IMPACT OF CAPITAL FLIGHT AND EXTERNAL DEBT SERVICING ON AGRIBUSINESS SECTOR PERFORMANCE: THE NIGERIAN EXPERIENCE

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00009176

No of Pages: 131

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $


ABSTRACT

 

The study investigated the impact of capital flight and external debt servicing on agribusiness sector performance in Nigeria from 1970 to 2018. Agribusiness sector performance was measured by total contribution of agriculture output to aggregate gross domestic product of Nigeria while capital flight was measured by the residual method proposed by World Bank. External debt servicing was measured by the amount paid as interest for externally borrowed funds. Also, other variables included the model were interest rate differentials, inflation, exchange rate and political instability. The trend analysis conducted on the data showed that agribusiness performance (proxy, output), capital flight and external debt servicing accelerated over the period. Prior to the empirical analysis, the time series data were tested for unit root using Augmented Dickey-Fuller and Philip-Perron approaches to confirm the stationarity of data. Based on the unit root test results, it was found that the data were integrated at different levels, that is, a mixture of integration at level and first difference. Since the data were of mixed integration, it became appropriate to use the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) proposed by Paseran et al. (2001) for situations that data were integrated at level and first difference. Long-run relationship between agribusiness output and the explanatory variables were ascertained by the F-statistic (5.982448) of the ARDL bounds tests which was greater than the upper and lower bounds of the ARDL critical values. The adjusted Rof 0.948618 showed that capital flight, external debt servicing, interest rate differentials, inflation, political instability and exchange rate accounted for approximately 94.86% of the total variations in agribusiness sector output in Nigeria. The observed collective impact of the explanatory variables on the dependent variable in the long-run was significant as shown by the p-value (0.000000) associated with the F-statistic. In the long-run, amidst fluctuations in interest rate differentials, inflation, political instability and exchange rate, capital flight emerged with negative coefficient (-0.020140) and a p-value (0.0352) which implied negative and significant impact of capital flight on agribusiness output. Similarly, external debt servicing emerged with a negative long-run coefficient (-3.455434) and a p-value (0.0211) indicating negative and significant impact on agribusiness sector output. In the short-run, all the explanatory variables were significant in explaining changes in agribusiness sector output as their p-values were less than 0.05 at the recommended lag length. However, capital flight and external debt servicing had positive impacts with coefficient of 0.020140 and 3.455434, respectively. The short-run adjusted Rof 0.882637 indicated that the explanatory variables sufficiently explained about 88.26% of the total variations in agribusiness output and its significance confirmed by the p-value (0.0000) of the F-statistic associated with the short-run ARDL model. Granger causality test was also carried out and it revealed that agribusiness output Granger caused external debt servicing. Based on these findings, it was recommended among other things that, government formulate and implement policies that would decelerate capital flight and external debt servicing and enhance agribusiness output and overall economic performance of the country.






TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page                                                                                                                                i

Declaration                                                                                                                             ii

Certification                                                                                                                            iii

Dedication                                                                                                                               iv

Acknowledgements                                                                                                                v

Table of Contents                                                                                                                   vi

List of Tables                                                                                                                          vii

Abstract                                                                                                                                   viii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study                                                                                                  1

1.2 Statement of Problem                                                                                                       9

1.3 Research Questions                                                                                                          11

1.4 Objectives of the Study                                                                                                    12

1.5 Research Hypotheses                                                                                                        12

1.6 Justification of the Study                                                                                                  13

 

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Conceptual Framework                                                                                                    15

2.1.1 Concept of capital flight and external debt servicing                                                    15

2.1.2 Measurement of capital flight                                                                                       17

2.1.2.1 Residual method                                                                                                         17

2.1.2.2 Dooley method                                                                                                           19

2.1.2.3 Trade mis-invoicing method                                                                                      22

2.1.2.4 Hot money method                                                                                                     23

