Inclusive Growth and Employment Risk 1985-2009

8/10/2019 Inclusive Growth and Employment Risk 1985-2009

1/20

Inclusive Growth and Employment Risk 1985-2009: The effect of Unemployment on

economic growth and Development in Nigeria.

Non-Experimental Impact Evaluation using SPSS and R

Olorunfemi Oladayo 1 and Raheem Kabir Kola 2

August, 2014 3

Today, graduate-unemployment has taken a new dimension in Nigeria. With scarce jobs,

many more seek higher education than the ability of the already saturated labour market

to absorb (Augustus N. Gbosi, 2005).

This material is a complement to the PEP International Policy Forum held in SantaCruz, Bolivia, May 7, 2014. The Annual Conference is based on a special Policy Forumorganized by the Partnership for Economic Policy (PEP , www.pep-net.org ). It consists of aseries of examples illustrating the basic economic policy and labour market reforms andinterventions used by Nigeria government between 1985-2009 period of growth andemployment issues. Users and researchers are advised to further analyze the datacontained in this material, before making adjustment towards policy that limits thepotential of 21 st century youth in Sub Saharan Africa.

From the foregoing, it is obvious that unemployment, especially the

unemployment of graduates, impedes Nigerias progress in many ways. Apart from

economic waste, it also constitutes danger for political stability (Ipaye, 1998). The state

of unemployment can even lead to depression, low self-esteem, frustration and a

1 Head of Research and Development: DWIPS Technology Lokoja Nigeria.2 Head of Software Engineering: DWIPS Technology Abuja, Nigeria.3 The researchers welcome criticism and suggestion to improve future research directions on the issues analyzed inthis study. We also wish to thank the anonymous sponsor of this study. Send critics to [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/20

number of other negative consequences (Ipaye, 1998). Youth employment is a crucial

issue in Nigeria because the youth constitute a major part of the labour force and they

have innovative ideas, which among other factors are important in the development

process of the country.

Aside the changes in labour market institution, urbanization issues and the rising

rate of the population demographics of the country which is faster than the job

opportunities, total neglect of the agricultural sectors and consequent mass exodus of

able bodied youths from the rural to urban areas has also worsen the effect of

unemployment due to continuous search of the none existing white cooler jobs. It is

against this backdrop of unemployment problems affecting states and the economy

that this research tries to investigate as a contemporary study in Nigeria. This is because

employment problem has become chronic and should be a matter of utmost national

concern.

Research QuestionsBased on the problem of the study, the following research questions form the basis ofthis investigation:

I. What is the magnitude impact of unemployment on Nigeria economy?II. What step should be taken to ensure that economic growth is such that brings

about decrease in unemployment in Nigeria?III. What is the tradeoff between seasonality in agricultural produce and rate of

unemployment change in Nigeria?

Objective of the StudyThe objectives that will guide this study are as follows;

I. To determine the relationship between unemployment and economic growth inNigeria.


3/20

II. To ascertain how structural changes in agricultural & manufacturing productioncan affect unemployment rate.

III. To measure the likelihood effect of unemployment on Nigeria growth &

development

IV. To conduct a comparative evaluation of unemployment rate among the 36 statein Nigeria.

V. To fill gap in literature and make policy recommendations based on findings ofthis research.

Significance of the study

One of the macroeconomics goals of any country is the actualization of full

employment. Therefore, unemployment in any system is seen as a policy failure.

However, there is always concerted effort on the part of the government in checkmating

the impact of unemployment in an economy. This study of unemployment is therefore

important to the economic policy makers, politicians, and graduates of higher

institutions in all discipline most especially graduate of business management. Firstly, to

the policy makers, this study will help in ascertaining the rate of unemployment in

Nigeria to the desired height. And the policy maker with the knowledge of the state of

unemployment in the system stands the best chance of controlling it through

appropriate initiative like poverty eradication programmes and creation of employment

opportunities that touches the lives of the population. Secondly, to Politicians, this

study is informative to would be Nigerian states governors to take decision concerning


4/20

the formation of policy towards setting-up cottage industry to reduce structural

unemployment affecting states that are public sector driven. Thirdly, university graduate

of business that have access to the findings of this report will also learn to be proactive

in the choice of sector where their managerial skills can be channel to; thereby averting

under capacity utilization (underemployment).

