ABSTRACT
This
study examined the effects of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on the Manufacturing
Sector of Nigeria. The objective of this
work is to determine the effects of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on the Manufacturing
Sector of Nigeria. Specifically, this
study evaluated the long run and short run effects of foreign direct investments
on the manufacturing sector contribution to GDP of Nigeria and its effects on
manufacturing capacity. The study
adopted ex post facto research design.
A time series data from 1982 to 2016 was used for the econometric analysis. The
econometric analyses used for this study are Johansen Co-integration Test,
Vector Error correction model, and Wald test. The Econometrics Views (E-view)
version 8.0 statistical Package was used for the analysis. The result revealed
that there was a significant long term effect of foreign direct investment of
manufacturing to gross domestic product in Nigeria. Secondly, there was a significant short run
effect of foreign direct investment of manufacturing to gross domestic product
in Nigeria. Thirdly, there was a
significant long term effect of foreign direct investment on manufacturing
capacity in Nigeria. Finally, there was
a significant short run effect of foreign direct investment on manufacturing
capacity in Nigeria. Conclusively, the
study indicated that there is a long and short run effects from foreign direct
investment and its determinants to the performance of manufacturing sector of
Nigeria. The study recommended among other things that peaceful and healthy
business environment be created to retain and attract more foreign direct
investment to increase the long run increase in manufacturing output
sector.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Title Page i
Declaration ii
Certification iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgements v
Abstract vi
Table of Contents vii
List of Tables x
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 11
1.3 Objectives of the Study 12
1.4 Research Questions 12
1.5 Research
Hypotheses 13
1.6 Significance of the
Study 13
1.7 Scope of the Study 14
1.8 Limitation of the Study 14
CHAPTER 2 – REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Conceptual Review 15
2.1.1 Concept of foreign direct
investment (FDI) 15
2.1.2 Benefits of FDI to host
economies 19
2.1.3 The performance of manufacturing
sector of Nigeria 21
2.2 Theoretical Framework 25
2.2.1 Spillover
theory 25
2.2.2 Dependency theory 29
2.2.3 Industrialization theory 31
2.2.4 Growth theory 36
2.3 Empirical Framework 39
2.4 Summary of Literature
Review 48
CHAPTER 3 – METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Design 50
3.2 Nature and source of Data
Collection 50
3.3 Model variables and Model
Specification 50
3.3.1 The dependent variables 50
3.3.2 The independent variables 50
3.3.3 Control variables 52
3.4 Model Specification 54
3.5 Technique of Data
Analysis 55
3.5.1 Unit root test 55
3.5.2 Testing for lag structure 55
3.5.3 Co-integration test 56
3.5.4 Vector error correction model 56
3.5.5 Wald test 57
CHAPTER 4 – DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Data Presentation 58
4.2 Descriptive Analysis of the
Variables used 59
4.2.1 Manufacturing contribution to
gross domestic product (MGDP) 59
4.2.2 Manufacturing capacity
(MCAPACITY) 60
4.2.3 Foreign direct investment (FDI) 60
4.2.4 Real exchange rate (RER) 60
4.2.5 Infrastructural development 60
4.2.6 Unemployment rate 61
4.2.7 Political instability 61
4.2.8 Population 61
4.3 Unit Root Test 61
4.4 Lag Order Selection 63
4.5 Inferential Statistics,
Hypothesis Testing and Result Interpretations
63
4.5.1 The vector error correction model
(VECM) for model one 65
4.5.2 The vector error correction model
(VECM) for model two 70
4.6 Discussion of Result 73
CHAPTER 5
– SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Summary of Findings 75
5.2 Conclusion 75
5.3 Recommendations 76
5.4 Contribution to Knowledge 77
References 78
Appendixes
LIST
OF TABLES
Data
used in the study 58
Descriptive
statistics of research variables from 1982-2016 59
Unit
root result 62
VAR
lag order selection criteria for model one 62
VAR
lag order selection criteria for model two 63
Johansen
co-integration test result for model one 63
Vector
error correction model result for model one 66
Wald
test result for model one
67
Johansen
Co-integration test result for model two
68
Vector
error correction model result for model two 71
Wald
test for model two 72
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
TO THE STUDY
Foreign
direct investment are the net inflows of investment to acquire a lasting
management interest (10 percent or more of voting stock) in an enterprise
operating in an economy other than that of the investor. It is an investment made by a country, in the
form of either establishing business operations or acquiring business assets in
the other country, such as ownership or controlling interest in a foreign
company. In most developed and
developing countries today, one of the major channels of achieving a rapid
economic development, is to attract Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in
different sectors of the economy, most especially in the manufacturing sector
because of its well-known economic advantages. FDI provides much needed resources to
developing countries such as capital, technology, managerial skills, entrepreneurial
ability, brands, and access to markets, as they are essential for developing countries
to industrialize, develop, and create jobs attacking the poverty situation in
their countries (Chenery & Strout, 1966).
