Download Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Abstract

 

This study is an economic assessment of the effectiveness and the potential side effects of the monetary policy toolkit developed over the past decades using data obtained from Central Bank of Nigeria from 1995 to 2020(Q1). Interest rate, exchange rate, inflation rate and ratio of broad money supply (BMS) to gross domestic product (GDP) were employed as the independent variables, while GDP growth rate was used as the dependent variable. The results of Jarque-Bera (JB) test indicated that interest rate (INR) and exchange rate (EXR) have a normal distribution while gross domestic product’s growth rate (GDPGR), inflation rate (IFR) and ratio of broad money supply to GDP (BMS/GDP) do not have. The results of Phillips-Perron (PP) test showed that GDPGR, IFR and BMS/GDP were stationary at level; INR was stationary at first difference and EXR was stationary at second difference. The Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression results revealed that IFR has a significant positive effect on economic growth proxied by GDPGR, while INR, EXR and BMS/GDP have a negative but not significant effect on economic growth in Nigeria. Durbin-Watson (DW) statistic indicated that there was no problem of autocorrelation. The Johansen Cointegration (JC) test results signaled the existence of a long-run relationship between the dependent and independent variables. The results of Granger Causality (GC) test revealed that a unidirectional causal relationship runs from exchange rate to economic growth. It also showed that a unidirectional causality runs from inflation rate to economic growth. Based on the findings, the study concluded that inflation is a significant and viable monetary policy instrument that affects economic growth in Nigeria and could be used by monetary authority in Nigeria to achieve a higher economic growth. Therefore, this study recommended that monetary authority in Nigeria should pay more attention to inflation rate in the economy as it has a significant effect on economic growth. Due to the fact that inflation rate has a positive effect, monetary authority should not target a very low level of inflation as economic growth would be affected negatively. Thus, in order to achieve a higher rate of economic growth, inflation rate should be moderate, above “single digit”. Also, interest rate, exchange rate and ratio of broad money supply to GDP should be low to enhance economic growth.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

Monetary policy is a deliberate action of the Central Bank of Nigeria to use its monetary policy instruments such as interest rates, open market operations, liquidity ratios, cash reserve ratios, statutory reserves, and moral suasion amongst others to regulate and control the availability of money in circulation in the economy. Monetary policy as the name implies is one of the major economic stabilization weapons which involve measures designed to regulate and control the volume, cost, availability and direction of money and credit in an economy to achieve some specific macro-economic policy objectives. It is a deliberate attempt by the monetary authority (Central Bank) to control the money supply and credit condition for the purpose of achieving certain broad economic objectives. It is also the control of money and Bank credit thereby regulating cost of credit in such a way it will affect aggregate demand in a direction that would continue to the achievement of healthy balance of payment, price stability and job opportunity (Anyawu 1993). However, it will settle in this study that macro-economic stability is a pre-requisite for sustainable growth and poverty reduction. Money supply is being controlled by the government in that firm belief that its rate of growth has something to do with rate of inflation.

Monetary policy as a technique of economic management is to bring about sustainable economic growth and development. This has been the pursuit of nations, as observed by Onyewu (2012) and formal articulation of how money affects economic aggregates. And this view dates back to the time of Adam Smith and later championed by the monetary economists. Since the expositions of the role of monetary policy in influencing macro-economic objectives like economic growth and development which include employment generation, stability in prices, growth in Gross Domestic Production (GDP), equilibrium in balance of payments and host of others monetary authorities are saddled with the key responsibility of using monetary policy to formulate and implement policies that gear toward driving the economy on an even keel.

