Analysis of the Effect of Non-Oil Export on Economic Growth of Nigeria

Analysis of the Effect of Non-Oil Export on Economic Growth of Nigeria

Hinmikalu, Patrick Olanrewaju, Dr. Chris AC-Ogbonna

Department of Economics, Veritas University Abuja

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8110222

Received: 20 November 2024; Accepted: 29 November 2024; Published: 20 December 2024

ABSTRACT

This work investigated the Impact of non-oil exports on Gross Domestics Product (GDP) of Nigeria. The statement of the problem of the study therefore is, how has the non-oil export sector helped to enhance the economic growth of Nigeria, and the major objective the study is to investigate the effects of Non-oil Export on the economic growth in Nigeria. The work employed Auto Regressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) modeling techniques analysis used in the study. The findings clearly showed that non-oil export from agricultural commodities and products, craft and manufactured products and solid minerals do not have significant effect on economic growth in the short run but does on the long run during the period under investigation and equally reinforced the fact that non-oil exports have a key role to play with regards to promoting economic growth in Nigeria. The study concluded that non-oil export will enhance economic growth in Nigeria and finally recommended that future policy-makers should aim at promoting adequate agricultural commodities and products, craft and manufactured products and solid minerals exports as this will ensure economic growth in the Nigerian Economy.

Key words: Non-oil export, economic growth, ARDL

JEL Classification: C10, C87, F10, F31

INTRODUCTION

Exportation is a very important component of the economy that seeks to enhance revenue and foster economic growth and development. Owing to this fact, it is said to be crucial for economic progress and this has informed the idea of export-led growth. Export is a catalyst necessary for the overall development of an economy (Abou-Strait, 2015). This increases the earnings of the country thereby creating a medium for growth by raising the national income of the country. It also increases the level of employment in the economy as a higher demand for exports will require more production which will in turn lead to the employment of more people. Exportation by a country also helps attain a favorable balance of trade and balance of payments for the exporting country as long as its exports reasonably exceed its imports.

Osuntogun and Edordu (2017), in their research on the potentials for diversifying Nigeria’s non-oil export to non-traditional markets, found out that Nigeria could not fully utilize its potential because the implementation of export promotion policies followed key market concentration strategy that is, concentration on more developing countries like Europe and USA, thereby resulting in less attention to gathering trade facilitating information that may further diversify Nigeria’s export market to less developing countries such as the countries in sub-saharan Africa. If a country engages in this inter-regional trade which will require lower transportation costs and enhance the competitiveness of commodities traded and ensures market clearing of export commodities it will reduce problems faced by exports to developed countries.

Nigeria being a country where the level of investment is quite low, foreign capital becomes a necessity in order to accelerate the slow rate of economic growth. The Nigerian economy is one that depends largely on foreign trade for growth and also depends majorly on the exportation of one commodity at a time. For instance, at independence, the major export commodity was cocoa and the leading sector in the economy was the agricultural sector but today, the major export commodity is crude oil and the leading sector is now the petroleum sector. This has not made the country have a balanced growth in the economy due to the fact that some sectors have been allowed to grow while growth has been impeded in others and this has made the country remain a developing country.

Export can be said to be a function of international trade whereby goods produced in one country are moved across the bothers of that country to another country for future sale or trade. These benefits will enhance the process of growth and development in such economy. It must also be said that, before these benefits can be fully obtained, the structure and direction of these exports must be carefully adapted so that the economy will not depend on only one sector for the supply of needed foreign exchange (Onayemi &Akintoye, 2019). Hence, there is a need for economic diversification in the economy.

Statement of the problem

Nigerian economy is still regarded as a developing economy due to poor policy implementation, lack of structural change among other factors. Also, lack of economic diversity which is a vital factor for economic progress or growth has caused the economy to primarily rely on crude oil for revenues and as the major export commodity in the economy. Before the 1970s, Nigeria’s exports were majorly non-oil commodities with agricultural commodities accounting for the majority of it. However, in the 1970s, when the price of crude oil in the international market sky-rocketed, the share of non-oil exports began to fall and have remained low ever since. This is due to the high rate of returns on oil exports which makes it more profitable to export oil and less profitable to export non-oil commodities. This has caused over-dependence on the oil sector and the proceeds from the exportation of crude oil. This heavy reliance subjects the country to difficulties when the price of crude oil, the major export commodity, is low in the international market. In light of this, the government adopted various strategies to boost non-oil exports which and stabilize the economy.