Data Presentation

Analysis and Interpretations

The fundamental reasoning & directions in the measurement of economic development

in the 21 st century is, advancement towards equitable opportunities (inclusive) for

economic participants during the process of economic growth with benefits to every

Year Rate of Unempl % change of unempl GDP % change in GDP % Agricultural contribution t % Manufacturing contribution to GDP1985 6.1 _ 201036.3 _ 32.7 10.951986 5.3 -13.11 205971.4 2.45 35 11.041987 7 32.08 204806.5 -0.57 33.9 8.241988 5.1 -27.14 219875.6 7.36 34.9 9.231989 4.5 -11.76 236729.6 7.67 34.1 6.701990 3.5 -22.22 267550 13.02 31.5 6.201991 3.1 -11.43 265379.1 -0.81 32.97 7.001992 3.5 12.90 271365.5 2.26 32.92 5.661993 3.4 -2.86 274833.3 1.28 32.96 6.641994 3.2 -5.88 275450.6 0.22 33.7 8.541995 1.9 -40.63 281407.4 2.16 34.1 6.371996 2.8 47.37 293745.4 4.38 34.1 5.681997 3.4 21.43 302022.5 2.82 34.6 6.011998 3.5 2.94 310890.1 2.94 35 6.301999 17.5 400.00 312183.5 0.42 36.69 5.632000 13.1 -25.14 329178.7 5.44 35.83 4.182001 13.6 3.82 356994.3 8.45 34.32 4.942002 12.6 -7.35 433203.5 21.35 43.89 3.892003 14.8 17.46 477533 10.23 42.59 3.842004 13.4 -9.46 527576 10.48 40.98 3.592005 11.9 -11.19 561931.4 6.51 41.19 3.322006 12.3 3.36 595821.6 6.03 41.72 3.062007 12.7 3.25 634251.1 6.45 42.01 2.992008 14.9 17.32 672202.6 5.98 42.12 2.852009 19.7 32.21 716949.7 6.66 41.84 3.01

Sources: NBS, 2010, CBN 2005, 2006 and 2009 Annual Reports

Table I: Unemployment Rate and Gross Domestic Product (Value Approach)


5/20

section of the society. Inclusive growth takes a longer-term perspective, as the focus is

on productive employment as a means of increasing the income of the poor and

excluded groups & raising their standard of living (Wikipedia, 2014). In this case, what is

the tradeoff between seasonality in agricultural produce and rate of unemployment

change in Nigeria? The insight required to find answers to this research question can be

found in exhibit A below. This question hinges on axiom that economic growth cannot

be divorced of productive sector development and employment creation.

One objective of this study is to ascertain how structural shift in the productivity of

agricultural & manufacturing outputs can affect unemployment rate. Following

Wikipedia 2014 report- sustainable economic growth requires inclusive growth. An

insight from exhibit A reveals that seasonal growth in agriculture produce ranges

Source: Data factbook from Nigeria n bureau of statistics 2010 and Central bank of Nigeria 2005 - 2009

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1 9 8 5

1 9 8 6

1 9 8 7

1 9 8 8

1 9 8 9

1 9 9 0

1 9 9 1

1 9 9 2

1 9 9 3

1 9 9 4

1 9 9 5

1 9 9 6

1 9 9 7

1 9 9 8

1 9 9 9

2 0 0 0

2 0 0 1

2 0 0 2

2 0 0 3

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 5

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 7

2 0 0 8

2 0 0 9

r a t i o

o f g r o w t h p e r y e a r

Exhibit A: Tradeoff between seasonality of Agricultural produce,downturn in Nigeria Manufacturing output and development issues

