ECONOMIC VOLATILITY, MONEY SUPPLY VELOCITY AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN NIGERIA

ECONOMIC VOLATILITY, MONEY SUPPLY VELOCITY AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN NIGERIA

Abstract

The paper empirically examined economic volatility (PSC/GDP), money supply velocity (BMS/GDP) and economic growth in Nigeria for the period 1990 – 2016. The study Anchored in the finance- growth conflicting theories of supply-leading and demand-leading hypotheses, and supported by the financial liberalization theory. Ordinary least square (OLS) multiple regression technique was employed to analyze time-series data collated from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the National Bureau of Statistics(NBS) statistical bulletins. Augmented-Dickey-Fuller (ADF) pre-estimation technique was utilized in testing for the presence of unit root. Results indicated that economic volatility, broad money velocity, and real interest rate jointly increased growth in the real gross domestic product (rGDP) in Nigeria. Specifically, broad money supply velocity and real GDP increased proportionately. However, economic volatility and real interest rate grew disproportionately with real gross domestic product. Based on these results, the paper recommended among other things, a robust monetary policy by the monetary authorities, encompassing reduction in the real interest rate and interest payment on short term securities in the financial market; and financial liberalization for the sustenance of money supply across the economy intending to encourage investment in the real sector for economic growth and development of Nigeria.

Keywords:  Economic Volatility, Money Supply Velocity, Economic Growth.

1.0. INTRODUCTION                                                                                            

A robust financial system guarantees adequate liquidity, smooth financial intermediation and free-flow of funds across the macroeconomic economy. Financial system refers to the presence of financial institutions, markets, instruments, rules and regulations as well as norms and conventions that facilitate the flow of funds for investments; purchase of economic goods and services; increase the volume of savings for future consumption opportunities. Peter and Milton (2006), described the financial system as a collection of markets, Institutions, laws, regulations and techniques through which bonds, stocks, and other securities are traded, interest rates are determined and financial services are provided and delivered across the world. The process of ensuring that funds are transferred from surplus saving units (savers) to deficit savings units (borrowers) to promote economic growth is often referred to as financial intermediation. Development finance experts believe that financial deepening involves mobilizing savings, managing liquidity, and mediating between savers and borrowers. Financial deepening is used interchangeably with financial depth to describe the capacity of the financial system to mobilize savings; create wealth by adding value to assets held over-time; providing liquidity by converting securities into cash without a significant loss in their face values; providing credit to finance consumption and investment expenditures; paying for electronic platforms and risk protection to businesses, consumers and governments against life, health, property and income losses.

Researchers argue that there is a bidirectional causality running from the financial deepening to economic growth. While financial deepening supports economic growth, economic growth in turn provides foundation for financial sector growth (Ghildiyal, Pokhriyal& Mohan, 2015). The pioneer work of Schumpeter (1911) asserted that financial sector growth engenders technological innovation and economic growth through the provision of financial services and resources to entrepreneurs for the implementation of innovative products and processes. The consensus among scholars and researchers is that a developed financial system is a catalyst for economic growth and development. See for instance, Odhiambo (2011), Okafor, Onwumere and Chijindu (2016), Obafemi, Oburata&Amoke (2016) and Atseye, Nedozi and Obasam (2017).  Robinson (1952), provided a contrary view indicating that the finance-growth relationship should run from growth to finance. Therefore, increase in economic growth leads to increase in demand for a particular financial investment thereby creating a well-developed financial sector that will automatically respond to financial demand in the economy. The conflict between financial sector growth and economic growth is captured in the supply-leading and demand-leading hypotheses. The former school of thought believes that financial system induces economic growth, while the latter holds that real sector growth drives financial sector growth