If the economy slows and employment declines, policy makers will be inclined to soften monetary policy to stimulate aggregate demand. When growth in aggregate demand is boosted above growth in the economy's potential to produce, slack in the economy will be absorbed and employment will return to a more sustainable path. In contrast, if the economy is showing signs of overheating and inflation pressures are building, the Central Bank will be inclined to counter these pressures by tightening the economy through monetary policy to bring growth in aggregate demand below that of the economy's potential to produce for as long as necessary to defuse the inflationary pressures and put the economy on a path to sustainable expansion. While these policy choices seem reasonably straightforward, monetary policy makers routinely face certain notable uncertainties because the actual position of the economy and growth in aggregate demand at any point in time is only partially known as key information on variables only come with lags such that policy makers are constraint to rely on estimates of these economic variables when assessing the choice of appropriate policy and therefore could act on the basis of misleading information. More so, monetary policy is not the only force acting on output, employment, and prices. Many other factors affect aggregate demand and aggregate supply and, consequently, the economic position of economic units. Some of these factors can be anticipated and built into spending and other economic decisions while others like shifts in consumer and business confidence, posture of creditors, natural disasters, disruptions in the oil market that reduce supply, agricultural losses, and slowdowns in productivity growth can be totally unpredictable and influence the economy in unforeseen ways.

The works of Christiano et al. (1999); Mishkin (2002); Bernanke et al. (2005); and Rafiq and Mallick (2008) showed that there is substantial evidence of the effectiveness of monetary policy innovations on real economic parameters in developed economies like the United States (US) and some core European countries. However, there have been various regimes of monetary policy in Nigeria. The economy often witnessed either expansionary or contractionary monetary policy in an attempt to achieve its set objectives. Nevertheless, studies by Gertler and Gilchrist (1991); Batini (2004); Folawewo and Osinubi (2006); Onyemu (2012); Fasanya et al. (2013) observed that despite efforts made towards achieving the desired macroeconomics objectives through monetary policy that the results have not been sustainable enough as there are evidences of relatively high rate of unemployment, increased poverty rate, low standard of living, unacceptable rate of inflation etc. especially in less developed economies. The prevalence of these macroeconomic vices as mentioned above clearly showed that the issues of economic development especially in Nigeria has not been visibly addressed by monetary policy.

Theoretical debate on the instruments of monetary policy has been based on two major paradigms, monetarist vs. Wicksellian. Under the monetarist view money supply is within the control of the central bank, so that Friedmaris rule of maintaining a target rate of growth of the money supply is more apt in determining optimal inflation and economic growth (Carlin and Soskice, 2006). The Wicksellian paradigm deems money as endogenous so that the interest rate becomes the appropriate instrument of monetary policy. However, recent developments in mainstream monetary policy have led to the refutation of the monetarist framework based on the premise that the interest rate paradigm represents the true behaviour of central banks (Fontana, 2007).

Consequently, modern design of monetary policy has followed the proposition of the New Consensus Macroeconomics (NCM). The basic principle of the NCM is the use of short-term interest rate to achieve price-stability (Meyer, 2001; Arestis, 2007). The objective of price-stability is centered on the supply-side equilibrium and the inability of monetary policy to have any long-run impact on real variables (Bean, 2007; Fontana, 2009). In the short-run, however, the existence of nominal rigidities means that policy can affect real variables temporarily.

Typical discussions of monetary policy like this, however, do not distinguish between developed and developing countries (Huang and Wei, 2006). Thus, central banks in developing countries are adopting inflation targeting (IT), which is founded on the tenets of the NCM. This is based on the erroneous but widespread belief that policies would have similar outcomes irrespective of the development status of the country (Epstein and Yeldan, 2008). Generally, most developing countries are characterized by weak institutions and financial underdevelopment which ensure that the effectiveness, transmission and implications of policy differ from those of advanced countries (Ghatak and Sanchez- Fung, 2007). Therefore, the gains and costs of low inflation can vary considerably between developing and developed countries.

Inflation targeting (IT) intrinsically requires central banks to be highly averse to inflation or at least reputably more inflation averse than political policymakers. The degree of aversion has important implications for the cost of disinflation. According to Carlin and Soskice (2006), the nonlinearity of the short-run Phillips curve causes the cost of disinflation to increase with the degree of inflation aversion so that IT may be very expensive overall. Hence, even if the NCM/IT approach is effective in stabilizing prices, it may have adverse consequences on economic growth, employment, equality, and poverty reduction particularly among developing countries (Cordero, 2008; Epstein, 2008).

