable growth in agricultural exports leads to a favourable balance of trade and the local processing industries obtain regular supplies of raw materials from the agricultural sector, which helps to provide some desirable linkages between agriculture and the rest of the economy. Contrary to expectations, the agricultural sector has underperformed in many regards. According to Romanus, Adeleje and De Alwis (2020), from the period 2016–2019, agriculture’s contributions to the economy in terms of output growth, employment, adequate food supplies, investment capital, and linkages with the rest of the economy became relatively insignificant. This development was reflected in the rising food prices and inflation rate, increase imports of food and agricultural raw materials for local industries and a relative decline in agricultural export earnings.

There has been a growth in documented literature both in developing and emerging economies examining the linkage between macroeconomic variables and the performance of the agricultural sector (Ali, Ali, Fatah and Ariff, 2010; Dalamini, Tijani and Masuka, 2015; Ogunjinmi, 2021; Osuji, Tim-Ashama, Okwara, Effiong and Anyanwu, 2020 and Victor,  Okoro, Bello and Alozie 2019). Despite this, to the best of the researcher’s knowledge, there is a presence of scarcity in studies empirically analyzing the influence of macroeconomic variables on the performance of the agricultural sector in Nigeria. Previous studies have been on the relationship between individual macroeconomic variables and performance of agricultural sector in Nigeria (Anina and Omojola, 2017; Abubaka, 2019 and Ibekwe, 2020). This, therefore, necessitates adoption of selected macroeconomic variables that collectively have a substantial effect on the performance of the agricultural sector in Nigeria.

The Understanding of the nature of relationship between the performance of the agricultural sector and its macroeconomic variables (interest rate, inflation rate, exchange rate, government agricultural expenditure and trade openness) is important in determining growth. This will help investors in agriculture with their investment decisions and the government in choosing the economic policies and actions that will drive the economy to attain economic growth. Many researchers and governments, in collaboration with the Central Bank of Nigeria, have conducted studies to investigate the extent to which macroeconomic variables influence the performance of the agricultural sector in Nigeria (Mbutor, Ochu and Okafor, 2013 and Adamgbe, Belonwu, Ochu, and Okafor, 2020).

The agricultural sector requires a lot of credit to finance current operations and capital investment needed to support the sector in the area of new techniques and facilities. Provision of credit to farmers to finance their current operations has been inadequate due to high interest rate charges. According to Asekome and Ikojie (2018), interest rates determine the return on agricultural investment and thus have a direct impact on agricultural sector performance. A lower interest rate reduces the cost of borrowing money for short-term inputs such as fertilizer, seeds, livestock expenses, chemicals and long-term capital investments, which include machinery and land. This can enhance productivity and overall performance of the agricultural sector. Also, if the regulatory authorities could carefully monitor expansionary pressure on the economy, they would develop more effective policies.

The general price rise in the economy (the inflation rate) has its implications on the performance of the agricultural sector. Oluwafemi (2012) observed that it is only in the midst of price stability that sustainable growth can be achieved. Erratic price behaviour is a disincentive to producers and consumers, and it can also discourage producers from investing in their farm enterprise. To avoid the effect of inflation on agricultural sector output, the Central Bank of Nigeria ensures that the price level remains stable. This can be achieved by implementing prudent monetary and fiscal policies that guard against inflation.

The agricultural sector is largely affected by exchange rate fluctuations. There is evidence to suggest that changes in exchange rate policy have significant consequences for a country’s domestic relative prices, particularly with respect to the agricultural sector’s importation of raw materials, farm implements, and the exportation of its output (Iheanachor and Ozegbe, 2021). However, the influence of exchange devaluation has useful relevance to the performance of agriculture in Nigeria. For instance, the introduction of devaluation in 2015 resulted in the competitiveness of Nigeria's products compared to foreign products in both local and international markets as the prices of most imported products have more than doubled while Nigeria’s export prices are lower. Thus, this led to import substitution and increased export opportunities, thereby helping to support government trade policy. This evidence will enable the Central Bank of Nigeria to strengthen the naira and also restore the international competitiveness of the economy.