The sector has continued to perform below its full potential despite series of debate on economic restructuring and diversification of the domestic economy which basically necessitated this study. It is now obvious that crude oil production is as critical to Nigeria as oxygen is to human life. Non-oil sectors like the agriculture and the mining sectors were known to have dominated Nigeria’s exports in the past. Non-oil exports accounted for more than 66% of Nigeria’s total export and contributed immensely to the growth of Nigeria’s economy in the 1960s (Ogunkola, Bankole and Adewuyi, 2008). Similarly, the manufacturing share of the GDP declined from 7% during 1992-96 to 6% during 1997-2001. As of 2001, agriculture accounted for about 41% of GDP, crude petroleum 13% and manufacturing 6% (Ebo, 2013). The crux of the problem was that while oil export was growing, non-oil exports were declining making the dominance much more rapid and pervasive. Teal (1983 estimates that the output of export crops grew at an average annual rate of 4.7% in 1950 – 1957 and 7.4% in 1960 – 1965, then declined by 17.3% in 1970 – 1975. The transformation of Nigeria from a net exporter of agricultural products to a large-scale importer of the same commodities was particularly marked during the period 1973 – 1982 (Oyejide, 1986).

The major objective of the study is to investigate the effect of Non-Oil Export on the economic growth of Nigeria.

LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Non-oil export products are those commodities excluding crude oil (petroleum products), which are sold in the international market for the purpose of revenue generation. It is made up of every other thing exported out of a country except petroleum products. “Manufactured exports consist of textiles, beer, cocoa butter, plastic products, processed timber, tyres, natural spring water, soap, detergent and fabricated iron rods. Agricultural export merchandise included cocoa, groundnut, palm oil, cotton, rubber (natural), yarn, palm products, fish and shrimps” (Okoh, 2014). According to CBN publication (2018) on the Nigerian export product guidelines oil export and non – oil export had to be distinguished because of the great difference in terms of volume and value of export earning between the two. Over the years, there had been serious concern over the dependency of oil export earnings in the development of Nigeria economy. As a result of this, various governments had tried to embark on diversification of the export base of the country. As Soludo (2018) noted that easiest way to fastening over nations’ economic recovering and development is to broaden over export base of non-oil exports, which will to invigorate the oiling sector of the economy and help place the economy on the sustainable development path.

Robert (2019) in a work titled ‘the impact of non-oil export on the economic growth in Nigeria (1987-2017), the linear multiple regression was employed of which her variables of choice were Non-oil export, Exchange rate, Inflation and GDP- Gross Domestic Product. It was observed based on the empirical result that non-oil export has a significant impact on the growth of GDP. The findings revealed that exchange rate and inflation rate have no significant impact on the growth of GDP and the study concluded that the effect of non-oil export earning, exchange rate and inflation rate have joint significant impact on the growth of GDP.

According to Ojo (2019), in a study carried out on the Problems and prospects of non-oil export in Nigeria, he used descriptive analysis to review relevant policy documents and identified the major problems constraining the development and growth of non-oil exports in Nigeria include the following: low level of production; there are low levels of production in both the agricultural and industrial sectors, which he said is attributable mainly to high cost of production which limited the capacity of producer to procure their needed inputs. Cost of production has been pushed up by high interest and exchange rates as well as the poor state of basic infrastructure. The major implications of low level of production are as domestic outputs are not enough to satisfy local consumption, there is hardly an exportation surplus for most goods, also the high cost of production which results in high product prices makes locally produced goods uncompetitive in the world market. He also pointed inadequate knowledge of export processes, procedures and incentives. Exports require accurate and timely information on markets, prices and quality standards and exports procedures. Also, exporters are not provided with incentive such as quality inspection and certification, movement of export goods and clearing of imported goods, among other. All these frustrate a lot of exporters out of business because of their implication of production that is high cost of output owing to time cost money wanted. Poor state and maintenance of infrastructures was another factor which he said hinder the effective manufacturing of products to services export trade and resulting in outright delays or spoilage. The state of power supply and telecommunication facilities among others things is inadequate for the dynamic requirement of foreign trade and these hampers the growth of the non-oil exports in Nigeria. He also suggested solutions to the problem. He said that there is need to promote expanded production in both the agricultural industrial sector. He said that a higher level of output will help to achieve satisfy local demand for goods, leave a reasonable balance for exports and reduce the unit cost of production. That export products should be diversified and promoting of foreign private investment also upgrading of basic infrastructure. Ozoudo (2018) carried out an investigation into the effect of non-oil export on the Nigeria economy. The study used OLS econometric method in the analysis and it was found the dominance of petroleum / crude oil in the export sector’s export and the inefficient performance of the non – oil marketing of board deterred progress of non – oil sector. His research covered the period from 1991 – 2008.The study concluded that the government should restructure the various marketing board to boost export.