(1985-2009)

% of Agricultural contribution to GDP (left scale axis)

% of Manufacturing contribution to GDP (right scale axis)


6/20

between 32%-43% approximation within twenty five years (1985-2009) of development

period. However, due to urbanization & repeated migration of youth (age group of 20-

44) in rural to urban communities adapting Todaro (1985) migration hypothesis;

agricultural productivity in relation to economic growth is therefore traceable to activity

based predominantly to people living in rural area within specific age limits (age group

of 15 19, 55 59 and 65+).

Conversely, the downturn in local productivity of manufacturing sector in Nigeria

is a limiting factor hindering inclusive growth. Within 1985-1990, close to 6%-11%

productive manufacturing performance was achieved in Nigeria. In contrast, fewer than

4% growth ratio in manufacturing contribution to GDP is the reality in 2004-2009

periods (see exhibit A). Simply put, a significant employment risk factor of 1.3% on

average, will impact youth employment potential adversely in manufacturing sector.

Employment risk is a comparison of 1.68 average of absolute deviation of 1985-1990

data points to that of 0.37 within 2004-2009 respectively.

To this end, one fundamental approach to address youth unemployment as

development issues that is peculiar to this study is a prime readjustment of

empowerment program for the youth in relation to inclusive growth. For example, using

25-44 age distribution, an optimal scheme for the unemployed with self-employment or

SMEs operational interest, should go beyond short-term (1-2 years period) skill training

programme addressing technical aspects of business setup; but rather, empowerment


7/20

program to beneficiary should also be inclusive of 3-5 years cash transfer payment on

quarterly basis within entrepreneurial trial period required to risk failure and create

sustainable activities for his/her setup venture in support towards productive

employment needs in low-income countries, like the case of Nigeria where general

unemployment rate is rising (see Exhibit B below).

In Nigeria, another instrumental factor to address development issues of youth

unemployment is urbanization processes. A situation where many believed that gainful

employment opportunity is city bound due to large factories possibilities & high activity

rate in the urban communities. Based on the premise where structural unemployment

affects many states among the 36 states including federal capital territory (Abuja) that is

public sector driven, what step should be taken to ensure that economic growth is such

that brings about decrease in unemployment in Nigeria? If given the research objective

to determine the relationship between unemployment and economic growth in Nigeria.

The ideal approach cannot be divorced of nonlinear correlation estimate threshold

found in table II & Exhibit B below.

Table II: Correlations Unemployment

rate (%)Gross Domestic

Product valueSpearman's rho Unemployment rate (%) Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .612

Sig. (2-tailed) . .001N 25 25

Gross Domestic Productvalue

Correlation Coefficient .612 1.000Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .N 25 25

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).


8/20

The result in table II shows that Nigeria economic growth (GDP) and prevailing

unemployment rate are both interdependent at 61.2% rank (rho) correlation coefficient

measurement. Put differently, that positive relationship exist between this two

macroeconomic variables (the reverse is also possible).

Using baseline threshold in Exhibit B aligned with the prime readjustment strategy, this

study therefore follow policy analysis on growth and employment report (PAGE

Initiative, 2013). Adapting the thematic focus of partnership for economic policy -

inclusive growth is about raising the pace of growth and enlarging the size of the

economy, while leveling the playing field for investment and increasing productive

employment opportunities (PEP, 2013). In this case therefore, the sub-optimal or


9/20

defunct reform of structural adjustment programme (SAP 1986-1994) and NEEDs

(national economic empowerment development strategy 1&2) crafted with key cardinal

focus to drive employment generation for youth, did not achieved sustainable impact

beyond reform periods (see exhibit B). Why? because the intervention

programme/reforms were not planned with impact evaluation & follow-up policy

review; Hence, the 32.08% high change in unemployment rate recorded in 1987 after

SAP launch, remains the same 32.21% in 2009 immediately after NEEDs programme

suspension (see exhibit B) by the new federal government regime in Nigeria by May,

2007. Though, series of reforms inclusive of MDG intervention, had yielded 6.66% GDP

growth in 2009 when compare to the adverse growth (-0.57%) level in 1987, this

economic growth is not inclusive due to the rise in general unemployment level and

population in Nigeria as at 2009 observation.