Normally, the government provides capital to support a wide range of services and infrastructure aimed at increasing output. At various times, the government has provided soft loans through the Agricultural Development Banks, Agricultural Credit Guarantee Scheme Loan, etc for provisions of improved varieties of seeds, livestock, fertilizers, agro-chemicals, irrigation and also has attracted foreign aid to individuals and agro-allied companies in Nigeria (Ofoegbu, Malanga and Igwe, 2018). The rate of government budgetary allocation towards agriculture has consistently been inadequate and short of expectations despite the assumed interests of the respective governments in recent years (Famobiele, 2013). For example, over the last two decades, the government allocated less than 2% of the total federal budget to agriculture, which contributed 2% of GDP (Adambge, et al., 2020).

The performance of Nigeria's agricultural sector and its export sub-sector is a function of trade liberalization. This function has not been adequately performed in the Nigerian environment (Anowor, 2013). Trade integration (both domestic and foreign) has not substantially enhanced or promoted market competitiveness as well as increased investment in commodity exports. On the other hand, to improve agricultural output, the sector requires trade openness to benefit from technology transfer that integrates the economy into a global supply chain that will create more job opportunities. Where these innovations are not forthcoming, agricultural output techniques may be stagnant. In Nigeria, technical innovation has not adequately made new services available to agricultural producers in the form of new technology, new ideas, and managerial skills. Constraints on agricultural sector performance have been in the form of trade barriers, which impose substantial costs on consumers, distort patterns of production and trade, reduce economic efficiency and cause environmental damage. Due to lack of supportive facilities, agricultural growth and competitiveness declined in their performance.

The issues discussed so far all end up in making the agricultural sector performance in Nigeria very low. The fundamental problem is how to improve the agricultural sector's output. Taking the average production capacity of the agricultural sector in the past 10 years, Nigeria's agriculture was substantially lower. Against this background of low agricultural sector output, there is a need for empirical evidence on the relationship between the selected macroeconomic variables and agricultural sector performance in Nigeria. 


1.3      OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

Based on the above-stated problems, the primary objective of the study is to examine the effect of macroeconomic variables on the performance of the agricultural sector in Nigeria. The specific objectives of the study aim to accomplish are as follows: to

i) determine the effect of interest rate on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.

ii) analyze the effect of inflation on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.

iii) examine the effect of government agricultural expenditure on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.

iv) investigate the effect of the exchange rate on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.

v) show the effect of trade openness on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.


1.4      RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The study will be guided by the following questions:

i) How does interest rate affect the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria?

ii) In what way does inflation affect the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria?

iii) How does government agricultural expenditure affect the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria?

iv) To what extent does exchange rate affect the agricultural gross domestic product agricultural in Nigeria?

v) To what extent does trade openness affect the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria?

 

1.5      RESEARCH   HYPOTHESES

Based on the above objectives and research questions, the following hypotheses are stated to guide the study:

H01: There is no significant effect of interest rate on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.

H02: Inflation rate does not have a significant effect on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.

H03: There is no significant effect of government agricultural expenditure on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.

H04: Exchange rate does not have a significant effect on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.

H05: Trade openness has no significant effect on the agricultural gross domestic product in Nigeria.


1.6     SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study investigated the effect of macroeconomic variables on the performance of agricultural output in Nigeria. Interest rate, inflation rate, exchange rate, agricultural government expenditure, and trade openness were chosen as macroeconomic factors. These variables were selected based on their strength as economic indicators.

The study covered a period of thirty-nine years (1981 to 2020) using annual time series data. The choice of the period is based on the availability of data; the coverage period of economic liberalization and other economic reforms and policies in Nigeria during the study period. The effects of these reforms and policies on interest charges on agricultural loans and advances, government agricultural expenditure, exchange rate, inflation, and trade openness on the performance of the agricultural sector are important to this study.


 

1.7      SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

To the government: In the past, the implications of macroeconomic indicators and agricultural output research were not considered among planning priorities because of insufficient information on the relationships. There is sufficient interest in recognizing the implications for research priority setting currently. Information on growth in agriculture will make government involvement in the agricultural sector pervasive and significant. The government will formulate and design appropriate policies to impact agriculture and other complementary policies that stimulate the performance of the agricultural sector, for example, macroeconomic policies. Generally, the intended impacts of government agricultural policies are to lower the cost per unit of output through higher-yielding crop varieties, better livestock breeding practice and more efficient supply of seedlings, fertilizer and pesticides, help producers succeed in the competitive business cycle by reducing the cost of cultivation; improve rural infrastructure as the road is crucial to raising agricultural performance through a reduction in transportation costs and loss of perishable produce; and enable agricultural food systems to provide foods for consumers at lower prices.