Udude and Okulegu (2018), examined whether there is bidirectional relationship between non-oil exports and economic growth in Nigeria. The study adopted impulse response analysis to determine if there exists a long run relationship with economic growth and non-oil export in Nigeria. Having integrated the short run dynamics and long run equilibrium, import and exchange rate were positively correlated with GDP while exports were negatively related with GDP. The findings revealed that the short run dynamics adjust to the long run equilibrium at the rate of 0.866% per annum. Abogan (2018), carried out a study on the impact of non-oil export on the economic growth of Nigeria between 1980 and 2010. He adopted OLS regression method to analyse the study. This study revealed that the impact of non-oil export on the economic growth was moderate and not all heartening as a unit increases in non-oil export impacted positively by 29% on the productive capacity of goods and services in Nigeria during the period.

Asanebi (2017) carried out another study on the performance of nil export in Nigeria using linear correlation co– efficient analysis. The study observed that the performance of non – oil sectors exports was below expectation in aggregate terms and so, has not made significant impact on the GNP of the country, cannot sustain the country in terms of economic growth and development. He also came up with the following findings; That primary commodities dominates Nigeria’s basket of non-oil export. He was of the opinion that the introduction of the structural adjustment programme (SAP) came with export promotion policy that saw some improvement in the proportion of semi-manufactures and manufactures. Though the performance of non-oil exports below expectation in terms of market diversification, it however, recorded some success in terms of a gradual growth in the proportion of value-added exports. Furthermore, he identified some major constraints that militated against non-oil export performance like inefficient credit scheme, etc. his period of research covered 1990 – 2000.

Safdari & Zaroki (2017), conducted a study on the effect of non-oil exports on economic growth (industry and mining sector, services and agriculture). The data were collected from 1961 to 2016 and were analysed using Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) model. The results of this study show that each section export growth has a positive effect on the growth of value added in the same section. But the effect of export growth on the value added in industry and mining sector is more than other sectors. Mehrabadi (2016), examined the effects of non-oil export on economic growth. Time series data and the method of VAR (Vector Auto Regressive) were used in the analysis. It was found that both oil and non-oil export had positive effect on the economic growth of Iran. Shujaat (2016), examined the causal relationship between GDP and exports for the period of 1975 to 2010. The aim of the study is to check affectivity of export promotion policy adopted by Pakistan during 1990s. Johansen test of Co-integration and Granger Causality employed to determine short run and long run causality. The result of the Co-integration reveals existence of one positive co-integrating equation. The result of causality test shows short run and long run causality run from GDP to exports. The result concludes that both in short and long run only growth in production cause exports growth.

Noula (2015), exported and quantified the contribution of agricultural exports to economic growth in Cameroon. The study employed an extended generalized Cobb Douglas production function model, using food and agricultural organization data and World Bank Data from 1975 to 2009. The findings showed that the agricultural exports have mixed effect on economic growth in Cameroon. Coffee export and banana export has a positive and significant relationship with economic growth. On the other hand, cocoa export was found to have a negative and insignificant effect on economic growth. Mohsen (2015), investigated the role of non-oil exports in the Syrian economic over the period of 1975 to 2010. The cointegration test indicates that GDP is positively and significantly related to oil and non-oil exports. The Granger causality test indicates bidirectional short run causality relationships between GDP, oil exports and non-oil exports. There are also bidirectional long run causality relationship between non-oil exports to GDP, and unidirectional long run causality relationship running from oil exports to GDP. The study result indicates that oil exports have the biggest effort on the GDP while Syed (2015), estimated the relationship between GDP and agricultural and non-agricultural exports for Pakistan employing Johansen cointegration technique by using secondary data for the period 1972 to 2008. It was found that agricultural exports have a negative relationship with economic growth.