In the same vein, the World Trade Organization (1996)
observed that FDI occurs when an investor based in one country which is the
home country, acquires an asset in another country with the interest to manage
that asset. Commenting further, Chenery and Strout (1996) posited that FDI
inflow is expected to transfer technology, as well as increase managerial and
marketing skills to domestic industries in order to enhance their productivity
and economic growth to the wider economy of the host nation.
According to Adegbite and Ayadi (2010), FDI helps to fill
the domestic revenue-generation gap in a developing economy, given that most
developing countries’ governments do not seem to be able to generate sufficient
revenue to meet their expenditure needs. Other benefits are in the form of
externalities and the adoption of foreign technology. Externalities here can be in the form of
licensing, employee training and the introduction of new processes by the
foreign firms (Alfaro, Chanda, Kalemli-Ozean and Sayek 2006).
Also, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is seen as a way
of filling the gap between domestic available supplies of saving, government
revenue, human capital skills and the desired level of resources needed to
achieve growth and development targets. FDI
is believed to have filled the gaps in management, entrepreneurship and
technology through spillovers and other externalities. FDI
occurs when a firm invests directly in facilities to produce or market a
product in a foreign country (Hill, 2005), and is usually embarked upon by
Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) or Multinational Corporations (MNCs). MNEs or MNCs are firms that have business
facilities or interest spread over several countries, but controlled by a
central headquarter (Stonner, Freeman, & Gilbert, 2007). MNEs or MNCs are believed to improve the
foreign exchange position of a host country; its long-run impact may reduce
foreign exchange earnings in both the current and capital accounts of the
balance of payment (BOP).
Every country at one point or another seeks ways to
improve its economy either through internal business strategies and
re-strategizing or external adventures. So
when a country seeks outside its border for business enhancement, economic
emancipation and general improvement in its finances and economy, it is referred
to as foreign investment. FDI has been
further described as the long term investment reflecting a lasting interest and
control, by a foreign direct investor or parent enterprise, of an enterprise
entity resident in an economy other than that of the foreign investor (IMF,
1999). Many African countries including
Nigeria have reformed their economic policy, investment laws and financial
system, in order to provide a conducive environment for private investment
(African Economic Outlook, 2006). Sub
Saharan Africa as a region has to depend heavily on FDI for many reasons, some
of which are exchange of scientific research and technological collaboration
(Asiedu, 2001). Foreign direct
investment (FDI) has increased dramatically in the past twenty years and with
an alarming increase to become the most attractive and generally accepted type
of flow of capital across borders in both developed, developing and under
developed economies.
Maji
& Achegbulu (2011) stated that the possibilities of achieving rapid and
sustained development through effective use of FDI have been applied and
demonstrated by countries like Singapore, Hong Kong and Thailand. With this,
these countries today are known among other countries as the developed and
industrialized countries in the world.
In addition, McAleese (2004) states that FDI embodies
a package of potential growth enhancing attributes such as technology and
access to international market” but the
host economy by supplying capital, technology and management resources that would
otherwise not be available. Such
resource transfer can stimulate the economic growth of the host economy (Hill,
2000).
FDI is far more than mere capital, it is a uniquely
potent bundle of capital, contracts, managerial and technological knowledge with
potential spillover benefits for host country firms. Unlike other forms of capital flows, FDI has
proven to be resilient during crisis, (Lipsey, 2001). This is evident in the Latin America debt
crisis of the 1980s, during the Mexican crisis of 1994-95, and during the Asian
financial crisis of 1997-98. These traits have engendered an intense
competition for foreign direct investment by developing and transition
economies.