For developing countries, the inflation threshold - which is the level beyond which inflation becomes harmful - is variously estimated at 11-18 per cent (Dada, 2011; Khan and Senhadji, 2001; Pollin and Zhu, 2006). In this regard, moderate inflation rate may therefore be optimal for developing countries rather the very low rate advocated for developed countries (Huang and Wei, 2006). There would thus be little justification for low inflation as the dominant objective of monetary policy in developing countries. The negative effect of inflation targeting on growth and employment triggers the need for the alternative monetary policy approach, especially for developing countries (Pollin et a/, 2007; Epstein and Yeldan, 2008; Cordero, 2008).

In Nigeria, monetary policy is conducted with the use of the short-term interest rate as the key instrument, while price stability is the paramount objective. Price stability in this context is defined as achieving and sustaining a single-digit rate of inflation; thus, giving the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) an asymmetric target below a 10 percent threshold. Nigeria is, however, characterized by weak institutional features, underdeveloped financial sector and a dominant government sector. These factors weaken the conduct of monetary policy and diminish its reliability. Furthermore, financial market underdevelopment can abate the ability of the monetary policy to influence the money market interest rates. Such ineffectiveness would bring about a weak transmission mechanism and emphasizes the need for an alternative approach (CBN, 2007). In the medium term, thus, the CBN plans to migrate to a full-fledged inflation targeting framework. This would entail the declaration of a specific inflation target (IT) around which the effectiveness of the Bank's policy actions would be judged. Adopting IT requires CBN’s independence, credibility, an adequate understanding of the transmission mechanism of monetary policy and the willingness to sacrifice other macroeconomic objectives (such as economic growth and employment) for the attainment of price stability (Ononugbo, 2012).

Inadequate knowledge of the economic system can deter policy actions from having the desired effects. Similarly, inadequate understanding of the consequences of monetary policy would lead to misjudgment and would substantially increase the costs of achieving any given goal. In Nigeria, uncertainty about the transmission mechanism and incomplete understanding of the system has remained a major challenge for monetary policy (Uchendu, 2009). This is compounded by the existence of a vibrant informal sector, which has ambiguous structures. Monetary policy in Nigeria is, therefore, undermined and characterized by uncertainty and inadequate knowledge (by policymakers and others) of the economy. These challenges are believed to contribute to volatility and slow economic growth in Nigeria (Batini, 2004; Balogun, 2007). This therefore gave rise to the need to investigate the effectiveness and the potential side effects of the monetary policy toolkit developed over the past decades.

Download Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

1.2 Statement of the problem

Most studies on the design of monetary policy in Nigeria have generally tended to investigate the effectiveness of the monetary policy in terms of money supply changes rather than other toolkits like interest rates, with narrow focus on it costs. Feridun, Folawewo & Osinubi (2005) found that the monetary policy approach in Nigeria, though ineffective, has resulted in increased instability in inflation and exchange rate. This instability, according to Adam and Goderis (2008) and Olubusoye and Oyaromade (2008), can be further attributed to the disruptive effect of crude oil price volatility on monetary policy efforts. Crude oil price volatility impacts on monetary policy through its impact on the fiscal revenue and monetary expansion.

The current practice of monetary policy, in many countries, is in agreement with the assumptions, conclusions and recommendations of the New Consensus Macroeconomics (NCM), with the short-term nominal interest rate as the instrument and price stability as the objective. The NCM assumes among other things that the financial market is adequately developed and capable of effectively conducting policy impulses to the rest of economy. In addition, low inflation is assumed to be achievable at minimal cost. However, Nigeria's financial system is relatively underdeveloped, shallow, bank dominated and characterized by inadequate market instruments and securities. This can impede the pass-through from policy rate changes to market rates; thus, diminishing policy effectiveness. Besides, the fact that banks may be more willing to hold risk-free government securities rather than lend to private investors implies that monetary policy interest rate changes may not affect aggregate demand as suggested by the NCM (Ononugbo, 2012). This further undermines the effectiveness of monetary policy.