The study adopted Porter’s Diamond Model of National Advantage that explains why some industries in some countries are so much more developed and competitive compared to industries elsewhere on the planet. It basically sums up the location advantages that Dunning is referring to in his Eclectic paradigm (also known as OLI framework). The Diamond Model could therefore be used when analyzing foreign markets for potential entry or when making Foreign Direct Investment decisions.

METHODOLOGY

This study adopted expost facto research design. The design deals with secondary information which can be described as quantitative data for empirical analysis. The ex post facto design is a quasi-experimental study examining how an independent variable, present prior to the study, affects a dependent variable. This design attempts to determine a cause-and-effect relationship between the independent and dependent variables. This independent variable cannot be manipulated or altered, in which ex post facto studies will look at how a particular characteristics, trait, or past occurrence affects the dependent variable.

Model Specification

In specifying the model for this study, the choice of the variables is guided from the literature following the work of Robert (2019) titled ‘the impact of Non-oil export on the economic growth in Nigeria (1987-2017)’. In the analysis, the linear multiple regression was employed of which the choice of variables are Non-oil export, Exchange rate, Inflation, Gross Domestic Product. It was observed based on the empirical result that non-oil export has significant impact on the growth of GDP. This study shall adapt the same growth model used by Robert (2019) (and make slight modification of variables used in the model by disaggregating non-oil export into solid minerals, agricultural commodities and products and craft and manufactured products into the model.

The functional specification of the model is stated as:

RGDP=f(NOEFSM, NOEFAGCP,NOEFCMP)

The model is thus, specified econometrically as;

RGDP=f(β0+β1 NOEFSM+ β2NOEFAGCP+β3NOEFCMP+μt) (3.1)

Where:

RGDP = Real Gross Domestic Product (proxy for economic growth)
NOEFSM= Non-Oil export from Solid Minerals
NOEFAGCP= Non-Oil export from Agricultural Commodities and Products
NOEFCMP= Non-Oil export from Craft and Manufactured Products

The variables are used in the model estimation such that component and sectorial contributions can be estimated.

PRESENTATION OF RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

The study examined the Non-oil export and economic growth in Nigeria. Descriptive statistics of the variables used in the study were carried out here. Estimation of the effect of non-oil export in different sectors (solid minerals, agricultural commodities and products and craft and manufactured products) on Nigeria economic growth was also analyzed in this chapter using the Auto Regressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) modelling techniques analysis employing E-Views 10.

Descriptive Statistics of the Variables

Table 4.1 showed the descriptive statistics of the variables. It can be seen that the mean of solid minerals export revenue, agricultural export revenue and Craft and Manufactured Export are 0.155400, 0.887111 and 0.150168 respectively. The Jarque-Bera probability value of the variables indicates uneven distribution.

Table 4.1: Showing the Descriptive Statistics

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

Lag Length Selection Criteria

When estimating a ARDL model, one or more information criteria may be used to determine the optimal lag order. The Akaike and Schwarz Information Criteria were incorporated for this purpose.

Table 4.2: Lag Order Selection Criteria

Note: * denotes optimal lag order

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

The Akaike criterion indicates a maximum of 2 lags while the Schwarz criterion indicates a maximum of 1 lag. Based on the Akaike criterion with the minimum value of 5.533534*, we would incorporate 2 lags in estimation.

Unit Root Test Results

The unit root test summary is presented in Table 4.3.

The Augmented Dickey Fuller (ADF) unit root test was employed to test for stationarity of all the macroeconomic variables employed for the study. The results are presented on the table below:

Table 4.3: Unit Root Test Result using Augmented Dickey Fuller (ADF)

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

Table 4.3 showed that variables are of mixture of different order of integration. This makes them suitable for ARDL has it accommodates mixture of different order of integration of variables, the natural choice of the model is cointegration analysis.

However, the decision rule here is that when the t-statistics is greater than the critical value at 5% significance level and the probability value (P-Value) is less than 0.05, it shows that the variable is stationary at level otherwise the difference is taken until it becomes stationary.

The results show that all the indicators are stationary at level, I(0) except NOEFSM which is stationary at first difference, I(1). The t-statistic values of all the variables are all less than the critical values at the standard 5% significant level and their probability values are greater than 0.05. The fact that the variables were not all stationary at level however connotes the existence of unit root and indication for co-integration. Therefore in order to avoid the misinterpretation bias that comes with analyzing co-integrated variables using the Ordinary least square estimation technique, the study will use the ARDL has it accommodates mixture of different order of integration of variables.

