The Economic and Social Impact of Privatisation of State-owned Enterprises in Africa

The case for privatization, whether defined in a broad or narrow sense, has been forcefully made by its advocates against the backdrop of the much advertised poor performances of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and theoretical arguments relating to the efficiency of private firms over public enterprises. Consequently, privatization and commercialization have been key components of the structural adjustment programmes foisted by the Bretton Woods institutions on Third World countries. Yet, the empirical findings on privatization, especially outside Africa where they exist, do not portray the strategy to be a panacea that works in all circumstances in all branches of economic activity. In spite of this, since the late 1980s, privatization has been stepped up in almost all African countries. And after about two decades of vigorous implementation of privatization programmes in Africa, there is a compelling need for a comprehensive and systematic analysis of various privatization issues, particularly the economic and social impact. This book thus establishes a clear case for a comprehensive and systematic analysis of the impact of privatization in Africa. Specifically, the book provides a state-of-the art review of privatization issues and research questions as a prelude to an in-depth study of the economic and social impact of privatization. In the light of the rich insights brought to bear on the issues, this book should stimulate the interest of researchers, donors and policy makers to undertake or support the follow-up in-depth research envisaged

PRODUCTIVITY AND UNEMPLOYMENT IN NIGERIA

Productivity and employment are issues that are central to the social and economic life of every country. The extant literature refers to productivity and unemployment as constituting a vicious circle that explains the endemic nature of poverty in developing countries. And it has been argued that continuous improvement in productivity is the surest way to breaking this vicious circle. Growth in productivity provides a significant basis for adequate supply of goods and services thereby improving the welfare of the people and enhancing social progress. As pointed out by Dernburg (1985:63), "Without it there would be no growth in per capita income, and inflation control would be all the more difficult". In fact, the observation has been made that continuous enhancement of productivity has been very central to the brilliant performance of the Asian Tigers and Japan in recent years (Simbeye, 1992; World Bank 1993). Recent developments in the world economy have also shown that countries with high productivity are not only central to the determination of global balance of powers (e.g Japan and Germany), but also serve as centres of stimulus, where world resources (including labour) are redirected to, as opposed to countries with low or declining productivity. Recent studies, for example, Rensburg and Nande (1999) and Roberts and Tybout (1997) have also shown that high productivity increases competitiveness in terms of penetrating the world market. Thus, a country with high productivity is often characterized by a very high capacity utilization (optimal use of resources), high standard of living, low rate of unemployment and social progress. Unemployment, on the other hand, has been categorized as one of the serious impediments to social progress. Apart from representing a colossal waste of a country's manpower resources, it generates welfare loss in terms of lower output thereby leading to lower income and well-being (Akinboyo, 1987; and Raheem, 1993). Unemployment is a very serious issue in Africa (Vandemoortele, 1991 and Rama, 1998) and particularly in Nigeria (Oladeji, 1994 and Umo, 1996). The need to avert the negative effects of unemployment has made the tackling of unemployment problems to feature very prominently in the development objectives of many developing countries. Incidentally, most of these countries' economies are also characterized by low productivity. Thus, it seems obvious to many policy makers that there must be a straight forward connection between productivity and employment/unemployment. However, the theoretical linkage between productivity and unemployment is yet to be settled in the literature. While some researchers posit that higher productivity may increase unemployment (e.g. Diachavbre, 1991; Krugman, 1994), some others argue that it could increase employment (e.g Yesufu, 1984; Akerele, 1994; CEC, 1993). In view of the unfolding reality coupled with the protracted debates this paper attempts to examine the linkage between productivity and unemployment. Specifically, it examines the dimensions of productivity and unemployment in Nigeria as well as the direction of causality between them. To this end, the rest of the paper is organized thus. Following this introduction is part II, which examines the conceptual and theoretical is sues. Part III discusses the profile of productivity and unemployment in Nigeria while the empirical link between them is examined in part IV. The final part contains the policy implications and conclusions

Savings, Investment and Growth Patterns in Developed and Developing countries

Variations in growth performances across regions of the world have been of significant interest to development economists. Prior to the spectacular growth of many of the East Asian economies, a variety of structural and non-structural factors were employed to explain the differences in growth_ performances. Since that time, however, regional variation in growth achievement has been explained in terms of differences in savings and investment performances. It has been widely observed in the literature that some regions ( e.g., Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America) tend to save and invest a smaller proportion of their aggregate outputs than did their more dynamic counterparts (e.g., Asia and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Countries (OECD)). Our interest in the linkage between savings, investment and economic growth is not new in the economic development literature. The works of Arthur Lewis in the 1950s, for example, portray the central task of economic development as that of raising the proportion of national income saved and invested from 4-5 per cent to 12-15 per cent (Lewis 1954). Recent theoretical perspectives, typified by endogenous growth models, suggest that high investment rates can result in a permanent increase in an economy's overall growth rates (Romer:·1986; Lucas 1988). Both theoretical approaches identify investment as a fundamental factor in economic growth. In contrast to developed countries, where growth- problems were viewed in the Keynesian sense of too much saving and too little spending, investment and, hence, economic growth in developing countries were constrained by the insufficiency of savings (James, et al 1987). In this context, evidence from development experiences strongly suggests that the best performing countries (even among the developing ones), have achieved this status largely on the basis of their high rates of savings and investmen

