Chukwuma Onyekachukwu Ike
Lecturer,
Department of Public Administration,
Anambra State University, Igbariam Campus.
Anambra State.
&
Rose Onyekwelu
Lecturer,
Department of Public Administration,
Anambra State University, Igbariam Campus.
Anambra State.
&
Uche Nora Okpalaibekwe
Lecturer,
Department of Public Administration,
Anambra State University, Igbariam Campus.
Anambra State.
Abstract
In September 2000, leaders from 189 nations ratified the Millennium
Declaration. The declaration is an unprecedented global commitment and one of
the most significant United Nations documents of recent time. It offers a
common and integrated vision on how to tackle some of the major challenges
facing the world. The declaration has resulted in eight Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) focused on reducing poverty, improving the quality of peoples’
lives, ensuring environmental sustainability, and building partnerships to
ensure that globalization becomes a more positive force for all the world’s
people. Specific targets and indicators have been set for each of the goals, to
be achieved by 2015. These goals might remain elusive unless much emphasis is
laid on the development of entrepreneurial skills. Entrepreneur can provide the
new approaches needed to hasten the process of reducing poverty and hunger.
This paper shows that while the MDGs do not formally set targets for financial
sector, Nigeria needs microfinance to empower the skilled economically active
poor through an integrated microfinance model in order to achieve the MDGs.
Introduction
The description of Nigeria as a paradox by the World
Bank (1996) has continued to be confirmed by events and official statistics in
the country. The paradox is that the poverty level in Nigeria contradicts the
country’s immense wealth. In September 2000, one hundred and eighty heads of
states ratified the Millennium Development Goals. The goals are unprecedented
global commitment and most significant world’s documents of recent time (UNDP,
2005). The declaration focused on poverty reduction, improving the quality of
people’s lives, ensuring environmental sustainability, and building partnerships
to ensure that globalization becomes a more positive force for the entire
world’s people (UNDP, 2003). Specific
targets and indicators have been set for each of the goals, to be achieved by
2015. To make a difference in these enormous forces, there is a need to think
in terms of transformational change in order to reverse these forces at global
and national levels.
In the light of the government’s concern for poverty
reduction, numerous policies and programmes have been designed at one time or
another, if not to meet the special needs of the poor, at least to reach them.
In this respect, the Millennium Development Goals provide a powerful organizing
framework for international actions to change the current patterns of
globalization and generate forces for greater democracy, equity and security.
According to Helsinki Process Track Report (2004), at the core of a
transformative development agenda is the need to strengthen the global
commitments to human governance. The agenda must be focused on strengthening
global ethics and responsibilities by bringing the principles of human
development and social protection into the concept of global economic
governance.
Since the MDGs
echo human aspirations of all, there is more congruence between local,
national, regional and global programmes for achieving them and less sense of
external agenda imposing constraints on national and local decisions. According
to Fosu (2005), while the world made significant progress towards achieving the
MDGs, Africa fared worst among the regions. lie argues that Africa saw the
slowest overall progress and suffered reversals in some crucial areas like
extreme poverty and adult life expectancy. The key element remain the fact that
the goals have been signed, leaders are to go back to their own countries and
translate the global agreement into national plans, commitment, strategies mind
budgets.
The critical
challenges facing Nigeria in achieving the MDGs are poverty and hunger,
joblessness, diseases, lack of shelter, environmental deterioration and gender
inequality. Nigeria is one of the poorest nations in the world. According to
the National Bureau of Statistics (2005), the national incidence of poverty in
Nigeria in 2004 was 75.5 per cent, which disaggregated into 70.7 per cent for
urban areas, and 79.2 per cent for rural areas. The report also showed that
54.7 per cent of the total population of Nigeria was living on less than one
dollar per day in 2004. The urban poverty incidence was 40.1 per cent compared
with rural poverty incidence of 60,6 per cent.
Nigeria was one
of the richest fifty countries in the early 197Os, She has retrogressed to
become one of the poorest countries at the threshold of the twenty first
century (Igbuzor, 2007). Despite the abundant natural resources in the country,
statistics show that the incidence of poverty using the rate of US $1 per day
increased from 28.1 per cent in 1980 to 46.3 per cent in 1985 and declined to
42.7 per cent in 1992, but increased again to 65.6 per cent in 1996 and stood
at 57.4 per cent in 2004 (National Bureau of Statistics, Various). The
rural dwellers constitute 60.6 per cent
of this population. The country fares poorly in all development indices. The
average annual percentage of growth of GDP from 1990 - 2000 was 2.4. This is
very poor when compared to Ghana (4.3) and Egypt (4.6). Nigeria is also one of
the twenty countries in the world with the widest gap between the rich and the
poor (Igbuzor, 2007). A Gini index of zero represents the perfect equality and
Nigeria has the highest Gini index in the world. The Gini index for Nigeria is
50.6, as against India (37.8), Jamaica (37.9), Mauritania (37.3) and Rwanda
(28.9) in 2004 (Human Development Report, 2007).