Most countries strive to attract Foreign Direct
Investment (FDI) in the manufacturing sector because of its acknowledged
advantages as a tool of economic
development. Africa and Nigeria in particular joined the
rest of the world to seek FDI as evidenced by the formation of New Partnership
for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), which has the attraction of foreign
investment to Africa as a major component. Improvements in economic policies
are needed to enhance macroeconomic performance and attain the minimum growth
rate required to meet the Millennium Development Goals set by the United
Nations. An increase in investment is
crucial to the attainment of sustained growth and development in the
country. This requires the mobilization
of both domestic and international finances. Given the unpredictability of aid
flows, the low share of the country in world trade, the high volatility of
short- term capital flows, and the low savings rate of the country, the desired
increase in investment has to be achieved through an increase in FDI flows, at
least in the short – run (De Gregorio, 2003).
Until recently, FDI was not fully embraced by Nigeria
and other African leaders as an essential feature of growth in the
manufacturing sector, reflecting largely fears that it could lead to the loss
of political sovereignty, push domestic firms into bankruptcy due to increased
competition and, if entry is predominant in the natural resource sector
accelerate the risk of environment degradation.
Akinlo (2006) argue that much of African skepticism toward foreign investment
is rooted in history, ideology, and the politics of the post – independence
period. They also argue that the
prevailing attitudes and concerns in the region are due in part to the fact
that policy – makers in the region are not convinced that the potential benefit
of FDI could be fully realized.
Although most of the concerns of Nigeria regarding
foreign investment are legitimate, for example, there is some evidence that the
activities of foreign oil firms in Nigeria have had perverse effects on local
environment (Ekpo, 2003). It has been
shown that if a host country creates conducive environment to investment, FDI
can play an important role in its development efforts. Its potential benefits include; employment
generation and growth by providing additional capital to a host country supplementing
domestic savings, integration into the global economy and transfer of modern
technology (Opaluwa, Ameh and Umeh, 2010).
The inadequacy of infrastructure has been one of the
major constraints for attracting foreign direct investment to the manufacturing
sector. On the other hand, the major weaknesses of the manufacturing
sector is its inability to create forward and backward linkages with the rest
of the economy. As a result, there was
weak raw material base resulting in excessive dependence on imported inputs;
poor technological base to support growth of manufacturing activities; obsolete
machinery and equipment as most plant equipment procured in the import
substitution era are ageing and wearing out.
Nigeria as the largest economy in Africa has attracted
significant amount of FDI inflow in recent years. The foreign direct investment inflow in
Nigeria increased from $193.2 million in 1986 to $1874.04 billion in 2002. For the periods of 2003 to 2013, it further
rose from $2005.4 billion to $5609 billion. The inflow of FDI as the percentage of GDP
increased from 0.93 percent in 1986 to 5.05 percent in 2009 but later declined
to 1.64 percent in 2010 and 1.07 percent in 2013 (UNCTAD, 2015).
However, according to UNCTAD (2015), Nigeria saw its FDI
inflow decline from 2010 to 2015 by 27% to $3.4 billion as the nation was hard
hit by the global drop in oil price, against this backdrop she accounted for
about 6% of FDI inflow to Africa and received approximately 31% of the
sub-regional total, with the oil and gas sector alone receiving about 70% of
the FDI inflow. This was as a result on the fact that FDI over the years
domiciled mainly in the now gloomy oil sector in Nigeria, hence contributing to
the underdevelopment of the manufacturing sector.
The sudden drop of FDI inflows in 2010 took place due
to recent events that occurred during the past administration. Among the events
majorly was the present of socio-political upheaval from some anti-social group
known as the “Boko Haram Sect” in the country especially in the Northeast which
is highly detrimental to the growth and health of the nation’s economy.
Okoli & Agu (2015) opined that the presence of the
terrorists – Boko Haram was a kind of a snail movement of the development
process and eventually a complete overhauling of the entire system, lack of
industrialization, capital flight and absence of technology transfers. This
makes the country economically unfriendly and non-conducive for investors to
thrive. Because, no investor will like to invest in a place where he will
suffer capital loss no matter how promising it will appear.
