ABSTRACT
This study analyzed the effect of public debt burden on economic growth of three sub-Saharan African economies (SSA), for a period of forty-one years; from 1981 to 2021. Public debt burden was measured by public debt servicing to revenue ratio, total debt to GDP ratio, public external debt to export receipts ratio, public domestic debt to domestic investments ratio, public debt burden for infrastructural development (measured by capital expenditure to GDP ratio) and public debt burden for recurrent expenditure (measured by recurrent expenditure to GDP ratio) while fiscal balance and trade openness were used as control variables. Ex post facto research design was used in a multiple regression analysis framework to determine the partial coefficients of the endogenous variables. First, pre-testing of data for unit root based on the Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) and Phillips-Perron (PP) approaches were carried out. The ADF and PP tests showed that the series of data were of mixed integration, that a combination of levels and first difference variables which necessitated the application of Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model. The ARDL results indicated that the relationship between public debt burden and economic growth followed a long-run path which was confirmed from the F-statistic of the ARDL bounds test. Chiefly, the results provided evidence that the effect of public debt burden varied among Nigeria, South Africa and Ghana. In the long run, the Nigerian economic growth was majorly affected by public debt servicing to revenue ratio, public external debt to export receipts ratio, public debt burden for infrastructural development, fiscal balance and trade openness. South Africa’s long-run economic growth was significantly driven by public external debt to export receipts ratio, public domestic debt to domestic investments ratio and public debt burden for infrastructural development. Ghana’s long-run economic growth was significantly affected by total debt to GDP ratio and public domestic debt to domestic investments ratio. The error correction mechanism of the ARDL model indicated that the speed of recovery to long-run equilibrium was faster for Ghana, followed by South Africa and Nigeria, respectively. From the policy perspective, the findings are of particular interest to government authorities saddled with the responsibility of managing the debt profile and economy. It was suggested that the government should focus on viable capital investments that have high returns that can help service public debt in the nearest future in order not to pass debt to the upcoming generations as an inheritance in the selected SSA nations.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Title Page i
Declaration ii
Certification
iii
Dedication
iv
Acknowledgement
v
Table of Contents
. vi
List of Tables x
List of Figures xi
Abstract xii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 5
1.3 Objectives of the Study 8
1.4 Research Questions 9
1.5 Hypotheses 9
1.6 Scope of the Study 10
1.7 Limitations of the Study 11
1.8 Significance of the Study 11
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Conceptual Framework 13
2.1.1 Concept of public debt 13
2.1.2
The burden of rising public debt 15
2.1.3 Domestic versus external debt 16
2.1.4 Public debt instruments 18
2.1.5 The effect of debt on the
domestic economy 20
2.1.6 Concept of economic growth 23
2.1.7 Public debt- economic growth relationship 24
2.2 Nigeria’s
Public Debt: A Brief History 28
2.2.1 Overview of Nigeria’s
public debt status 32
2.3 Causes of the Astronomical Growth in Nigeria’s
external debt 35
2.3.1
Endogenous factors 35
2.3.2
Exogenous factors 37
2.3.3
Total domestic debt: composition and analysis 44
2.4 The Evolution of
Public Debt in South Africa 45
2.4.1 Public debt reforms in South Africa 48
2.4.2 Public debt and economic growth trends in
South Africa 54
2.4.3 Domestic public debt trend in South
Africa 55
2.4.4 Foreign
public debt trend in South Africa 62
2.5
Ghana’s Public Debt trajectory 63
2.5.1
Debt crisis and debt cancellation 64
2.5.2 The growth in Ghana’s external debt 65
2.5.3
Domestic debt 66
2.5.4
Commodity and lending boom, and manufacturing decline 69
2.5.5
Commodity price crash and the new debt trap 70
2.6
Theoretical Framework 72
2.6.1
Neoclassical views 72
2.6.2
Keynesian and New-Keynesian views 81
2.6.3
Public finance 83
2.7 Review of Empirical Literature 86
2.7.1 Evidence from Nigeria 86
2.7.2 Evidence
from Ghana 91
2.7.3
Evidence from South Africa 94
2.7.4 Evidence from other developing and developed
Countries 94
2.7.5