However, as a result of the continuous deterioration
of living conditions in the late 1980s, several poverty alleviation programmes
came on board. They were designed to impact positively on the poor. By the end
of 1998, there were sixteen poverty alleviation institutions in the country. In
1994, the Government set up a broad-based Poverty Alleviation Programme
Development Committee (PAPDC) under the aegis of the aegis of the National
Planning Commission. The primary objective of the PAPDC was to advise the
government on the design, coordination and implementation of poverty
alleviation programmes. Its work contributed immensely to the emergence of a
new approach to the design and organisation of poverty alleviation programmes
culminating in the establishment in 1996 of the Community Action Programme for
Poverty Alleviation (CAPPA). CAPPA is a community based approach which adopts a
combination of social funds and social action strategy. The CAPPA document drew
largely from the past experience on poverty reduction efforts in the country
and attempts to ensure that the poor are not only carried along in the design
and implementation of poverty projects that affect them but that the poor
themselves actually formulate and manage the poverty projects. Various agencies
(Government, Donors and NGOs) involved in poverty alleviation in the country
have embraced the CAPPA strategy. Also, in 1996, a draft National Poverty
Alleviation Policy document was produced by the Government through the National
Planning Commission. Its thrust is the improvement in human welfare in the
immediate and distant future.
Specifically, a number of government programmes
initiated in the past, have aimed at improving basic services, infrastructure
and housing facilities for the rural and urban population, extending access to
credit farm inputs, and creating employment. Most of the programmes were,
however, not specifically targeted towards the poor, though they affect them.
There are specific multi-sector programmes (water and sanitation, environment,
etc) as well as sector-specific programmes in agriculture, health, education,
transport, housing, finance, industry/manufacturing and nutrition.
In line with the
above, we are faced with the challenges of making the MDG work in Nigeria.
Whether Nigeria can meet the MDGs is a very important question that should be
agitating the minds of policy makers and scholars. This fear is compounded by
the NEEDS document which clearly states that “if the present trend continues,
the country is not likely to meet the MDGs”. This collaborates the Nigerian
first MDGs report in 2004 which states that “based on the available
information, it is unlikely that the country will be able to meet most of the
goals by 2015 especially the goals related to eradicating extreme hunger and
poverty”.
On the other
hand, the 2005 Nigerian MDGs report states that “given the current policy
environment and strong political will, there is also the likelihood of
eradicating extreme poverty and hunger”. According to Igbuzor (2007), the
conclusion of the MDGs 2005 report is very remarkable and gives hope that there
is possibility for achieving all the MDGs in Nigeria with sustained effort.
This conclusion is quite different from the conclusions reached by the first
report in 2004. It is intriguing that without providing the basis and reason
for the dramatic change, the 2005 report states that there is high potential to
achieve three of the goals (Goals, 2, 7 and 8), likelihood to achieve one of
the goals with strong political will (Goal 1) and the need for sustained
efforts to ensure that the country meets the remaining four goals (Goals 3, 4,
5 and 6).
The most basic
and undisputed fact about Nigerian extreme poverty is that it is overwhelmingly
rural. If the country continues at this rate of development, even in 2025 when
the majority of the world’s population is projected to live in urban areas, 60
per cent of the population will still be in rural. Against this background, it
is evident that rural development must be at the centre of approaches to reduce
overall poverty in Nigeria. The focus needs to be on enhancing the productive
role of rural poor people, on enabling them to improve their productivity and
increase their incomes. This can only come through entrepreneurship development
targeted at the economically active poor in the rural areas. Emphasis on
entrepreneurship development of the rural people does not imply that education,
health, access to water and sanitation, and other social investments are not
essential. They are, but social services will not be sustainable without
substantial investment in productive activities that enable the rural poor to
increase their productivity and raise their incomes. This is not taking place
in the country yet. Correcting this imbalance through an integrated micro
finance model is the main focus of this paper.