Bounds Cointegration Approach

The estimated bounds cointegration test can be observed from Table 4.4. From the lower bound, the alternative hypothesis of cointegration is rejected since the F-statistic 2.116904 is lower than the upper bound critical value 3.38 at 5 percent level of significance. Therefore, the series are not cointegated; that is they do not indicate the relevant long-run (equilibrium) relationships among the variables. We have to employ only the short-run model which is ARDL and not ECM.

Table 4.4: F-Bounds Test Result using ARDL Long Run Form and Bounds Test

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

Regression Analysis Using Auto Regressive Distributed Lag (ARDL)

Table 4.5: ARDL short-run relationship Result

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

The result in table 4.5 above shows that in the short-run, gross domestic output has a strong relationship with its two period lag value i.e. economic growth depends on its two previous value in the short-run. The result also shows that Non-Oil export from Agricultural Commodities and Products (NOEFAGCP), Non-Oil export from Craft and Manufactured Products (NOEFCMP) and Non-Oil export from Solid Minerals (NOEFSM) do not have significant effect on economic growth (RGDP) in the short run but does on the long run. This indicates that the diversification from oil export to non oil export of these products will make a great contribution to the Nigerian economy (RGDP) only when the Nigerian government focuses on it at the long run and not on short run basis. The R-squared value of 0.43 indicates that about 43% percent of the variations in economic growth is explained by the regressors in the model, and after taking cognisance of the degree of freedom, the adjusted R-squared value of 0.27 indicates that 27% percent of the variation in economic growth is explained by the regressors. Though the significance of the entire model is also confirmed by the F-statistics probability value 0.0274, indicates that all the explanatory variables (NOEFAGCP, NOEFCMP and NOEFSM) are important factors to be considered when explaining the changes in the RGDP or have a joint significant consequence on output growth in Nigeria in the short-run. The absence of serial autocorrelation or heteroscedasticity was also confirmed as the Durbin Watson statistics of 1.9189 was less than the coefficient of determination and the required value of between 1.9 and 2.1. We go further by using the LM test to confirm the non-existent of serial correlation in our model.

Serial Correlation Test

Table 4.6: Autocorrelation Test Using the Breusch-Godfrey Serial Correlation LM Test

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

The above table shows the probability values of Obs*R-squared (0.9080) of the Breusch-Godfrey Serial Correlation LM Test is above the 0.05 benchmark and therefore show that the residuals of the ARDL are free from autocorrelation. Moreso, given the probability value of 0.9343 percent, we fail to accept the alternative hypothesis which states that there is a significant relationship between the all explanatory variables (NOEFAGCP, NOEFCMP and NOEFSM) and economic growth (RGDP) in the short run, rather we accept the null hypothesis which states that there is no significant relationship between these variables in short run and conclude that our short run model is free from serial correlation.

Heteroskedasticity Test

Table 4.7: Heteroskedasticity Test using Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

The above table shows the probability value of Obs*R-squared (0.6310) of Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey’s heteroskedasticity test is above the 0.05 benchmark and therefore shows that the residuals of the ARDL Model are free from heteroskedasticity. Moreso, given the probability value of 0.6912 percent, we fail to accept the alternative hypothesis which states that there is a significant relationship between the all explanatory variables (NOEFAGCP, NOEFCMP and NOEFSM) and economic growth (RGDP) in the short run, rather we accept the null hypothesis which states that there is no significant relationship between these variables in short run and conclude that our short run model is free from Heteroskedasticity.

Table 4.8: Heteroskedasticity Test using ARCH

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

The above table shows the probability value of Obs*R-squared (0.8502) of ARCH’s test is above the 0.05 benchmark and therefore shows that the residuals of the ARDL Model are free from ARCH effect. Moreso, given the probability value of 0.8615 percent, we fail to accept the alternative hypothesis which states that there is a significant relationship between the allexplanatory variables (NOEFAGCP, NOEFCMP and NOEFSM) and economic growth (RGDP) in the short run, rather we accept the null hypothesis which states that there is no significant relationship between these variables in short run and conclude that our short run model is free from ARCH effect.

Normality Test using the Jarque-Bera Test

Figure 4.1: Jarque-Bera test Graph

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10, 2023

The above figure shows the probability value (0.96769) of Jarque-Bera test is above the 0.05 benchmark and therefore indicates that the residual of ARDL Model is normally distributed.