Summary of related literature review 101
2.7.6
Gap in empirical literature 107
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Design 108
3.2 Nature and Sources of Data 108
3.3 Model Specification 109
3.3.1 Description of model variables 111
3.3.1.1 Dependent variable 111
3.3.1.2 Independent variables 112
3.4
Justification of Variables in the Models 114
3.5 Analytical Procedures 118
3.5.1 Unit root test 118
3.5.2 Autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL)
bounds testing 120
3.5.3 Co integration test 121
3.5.4
Coefficient estimation 122
CHAPTER
4: PRESENTATION OF DATA, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
4.1
Presentation of Data 124
4.2 Trend
Analysis of Data 127
4.2.1 Descriptive statistic 135
4.2.2 Test for multicollinearity 140
4.3 Test for Stationarity 141
4.4 Lag Selection Criteria 144
4.5 ARDL Bounds Testing and
Estimation 147
4.3.1
Long-run ARDL estimates 150
4.3.2 Error correction
mechanisms (ECMs) and short-run dynamics 155
4.3.3
Hypothesis testing 160
4.3.4 Diagnostic tests 164
4.4 Discussion of Findings 166
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY,
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Summary of Findings 170
5.2 Conclusion 171
5.3
Recommendations 172
5.4 Contribution to Knowledge 174
REFERENCES 175
APPENDICES 189
LIST OF TABLES
2.1 Nigeria’s external public debt
outstanding (1981 – 2019 in Billions of Naira) 39
2.2 Nigeria’s external debt servicing
(1981 – 2019) in NGN’ billion.
42
2.3 Nigeria’s external debt by lenders
(as at 31st December, 2020) 44
2.4 Domestic debt profile of Nigeria 45
2.5
Composition of domestic public debt in South Africa (by instrument) (2012-2017)
57
2.6 Structure of domestic public debt in
South Africa (1970-2015)
58
2.7
Domestic government bond in South Africa (by holder) 2010 – 2017 61
2.8 Summary of empirical literature
review 101
3.1
Operationalization of variables 114
4.1(A)
Data for Nigeria 125
4.1(B) Data for South Africa 126
4.1(C) Data for Ghana
127
4.2
Descriptive statistic
136
4.3
Variance Inflation Factor (VIF)
141
4.4 (A) Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) test
for unit root 142
4.4 (B) Phillips-Perron (PP) test for unit
root 143
4.5 VAR lag order selection criteria 144
4.6 Short- run estimates for the
Models
145
4.7 Bounds test for cointegration 149
4.8 Results
of long-run ARDL estimates
151
4.9 (A)
ECM for the Nigerian model
155
4.9 (B) ECM for the South African model
156
4.89(C) ECM for the Ghanaian model 157
4.10 Diagnostic tests
164
LIST OF FIGURES
2.1 Link between fiscal policy tools of government and economic
growth 27
2.2 Nigeria’s public debt (1923 –
1953)
29
2.3 Nigeria’s public debt (2012 –
2020)
31
2.4 Actual deficit and public debt in
Nigeria (N'trilliom) 34
2.5 Federal government expenditure &
revenue for 2015 and 2019
34
2.6 Federal and State government
percentage of total external debt. 41
2.7 Ghana’s external debt profile 2006-
2020 as percentage of GDP
68
4.1 Trend of GDP per
capita growth rate (GDPgr)
127
4.2 Trend of public debt service to revenue ratio
(PDS) 128
4.3 Trend of total public
debt stock to GDP ratio (TPD) 139
4.4 Trend of public
external debt stock to export ratio (PED) 130
4.5 Trend of public domestic debt stock to
investment ratio (PDD) 131
4.6 Trend of public debt for infrastructural development to GDP ratio (PDI)
132
4.7 Trend of Public debt for recurrent expenditure to GDP ratio (PDR) 133
4.8 Trend of fiscal balance to GDP ratio
(FIB) 133
4.9 Trend of trade openness to GDP ratio
(TOP) 134
4.10 AIC model selection plot for
Nigeria
147
4.11 AIC model selection plot for South
Africa
148
4.12 AIC model selection plot for Ghana
148
4. 13 (A) CUSUM test for
Nigeria
165
4. 13 (B)
CUSUMSQ test for South Africa 165
4.13(A): CUSUM test for Ghana
165
CHAPTER
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
BACKGROUND
TO THE STUDY
Sustainable
economic growth has overtime been regarded as a predominant concern of all
economies (Ajayi and Edewusi, 2020). It is one of the prerequisites for
improving standard of living of societies and an important indicator of
economic well- being. The most effective tool for economic growth is sound
macroeconomic policies focusing on both private and public investment to
generate wealth, increase productivity, national income and employment, reduce
inflation, and finance public service provision (Saungweme and Mufandaedza,
2018). However, most countries are unable to generate enough revenue to finance
national budgets which make them rely on both domestic and external debts,
thereby making public debt one of the major economic policy issues confronting
governments today (Mankiw, 2020).