For a developing country like Nigeria, the inflow of
foreign capital may be significant in not only raising the productivity of a
given amount of labour, but also allowing a large labour force to be employed
(Sjoholm,1999). Domestic consumers may
also benefit from Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in that when the investment
is cost reducing in a particular industry, consumers of the product may gain
through lower product prices, hence another industry that uses this product
benefit from the lower prices. This creates profits and stimulates expansion in
the second industry. Additionally, if
the investment is product improving or product motivating, consumers benefit in
the form of better quality products or new products. For most countries, taxes on foreign profits
or royalties from concession agreements constitute a large proportion of total
government revenue.
The acknowledged benefits of the FDI seems to be more
than the demerits, and this seems to explain the current move of developing
countries, seeking to attract FDIs by removing the structural barriers and
encouraging foreign investors. Such encouragement includes offers of incentives
such as income tax holidays, import duties exemptions, and subsidies to foreign
firms. The trend of the foreign direct
investment in recent times whether public or private is positively related to
democratization and sound economic climate existing in the recipient developing
countries (Egwuatu, 2007). This
indicates that the more developing countries are favourable disposed to
democracy and sound economic policies, the more foreign direct investment they
can attract.
In another development, the low capacity utilization
of the manufacturing sector, estimated at below 30 per cent, is a major factor
responsible for the sector’s low contribution to the economy. The available production
capabilities in the Nigerian economy, the amount of investment goods and other resources
required to exploit the opportunities opened up by the SAP are so enormous that
a large component of external financing is needed. However, the policy indicates Nigeria’s high preference
for FDI as against any other type of foreign capital inflow for financing
development programmes.
In the modern world, manufacturing sector is regarded
as a basis for determining a nation's economic efficiency (Amakom, 2012). However, after the discovery of crude oil in
Nigeria in the late 1950s, the nation has shifted from its pre-eminent
developing industrial production base and placed heavy weight on crude oil
production (Englama, et al. 2010); not only has this jeopardized its economic
activities, it also aggravated the nation's level of unemployment. Nigeria as a
giant of Africa has for long been regarded as a nation blessed with abundant
human and material resources; however, the underutilization of these potentials
has amplified widespread poverty, low standard of living at individual level
and rising unemployment in the country as a result of incessant mono-economic
practice and drastic neglect of other sectors of the economy such as
agriculture, tourism, mining and the manufacturing industry.
In spite of the country's vast oil wealth, the World
Bank Development Indicators (2014) has shown that majority of Nigerians are
poor with 84.5 per cent of the population living on less than two dollar a day
based on a survey conducted in 2010 up from 63.1% reported in 2004 survey. The
United Nations Human Development Index (2014) also ranks Nigeria 152 out of 187
countries, which is a significant decrease in its human development ranking of
151 in 2004; and World Bank Development Indicators (2012) placed Nigeria within
the 47 poorest countries of the world. The issue of poverty can be easily
traced to mono-economic practice and underutilization of the nation’s endowed
resources, especially in manufacturing sector (Akinmulegun and Oluwole, 2013),
which could have opened up windows of opportunity in job creation and economic
development.
Anyanwu, (2001)
commented “prolonged economic recession occasioned by the collapse of the world
oil market from the early 1980 and the attendant sharp
fall in foreign exchange earnings have adversely affected economic growth and
development in Nigeria. Other problems
of the economy include excessive dependence on imports for consumption and
capital goods, dysfunctional social and economic infrastructure, unprecedented
fall in capital utilization rate in industry and neglect of the agricultural
sector among others”. Most importantly,
to put the country back on the path of recovery and growth will require
urgently rebuilding deteriorated infrastructure and making more goods and
services available to the citizenry at affordable prices. Anyanwu, 2001 proposes that given the
importance of high productivity in boosting economic growth and the standards
of the people, productivity measurement cannot but be of importance to both
policy makers and researchers. Productivity
measurement can be used to evaluate the efficient of an economy in relations to
others. Anyanwu further proposes high
productivity in the Nigerian manufacturing industry as a necessary condition
for the sectors’ recovery, achieving competitiveness, boosting the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) and uplifting the standards of living of the
people. Achieving high productivity
will require a frontal attack on the problems confronting the sector which are
low technological development, High cost of productivity, lack of access to
finance. This would imply a quantum leap
in output of goods and services. Ogbu
(2012) states that no other sector is more important than manufacturing in
developing an economy, providing quality employment and wages, and reducing
poverty. Increasing productivity should be the focus because many other
countries that have found themselves in the same predicaments have resolved
them through productivity enhancement schemes. For instance, Japan from the end
of the World War II and the United States of America from the 1970s’ have made
high productivity the centre point of their economic planning and the results
have been resounding.