2.1.2.5. The asset method                                                                                                       24

2.2 Empirical Framework on Capital Flight and External Debt Servicing                                    28

2.3 Determinants of Capital Flight                                                                                         35

2.3.1 Macroeconomic instability                                                                                            35

2.3.2 Inflation                                                                                                                         39

2.3.3 Political instability                                                                                                        40

2.3.4    Rate of return differentials                                                                                         41

2.3.5    Capital inflows or foreign direct investment                                                              41

2.4       Determinants of External Debt Servicing                                                                  42

2.4.1    Inefficient trade and exchange rate policies                                                               43

2.4.2    Adverse exchange rate movements                                                                            43

2.4.3    Adverse interest rate movements.                                                                              43

2.4.4    Poor lending and inefficient loan utilization.                                                                         44

2.4.5    Poor debt management practices                                                                                44

2.4.6    Accumulation of arrears and penalties.                                                                      44

2.5       Nigeria’s External Debt Profile                                                                                    44

2.6       Nigeria’s External Debt Relief                                                                                   45

2.7       Theoretical Framework on Capital Flight and External Debt                                                46

2.7.1    The investment diversion theory                                                                                46

2.7.2    The debt driven capital flight thesis                                                                           47

2.7.3    The tax-depressing thesis                                                                                           48

2.7.4    The austerity thesis                                                                                                     48

2.8       Analytical Framework on Capital Flight and External Debt                                      50

2.8.1    Multiple regression analysis                                                                                       50

2.8.2   The granger causality test model                                                                                53

2.8.3    Estimation procedure                                                                                                  53

2.8.3.1 Unit root tests                                                                                                             54

  2.8.3.2 Co-integration equation                                                                                           55

 

2.8.3.3 The error correction model equation                                                                         55

2.9       Impact of External Debt Servicing on Agribusiness Sector Performance                55

2.10     Impact of Capital Flight on Agribusiness Sector Performance                                         56

 

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

 

3.1       Study Area                                                                                                                  57

3.2       Data Source and Collection Procedure                                                                          58

3.3       Method of Data Analysis                                                                                              58

3.4       Model specifications                                                                                                     59

3.4.1   The granger causality test model                                                                                62

3.4.3.1 Estimation procedure                                                                                                   62

3.4.3.2 Unit root tests                                                                                                             62

3.4.3.3 Co-integration equation                                                                                               63

3.4.3.4 The error correction model equation                                                                             64

3.4.3.5 External debt regression equation                                                                                 64

3.4.3.6 Capital flight regression model                                                                                      65

 

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1       Unit Root Test for Stationarity of Data                                                                          66

4.2       Trend of Acceleration, Stagnation and Deceleration of the Time Series Data                  69  

4.2.1    Total agribusiness sector output (AGBSO)                                                                     69

4.2.2    Trend of capital flight from Nigeria                                                                                70

4.2.3    Trend of external debt servicing in Nigeria                                                                     71

4.3       Descriptive Statistic of Data                                                                                           72

4.4      ARDL Estimation for Long-Run and Short-Run Impact of Capital Flight             75

              and External Debt Servicing on Agribusiness Sector Performance in Nigeria.

 

4.4.1    ARDL bounds testing for co-integration                                                                         76

4.4.2    Long-run ARDL estimation                                                                                           77

4.4.3    Error correction mechanism (ECM) and short-run estimates                                               83

4.4.4    Diagnostic tests                                                                                                                 85

4.5       Granger Causality Test                                                                                                      87

 

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1       Summary of Findings                                                                                                        88

5.2       Conclusions                                                                                                                       91

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                                            92


References                                                                                                                        96

  

Appendices                 109

 

 


 

LIST OF TABLES


4.1: Unit root test results at level                                                                                           67

4.2: Unit root test results at first difference                                                                            68

4.3: Summary of descriptive statistic of the time series data                                                 72

4.4: Bounds test results                                                                                                           76