Debt
or borrowing has been described as an important instrument of fiscal policy
available to government to fund the development of a nation. Debt is employed
for the settlement of expenditures that will ultimately increase productivity
and improve the growth of the economy, although, studies have suggested that
public debt impacts negatively on the growth of most developing economies.
These studies opined that when the cost of servicing debt expands beyond the
coping capacity of the economy, it impacts negatively on its ability to achieve
the desired fiscal and monetary policy objectives and this may constrain the
ability of government to undertake more productive investment programmes in
infrastructure, education and public health thereby impeding economic growth (Mhlaba
and Phiri, 2019; Huang, Panizza, and Varghese, 2018; Muhammad, Ruhaini, Nathan
and Arshad, 2017).
However, continuous budget deficits by nations
demonstrate that government expenditure is high relative to its revenue and
this gap has been identified to be filled with public debt (Mankiw, 2020).
Public debt which includes both internal (domestic) and external debts is
considered when the revenue realized by the government is insufficient for its
projected expenditures (Rahman, Ismail and Ridzuan, 2019)).
The
issue of the third world debt especially that of emerging market economies of
Sub-Saharan Africa has been on the centre stage in international discussion for
the past three decades. The debt crisis of these emerging nations evolved from
a complex combination of factors, some of which are external while others were
the result of the internal policies pursued by the African governments. A major
cause of the African debt crisis was the two oil price shocks of the early and
late 1970s. To be precise, the oil price hike of 1973 to 1974 changed the
international environment, leading to macroeconomic deterioration in Africa.
The unprecedented increase in oil prices distorted the trade balance of oil
importing countries and created fiscal deficits that undermined domestic
investment (UNCTAD, 2017).
The
situation became worse during the second oil shock of 1979 to 1980 which
happened jointly with a sharp increase in world real interest rates. The global
recession of 1981-1982 compounded the problem by adversely depressing demand
for the key exports of developing countries. Moreover, the deteriorating terms
of trade caused by the recession created balance of payment problems for oil
exporters and worsened those of oil importers. However, based on the assumption
that the global recession would be short-lived and that prices of non-fuel
commodities would recover quickly, most of these countries resorted to heavy
external borrowing to finance the fiscal and external imbalances. However, the
1982 global financial crisis caused a sudden end to the era of liberal lending.
Developing Countries could no more roll over their debts and could hardly
service their debt from extra borrowing from abroad. Export earnings were also
insufficient for debt servicing as a result of unfavourable terms of trade
confronting those economies. Debt stocks of countries were escalating at a time
when export earnings were on the decline due to rapid fall in prices on the
international market. Consequently, imports were being gradually cut down as a
way of solving increasing current account deficits. Economic condition further
worsened globally and debt default replicated in other economies ravaging
through Latin America and this marked the emergence of the debt crisis in
heavily indebted developing economies as well as Sub-Saharan Africa (Agbemavor,
2015).
To
address the growing debt burden, governments around the world agreed to the
Heavily Indebted Poor countries (HIPC) debt initiative developed by World Bank
and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The initiative was intended to build
on existing debt relief efforts and bring together all of a country’s creditors
to provide debt relief in conjunction with policy reforms to allow countries to
exit from the debt crisis (World Bank, 2018).