Hypothesis testing

What is the magnitude impact of unemployment on Nigeria economy? Considering the

learning or research outcome with scientific goals to measure the likelihood effect of

unemployment on Nigeria growth & development; the hypothesis restated here is:

H0: Unemployment does not have significant effect on economic growth &

development in Nigeria.

H1: Unemployment does have a significant effect on the economic growth &

development in Nigeria.


10/20

Table III: Model Summary and Parameter Estimates Dependent Variable: Gross Domestic Product valueEquation Model Summary Parameter Estimates

R Square F df1 df2 Sig. Constant b1di

men

sion1

Power .482 21.430 1 23 .000 162713.042 .387Growth .562 29.548 1 23 .000 12.277 .054

The independent variable is Unemployment rate (%).

The model summary result found in table III shows that an estimated 48.2% (R 2 = 0.482)

variability in Nigeria economic growth on average (dependent variable being GDP

values) is being explained by annual changing rate of unemployment variable

(predictor), if power calculation technique is administered. A counterfactual

investigation conducted by Tabeuina Daveri (2000) found empirical support by raising a

hypothesis that unemployment has a negative effect on economic growth while Layard

and Nickell (1999) supported findings that the labour market institution that increase

unemployment also lower economic growth. By contrast, following result in table III, the

growth equation lacked sufficient impact estimate (b 1 = 0.054) to predict Nigerian

economy from changes found in unemployment rate (25 years period: [1985-2009])

Fundamentally, using a causal effect approach in table III, the Interpretation of

parameter estimate statistic on average outcome suggest that; each unit group of

persons added to unemployment grid thus produces 38.7% impact (see table III: b 1 =

0.387) on economic growth (GDP value). But the average outcome here is without

feedback effect to explain development issues relating to inclusive growth and

productive employment in the long-run. However, the regression parameter estimate


11/20

found in the power equation result (see Table III) is statistically significant (Sig.=0.000 dataX2002 X2003 X2004 X2005 X2006 X2007 X2008

ABIA 14.8 11.4 9.65 7.9 13.5 10.9 14.50ADAMAWA 12.9 11.9 16.65 21.4 17.9 11.9 29.40AKWA-IBOM 12.3 14.4 14.40 14.4 15.3 13.5 34.10ANAMBRA 6.6 9.1 9.45 9.8 10.8 11.1 16.80BAUCHI 10.4 20.5 25.10 29.7 23.9 7.3 37.20BAYELSA 3.5 7.1 14.00 20.9 16.0 6.9 38.40BENUE 8.2 4.8 11.70 18.6 10.8 67.4 8.50BORNO 6.4 0.8 3.55 6.3 5.8 7.8 27.70CROSS-RIVER 7.9 12.0 11.50 11.1 16.9 11.8 14.30DELTA 14.9 17.1 10.80 4.5 13.8 18.9 18.40EBONYI 2.8 16.7 11.80 7.0 10.9 11.5 12.00EDO 4.8 3.1 6.50 9.9 8.6 5.1 12.20EKITI 17.5 8.2 7.85 7.5 8.7 15.6 20.60ENUGU 15.2 16.5 21.60 27.4 20.0 11.5 14.90GOMBE 13.4 7.6 15.20 22.8 15.6 10.5 32.10IMO 19.9 22.1 19.30 16.5 21.5 7.6 20.80JIGAWA 6.1 20.5 19.80 19.1 21.6 17.4 26.50KADUNA 8.4 19.6 15.90 12.1 14.1 5.9 11.60KANO 12.8 25.9 22.50 19.1 19.4 12.7 27.60KATSINA 10.4 20.3 22.10 23.8 19.3 5.8 37.30