4.5: Long-run estimates of the ARDL model                                                                         77

4.6: Error correction mechanism and short-run coefficient estimates                                    84

4.7: Summary of diagnostic tests for the ARDL models                                                       87

4.8: Granger causality test results








LIST OF FIGURES


1:         Trend of total agribusiness sector output in Nigeria                                                   69

2:         Trend of capital flight from Nigeria                                                                            70

3          Trend of external debt servicing for Nigeria                                                               71

4:          Volatility plot for total agribusiness sector output given fluctuations in capital

            flight, external debt servicing and other explanatory variables in the model.       75

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

                                                                    

 

CHAPTER 1

 

INTRODUCTION

 

 

1.1  BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Capital departure from Africa and especially Nigeria has been as of late, put at the bleeding edge of the improvement strategy banter. Lately, significant interest has emerged in the degree to which capital flight unfavorably affects financial turn of events (United Nation Development Program, 2011). Ajilore (2010) thought that, capital flight is for the most part connected with transient surges coming about because of political and financial vulnerabilities in the home country. Capital trip in all consequences alludes to capital moving out of a homegrown economy to another nation's economy. Capital flight could have extreme impact on the overall economy just as on agribusiness area specifically both in Nigeria and somewhere else. Cash that is moved out of a nation can't contribute sensibly to her sectoral advancement; agribusiness area comprehensive. Net financial advancement is the entirety of all sectoral monetary turn of events. Additionally, complete monetary shortage is the entirety share deficiencies contributed from every area. Capital flight influences the monetary offer commitment of every area of the economy of which agribusiness isn't excluded. The Implication is that capital flight influences the portion of agribusiness commitment to the overall monetary growth. (Ajayi, 2014)

 

The sluggish economic growth and persistent balance of payment deficits in most developing countries have been attributed to capital flight (Ajayi, 2014). Indeed, the high levels of capital flight pose serious challenges for domestic resource mobilization in support of investment and growth in Africa (Fofack and Ndikumana, 2010). According to Ndikumana and Boyce (2001), many developing countries are losing more resources through capital flight than through debt servicing. Scholars have expressed concern over the magnitude, causes and consequences of these net flows. Investors from developed countries are seen as responding to investment opportunities while investors from developing countries are said to be escaping the high risks they perceive at home (Ajayi, 2014).

 

Thus, according to Schneider (2003), capital flight involves the outflows of resident capital which is motivated by economic and political uncertainties in the home country. The International Monetary Fund IMF (1996) reveals that Nigeria suffered a loss of $7,573million between 1972 and 1989 to capital flight. Out of this total, the sum of US$7,362 million was lost between 1972 and 1978 against a capital inflow of $270 million within the same period. International Financial Corporation (1998) observed that Nigeria is among many African economies that have achieved significant lower investment levels in industrial and agribusiness sectors as a result of capital flight. Such low level investment brought about by high rate of capital flight in Nigeria also has multiplier consequences in all aspects of the economy but with primary consequence in agribusiness sector. The 2007 United Nation Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) report showed that around $13 billion per year have left the African continent between 1991 and 2004. This represents a huge 7.6% of annual GDP with Nigeria having external assets 6.7 times higher than her debt stocks. In addition, the total stock of illicit outflows from Nigeria between 2002 and 2011 was put at $142,274 million (Global Financial Integrity, 2013).   

 

Capital flight has been regarded as a major factor contributing to the mounting foreign debt and inhibiting development efforts in the third world countries (Ndiaye, 2011). The extent of capital flight the world over necessitates efforts to checkmate and regulate it, especially in the developing countries where it impacts adversely on the scarce capital and hinder agrarian development which encourages deficiency of developmental resources. This anomaly has persevered since there is no strong opposition or regulations. Actually, there are benefits and losses associated with capital flight but the losses far outweigh the gains, especially in the developing economies where it is so rampant. The individuals transferring and the receiving countries benefit while the citizens in the sending macro economies living standard are to an extent retarded from huge capital fight. This can account for persistent low living standard, lack of industrialization and true agribusiness development. Capital flight undermines agribusiness investment; hence economic growth and sustainable development. It undermines government revenue, social expenditure and meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets. It also undermines a fair distribution of wealth, governance in both the public and private sector; and the development of systems of accountability and a vibrant economy (Ajayi, 2014).