Multilateral
and bilateral creditors reviewed their lending policies to low-income
countries, especially to Africa by stipulating that further loan disbursement
will be based only on economic reforms in the context of structural adjustment
and Economic Recovery programmes. These intervention programmes failed woefully
to deliver the promised growth and development in many African countries due to
heavy debt-service obligations (World Bank, 2018).
Africa’s large
accumulated debt stock is thwarting the region’s prospects and efforts in
achieving increased saving and investment, which consequently dwindles economic
growth and poverty reduction. The debt overhang of the region has affected
public investment in both physical and social infrastructure due to the massive
outflow of resources in debt-service payment. Similarly, it has inhibited
private investment, since private investors are scared of policy distortions in
environments marred by severe external imbalances and fluctuating exchange
rates. By investing less in public health, social infrastructure and human
resource development, implies that the external debt burden has compromised
some of the essential conditions for sustainable economic growth and poverty
reduction.
Although
government’s borrowing from the domestic capital market has lesser potential of
creating debt crisis, as it is believed to create positive externality in the
domestic capital market and prevents capital outflow, most developing countries
nonetheless prefer external borrowing to the domestic one (Agbemavor, 2015). In
developing countries therefore, external debt constitutes the greater part of
the public debt structure (Ijirshar, Fefa and Godoo, 2016) and the choice of
external debt over domestic debt could be rationalized based on the following
reasons:
First,
the over-reliance on domestic borrowing can lead to financial instability and
crowd out the private sector (Panizza, and Presbitero, 2013).
Secondly,
huge domestic debt may put pressure on the financial institutions jeopardizing
the financial stability of the domestic economy.
Thirdly,
managers of an economy can easily use debt relief initiatives to address
external debt
burden
which is non-existent with domestic debt.
Several
other factors contribute to the growth of external debt. Ajayi and Edewusi (2020) classified the
causes of external debt into external and internal factors. External factors
include the cumulative effect of world price shocks which creates fiscal
imbalance requiring huge borrowing to fill the fiscal gap, worsening terms of
trade and liberal lending policy of international banks. Internal factors are
attributed to excessive monetary expansion which causes inflation, over-valued
exchange rate and poor management of public projects. Other factors which
contribute to swift increases in the external debt stock include, increase in
interest rate payable on loan, debt accumulation, volatility in exchange rates,
absence of institutional checks on government borrowing and spending, and
corrupt leadership (Ekor, Orekoya, Musa, and Damisah,2021;Ajayi and Edewusi
2020).
External
debt may promote economic growth when the borrowed funds are invested in
sustainable projects that generate revenue for servicing of the debt. External debt accumulation therefore does not
imply slow economic growth but rather the lack of information on the nature,
structure, and the magnitude of the debt coupled with inability to meet the
debt obligation that impedes growth (Ekor, et al, 2021).
It
is now generally believed that a lasting solution to the external debt problem
in Sub- Saharan Africa is to double official aid inflow and open western
markets for the debtor countries to freely buy and sell, so that they can
attain sustainable growth and development and to meet the development
challenges facing the region, particularly that of reducing poverty by 2025. Moreover,
the agricultural and industrial sectors of their economies need to be protected
as well as encouraged to boost exports, which is their main foreign exchange
earner. To achieve the Millennium Development Goals, Sub- Saharan Africa would
need to generate a growth rate of at least 7 to 8 percent per annum and sustain
this growth for not less than a decade (Sachs, Traub-Schruidt, Kroll,
Lafortune, and Fuller, 2021).
1.2
STATEMENT
OF THE PROBLEM
The
external debt crisis of the third world, and indeed Sub-Saharan Africa has
imposed enormous costs on the debtor countries, most notably, low economic
growth and crowding out of private investment (Mhlaba and Phiri (2019).
Although
a substantial proportion of Sub-Sahara Africa debts are development-related,
the ability to service them does not only depend on growth and development in
the debtor countries, but also on a healthy and expanding world economy (Sachs
et al, 2021, Abbott, 1993). However, the presumed growth and development did
not take place, instead the development loans retarded it by depleting an
increasing share of their limited foreign exchange resources for debt-service
payments. This problem was further aggravated by the large number of bogus
projects and over ambitious development plans which negatively affected the
development effort in the region (Ahlborn and Schweickert, 2016).