Entrepreneurship Development, Poverty
Eradication and Millennium Development Goals
Scholars have
documented enormous evidence which points to the fact that extreme poverty is
predominant in rural areas (IFAD, 2003; Helsinki, 2005, Nwafor, 2005). The
definition and conceptualization of poverty is complex and varied across fields
and regions. A poor person is considered as one without job, who cannot help
himself or cater for his family, who has no money, farm or business. Adolescent
males and females are poor if they have no parents, no education, no good food,
clothes and health (Aigbokhan, 2000). These poor persons are malnourished and
ageing fast, without self confidence, look dirty and live in filthy
environment. He or she cannot cater for his family, train his children in
school and pay medical bills. These persons predominantly are domiciled in the
rural areas of this country.
In Nigeria,
various strategies have been advocated in literature to address poverty
challenges. Prominent among these are growth strategy, basic needs strategy,
targeting approach, and employment-oriented approach.
Economic growth
approach, which goes back to the 1950s and 1960s development policy in
literature, emphasizes growth as central to any policy on poverty reduction.
However, because of the reliance on the ‘trickle down’ effect and on the pace
of growth, which may be driven by capital intensive production process, the
traditional growth approach has been found to produce less progress in poverty
reduction (Aigbokham, 2008). This has therefore, led to a shill in emphasis
from the pace of growth to the structure of growth strategy.
The basic needs
approach has as its main objective the need to satisfy the essential
requirements for minimum standard of living. The approach is concerned with
improving first, income earning opportunities for the poor, second, the public
service that reach the poor, third, the flow of goods and services to meet the
needs of all members of households, and fourth, the participation of the poor
in ways in which their needs are met (Ladgerwood, 2000).
The targeting
approach requires the directing of poverty alleviation programmes to specific
groups within the country. Components of the approach include micro- credit,
school meal, medical care, safety nets, and public works programmes. The
approach requires proper identification of the target group for effective
targeting.
The employment -
oriented target emphasizes employment promotion as the principal means of
spreading the benefits of economic development more evenly throughout the
economy. The pace growth objective was modified so as to maximize r not only
output, but also the rate of labour absorption.
The inevitable
conclusion from the foregoing is that in spite of the various prograrnmes
implemented to date, the incidence of poverty is still high and unemployment
problem remains daunting. Unlike in the past, focus should not be mainly on
public work schemes and public sector agencies, the level of corruption and
institutional weaknesses in public agencies. Policy should shift to the
promotion of private sector labour intensive growth. The rural development
approach should be adopted.
Rural development
approach derives from the perspective that the majority of the poor in
developing countries live in rural areas. The approach, therefore, emphasizes
the need to focus development effort in the sector. Though, there are variants
to this approach, the most prominent is perhaps the integrated rural
development variant. This variant recognizes that poverty is multi-dimensional
and therefore, requires multi-pronged approach. The approach seeks to develop
all sectors of the rural economy and link them up effectively. The components
of the approach include infrastructure development, provision of social
services and employment generation opportunities to the rural dwellers in
general and the rural poor in particular (Aigbokham, 2008).
Achieving
sustainable poverty reduction and broad-based economic growth depends on
enabling poor men and women to transform their livelihood. The poor need to be
given a chance to build their individual and collective skills and capabilities
in order to gain access to economic opportunities and basic social services and
infrastructure. Lack of a virile entrepreneurial institution makes it difficult
for the poor to exploit opportunities within their communities and to develop
links with external partners (IFAD, 2005).
The development
of entrepreneurship, as both concept and activity, has been identified as a
very important strategy for poverty reduction and attainment of MDGs. In
Nigeria, the primary barrier to achieving the MDGs is often not so much
scarcity of capital, labour or land as it is a scarcity of both the dynamic
entrepreneurs that can bring these together and the markets and the mechanisms
that can facilitate them in this task.
According to
UNDP (1999), entrepreneur is the process of using private initiative to
transform a business concept into a new venture or to grow and diversify an
existing venture or enterprise with high growth potential. There is a
wide-spread opinion that national or regional economic development is
associated with new firm creation intensity (e.g. Vanessa and Loomets, 2006).
New firms formation is considered as an important indicator of entrepreneurial
activity and key component in economic growth and development. Entrepreneurs
identify an innovation to seize an opportunity, mobilize money and management
skill, and take calculated risks to open markets for new products, processes
and services (Harper, 2003). While traditional theories are of the opinion that
entrepreneurs are born (innate principle which is stamped on the soul, and the
soul brings it into the world), modern development economics have argued
otherwise, and have also emphasized the need for entrepreneurship development.