Given the importance
of high productivity in boosting economic growth and the standards of living of
the people, it is necessary to evaluate the effects of FDI on the manufacturing
sector of the Nigeria. In the light of the foregoing,
there cannot be another appropriate time to evaluate the effects of FDI on the
manufacturing sector of the Nigerian Economy than now.
The economy of Nigeria had a lot of structural distortions
in the 1980’s. The economic policies
pursued prior to 1985 made the economy of Nigeria vulnerable to external
shocks. Consequently the 1986 budget sought to deemphasize controls and adopted
policy aimed at expanding the economy resources base. To attain this goal in
1986 budget at a time in the structural adjustment program which was launched
in July 1986 with the introduction of structural adjustment program came to
deregulation of the Nigerian economy.
The deregulation policy which the structural adjustment called for is
the process by which government removes unnecessary control which tends to
prevent the effective and efficient program of economic and business
activities. It can also be said to be
reduction or elimination of laws and regulations that hinder free competition
in supply of goods and services, thus allowing market forces to drive the
economy.
Aluko, M.O, Akinola, G.O, and Fatokun, S. (2004),
commented that one of the greatest problems of the Nigerian economy is the
problem of capacity utilization in the manufacturing sector. This problem became more pronounced and
aggravated by the structural adjustment programme and recently by globalization
and all that accompanied it. The deplorable
conditions of the manufacturing sector are attributed to a horde of factors
like lack of an enabling environment, which included policy and polity
instability, poor macro-economic
environment, poor legal environment
which could not guarantee property right and safety, and lack of good
governance. Others are poor and
inadequate infrastructure, poor implementation of incentives to manufacturing,
including export incentives, low access to investible funds due to
underdeveloped long-term capital market that match industrial projects needs.
Malik, A; Teal, F; and Baptist, S (2004), analyzed
that manufacturing activity can only flourish in a good investment climate with
the following features in place: physical infrastructure, financial markets and
creation of the enabling environment for investment and determine the
opportunities and incentives for firms to invest productively create job and
expand business. They identified three
problems as major constraints to the development of the manufacturing industry:
Infrastructural constraints, access to credit, and the broader macroeconomic
conditions affecting the demand for goods produced by the manufacturing sector.
The Nigerian government has adopted several policies
to attract FDI in this globalization era. Especially, the government implemented IMF
monitored liberation of its economy, invites foreign investors in the
manufacturing sector. The nation’s economic policies that helped in attracting
the foreign investment and foreign entrepreneurs to invest their resources in
Nigeria includes tariff concession on the imported goods, especially on
imported raw and input material for industrial use, policies on reduction of
corporate tax, tax relief for research and development and policies on joint
venture business.
Therefore, it is evident that if a host country like
Nigeria creates a conducive and friendly macroeconomic environment for
investors, FDI can play a crucial role in the manufacturing sector which will
carve out potential benefits which include employment generation, promotion of
citizen’s welfare and economic growth by providing additional capital to the
host country, stabilizing exchange rate, supplementing domestic savings and
transfer of modern technology.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The
manufacturing sector in Nigeria is seen to be tied to foreign investments
because of the purchase of capital equipment in other to facilitate growth and
development process. This has been a success in Nigeria until the early 1980s,
when oil market that was the major source of the nation’s foreign earnings
collapsed due to fall in prices. As a result, there was a reduction of foreign
investments gotten from the exportation of oil. This could not provide the
necessary stimuli for the growth and development in the manufacturing sector
(Akinmulegun & Oluwole, 2013).