In
spite of the economic reforms such as the Structural Adjustment Programmes
(SAP), adopted by Nigeria and Ghana, and Economic Recovery Program (ERP)
pursued by South Africa since mid-1980s, the region recorded only modest growth
with successive levels of high inflation and unsustainable balance of payment
deficits. Moreover, Sub-Saharan Africa continues to experience worsening
economic conditions that encouraged high levels of foreign borrowing. Since the
inception of the crisis, the growth performance has been very disappointing due
mostly to the increased outflow of resources in debt service payments. The
acquired loans appeared not to have yield a rate of return higher than the cost
of borrowing to repay the debt. Moreover, the region’s economies have had a
history of debt-servicing difficulties due to insufficient domestic resources.
This was evidenced by the fact that on several occasions the countries were in
debt-service arrears (World Bank, 2018).
Notwithstanding
previous debt relief, rescheduling and restructuring initiatives, Sub-Saharan
Africa’s debt problems and economic situation seem to have remained fragile.
The high external debt-service has depleted the savings and foreign exchange
earnings that could have been used in domestic investments and in the provision
of social services for the growing population. In addition, the region’s
mounting debt stocks have discouraged the inflow of foreign resources in the
form of foreign direct investment for fear of high taxation rates and
macroeconomic policy distortions. Instead of attracting resources from abroad,
domestic resources flee to the developed nations either for safe keeping or for
investment (Idris and Ahmad, 2017).
Accordingly,
this work is undertaken to assess both the short term and long term
implications of mounting debt burden on the economies of Nigeria, Ghana and
South Africa.
Again,
there have been concerns among policy makers that the rapid increase in public
debt has the potential of eroding a country’s sovereign rating, particularly if
it is not supported by proportionate growth in the economy (Budiman and
Desilver, 2017).
Numerous
studies have been done with regard to the impact of Public debt on economic
growth of Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa. Ajayi and Edewusi (2020) found that External debt exerted negative
long-run and short - run effect on economic growth of Nigeria while Domestic
debt exerted positive long – run and short – run effect on economic growth of
Nigeria. In Ghana, Erickson and Owusu-Nantwi (2016) discovered a
positive and significant long- run relationship between public debt and
economic growth. In the short run, however, they argued that there was a
bi-directional relationship between the level of growth in the economy and
public debt. Mhlaba and Phiri (2019) examined the impact of public debt on
economic growth in South Africa. The study supported a negative relationship
between public debt and economic growth, irrespective of whether the analysis
was in the short or long run.
Some
studies found the accumulation of public debt and repayment costs as growth
inhibiting (Ajayi and Edewusi, 2020; Said and Yusuf, 2018; Favour, Ideniyi, Oge
and Charity, 2017; Dada, 2012) while others found that debt- financed
expansionary fiscal policies positively affect economic growth (Ude, Ugwu and
Onwuka, 2016; Bakare, Ogunlana, Adeyeye and Mudashiru, 2016) though they did
not carry out a comparative study.
The
lack of consensus surrounding the outcomes of public debt burden on economic
growth with most of the studies about the same country or geographical area, is
related to the methodological differences and also the nature of the data
employed, which are generally very diverse and often contradictory. These
variations suggest an ensuing controversy in the literature about growth and
government debt relationship. There is the need for a further empirical
investigation into the subject matter. Consequently, this study is intended to
add to existing literature in providing new empirical evidence on the impact of
Public debt burden on the economic growth of Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The broad objective of this study is to
assess the effect of Public debt burden on economic growth in Nigeria, Ghana
and South Africa. The specific objectives are to;
i.
Ascertain the effect of aggregate Public debt burden on economic growth
in Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa;
ii.
Examine the impact of
External debt burden on economic growth in Nigeria, Ghana
and South Africa;
iii.
Determine the effect of Domestic
debt burden on economic growth in
Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa;
iv.