12/20

KEBBI 12.3 19.8 19.90 19.9 15.2 11.8 12.00KOGI 19.9 14.9 11.80 8.7 12.5 16.5 19.00KWARA 8.8 5.4 4.20 2.9 7.5 16.4 11.00LAGOS 8.0 25.6 16.10 6.5 15.5 10.2 19.50NASARAWA 1.6 5.1 6.90 8.7 8.1 7.6 10.10NIGER 6.3 6.7 3.50 0.2 3.6 17.0 11.93OGUN 9.2 1.3 1.90 2.5 2.3 3.9 8.50ONDO 16.8 7.3 6.80 6.2 6.7 5.8 14.90OSUN 1.0 0.4 1.20 1.9 2.7 6.3 12.60OYO 7.0 0.8 3.10 5.3 4.3 6.5 14.90PLATEAU 11.8 0.4 1.60 2.8 2.9 8.7 7.10RIVERS 6.6 15.3 11.20 7.0 25.0 4.7 27.90SOKOTO 4.1 4.9 4.50 4.1 6.4 12.1 22.40TARABA 16.8 23.8 13.60 3.4 14.0 5.9 26.80YOBE 15.0 12.1 10.70 8.0 13.6 19.9 27.30ZAMFARA 46.4 71.5 61.30 51.1 50.8 12.8 13.30FCT 14.4 5.3 5.90 6.5 16.4 16.4 21.50

> data.agnes data.agnesCall: agnes(x = data, metric = "manhattan", stand = TRUE, method ="average")Agglomerative coefficient: 0.8758194Order of objects:

[1] ABIA ANAMBRA CROSS-RIVER EBONYI KADUNA LAGOS[7] DELTA YOBE KOGI EKITI FCT RIVERS

[13] TARABA BORNO OYO SOKOTO EDO NASARAWA[19] OGUN PLATEAU OSUN KWARA NIGER ONDO[25] ADAMAWA GOMBE AKWA-IBOM BAYELSA BAUCHI KATSINA[31] ENUGU KEBBI IMO JIGAWA KANO BENUE[37] ZAMFARAHeight (summary):

Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max.1.890 2.925 3.804 5.440 5.467 35.260

Available components:

[1] "order" "height" "ac" "merge" "diss" "call""method"[8] "order.lab" "data"

From the evidences contained the data, the Dendrogram (using average linkage

between groups: see graph below) result suggests that people living in various state like

Delta, Yobe, Kogi, Ekiti and FCT (federal capital territory tends to have similar

unemployment challenges. These category of states are therefore classified as one

group. However, the dendogram suggests further that when the dwellers, particularly

the youth living in this particular group of five as one identity, decides to migrate to

another neighbor class of group (Abia, Anambra, Cross-River, Ebonyi, Kaduna and

lagos), to search and compete for few available jobs in a state with high population


13/20

density and large number of manufacturing and service firms or industry; such migrants

that may be faced with information asymmetric in the labour market might create an

unintended job competition among the people in the other states. The possible solution

to this issue stated here, is for policy makers to address inclusive growth andemployment risk as explained in context found previously in exhibit A model.


14/20

Discussion of Findings

For policy review, another major example of sub-optimal empowerment program in

practice is the graduate internship scheme (GIS) initiative under the SURE-P (Subsidy

reinvestment and empowerment programme) intervention of Nigeria federalgovernment in 2011. GIS aims to provide Nigerian graduates with quality temporary

work experience that will make them stronger candidates for job openings in the labour

market through a one-year internship placement (Papka P.M. August 6, Project Director

(GIS) report, 2014). Stating further that, during the period of internship, the Federal

Government will provide each intern with a monthly stipend payment of N30,000, and a

group life Insurance.