Prior to financial sector reforms in Nigeria in 1986, there were financial repressions such as interest rate controls, selective credit allocations, reserve requirements, and other direct monetary controls (Oguijuba and Obiechina, 2011). Access to banking business was therefore limited to the dominance of government owned banks. The financial sector reform was a component of the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP). According Uche (2000). SAP was designed to achieve balance of payment viability by altering and restructuring the productions and consumption patterns of the economy; eliminating price distortions; reducing the heavy dependence on consumer goods; imports and crude oil exports, enhancing the non-oil exports base, justifying the role of the private sector and achieving sustainable growth. To achieve these objectives, the main strategies of the SAP were the adoption of a market exchange rate for the naira, the deregulation of external trade and balance of payment arrangements, reduction in price and administrative control and more reliance on market forces as a major determinants of economic activity. Lending credence to Uche (2000), Ojo (1991), pointed out that deregulation of the economy was justifiable because of stagnant growth, raising inflation, unemployment, food shortage and mounting external debt. As observed by Malunond (2007), depending on foreign sources to finance investments and promote growth and development predisposes a country to external shocks. The Nigerian economy has been experiencing macroeconomic instability with high unemployment, drop in the price of crude oil, drop in market capitalization, increase in inflation rate, increase in budget deficit and depreciation of the naira with attendant consequences on economic volatility, slow velocity of money supply and eventual contraction. As observed by Nzotta (2004), variations in the aggregate money supply overtime may adversely affect attainment of macroeconomic objectives of the government. Considering the volatility of other macroeconomic aggregates, the predictive power of money supply over economic growth may be constrained (Odumusor, 2019). Osada and Saito (2010), averred that credit development fosters economic growth by raising savings, improving efficiency of funds and promoting capital accumulation. Accumulated capital becomes the seed money with which to achieve macroeconomic objectives. The economic recession of 2016 is a pointer to the foregoing. When a country experiences negative growth in real GDP in two consecutive quarters in a year, recession has occurred. According to Atseye, Obim and Eke (2014), economic recession is characterized by low aggregate demand occasioned by low level of disposable income, falling gross domestic product (GDP), business failure and massive loss of jobs. Prior to the recession, the National Bureau of Statistic(NBS) had reported a 4.45% growth in real GDP in the first quarter of 2013, and 5.40% and 5.17% in the second and third quarters respectively. Yet, the first quarter of 2014 witnessed a GDP growth rate of 6.21%, and 6.54% and 6.23% in the second and third quarters respectively. However, growth declined in 2015 by 3.96% and 2.35% in the first and second quarters. The third and fourth quarters of 2015, recorded 2.84% and 2.11% growth rates. The economy started manifesting symptoms of recession with a negative GDP growth rate of -0.36% in the first quarter of 2016, and eventually slumped into recession as a consequence of another negative -2.06% in GDP in the second quarter (NBS, 2016). Afimia (2017) attributed the recession to: decline in global demand of Nigeria’s crude oil, activities of Fulani herdsmen as well as Boko Haram terrorists, heavy dependence on importation, erratic power supply, shortage of gas supply to manufacturing companies, delay in assent to the 2016 budget, and introduction of the Treasury Single Account (TSA).

Many empirical works have controversially established a bidirectional causality between financial system growth (depth) and economic growth; utilizing different indicators of financial depth such as quality, structure, price of finance and cost of financial service products offered by the financial system. other yardsticks for measuring financial deepening include the ratios of private sector credit to GDP, market capitalization to GDP, money supply to GDP, financial structure to GDP, and trade openness to GDP. Variations in measurement of financial depth have created research gaps in selecting critical financial deepening indicators to address specific research problems. In view of this, the paper selected economic volatility and money supply velocity and regressed against economic growth in Nigeria during the period 1990-2016.       

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Theoretical Framework 

2.1.1 Supply – Leading Hypothesis

This theory is credited to Patrick (1966). Theory states that financial development or financial system growth stimulates economic growth. The theory argues that a well financial system promotes economic efficiency, creates liquidity, mobilizes savings for capital formation and investment in sectors, such as manufacturing and industrial, agricultural and servicing to promote entrepreneurship (McKinnon, 1973, Shaw 1973, Moore 1986, Onwumere 2012, Okafor, et al 2016). This theory is apt as the paper tested the ratios of money to GDP and private sector to GDP money supply velocity and economic volatility respectively, against economic growth.

2.1.2    Demand – Leading Hypothesis

This theory associates with Goldsmith (1969) and proposes that real sector growth drives financial system development and stimulates demand for financial services. Goldsmith (1969), posited that financial development has positive casual effect on economic growth. Therefore, it is an alternative proposition to the supply-leading. Growth in the real sector stimulates new demands for financial services which in turn exerts pressures to establish larger and more sophisticated financial institutions to satisfy the new demand for financial services (Darrat, 1999 and Onwumere, et al, 2012).

