PATRONIZE

Submit for less stress

Tuesday, 10 September 2019

evaluate the second wave of the Nigerian privatization programme spanning (2008-2012).




CHAPTER ONE
1.0     INTRODUCTION
1.1     BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Privatization of state-owned enterprises has become an important phenomenon in both developed and developing countries. Over the last decade, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) have been privatized at an increasing rate, particularly in developing countries (DCs). Privatization has become an important phenomenon in both developed and developing countries. Over the past decade, privatization attempts have been occurring at an increasing rate, especially in developing countries. The compound annual average growth rate was around 10% between 1990 and 2000, with global privatization revenues jumping from $25 billion in 1990 to $200 billion in 2000. The number of countries that have implemented privatization policies has exceeded 110, not to mention that privatization has touched almost every aspect of economic activity (Shadeh, 2002).
Privatization of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) has become a key component of the structural reform process and globalization strategy in many economies. Several developing and transition economies have embarked on extensive privatization programmes in the last one and a half decades or so, as a means of fostering economic growth, attaining macroeconomic stability, and reducing public sector borrowing requirements arising from corruption, subsidies and subventions to unprofitable SOEs. By the end of 1996, all but five countries in Africa had divested some public enterprises within the framework of macroeconomic reform and liberalization (White and Bhatia, 1998). In line with the trend worldwide, the spate of empirical works on privatization has also increased, albeit with a microeconomic orientation that emphasizes efficiency gains (La Porta and López-de-Silanes, (1997); Boubakri and Cosset, (2001); Dewenter and Malatesta, (2001) D'Souza and Megginson, (2007). Yet, despite the upsurge in research, our empirical knowledge of the privatization programme in Africa is limited. Aside from theoretical predictions, not much is known about the process and outcome of privatization exercises in Africa in spite of the impressive level of activism in its implementation.
Current research is yet to provide useful insights into the peculiar circumstances of Africa, such as the presence of embryonic financial markets and weak regulatory institution efforts. Most objective observers agree, however, that the high expectations of the 1980s about the "magical power" of privatization bailing Africa out of its quagmire remain unrealized (Adam et al., (1992); World Bank,(1995); Ariyo and Jerome, (1999); Jerome, (2005).
As in most developing countries, Nigeria until recently witnessed the growing involvement of the state in economic activities. The expansion of SOEs into diverse economic activities was viewed as an important strategy for fostering rapid economic growth and development. This view was reinforced by massive foreign exchange earnings from crude oil, which fuelled unbridled Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) investment in public enterprises. Unfortunately, most of the enterprises were poorly conceived and economically inefficient. They accumulated huge financial losses and absorbed a disproportionate share of domestic credit. By l985, they had become an unsustainable burden on the budget. With the adoption of the structural adjustment programme (SAP) in 1986, privatization of public enterprises came to the forefront as a major component of Nigeria's economic reform process at the behest of the World Bank and other international organizations.
1.2     STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
The issue of cost performance and accountability of privatized public enterprise have been a serious subject of the debate and different interest group that is the “stakeholders”. The post privatization effect this enterprise have been the subject of public scrutiny and criticism by the public and others alike. Majority are of the view that their performance is not different from the way it was when they were under public enterprise.
In response to this in recent national assembly committee, that was set up to look into this enterprise partially supported public concern on their performance. It is against these background that this research is carried out to determine or find out if these view are true as the research is intended to look at this research is intended to look at this privatized firms cost performance and accountability. Public enterprise before their recent privatization where perceived to be bedeviled by numerous challenges ranging from political interference, inefficiency in the management of resources, conflict of objectives, overdependence on subvention for survival etc. these over the years have been the main source of criticism of public enterprises and the reason why they are poorly managed . is this issue the same after the privatization o these enterprises? This study is intended to establish it.
1.3     RESEARCH QUESTION:
Based on the problem statement and the objective of the study stated above the study will answer the following questions;
i)       Has privatization improved the cost performance and accountability of this firm as anticipated?
ii)      To what extent are privatized firms accountable to shareholders and other relevant stake holders?
iii)     To what level has there been effective checks and balances in privatized enterprises in Nigeria.

1.4     OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The overriding objective of this study is to evaluate the second wave of the Nigerian privatization programme spanning 2008-2012. The specific objectives are as follows:
(i)      To examine whether privatization has improved the cost performance and accountability of privatized firm.
(ii)     To assess the extent to which privatized firms are accountable to shareholders and other relevant stakeholders.
(iii)    To determine if there are effective checks and balances in privatized enterprises in Nigeria.
1.5     STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS
Ho:   Privatization has not led to efficient and improved cost Performance.
Hi:    Privatization has led to efficient and improved cost Performance.  
Ho:   There have been no effective accountability to share holders and other relevant stake holders.
HI:    There have been effective accountability to shareholders and other relevant stakeholders.
Ho:   Privatization has not led to effective checks and balances in privatized enterprises in Nigeria.
Hi:    Privatization has led to effective checks and balances in privatized enterprises in Nigeria.







Order for full projects: #2000


Payments method: bank deposit / Bank Transfer

                         Skye Bank 1
Bank account name:          Yekeen Idris Adeseun
Bank account number:      3026132730


                           GTB Bank 2
Bank account name:       Yekeen Idris Adeseun
Bank account number:.       0165460421

Send your payments details to..... 
Email:  idrisyekeen7@gmail.com or 08167674702
  1. Your full name
  2. Your email that the documents will be sent to
  3. Your payments details
  4. Your mobile number


No comments:

Post a Comment

nairabet

jumia

what we do

what we do
patronize us