Empirically, consequent upon the findings in this study, the rising rate of unemployed

persons irrespective of gender, age distribution and geographical location is a signal to

measure the unproductive sector in which the youth as a group is more vulnerable.

Unemployment rate according to Begg, (2004) is the percentage of people in the labour

force without jobs. However, to level up this scientific investigation, the productive

sector cannot be left out of research equation. Productive sector of the Nigeria

economy in this context is inclusive of Agricultural & manufacturing sectors

contribution, but not limited to this critical sector (see Exhibit A). For comparison, the

impact of productive sector to the economy which is the unexplained factor (see Model

summary in table III) in the curve estimation regression model (1- R 2 statistic: [1-0.482]

= 0.518) is put at 51.8% probability estimate approximately for power calculation.


15/20

Summary of Findings

One major rationale to understand the strong positive correlation (rho= 0.612) between

unemployment rate and economic growth indicator in Nigeria is that raising the gross

domestic product (value approach) is critical for the control of rising unemployment rate

though; the outcome may not be parallel in the long-run (see exhibit C & table II).

Corroborating Walterskirchen (1999) the simple, but wrong argument is: There can be

no negative relationship between economic growth and unemployment, because GDP

and unemployment are both rising in the long run. Conversely, the macroeconomic

policy framework has enhanced the stability (year-on-year change in GDP) of Nigerian

economy. In contrast, the shift (year-on-year change in unemployment rate) in labour


16/20

market issues extends towards an irrational patterns (1988-2000: see exhibit B) hence,

the need for prime readjustment strategy to tackle unemployment affecting the

standard of living of the youth in Nigeria.

Conclusions

The dynamics of impact evaluation in relation to unemployment and economic growth

in Nigeria have been fully explained in this study. Although few hindrances to interpret

the cause-effect factor (predictive) of labour market supply and economic development

in developing countries such as the Nigeria case is still problematic. However, the

estimated 38.7% average impact of unemployment on economic growth indicator for

twenty five annual period (long-term: 1985-2009) can be approached as implicit cost

associated with marginal unit of output that can be produced locally if the unemployed

grid of people particularly the youth are nationally motivated to experiment

entrepreneurial initiatives to create value to their immediate communities, rather than

migrating to urban labour market in search of high rewarding jobs.

Recommendations

One main recommendation based on evidences in this study is that government policy

relating to labour market reforms in Nigeria should be integrated with a baseline &

follow-up actions of reforms impact evaluation to curb policy shock or unintended

effect of empowerment scheme.


17/20

Policy makers especially in Nigeria and particularly the policy interventions at the state

level should acknowledge the fact that civil service jobs extension is not likely to account

for productive employment creation for 21 st century youth. This explains the missing link

of inclusive growth approach.

The Nigerian youth are likely to be left behind when short-term skills acquisition

program is not planned with sustainable Prime readjustment strategy that can absorb

failure risk of self-employed or green entrepreneurial drives to create activity based

business that can employ more people locally.

The employment risk factor attributed to loss of jobs in the manufacturing sector in

Nigeria on a long-term measurement approach should be controlled through optimal

labour market reforms and economic development policies review.


18/20

REFERENCE

Adelodun, S. (2006). How to be your own boss. Daily Sun : The Sun News Online 2005 .

Retrieved from http://www.a:/unemployment.htm

Anyanwu, J. C., (2005). Rural Poverty in Nigeria: Profile, Determinants and Exit Paths.

African Development Review , Vol. 17, Issue 3, December 2005, 435-460.

ISHR, (2006). Activities Report. ISHR Group Nigeria 2001 ; Retrieved from

http://www.ishrgroup.com

Omotosho, (2009). Problems and counseling needs of unemployed youths in Nigeria.

Bajoma, O. (1996), Manpower Utilization in Nigeria: Analysis of some causes and

consequences of Unemployment . Lagos, FBN Bi-Annual Review.