2.1.3    Theory of Financial Liberalization

The financial liberalization theory also known as complimentary hypothesis holds that alleviating financial restrictions such as interest rate ceiling, exchange rate regulation, reserve requirement, and direct credit control by allowing market forces to prevail stimulates economic growth. The traditional artificial ceiling on interest rate reduces savings, capital accumulation and discourages the tradition of resources mobilization. The theory is a combination of the hypothesis of McKinnon (1973) and Shaw (1973. Financial repression refers to policies that result in savers earning returns below the rate of inflation in other to allow banks to provide cheap loans to companies and government, reducing the burden of repayments. In other words, financial repression refers to the notion that a set of government regulations, laws, and other non-market restrictions that prevent the financial intermediaries of an economy from functioning at their full capacity.

2.3       Empirical Literature                                                                        

Enormous empirical works establishing causal relationship between financial sector growth and economic growth abound in local and international literatures. For instance, Ndebbio (2004) provided a link between financial deepening and economic growth as well as development in 34 selected Sub-Sahara African countries. Financial deepening was defined as the degree of financial intermediation (M2/V) and economic growth as growth per capita in real money balances. Using the ordinary least square multiple regression technique, the study reported a positive causal relationship between financial deepening and economic growth with policy implications for growth of real money balances and financial intermediation. Similarly, Ngrena and Abimbola (2013) investigated the implications of financial deepening dynamics for financial policy coordination in the West African Economic and Monetary Union sub-region (WAEMU). Using hypothetical deductive theoretical and empirical investigation with static and dynamic, both the panel data. The showed a statistically significant relationship between financial deepening and economic growth. Another paper by Ngogang (2015), examined the relationship between financial development and economic growth in Sub-Sahara Africa and reported a positive link between financial development and economic growth in the region.                                                  

In a single country study, Ang (2007) examined the extent to which financial development contributed to output expansion in Malaysia during the period 1960-2003. Autoregressive Distribution Lag (ARDL) model with F- bound test was employed. The study found that aggregate output and associated determinants were    co-integrated in the long-run, suggesting that financial development, private capital stocks and the labour force exerted a positive impact on economic development. In Northern Cyprus, Guryay, Safakli and Tuzel (2007), examined the casual relationship between financial development and economic growth, covering the period 1986-2004. Findings revealed an insignificant positive relationship between financial development and economic growth.  Results also indicated that causality runs from economic growth to financial development. In some studies, direction of causality is in reverse or bidirectional.  In South Africa, Jalil, Wahid and Shahbaz (2010) assessed financial sector development and economic growth for the period 1965-2007. The ARDL model was adopted and result showed a positive monotonic relationship between financial development and economic growth for South Africa. Trade openness and per capita income were found as important determinants of economic growth.  Aye (2015) investigated the causal relationship between financial development and economic growth in Nigeria during 1981- 2012. The study revealed that while financial deepening indicated predictive influence on economic growth at some periods, economic growth has predictive control for financial deepening at some periods, indicating bi-causality between financial deepening and economic growth.Oniere, (2014) examined the impact of financial deepening and foreign direct investment on economic growth in Nigeria beginning from 1981 to 2012. The study adopted the vector Error correction model with economic tests such as Augmented Dickfuller (ADF) unit root test and JohensenCointegration test. The study showed that private sector credit, liquidity ratio and foreign direct investment have a statistically significant influence on economic growth. However, the ration of broad money (M2) to GDP which indicates the overall size of the financial intermediary of a country exerted a negative impact on economic growth. Onwumere, et al (2012) examined the impact of financial deepening on economic growth from a Nigerian perspective and adopted the supply-leading hypothesis. The researchers used variable such as broad money velocity, money stock diversification, economic volatility, market capitalization and market liquidity as proxies for financial deepening and gross domestic product growth rate for economic growth. Their study adopted a Multiple Regression Model (MRM) and revealed that broad money velocity and market liquidity promote economic growth in Nigeria while money stock diversification, economic volatility and market capitalization did not within the period studied (1992-2018). Nzotta (2009) analyzed relationship between financial deepening and economic development in Nigeria between 1986 and 2007. Financial deepening indicators were expressed as the ratio of money supply to GDP, the value of cheques cleared to GDP, financial savings to GDP and deposit money bank assets to GDP. The study found a low financial deepening index in Nigeria over the years. It was observed that the financial system had not sustained an effective financial intermediation, especially credit allocation and high level of monetization of the economy.