Determine the impact of
public debt service on economic
growth in Nigeria,
Ghana and South Africa.;
v.
Examine the impact of
public debt burden for infrastructural development on economic growth of Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa; and
vi.
Evaluate the impact of
public debt burden for recurrent expenditure on economic growth in Nigeria, Ghana
and South Africa.
1.4 RESEARCH
QUESTIONS
The
following research questions have been formulated to guide the study
i.
To what extent does aggregate public debt burden affect economic growth
in Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa?
ii.
In what way does External debt burden affect economic growth in Nigeria,
Ghana and South Africa?
iii.
In what way does Domestic debt
burden affect economic growth in Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa?
iv.
To what extent does Public debt service impact on economic growth in
Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa?
v.
How does public debt burden for
infrastructural development impact on economic growth in Nigeria, Ghana and
South Africa?
vi.
To what extent does Public debt burden for recurrent expenditure impact
on economic growth in Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa?
1.5
RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
In the effort to examine the effects of
Public debt burden on economic growth of Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa, the
following null hypotheses have been tested in this study;
H01: Aggregate
Public debt burden has no significant impact on economic growth in Nigeria,
Ghana and South Africa.
H02: External debt burden does not have
significant effect on the economic growth of Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa.
H03: Domestic debt burden does not have
significant effect on the economic growth of Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa.
H04: Public debt service does not have significant
impact on the economic growth of Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa in the short
and long- run.
H05: Public
debt for infrastructural development does not have significant impact on
economic growth in Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa,
H06: Public debt for recurrent expenditure has no
significant impact on economic growth in Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa.
1.6 SCOPE
OF THE STUDY
Government
debt continues to be a critical economic policy issue, which largely affects
both developed and developing countries, due to elevated level of debt. From a
general viewpoint, government debt is a crucial feature of a country's
financial system and a major indicator that contributes to the formation of a
country's reputation in the international market.
This
work investigates the impact of Public debt burden on economic growth in
Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa. The study employed time-series data and will
be limited to the period 1981 to 2021. Basically, Sub-Saharan African (SSA)
nations began to experience debt problem from the early 1980s when foreign
exchange earnings plummeted as a result of the collapse of prices in the
international oil market and external loans began to be acquired
indiscriminately (Ukwuoma and
Imandojemu, 2019). The debt crisis, which is the combination of
accumulated debt stock and difficulty servicing those loans, has imposed
several burdens on the emerging economies of Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa.
This
is reflected in the fall in real growth rates, investment rate and export
earnings since 1980s till date, hence the choice of this period for the study.
Again, Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa have been chosen for comparative study
because whilst Nigeria and South Africa are the top two largest countries in
SSA, Ghana is the fastest growing economy within the SSA region.
1.7 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The researcher encountered some challenges
sourcing data from the various national debt offices and apex banks of the
three economies being studied for conducting comparative empirical analysis. It
was also observed in the course of the study that the data from the national
debt offices and apex banks of these three economies were in their national
currencies and therefore posed a problem of currency conversion. However, to overcome these problems, the
researcher painstakingly collected information from the World Bank, International
Monetary Fund and other reputable International Financial organizations/
agencies.
1.8 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The
study complements existing and yet to be published studies on the link between
Public debt and macroeconomic stability in developing and less-developed
economies, as little research is undertaken to achieve a conclusive outcome.
The outcome of the study will benefit the following categories of stakeholders:
i)
The three tiers of
government and regulatory agencies will be guided on how to continue to improve
in public finance management policies especially keeping public debt levels
within sustainable levels.
ii)
Policymakers are provided
with empirical basis that will guide them in making appropriate decisions on
whether the government should continue to rely on debts
or resort to some
other instruments of fiscal policy measures like additional taxes, reduction of
public expenditures, etc. to stimulate economic growth.
iii)
The study will also be
useful to international development partners and donors to better appreciate
public debt and growth nexus for control and regulation purposes in order to
minimize any adverse effect that may accompany public external debt in Nigeria,
South Africa and Ghana.
iv)
Finally the general
public stands to benefit as the study x-rays the effort of successive
government in utilizing borrowed funds to stimulating economic growth or
otherwise.
Login To Comment