To potential investors: Substantial improvement in the performance of the agricultural sector is needed to combat poverty and realize food security and nutritional goals. There is growing evidence that improved performance of the agricultural sector is among the most efficient ways to reduce poverty and hunger. Investors can generate a wide benefit from the impact of the macroeconomic variables on the performance of the agricultural sector. The effects of these macroeconomic indicators can be short-term, medium-term, or long-term on the performance of agriculture. This study provides prospective and current investors with knowledge and vital information on factors affecting agricultural growth.

To researchers: This study explains an area that has not been deeply researched, and thus, this study has formed a foundation where other researchers could confirm, develop, or enrich the study findings. This research would also supplement studies on another related area of subject matter. The finding can only be generalized to these macroeconomic variables, and students can carry out further studies to capture the effect of additional macroeconomic variables on the performance of agriculture in Nigeria.


1.8       LIMITATIONS OF STUDY

This study focused on the effect of macroeconomic variables on the performance of the agricultural sector in Nigeria. Like other studies on macroeconomic variables, monthly, quarterly, and annual time series data can be obtained from the National Bureau of Statistics and Central Bank of Nigeria. There was a limitation of timing in data collection as the researcher was faced with the problem of collecting data to date. This, therefore, resulted in limiting the annual time series data to 2020. Also, another limitation of the research is the fact that it focuses mainly on the Nigerian economy.

The problem of power supply in developing economies like ours is another limitation. Inadequate power supply, associated with the poor funding of our utility providers, was a serious impediment to the research effort. Hence, the researcher relied on an alternative source of power supply to accomplish the work.

However, these limitations did not affect the outcome of reliable evidence on the study of the relationship between macroeconomic variables and the performance of the agricultural sector in Nigeria because of the econometric technique and analytical tools employed.

 

                                                                

Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects

FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!

+(234) 0814 780 1594

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.

Ratings & Reviews

0.0

No Review Found.

Review


To Comment


Sold By

ProjectShelve

8131

Total Item

Reviews (31)

  • Anonymous

    3 weeks ago

    This is so amazing and unbelievable, it’s really good and it’s exactly of what I am looking for

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    Great service

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    This is truly legit, thanks so much for not disappointing

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    I was so happy to helping me through my project topic thank you so much

  • Anonymous

    1 month ago

    Just got my material... thanks

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Thank you for your reliability and swift service Order and delivery was within the blink of an eye.

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    It's actually good and it doesn't delay in sending. Thanks

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    I got the material without delay. The content too is okay

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Thank you guys for the document, this will really go a long way for me. Kudos to project shelve👍

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    You guys have a great works here I m really glad to be one of your beneficiary hope for the best from you guys am pleased with the works and content writings it really good

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Excellent user experience and project was delivered very quickly

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    The material is very good and worth the price being sold I really liked it 👍

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Wow response was fast .. 👍 Thankyou

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    Trusted, faster and easy research platform.

  • TJ

    2 months ago

    great

  • Anonymous

    2 months ago

    My experience with projectselves. Com was a great one, i appreciate your prompt response and feedback. More grace

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Sure plug ♥️♥️

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Thanks I have received the documents Exactly what I ordered Fast and reliable

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Wow this is amazing website with fast response and best projects topic I haven't seen before

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Genuine site. I got all materials for my project swiftly immediately after my payment.

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    It agree, a useful piece

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Good work and satisfactory

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Good job

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Fast response and reliable

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Projects would've alot easier if everyone have an idea of excellence work going on here.

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Very good 👍👍

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Honestly, the material is top notch and precise. I love the work and I'll recommend project shelve anyday anytime

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    Well and quickly delivered

  • Anonymous

    3 months ago

    I am thoroughly impressed with Projectshelve.com! The project material was of outstanding quality, well-researched, and highly detailed. What amazed me most was their instant delivery to both my email and WhatsApp, ensuring I got what I needed immediately. Highly reliable and professional—I'll definitely recommend them to anyone seeking quality project materials!

  • Anonymous

    4 months ago

    Its amazing transacting with Projectshelve. They are sincere, got material delivered within few minutes in my email and whatsApp.

  • TJ

    5 months ago

    ProjectShelve is highly reliable. Got the project delivered instantly after payment. Quality of the work.also excellent. Thank you