Bwire and Musime (2006) investigated the connections between financial development and economic growth in Uganda during the period 1970-2005 through the use of modern multivariate techniques and Granger causality test. They found significant evidence that financial sector reforms adopted in the early 1990s contributed to the real GDP of Uganda. Thus, financial development is crucial, but not sufficient to stimulate the desired level of economic growth. Odhiambo (2008), using time series of the period 1968-2002 and adopting a dynamic causality model, investigated the causality between financial development and economic growth in Kenya. Broad money (M2), currency ratio (CC/M1) and credit to private sector as financial development indicators. Results suggested that causality between financial development and economic growth depends on the type of financial development indicators employed. Waiyaki (2013) carried out an assessment of the relationship between financial development, economic growth and poverty in Kenya for the period 1997-2012. The study attempted to determine the direction of causality between financial development and economic growth as well as the effect of financial development on economic growth with a focus on the banking sector, and the stock market in Kenya. The variables used included broad money supply M3, credit to private sector, bank deposits, stock market capitalization, stock market turnover and volume of stocks traded. The study used OLS method under the PARCH model. The finding show that some financial development variables such a M3 and credit to the private sector did not lead to growth while bank deposits did during the period of the study. In another study in Nigeria, Okafor, et al (2016) examined financial deepening indicators and economic growth in Nigeria for the period 1981 — 2013. Using a causal and impact analysis, with Error Correction model, the study revealed that there is a long run relationship between economic growth, broad money supply and private sector credit, with high speed of adjustment towards long run equilibrium. The results also showed that while broad money supply had a positive and non-significant impact on economic growth, private sector credit has negative and non-significant impact on growth. The Granger causality tests showed that neither broad money supply nor private sector credit is granger causal for economic and vice versa.

3.0   MATERIALS AND METHOD

The paper extracted annual historical data from the Central Bank of Nigeria and National Bureau of Statistics bulletins. Annual data on private sector credit and broad money supply were deflated by real GDP to obtain economic volatility and money supply velocity respectively. Empirical model typical of ordinary least square multiple regression borrowed extensively from Levine (1997) and Onwumerre et al (2012).

GDP_g = F(ECV, RINT, BMS/GDP)

Econometrically given as:

……………… .(1)

To checkmate the presence of heteroscedasticity, equation 1 was logged as follows

logGDPg = α₀ + α₁logECV + α₂logRINT + α₃logBMS/GDP + ε₀

Where: GDPg = Gross Domestic Product growth rate

ECV = Economic volatility (PSC/GDP) measured as private sector credit per GDP or the ratio of credit to private to real GDP

Rint = Real interest in the economy, BMS/GDP = Money supply velocity expressed as broad money supply per GDP or the ratio of broad money supply to GDP, and   ε₀ as the error term.

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1-Unit Root Test ADF

Results in Table 1 above showed ADF unit root test. All variables were stationary at level I(1)- at first difference with data converging after random walk at first difference, indicating absence of spurious data.

Table 2: Regression Results

A constant value of 0.129876 showed that holding independent variables (ECV, RINT and BMS/GDP) constant as well as other macroeconomic factors, Nigerian economy experienced a positive growth of 0.129876. or 12.9876%. The coefficient of economic volatility (measured as the ratio of private sector credit to real GDP) had a negative value of 0.123620 or 12.362%. Therefore, a unit increase in economic volatility resulted in a decrease in real GDP growth rate by 0.123620. The implication is that funds meant for investment to enhance the productive capacity of the private sector are either inaccessible or misappropriated due to high interest rate and corruption. For instance, investors can earn higher and quicker returns by investing in short term financial instruments compared with long term investment in factories and researches. Again, government grants and subsidies to boost output in priority sectors like agriculture and manufacturing, sometimes do not reach the ultimate beneficiaries. Real interest rate (RINT) showed a negative value of 0.997818, implying that a unit increase in real interest rate led to a negative growth rate in real GDP of 0.997818. This explains the inverse relationship between real interest rate and money supply in the financial market. Availability and accessibility of funds in the financial market are often hampered by high interest rates with adverse effect on output in the economy. Finally, broad money supply volatility (ratio of M2 to GDP) showed a positive value of 0.022553, implying that a unit increase in broad money supply per real GDP resulted in an increase in economic growth by 0.022553. This means broad money supply velocity and real GDP growth rate increased proportionately in Nigerian.