 

External debt may be defined as debt owed to non-residents repayable in terms of foreign currency, food or service (World Bank, 2004). It is generally expected that developing countries facing scarcity of capital will acquire external debt to supplement domestic savings. In order to encourage growth, countries at early stages of development like Nigeria borrow to augment what they have because of dominance of small stocks of capital. Economic theory suggests that reasonable levels of borrowing by a developing country are likely to enhance its economic growth (Pattilo, et al., 2002).  The effect of external debt on agribusiness investment of a country has remained questionable for policy makers and academics alike. External debt may be used to stimulate the economy but whenever a nation accumulates substantial debt, a reasonable proportion of public expenditure and foreign exchange earnings will be absorbed by debt servicing and repayment with heavy opportunity costs (Albert, Brain and Palitha, 2005). Excessive external debt constitutes obstacle to sustainable agribusiness development and poverty reduction (Maghyere and Hashemite, 2003; Sanusi, 2003 and Berensmann, 2004). Those who argue that external debt has positive effect on the economy do that from the stand point that external debt will increase capital inflow and when used for productive ventures, accelerates the pace of economic growth. The capital inflow may be associated with managerial know-how, technology, technical expertise as well as access to foreign market. The above is in agreement with the views of the Keynesian theory of capital accumulation as a catalyst for economic growth. However, external debt may have negative impact on investment through debt overhang and credit-rationing problem (Ajayi and Ibi, 2003). Debt overhang phenomenon is where substantial resources are used for debt servicing such that it stifles economic growth. It becomes a tax on domestic production such that the amount spent hampers meaningful economic growth activities as it reduces resources available to government to implement growth oriented economic policies. The authorities increase interest rates to narrow savings - investment gap, thus affecting new investment, generating greater surplus for debt servicing and repayment. However, this may subsequently depress future growth prospects.

 

The first major borrowing of $1 billion from the International Capital Market (ICM) by the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) was referred to as “Jumbo loan” increasing her total external debt to $22 billion. The condition worsened between 1981 and 1982 as various government agencies and state governments resorted to deficit budgeting partly financed through external loans secured from private sources under stiffen conditions (CBN, 2008). The Debt Management Office (DMO) annual report and account (2001) reflected a 13.8% fall of official debt sources in favour of the private debt sources which rose again to an average of 82%. Trade arrears emerged by the end of 1982 constituting a large portion of the total external debt of the nation. The jumbo loan of 1987 was supported by the promulgation of decree No. 30 of the 1978 which limited the external loans that the Nigerian government could raise to $5 billion. The increase in the size of Nigerian external debt was due to the preponderance of borrowing from international agencies and countries at non concessional interest rate. This borrowing came as a result of the decline in oil earnings from the late 70‟s and the emergence of high trade arrears due to inability of the country to easily neither produce nor foot the bills of importation of the needed goods and services (Ajayi and Ibi, 2003).

 

Nigeria economic growth and development had been volatile in danger and highly discouraging despite the huge external loan profile before the year 2000. Within the 80‟s, the country experienced the most economic recession with declining growth rate, hyper inflation, and high unemployment rate, disequilibrium in balance of payment, industrial decadence, poor infrastructure and serious external debt burden.