Bello, (2003). Meeting the Challenge Of Risking Unemployment In Employment, Policy &

Strategy Formulation Mission To Nigeria. Report Submitted By The Ilo. 21st Oct-

22nd November.

Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Statistical Bulletin (Volume 16, 2005 Edition, & Volume 19,

2008 Edition) Retrieved From Www.Cenbank.Org

Davidson, & Mackinnon. (1993). Theory of Employment, Interested & Money . London:

Macmillan.

Downess. (1998). Oxford Economics Papers . 19(15) 24-25.

Gbosi, A.N. (2005). The Dynamics of Managing Chronic Unemployment in Nigerias

depressed Economy . Inaugural Lecture Series.

Gujarati, (1995). Growth & Employment, in Development Problem Countries . New York:

Mcgraw-Hill, Publishers.

Ipaye, B. (1998). Counseling the unemployed : Some exploratory ideas for the Nigerian

Counselors.

Levin & Wright, (2000). Nigeria Unemployment Problem Tim Int. Journal, Sept,19 Vol.1

No 1.
http://www.a/unemployment.htmhttp://www.a/unemployment.htmhttp://www.a/unemployment.htmhttp://www.ishrgroup.com/http://www.ishrgroup.com/http://www.cenbank.org/http://www.cenbank.org/http://www.cenbank.org/http://www.cenbank.org/http://www.ishrgroup.com/http://www.a/unemployment.htm


19/20

Lindbeck, A. (1999). Unemployment Structural : Institute of International Economic

Studies . Stockholm University; Seminar Paper No. 676, October.

Lindbect. (1999). Unemployment In Developing Countries: An Over-View . New York: Mc-

Grow-Hill Publishers.Machin, S and Manning, A. (1998). The Causes and Consequences of Long Term

Unemployment in Europe . Centre for Economic Performance, London School of

Economics; July.

Meier, G. (1988). International Economics: The Theory of Policy , New York: Oxford Press.

National Bureau of Statistics. (2012), National Unemployment Rates (1995 - 2011).

Retrieved from www.nigerianstat.gov.ng

Nickel. (1999) Issues on Unemployment & Violence , Second Edition. New York Grow-Hill.

Okafor, E.E. (2011). Youth Unemployment and Implications for Stability of Democracy in

Nigeria . Department of Sociology, University of Ibadan: Ibadan, Nigeria.

Olison, (1984). The Federal Solution Political Studies Vol.1.

Olueye78, (2006).Management & Unemployment in Nigeria.

Osinubi, (2006).The Political Crisis & Solution Vanguard july 19

Todaro, M. R. (1989), A Model of Labour Migration and Urban Unemployment in Less-

Developed Countries , American Economic Review.

Geddes, Barbara (1990). How the Cases You Choose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection

Bias in Comparative Politics . Political Analysis . Vol. 2: 131-150.

Geddes, B. (2003). Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in

Comparative Politics , University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor.

George, and McKeown, (1985). Case Studies and Theories of Organizational Decision

Making, in Advances in Information Processing in Organizations . A Research

Annual, Vol. 2, ed. Robert F. Coulam and Richard A. Smith (Greenwich,

Conn.: JAI Press, 1985): 34 41.


20/20

NPC Report, (2004). National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy

(NEEDS), National planning Commission. Abuja, Nigeria.

PEP, (2013). Policy Analysis on growth and employment: thematic focus towards Inclusive

growth.

PEP, (2014). Fostering Entrepreneurship for Inclusive Growth and Poverty Reduction:

Conclusions and Recommendations from discussion panels, International Policy

Forum, Santa Cruz, Bolivia, May 7, 2014.

Wikipedia, (2014) Sustainable and Inclusive growth

Papka P.M. August 6, Project Director (GIS) SURE-P: [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

Documents

Inclusive Growth and Employment Risk 1985-2009