4.1 Analysis of the Evaluation Methods

4.1.1 Evaluation Based on theoretical criteria/expectation

As stated early in chapter three, the researcher parameter estimates are expected to conform to a priori expectation consequently the table below summarizes the outcome of the researcher model parameters on an a priori ground.

All the independent variables conformed to theoretical expectation, meaning that all the variables have mix impact to the growth of Nigerian economy.

4.1.2 Evaluation Based on Statistical/Significant Criteria

The R² (Coefficient of determination) was 0.99 (99%), thus 99% of the variation in the dependent variable (rGDP) is caused by the explanatory variables (ECV, RINT and BMS/GDP) in the model. This is endorsed by R –bar- square value of 99%. Therefore, means 99% of the systemic changes in rGDP are explained by the explanatory variables (ECV, RINT and BMS/GDP). We deduced that changes in GDPg is a function of broad money, real interest rate and economic volatility.

Table 4: t- statistic summary test

Result of t- statistic above economic showed that volatility and real interest rate are individually and statistically significant using the rule of thumb. Therefore, economic volatility and real interest rate individually affected economic growth significantly in Nigerian

Table 5: F-test summary

From the f-test summary, our tabulated f statistic was 4.73 and less than f-cal value of 398.0202. The f-statistic value was zero and less than 0.05, we concluded that the model was statistically significant with satisfactory goodness of fit, indicating that all or at least one of the explanatory variables explained goodness of fit, hence ECV, RINT and BMS/GDP are all good indicators of financial system depth in Nigeria. With the DW statistic of ‘2.100’ approximately ‘2’, our equation was unbiased and without autocorrelation.

 5.0 Conclusion and Recommendations

The paper critically examined the relationship between economic volatility and economic growth; broad money supply velocity and economic growth. Real interest rate was used as control variable. Results indicated that increase in economic volatility, broad money supply velocity and real interest rate jointly resulted in increase in real gross domestic product. However, real interest rate and economic volatility negatively affected growth in real GDP. These results were expected as shown in our apriori expectations Table 3 above. Research results followed the theoretical prediction of finance-driven growth, hence causality flows from financial system depth to economic growth and development. Suffice it to say that our variables, economic volatility, broad money supply velocity and real interest rate are good indicators of the depth of the Nigerian financial system. Based on the specific findings, the following recommendations were suggested as part of policy framework. A robust monetary policy of the Central Bank of Nigeria should deliberately reduce the price of funds in the financial market as well as interest payment on short term securities to encourage investment in real sector, and promote economic growth. Transparency and accountability are required for effective and efficient use of funds like grants, subsidies and other forms of direct credit to the private sector. Increase in money supply with less financial repression would facilitate economic growth and development in Nigeria.