 

The poverty rate of the country stood at 65% and the country was classified as one of the weakest economies of the world on per capital basis. The debt crisis of Nigeria reached a maximum proportion in year 2003 when the country was to transfer as much as $2.3 billion to service its debts. According to Okonji-Iweala, et al., (2003), the accumulated effect of the debt at maturity began to yield some serious strains on the nation's macroeconomic indices. For example, the Naira was devalued, the nation's reserve and revenue started depreciating while inflation and unemployment intensified. These debt crises for Nigeria incidentally and fortunately coincided with the time the IMF and World Bank was granting debt relief to some highly indebted poor countries of the world.

The Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative and Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) were launched by the IMF and the World Bank in 1996 and 1999 respectively. The objective was to reduce the external debt of severely indebted poor countries to a sustainable level to enhance investment and further economic growth. They did not however, consider Nigeria as a poor country because of its oil deposit and high price of the oil. Getting relief on the premise of HIPC was near impossible.

 

The then President Olusegun Obasanjo in conjunction with his finance Minister, Okonjo-Iweala had prioritized securing debt relief from the creditors as a cardinal objective of his administration because Nigeria already had a debt overhang problem having debilitating effects on her economy and that was the popular efficacy argument or justification for the provision of the debt relief. Consequent upon the foregoing argument, the HIPC initiative introduced some guiding principles regarding a country's eligibility for debt relief. According to Debt Management Office (DMO 2010), for a country to be considered for HIPC initiative, it must face an unsustainable debt burden beyond traditional available debt relief mechanisms and establish a track record of reform and sound policies through IMF supported programmes.

 

The HIPC initiative was further expanded in 1999 and provided more rapid debt relief to more countries. A 2years policies support instrument was approved to monitor Nigeria economic reforms drive. Consequent upon that, Paris Club agreed to write off 60% of the $30.85 billion (amounting to $18 billion) owed to its club members. This deal was signed in July 2005, after which the country was able to affect the balance of 40%, thus, saving the country from the yearly $2.3 billion debt service burden. This debt relief is expected to put the economy on better springboard to accelerate the pace of growth and development and put the country on the path of economic recovery. To the contrary, the country appears to be deteriorating with higher rate of unemployment and lower living standard.

 

Agribusiness sector indeed is an important source of employment and income generation worldwide (Da Silva, 2009). In most developing countries, agribusinesses are dominant in terms of contribution to value-added in manufacturing. In agribusiness-based countries, these contributions are as high as 66%, whereas in transforming and urbanized countries, it reaches 38% and 37% respectively (FAO, 2009). Agribusiness sector remains very vital to the growth and development of every nation's economy. The sector's role includes: improving food security, resource employment and poverty alleviation (FAO, 2009). In spite of Nigerias rich agricultural resource endowment; there has been a gradual decline in agribusiness contributions to the nation's economy in the presence of enormous capital flight (Manyong et al., 2003). In the 1960s, agriculture accounted for 65-70% of total exports; it fell to about 40% in the 1970s, and crashed to less than 2% in the late 1990s. The average agricultural growth rate for 20042007 was 7 percent but dropped to 5.2 percent from 2008-2013. Furthermore, the agricultural sector has been one of the least attractive sectors for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Nigeria. Through 1970 to 2001 the sector comprised only 1.7 percent of the total FDI (FAO, 2012).

 

Agribusiness enterprises generate demand for agricultural raw materials; this in turn creates work opportunities at the farm level and contributes to increased demand for agricultural inputs (Wilkinson, 2004). The demand for ancillary agro-processing inputs, such as packaging items and product ingredients, tend also to rise with new investments in agribusiness. Many types of agribusiness enterprises can be operated feasibly at the small and medium-scale level, using low cost, labour intensive technologies. As such, small and medium-scale enterprises, most of which are labour intensive, are predominant in much of the agribusiness sectors of the developing world. With a tendency to be located close to their sources of raw materials, agro-processing enterprises favour the attraction of investment to the rural space and thus are an important driver in the creation of non-farm rural employment (Reardon, 2007) . Because agribusinesses are uniquely situated between natural sources of food and fibre, promotion of agro-enterprise development can have numerous benefits. These includes: positive impacts on employment in both rural and urban areas, offering market access to agricultural smallholders, business linkages to small and medium-scale enterprises (SME); enhanced food security by reducing post-harvest losses and extending the shelf-life of foodstuffs for the rapidly increasingly population of urban poor (Onwumere and Okpani, 2017).