Over the years, the objectives of monetary policy have remained the attainment of internal and external balance of payments. However, emphasis on techniques/instruments to achieve those objectives has changed over the years (CBN, 2014).

It is on record that the direct approach to monetary management was the main technique of monetary policy implementation in Nigeria before the introduction of the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) in 1986. Between 1986 and 1993, the CBN made efforts to create a new environment for the introduction of indirect approach to monetary management (CBN, 2013). A major action taken as part of the monetary reforms programme was the initial rationalization and eventual elimination of credit ceilings of selected banks that were adjudged to be sound. After the initial test run of the indirect monetary management approach, monetary management shifted to the indirect approach in which Open Market Operation (OMO) was the principal instrument of liquidity management (CBN, 2013). Since the introduction of the indirect approach, the primary and secondary markets for treasury securities have been developed to take advantage of liberalization introduced through the reforms. Discount houses, banks and some selected stockbrokers tend to be very active in the primary market for treasury bills.

In August, 1987, the CBN liberalized the interest rate regime and adopted the policy of fixing only its minimum rediscount rate to indicate the desired direction of interest rate. This was modified in 1989, when the CBN issued further directives on the required spreads between deposit and lending rates. In 1991, the government prescribed a maximum margin between each bank's average cost of funds and its maximum lending rates. Partial deregulation was, however, restored in 1992 when financial institutions were required to only maintain a specified spread between their average cost of funds and maximum lending rates. The removal of the maximum lending rate ceiling in 1993 saw interest rates rising to unprecedented levels in sympathy with rising inflation rate which rendered banks' high lending rates negative in real terms, in 1994, direct interest rate controls were restored. As these and other control introduced in 1994 and 1995 had negative economic effects, total deregulation of interest rates was again adopted in October, 1996 (CBN, 2013). In 2014, monetary policy was focused on achieving the objective of price and exchange rate stability. Accordingly, the bank sustained its tight policy stance with a view to ensuring that electioneering spending did not result in uptick in inflation (CBN, 2014). Thus, it is in the light of the various reforms in monetary policy management that this study looks at the effect of monetary policy on economic growth in Nigeria.

Despite the various reforms in monetary policy management, the overall objective of monetary policy which is the attainment of overall macroeconomic stability has not been achieved. The pursuit of price stability has not yielded the desired result as inflation rate is still dangling. Also, exchange rate continues to be volatile and this does not augur well with the economy. Moreover, the rate of unemployment remains high. Thus, the reported growth of the economy is not evidenced in the standard of living of the people. Small and Medium Enterprises are struggling to survive. The above facts question how effective monetary policy is in Nigeria. This necessitated this economic assessment of the effectiveness and the potential side effects of the monetary policy toolkit developed over the past decades.

1.3       RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The following questions have been put forward to address the research objectives;

i.                    Does interest rate affect the growth rate of gross domestic product in Nigeria?

ii.                  To what extent does exchange rate effect the growth rate of gross domestic product in Nigeria?

iii.                 How has inflation rate effect the growth rate of gross domestic product in Nigeria?

iv.                How has broad money supply effect the growth rate of gross domestic product in Nigeria?

1.4       OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

this study is an economic assessment on the effectiveness and the potential side effects of the monetary policy toolkit developed over the past decades. Consequently, the specific objectives include:

1. To examine the effect of interest rate on the growth rate of Gross Domestic Product in Nigeria

2. To determine the effect of exchange rate on the growth rate of Gross Domestic Product in Nigeria

3. To assess the effect of inflation rate on the growth rate of Gross Domestic Product in Nigeria

4. To examine the effect of broad money supply on the growth rate of Gross Domestic Product

            FOR OFFLINE PAYMENTS.


Bank: - Access Diamond 

Account Name: -PIYO ILIYA BERNARD

Acc No. 0088203974

INSTRUCTIONS AFTER PAYMENT

After making payment, kindly send the following:

1. Your Full name
2. Your Active Email Address
3. Your Phone Number
4. Amount Paid
5. Project Topic


Send the above details to our contact number; 08136055674. As soon as details are sent and payment is confirmed, your project will be delivered to you within minutes.