Entrepreneurship development is the process of enhancing entrepreneurial skills
and knowledge through structured training and institution-building programmes
(UNDP, 2003).
Entrepreneurship
development aims to enlarge the base of entrepreneurs in order to hasten the
pace at which new ventures are created. There is the temptation of confusing
small and medium enterprise (SME) development and entrepreneurship development
by policy makers in Nigeria. Entrepreneurship development focuses on the
individual who wishes to start or expand business. Small and medium enterprise
development, on the other hand, focuses on developing the enterprise, whether
or not it employs or is led by individuals who can be considered as
entrepreneurs (UNDP, 2003). Furthermore, entrepreneurship development
concentrates more on growth potential and innovation than SME development does
(Evaluation Office, 1999). Entrepreneurship is the forerunner of the
development of small and medium enterprise (SME).
Entrepreneurship
development focuses on improving the culture and climate for enterprise. It
addresses the number and quality of entrepreneurs easing business entry
conditions and its objectives are broader than conventional small and medium
enterprise policy, extending beyond improving access of individual firms to
resources to increasing the future supply of knowledge entrepreneurs (Maduakoh,
2005).
Successful
entrepreneurship must be tied to funding and skill development. Inang and
Ukpong (1992) argue that available evidence shows that, in spite of the
existence of many special credit schemes and the crucial role that SSEs are
expected to play in grass-root development, the enterprises are yet to enjoy
reasonable access to credit as they largely depend on personal/family and
informal sources of funds. Micro finance has taken the centre stage as the
major source of credit to the economically active poor.
According to the
MDG Microfinance Guideline (2005), micro finance is a means to invest in
small-scale enterprise, informal and self employment opportunities to increase
income in cities access to employment is in itself is a means towards inclusion
and poverty reduction. It can also provide the financial means to adequate
housing and related essential services. The document argues further that small
enterprises and young entrepreneurs SU tThr most fiolmi a poor investment
climate. Access to credit and other financial srvices is important to growth
and investment, yet few small businesses and individuals are able to get the
access they need. This problem is compounded in the country by the unwilling
attitudes of universal banks m the country to make a paradigm shift in giving
credit to the rural poor.
The Need for an Integrated Microfinance
Bank Model in the Achieving MDG in Nigeria
Universal banks
traditionally lend to medium and large enterprises because they are adjudged to
be credit worthy. They avoid lending to the poor and micro enterprises because
of the associated cost and relatively high risk (Anyanwu, 2004). Microfinance
banks were created to till his credit gap. The practice of micro finance is
culturally rooted. In the 2005 World Summit, microfinance was prominent on the
agenda of that gathering (UNCDF 2005a). According to the 2005 World Summit
Document (UNCDF, 2005a), while the MDGs do not formally sets targets for
financial sector access, low-income countries need micro finance to achieve
MDGs. Microfinance underpins the achievement of many MDGs and plays a key role
in many MDGs strategies. Micro finance foster financially self-sufficient
domestic private sectors and creates wealth for low-income people.
The Central Bank
of Nigeria in 2005, made public a regulatory framework for microfinance banks
in Nigeria, According to CBN (2005), robust economic growth cannot be achieved
without putting in place well focused programmes to reduce poverty through
empowering the people by increasing their access to factors of production,
especially credit. CBN further states that the latent capacity of the poor for
entrepreneurship would be significantly enhanced through the provision of
microfinance services to enable them engage in economic activities and be more
self-reliant; increase employment opportunities, enhance household income, and
create wealth.
Microfinance has
evolved as an economic development approach, adopted by United Nations as MDGs
strategy intended to achieve the eradication of extreme poverty (UNDP, 2005).
The term refers to the provision of financial services to low-income clients,
including the self employed. UN Micro finance Readers’ Guide (2005) states that
microfinance is one of the practical development strategies and approaches that
should be implemented and supported to attain the bold ambition of reducing
world poverty by half. Mathieu Kerekon, the President of the Republic of Benin,
who spoke in his capacity as Chairman of Coordinating Bureau of the Least
Developed Countries also states that “2005 was declared the International Year
of Micro credit in order to stress the crucial importance of access to finance
and particularly to micro finance. Access by the poor people to financial
services is a powerful tool to fight poverty. Microfinance is an important
clement of the financial sector and must be treated as such. It makes a huge
different when poor people have access to a broad range of financial services,
whereby they can invest in income producing activities and meet their vital needs,
such as health, education and nutrition. The work that lies ahead is together
to commit to effective action, which will give US victory by helping the poor
people and target groups in our country to overcome destitution and disease. By
doing this, we will have done a good humanitarian deed. Finally, our fervent
wish is that these 1lesent deliberations lead to realistic solutions that
reflect the specific nature of the least developed countries-one that will help
reverse the persistent tendency of the impoverishment of their people and the
marginalization of their socioeconomic structure” (UNCDF, 2005a).