 

The combined effects of employment gains and food security through improved agribusiness competitiveness can be an important strategy for reducing the overall poverty within developing countries (Onwumere, Nmesirionye and Ene 2012). Agribusiness sector remains very vital to the growth and development of every nation's economy. The sector's role includes: improving food security, resource employment and poverty alleviation (Mbanasor, 2009).

 

Furthermore, analysis combining both rigorous capital flight and external debt services determinants have been notably lacking to date. This study provides an integrated analytical framework with empirical and theoretical foundations that can be used to study the impact of capital flight and external debt servicing on agribusiness sector performance (1970-2017)

 

1.2 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

In spite of Nigerias rich agricultural resource endowment; there has been a gradual decline in agribusiness contributions to the nation's economy in the presence of enormous capital flight and debt servicing (Ajayi, 2014). In the 1960s, agribusiness accounted for 65-70% of total exports; it fell to about 40% in the 1970s, and crashed to less than 2% in the late 1990s. The average agricultural growth rate for 20042007 was 7 percent but dropped to 5.2 percent from 2008-2013. Furthermore, the agricultural sector has been one of the least attractive sectors for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Nigeria. Through 1970 to 2001 the sector comprised only 1.7 percent of the total FDI (FAO, 2012).

Agribusiness is an important sector of the economy with high potentials for employment generation, food security, foreign exchange earnings and poverty reduction. However, funds meant for the investment and development of agribusiness in particular and the economy in general is ''fleeing'' from the resident country to another country; this in essence is capital flight. Capital flight has been known to thwart economic development, foster corruption, in particular, in countries with mineral extraction and deepens inequality. The possible disruptive effects on the economy which stem from capital flight become more severe and glaring when one considers the magnitude of the flight from Nigeria. Capital flight in Nigeria deserves attention because it is regarded as a major contributing factor to the mounting debt problems that inhibit development efforts (Ajayi, 1996). In the words of Khan and Hague (1985) capital flight reduces government revenues and the ability to service external debt. As government revenues fall with the erosion of the tax base, there is an increased need to borrow abroad, thereby increasing the foreign debt.

 

Clearly, Nigeria needs sustainable growth involving the parallel expansion and capacity output. A high rate of sustainable growth requires high rate of investment. Without much prospect of an increase in the national savings rate, domestic investment can be boosted only by a reduction in net capital outflows. These crisis situations and their consequences for economic conditions in Nigeria call for more research on the factors that impel capital flight. Capital flight from Nigeria therefore deserves serious attention for several reasons. The low level of domestic investment is attributable in part, to the apparent scarcity of domestic savings, weak and shallow financial systems, and high credit risks due to unstable macroeconomic and political conditions. This downward trend in capital formation and investment is accompanied by slowdown of economic growth. The effect resulting from shortages of revenue and foreign exchange falls disproportionately on the shoulders of the less wealthy members of the society. The repressive impact of the capital flight is compounded when financial imbalances result in devaluation.