Various
policy measures by government in Nigeria have been adopted in other to rectify
the problems associated with the country’s foreign earnings, but little was
achieved. Among these policies include the Restrictive Monetary Policy, the
Stabilization Measure of 1982 and the Stringent Measure of 1984, as well as the
Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) of 1986 whose aim was to reduce the high
dependency of crude oil as a major foreign exchange earner by promoting non-oil
exports especially the manufacturing products in the economy (Okoli & Agu,
2015). However, with the pursuant of these policies, Nigeria still recorded the
second largest recipient of FDI inflows among low-income countries (CBN, 2010).
It
is important to note that various factors are impeding the flow of FDI in the
Nigerian economy,
which has made other sectors mostly the manufacturing sector to suffer, as the
level of productivity and performance seems to be very low and poor. These
factors include: the present of social-political upheaval from some anti-social
group/terrorists known as the “Boko-Haram Sect”, insufficient human capital
skills, poor management of resources, weak or inadequate infrastructure,
corruption, political instability, and poor technological base to support the
growth of manufacturing activities and obsolete machinery and equipment (Opaluwa,
et al, 2012; Okoli&Agu, 2015; Fabayo, 2003; Eboh, 2011; Nnanna, et
al, 2004).
Therefore,
in the light of the above, this study examines the effects of FDI on the Manufacturing
Sector of Nigeria.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The main objective of this study is to determine the
impact of Foreign Direct Investment on the manufacturing sector of Nigeria.
The
Specific objectives are:
1.
To examine the long run effect
of Foreign Direct Investment inflow on the Manufacturing Sector Contribution to
Gross Domestic Product of Nigeria.
2.
To evaluate the short run
effect of Foreign Direct Investment outflow on the Manufacturing Sector to Gross
Domestic Product of Nigeria.
3.
To investigate the long
run effect of Foreign Direct Investment inflow on the Manufacturing Capacity of
Nigeria.
4.
To assess the short run effect
of Foreign Direct Investment outflow on the Manufacturing Capacity of Nigeria.
1.4
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.
How does the Manufacturing
Sector contribution to Gross Domestic Product respond to Foreign Direct
Investment in the long run?
2.
In what ways does the
Manufacturing Sector Contribution to Gross Domestic Product react to Foreign
Direct Investment in the short run?
3.
To what extent does
Manufacturing Capacity respond to Foreign Direct Investment in the long run?
4.
What is the effect of
Foreign Direct Investment on Manufacturing Capacity in the short run?
1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
The following hypotheses
stated in null form were tested in the study.
HO1. Manufacturing Sector contribution to Gross
Domestic Product does not significantly and positively respond to Foreign
Direct Investment in the long run.
HO2. Foreign Direct Investment do not have a
significant and positive effect on Manufacturing Sector contribution to Gross
Domestic Product in the short run.
HO3. The effect of Foreign Direct Investment on
Manufacturing Capacity is negative and insignificant in the long run.
HO4. Foreign Direct Investment do not have
significant and positive effect on Manufacturing Capacity in the Short run.
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
This study will act as a guide for policy debate in
the area of FDI in our economy. It is envisaged that the research findings will
be of the following specific significance.
It will serve as a guide to economic policy makers and
planners in future decisions concerning FDI.
The findings and recommendations of
this study will be of immense benefit not only to the government, but also to
other researchers and students for future research undertakings.
1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The scope of this study covers manufacturing
sector contribution to gross domestic product (MGDP), Manufacturing Capacity
(Mcapacity), foreign direct investment (FDI) and some of its determinants in
Nigeria from 1982 to 2016. This period
cuts across the military dictatorship and present democratic governance, the
period of regulated and deregulated economy (the period before, during and post
structural adjustment programme in Nigeria).
1.8 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
The basic limitation occurred in the process of
collection of data and other relevant materials for this study.
Again, we relied on secondary data for this work. Hence the work might not be free from the
problem of inadequacy and inconsistencies generally associated with data
collection. The limitations however do
not invalidate the conclusions reached on this study.
Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects
FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!
+(234) 0814 780 1594
Login To Comment