The Central of
Bank of Nigeria (CBN) responded to this clarion call by releasing to the public
a regulatory framework for microfinance banks in Nigeria in December, 2005. The
Microfinance Banks replaced the ailing Community Bank created in 1990 (Oluwole,
2008). Existing Community Banks were mandated to migrate to Microfinance Banks
within twenty four months of the approval of the policy. The framework also
made provision for unit and state micro finance banks. The existing NGOs which intend to operate
Microfinance Banks were given the option to incorporate a subsidiary MFB or
convert folly into MFB. This regulation brought Microfinance Banks in Nigeria under
the purview of CBN (CI3N, 2005).
The financial
services generally rendered by microfinance banks in Nigeria centred on
financial intermediation. The financial services include; small loan, typically
for working capital; informal appraisal of borrowers and investments;
collateral substitutes, such as group guarantees or compulsory savings; access
to repeat and smaller loan, based on repayment performance; streamlined loan
disbursement and monitoring; secure savings products. These are repeats of their
activities as community banks. This financial intermediation model has simply
made microfinance banks in Nigeria mere banks. Micro finance is not simply
banking, it is a development tool.
For Nigeria to
achieve the MDGs on eradicating extreme poverty, microfinance banks must adopt
the Microfinance Integrated Model. The integrated model or approach takes a
more holistic view of the clients (Lidgerwood, 2000). It provides a combination
or range of financial and social intermediation, entrepreneur development and
social services. financial intermediation involves the transfer of capital or
liquidity from those who have excess at a particular time to those who are
short at the same time (Pandey, 2004), Social intermediation is the process of
building human and social capital required for sustainable financial
intermediation with the poor (Ledgerwood, 2000). Entrepreneur development is
the process of enhancing entrepreneurial skills amid knowledge through
structured training and institution-building programmes (Evaluation Office,
1999). Entrepreneur development is one of the permissible activities oh’
microfinance banks in Nigeria.
Integrated microfinance model is the progenitor of local private sector development, because it
provides services that; help young economic active poor develop new skills and
experiences that can he applied to many other challenges in life; create
employment directly for entrepreneurs and indirectly for those they employ;
provide valuable products and services for the country (thereby reducing import
dependency); promote innovation and development that encourages the
economically active poor to find solutions, ideas and ways of doing things;
promote social change and cultural identity; create a sense of community one in
which young men and women are valued and better connected to society (UNCDF,
2005b). The model is particularly strong in private-sector advocacy for
entrepreneurship development.
and design
unique, innovative business opportunities, based on an analysis of local
conditions and their own special skills; entrepreneur development programmes
will have to include support for entrepreneurship orientation and awareness,
the development of competencies (skills, experience and attitudes) necessary to
recognize a market opportunity and organize the resources to meet it, and the
improvement of business performance for growth and competition; create special
measures to develop the desired competencies of trainers and facilitators;
launch a pilot entrepreneurship development programme and expand to other
locality; and internalize the entrepreneurship development support system so
that it has the momentum and capability to continue and expand through local
efforts.
Conclusion
The country’s
commitment to poverty is large and growing. To translate that commitment into
effective progress towards the achievement of the MDGs requires a deeper
understanding of who the poor are, what constitutes their livelihood, and the
root causes of their poverty- particularly in the rural areas of the developing
world where most poverty is concentrated. Until national commitment is matched
with that deeper understanding, its impact is likely to fall short of
expectation.
No amount of
national or international assistance will radically improve the rural
situation, unless such transformation is based on the aspirations, assets and
activities of rural people and unless poor people own the change process.
Donors, governments and development agencies cannot do development for the
poor. What they can do is assist and enable, in order words, change will take
place only to the extent that effective support is given to the rural
initiatives of individuals, groups and communities.
Major efforts
need to be made to remove the critical material, institutional and policy
obstacles that prevent the rural poor from seizing opportunities for improved
livelihoods in ways that they themselves can sustain and expand. Development
cannot be done for them. What can be done is to create the conditions that
empower the poor to become agent of change.