On the other hand, huge external debt does not necessarily imply a slow economic growth; it is a nation’s inability to meet its debt service payments fueled by inadequate knowledge on the nature, structure and magnitude of the debt in question (Were, 2011).  It is no exaggeration that this is the major challenge faced by the Nigerian economy. The inability of the Nigerian economy to effectively meet its debt servicing requirements has exposed the nation to a high debt service burden. This poses a grave threat to the agribusiness development as a large chunk of the nation’s hard earned revenue is being eaten up. Nigeria’s external debt outstanding stood at US$28.35 million in 2001 which was about 59.4% of GDP from US$8.5 million in 1980 which was about 14.6% of GDP (World Development Indicators, 2013). The debt crisis reached its maximum in 2003 when US$2.3 billion was transferred to service Nigeria’s external debt. In the year 2005 the Paris Club group of creditor nations forgave 60% (US$18 billion) of US$30.85 billion debt owed by Nigeria. Despite the debt relief of US$18 billion received by Nigeria from the Paris club in 2005 the situation remains the same (Bakare, 2010). The question then becomes why has external borrowing not accelerated the pace of growth of the Nigerian economy?

 

Previous studies have been carried out on impact of capital flight on economic growth, impact of external debt servicing on economic growth but little or no work has been done with respect to agribusiness sector performance. It is against this backdrop that this study sets to find out the impact of capital flight and external debt services on the agribusiness sector performance (1970-2017).

 

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The following research questions will be addressed in this study.

1. How is the trend of acceleration, stagnation and deceleration on capital flight, debt servicing and agribusiness sector performance within the reference period?

2. What is the mean value in capital flight, external debt servicing and agribusiness sector performance within the reference period?

3. Is there long-run impact of capital flight and external debt servicing on agribusiness sector within the reference period?

4. Is there short-run impact of capital flight and external debt servicing on agribusiness sector within the reference period?

5. What is the relationship between capital flight and agribusiness sector performance; external debt servicing and agribusiness sector output performance within the reference period?

 

1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The broad objective of this study is to analyze the impact of capital flight and external debt servicing on agribusiness sector performance (1970-2018).

The specific objectives of this study are to:

(i) analyze the trend of acceleration, stagnation and deceleration on capital flight, external debt servicing and agribusiness sector  output performance within the reference period.

(ii) determine the mean variability in capital flight, external debt servicing and agribusiness sector  performance within the reference period.

(iii) estimate the long-run impact of capital flight and external debt servicing on agribusiness sector  performance within the reference period.

(iv) estimate the short-run impact of capital flight and external debt servicing on agribusiness sector  performance within the reference period.

(v) investigate the relationship between capital flight and agribusiness sector performance; external debt servicing and agribusiness sector performance within the reference period.

1.5 RESARCH HYPOTHESES

The following hypotheses were tested in line with the research objectives.

HA1: There is a positive relationship between external debt servicing and agribusiness sector performance within the reference period.

HO2: Capital flight does not impact on the agribusiness sector performance within the reference period.

HO3: External debt servicing has negative impact on the agribusiness sector performance within the reference period.

1.6 JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

The place of agribusiness in Nigeria’s economy has remained critical over the decades. Prior to the political crisis of 1967-1970, agriculture’s positive contributions to the economy were instrumental in sustaining economic growth and stability. The bulk of food demand was satisfied from domestic output, thereby obviating the need to utilize scarce foreign exchange resources on food importation. Stable growth in agricultural exports constituted the backbone of a favorable balance of trade. Sustainable amounts of capital were derived from the agricultural sector through the imposition of several taxes and accumulation of marketing surpluses, which were used to finance many development projects. However, the crisis that developed in Nigerian economy during the civil war became more serious in the early 1970s, which coincided with the rising fortunes of the petroleum sector. From that period to date, agriculture’s contributions to the economy became relatively insignificant. This development is reflected in rising food prices and inflation, increased imports of food and agricultural raw materials for local industries, a relative decline in agricultural export earnings and deteriorating living conditions in the rural areas. It is expected that the result of this study would aid policy makers in their effort to revamp the Nigeria economy vis-à-vis agribusiness development through bringing to a halt the movement of funds meant for the development of the economy and minimize the rate of external borrowing. Hence, the study will analyze the determinants of capital flight and external debt servicing which could guide policy makers in estimating the impacts of capital flight and external debt servicing on agribusiness sector performance.

 

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.


To Review


To Comment