PRODUCTIVITY AND UNEMPLOYMENT IN NIGERIA

The need to avert the negative effects of unemployment has made the tackling of unemployment problems to feature very prominently in the development objectives of many developing countries. Incidentally, most of these countries' economies are also characterized by low productivity. Thus, it seems obvious to many policy makers that there must be a straight forward connection between productivity and employment/unemployment. However, the theoretical linkage between productivity and unemployment is yet to be settled in the literature. While some researchers posit that higher productivity may increase unemployment (e.g. Diachavbre, 1991; Krugman, 1994), some others argue that it could increase employment (e.g Yesufu, 1984; Akerele, 1994; CEC, 1993). In view of the unfolding reality coupled with the protracted debates this paper attempts to examine the linkage between productivity and unemployment. Specifically, it examines the dimensions of productivity and unemployment in Nigeria as well as the direction of causality between them. To this end, the rest of the paper is organized thus. Following this introduction is part II, which examines the conceptual and theoretical is sues. Part III discusses the profile of productivity and unemployment in Nigeria while the empirical link between them is examined in part IV. The final part contains the policy implications and conclusions

The Role of Goal-Setting and Action Plans in Leadership Effectiveness in Nigerian Higher Educational Institutions

Every organisation, worldover, has contributed to witness changes in technology, demand patterns, socio-political circumstances, customer tastes and so on. This includes the tertiary institution in general and the polytechnics in particular. With the globalisation of products and market, it becomes compulsory for institutions charged with the responsibility of developing specialised and critical mass of human capital to seek ways of responding quickly to these changing needs. Some of which are the adoption of modern management skills for planning long-range progress. This effective goal-setting and action planning in higher educational institutions through the conceptualization of mission and vision statements for the organisation where they do not exist, the reduction of every job type to specific duties and responsibilities in order to determine level and standards of performance for each; establishing performance indicators; simplifying targets to measurable, attainable, realistic and time-bound (SMART); conduct self evaluation even before they are appraised by their supervisors among others. Also suggested is the need for equitable reward system, the conduct of a review of the corporate values as well as the desired employee behaviours and work ethics when there are obvious reasons to do so. Nigerian Journal of Clinical and Counselling Psychology Vol.8(1) 2002: 77-10

Productivity and Unemployment in Nigeria

Productivity and employment are issues that are central to the social and economic life of every country. The extant literature refers to productivity and unemployment as constituting a vicious circle that explains the endemic nature of poverty in developing countries. And it has been argued that continuous improvement in productivity is the surest way to breaking this vicious circle. Growth in productivity provides a significant basis for adequate supply of goods and services thereby improving the welfare of the people and enhancing social progress. As pointed out by Dernburg (1985:63), "Without it there would be no growth in per capita income, and inflation control would be all the more difficult". In fact, the observation has been made that continuous enhancement of productivity has been very central to the brilliant performance of the Asian Tigers and Japan in recent years (Simbeye, 1992; World Bank 1993). Recent developments in the world economy have also shown that countries with high productivity are not only central to the determination of global balance of powers (e.g Japan and Germany), but also serve as centres of stimulus, where world resources (including labour) are redirected to, as opposed to countries with low or declining productivity. Recent studies, for example, Rensburg and Nande (1999) and Roberts and Tybout (1997) have also shown that high productivity increases competitiveness in terms of penetrating the world market. Thus, a country with high productivity is often characterized by a very high capacity utilization (optimal use of resources), high standard of living, low rate of unemployment and social progress. Unemployment, on the other hand, has been categorized as one of the serious impediments to social progress. Apart from representing a colossal waste of a country's manpower resources, it generates welfare loss in terms of lower output thereby leading to lower income and well-being (Akinboyo, 1987; and Raheem, 1993). Unemployment is a very serious issue in Africa (Vandemoortele, 1991 and Rama, 1998) and particularly in Nigeria (Oladeji, 1994 and Umo, 1996). The need to avert the negative effects of unemployment has made the tackling of unemployment problems to feature very prominently in the development objectives of many developing countries. Incidentally, most of these countries' economies are also characterized by low productivity. Thus, it seems obvious to many policy makers that there must be a straight forward connection between productivity and employment/unemployment. However, the theoretical linkage between productivity and unemployment is yet to be settled in the literature. While some researchers posit that higher productivity may increase unemployment (e.g. Diachavbre, 1991; Krugman, 1994), some others argue that it could increase employment (e.g Yesufu, 1984; Akerele, 1994; CEC, 1993). In view of the unfolding reality coupled with the protracted debates this paper attempts to examine the linkage between productivity and unemployment. Specifically, it examines the dimensions of productivity and unemployment in Nigeria as well as the direction of causality between them. To this end, the rest of the paper is organized thus. Following this introduction is part II, which examines the conceptual and theoretical is sues. Part III discusses the profile of productivity and unemployment in Nigeria while the empirical link between them is examined in part IV. The final part contains the policy implications and conclusions