Today,
re-engagement in entrepreneurial development through integrated microfinance
model is essential, not only for achieving millennium development goals in
Nigeria, but also for increasing economic growth rates in the country. To be
effective however, this re-engagement will require a firm grasp of what
strategies and interventions will best contribute to achieving sustainable
rural development involving the rural people, not as beneficiaries, but as
empowered agents of change, capable of keeping pace in a world of, rapid
evolution.
The greatest
potential contribution that the proposed integrated microfinance bank can make
to the MDGs process in Nigeria is to spearhead a re-thinking of the rural
development through identifying local needs and developing entrepreneurs,
making them have access to capital, in order to bring about the much clamoured
development.
References
Aigbokhan, BE. (2000), “Poverty, Growth and
Inequality in Nigeria: A Case Study”, African Economic Research Consortium,
Nairobi, Kenya
Aigbokhan, B.E. (2008), “Growth, Inequality anti
Poverty in Nigeria”, Economic Commission for ACGS/MPAMS Discussion Paper No. 3
Anyanwu, C.M. (2004), “Microfinance Institutions in Nigeria: Policy, Practice
and Potentials”, A Paper Presented at the 024 Workshop on “Constraints to
Growth in Suub Sahara Africa”, Pretoria. South Africa, November 29-30
CBN (2005), Microfinance Policy, Regulatory and
Supervisory Framework for Nigeria
Evaluation Office (1999), “Entrepreneurship
Development”, Essential Synthesis of Lessons Learned, No.2.
Fosu, A. (2005), “Achieving the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) in Africa: An Issues Paper, A Paper Presented at the Conference of
African
Ministers of Finance, Planning and Economic
Development, 11th — 13th
May, Abuja Nigeria
Harper, A.D. (2003), Foundations of Entrepreneurship
and Economic Development, New York: Routledge
Helsinki, (2005), Mobilizing Resource for the
Millennium Development Goals, Report of the Helsinki Process on Globalization
and Democracy, Track on Global Economic Agenda. Human Development Report, 2008
IFAD, (2003), Achieving the Millennium Development
Goals by Enabling the Rural Poor to Overcome their Poverty, Discussion Paper
Igbuzor, O.
(2006), “The Millennium Development Goals: Can Nigeria Meet the Goals in 2015?
A Paper Presented at a Symposium on Millennium
Development Goals and Nigeria, Organized by the
Institute of Chartered
Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN), Abuja District on 27th July, at Sheraton
Hotel and Towers.
Inang, E.E. and Ukpong, G.E. (1992), “A Review of
Small-Scale Enterprises Credit Delivery Strategies in Nigeria”, CBN Economic
and Financial Review, Vol.30, No.4
Ledgerwood, J. (2000), Sustaining Banking with the
Poor: Microfinance Handbook, An Institutional and Financial Perspective,
Washington, D.C: The World Bank
Maduakoh, A. (2005), “Enterprise Promotion and
Entrepreneurial Skill
Development: The Role of the Diaspora” A Paper
Presented at
Strengthening National and Regional Capacities for
Analyzing and
Addressing Migration and Development Issues, IOM
Conference, Harare,
Zimbabwe, 25-27 October
National Bureau of Statistics (2005), Poverty Profile
in Nigeria, Federal Republic of Nigeria
National Planning Commission (2004), National
Economic Empowerment and National Development Strategy (NEEDS), Abuja: Perfect
Printers Limited
Nigerian Millennium Development Goals Report, 2004
Nigerian Millennium Development Goals Report, 2005
Nwafor, M. (2005), “Trade Liberalization and Poverty
in Nigeria: Lessons from the Past”, African Institute for Applied economics,
Nigeria
Oluwole, A. (2008), “Microfinance Banking: The Nigerian
Experience
Pandy, I.M. (2004), Financial Management, 8ed, India:
Vikas Publishing House, PVT Ltd
UNDP (1999), Business and the Millennium Development
Goals: A Framework for Action
UNCDF (2005a), “Microfinance and the Millennium
Development Goals”, A Reader Guide to Millennium Project Reports and other UN
Documents
UNCDF (2005b), “Microfinance Matters: Building
Inclusive Financial Sectors, Issue 16,
Vanessa, V. and Loomets, P. (2006), “The Role of
Entrepreneurship in Economic Development and implications for SME in Estonia”,
A paper
Presented to the l4’ Nordic Conference on Small
Business Research, May
11-13, Stockholm, Sweden.
No comments:
Post a Comment