REFERENCES                                                                                                       

1. Peter, S. R. & Milton, H. M. (2006). Money and Capital Markets: Financial Institutions and Instruments in a global market place. Irwin: Mcgraw.
2. Ghildiyal, V., Pokhriyal, A.K. & Mohan, A. (2015). Impact of financial deepening on economic growth in Indian perspective: ARDL bound testing approach to cointegration. Asian Development Policy Review, 3 (3) 49 – 60.
3. Schumpeter, J. A. (1911). The theory of economic development,translated by Redvers Opie, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Odhiambho, N. M. (2011). Financial International versus financial market: A South African experience. International Investigation Journal of Economic Journal, 10 (2), 77-84.
5. Okafor, I. G., Onwumere, J. UJ. &Chijindu, E. H. (2016). Financial deepening indicators and economic growth in Nigeria: A causality and impact analysis. Asian Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting 1 (2), 1-11.
6. Obafemi, F. N. Oburota, C. S. &Amoke, C. V. (2016). Financial Deepening and Domestic Investment in Nigeria. International Journal of Economics and Financial. 8 (3), 40-54.
7. Atseye, F. A., Nedozie, F. O. &Obasam, J. O. (2017). Selected macroeconomics determinants of saving: empirical evidence from Nigeria (1991-2014). International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research.2 (12) 5528-5551.
8. Robinson, J. (1952). The generalization of the general theory, in the rate of interest and other essays, London: Mcmillan
9. Ogujiuba, K. &Obiechina, M. E. (2011). Financial sector reforms in Nigeria: issues and challenges. International Journal of Business and Management, 6 (6) 222 – 233.
10. Uche, C. U. (2000). Banking regulation in the era of structural adjustment: the case of Nigeria, Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance. 8(2) 157 – 165.
11. Ojo, M. (1991). Deregulation in the banking industry: a review and appraisal. CBN Economic and Financial Review. 29(1) 1991.
12. Malunond, T. A. (2007). Determinants of domestic saving performance in Egypt; An Empirical study. Available at:http://www.bu.edu.eg/portal/uploads/openlearing/Determinants%20f&20saving%20performance%20Egypt%20An%20Empirical%20StudyPaperpdf.
13. Nzotta, S. M. (2004). Money, banking and finance. Owerri: Hudson-Jude.
14. Odumusor, C. J. (2019). Impact of money supply on the growth of the Nigerian economy. Journal of Economics anf Finance, 10 (1), 30-46.
15. Osada, M. & Saito, M. (2010). Financial integration and economic growth: An empirical analysis using international panel data from 1974-2007. Bank of Jordan Working Paper Series, 10-E-5.
16. Atseye, F.A., Obim, N.E & Eke, F.A (2014). Determinant of Financial Structure: Evidence from Nigerian quoted firms. Research journal of Finance and Accounting, 5(16), 53-66
17. Afimia, E. (2017).Nigeria’s economic recession of 2016. (University of Ibadan,Nigeria.StaffWorkingPaper).researchgate.net/publication/319544120_Nigeria_Economic_of_Reccession_of_2016
18. Mckinnon R. (1973), Money and capital in economic development. Washington: The Brooking Institute.
19. Shaw E. S. (1973), Financial deepening in economic development. New York Oxford University.
20. Onwumere, J., Ibe, I. G., Ozoh, F. O. &Mounanu, O. (2012). The impact of financial deepening on economic growth: evidence from Nigeria. Research journal of financial and accounting 3, (10), 56-71.
21. A. R. (1999). Are financial deepening and economic growth casually related.Another work economic journal (1913) 319-335
22. Ndebbio, J. E. U (2004), Financial deepening, economic growth and development. Evidence from selected Sub-Sahara African Countries.AERC Research Paper.
23. Ngongang, E., (2015). Financial development and economic growth in Sub-Saharan African: a dynamic panel data analysis. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 6(3), 50-68.
24. Ang, J. B. &McKibbin, W. J. (2007). Financial Liberalization, financial sector development and growth: evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Development Economics 84, 215-233.
25. Guryay, E. J. Safkli, O. V. &Tuzel, B. (2007). Financial development and economic growth: evidence from Northern Cyprus. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 2 (8), 1-15.
26. Jalil, A., Abu, W. N., &Shahbaz, M. (2010). Financial development and growth: a positive, monotonic relationship? Empirical evidences from South Africa. Retrieved from http://mpra.ub,uni-muenchen.de/27668/
27. Oniore, J. O., (2014). Impact of financial deepening and foreign direct investment effectiveness on economic growth in Nigeria. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 2(10): 1 – 16.
28. Nzotta, S. M. & E. J. Okereke (2009), financial deepening and economic development in Nigeria. African Journal of Accounting, Economics, Finance and Banking Research. 5 (5), 24-38.
29. Odhiambho, N. M. (2011). Financial intermediaries versus financial market: a South African experience. International Investigation Journal of, Economic Journal 10 (2), 77 -84.
30. Waiyaki, N. I. (2003). Financial development, economic growth and poverty in Kenya. Retrieved from http://www.eropository.uonbi.ac.ke
31. Levine, R. (1997). Financial development and growth: Views and agenda. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 688-726.
32. Onayemi, S. O., (2013), Output growth, economic openness and financial deepening in Nigeria. a structural differential and causality analyses. European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 26(1): 1381 – 1395.
33. National Bureau of Statistics (2016)