Stability Conditions: Using CUSUM Graph

Figure 4.2 CUSUM Graph

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

The figure 4.2 above shows that the CUSUM line is within the critical bounds of 5 percent level of significance which indicates that the model has structural stability. Therefore, the ARDL Model satisfies the stability condition as it lies within the 5 Standard Deviation Error bound.

Figure 4.3 CUSUM of squares Graph

Source: Author’s computation using E-Views 10,2023

The figure 4.3 above shows that the CUSUM of squares line is within the critical bounds of 5 percent level of significance which indicates that the model has structural stability. Therefore, the ARDL Model satisfies the stability condition as it lies within the 5 Standard Deviation Error bound.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

As stated earlier, high reliance on crude oil exports and lack of economic diversity are some of the major challenges facing sustainable economic growth in Nigeria. Therefore, given that several reforms aimed at promoting non-oil exports have been enacted in order to promote economic diversification, this study sought to weigh the level of success achieved by attempting to empirically ascertain the impact of non-oil exports on Nigeria’s economic growth with Auto Regressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) modelling techniques analysis. On this note it was found subsequently that Non-Oil export from Agricultural Commodities and Products, Non-Oil export from Craft and Manufactured Products and Non-Oil export from Solid Minerals do not have significant effect on economic growth in the short run but does on the long run. This could involve a deeper exploration of factors like infrastructure limitations, policy implementation challenges, or global economic conditions that might be suppressing short-term growth.

These findings clearly imply that the diversification from oil export to non oil export of these products will make a great contribution to the Nigerian economy only when the Nigerian government focuses on it at the long run and not on short run basis and equally reinforce the fact that non-oil exports have a key role to play with regards to promoting economic growth in Nigeria.

Further, considering the fact that these findings conform to the findings of several studies such as Abogan (2018) and Udude and Okulegu (2018) that were consistent, this is drawn from their positive coefficients which portray the sector as having the potential to boost economic growth if given adequate attention, hence the long run. This study recommends that concerted efforts should be made by policy makers to promote the production of non-oil exports so as to boost economic growth in Nigeria.

CONCLUSION

First and foremost, considering the fact that an insignificant relationship was found to exist between Non-oil export from agricultural commodities and products, craft and manufactured products and solid minerals are yet to positively affect economic growth in Nigeria in the short run but does on the long run as reviewed in the work.

It was recommended that future policy-makers should aim at promoting adequate agricultural commodities and products, craft and manufactured products and solid minerals, as this will ensure economic growth in the Nigerian. It is therefore recommended that short run policies by the government should be tailored towards the improvement of the non-oil sector by encouraging them, incentivize farmers and subsidize their produce which will catalyse increments in non-oil output to export levels for the betterment of the Nigerian economy at the long run..

REFERENCES

1. Abogan, S.J., (2018). Non-oil exports and economic growth in Nigeria. Academic Journal of Economic Studies, 1(2), 123-145.
2. Abou-Strait, F., (2015). Are exports the engine of economic growth? An application of co-integration and causality analysis for Egypt. African Development Bank, Economic Research Working Paper, No 76, July.
3. Adewumi, J., & Ademgba, S., (2010). Analysis of non-oil exports in Nigeria. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Science (JETEMS), 3(5), 25-38
4. Aigbedion I. N., & Iyayi S. E., (2007), Explaining African economic growth performance: The case of Nigeria”. A revised interim report on Nigerian case study prepared for the African economic research consortium research, May. International Journal of Physical Sciences, 2(2)
5. Ajayi, S. I., (2013) .Globalization and Africa. Journal of Africa Economics, 12,(12): 120-150.
6. Agoston, A.A., (2015). Non-oil exports in the economic growth of Nigeria: A study of agricultural and mineral resources. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 3(2), 123-220
7. Asenobi, F., (2017). Are exports the engine of economic growth? An application of correlation coefficient analysis-. African Development Bank, Economic Research Working Paper, 76, July.
8. Blecker, A., (1999). Diversifying the productive base of Nigeria, an econometric approach to the assessment of non-oil export promotion strategies. International journal of Business and Economics, 5(2), 12-20
9. Carbough, I. H., (2014). Diversifying Nigeria’s economy through non-oil export Promotion Leadership newspaper, May 13.
10. CBN (2019). Central Bank of Nigeria’s annual report and statistical bulletin
11. CBN (2018).Central Bank of Nigeria’s annual report and statistical bulletin.
12. Central Bank of Nigeria, Annual Report and Statement of Account (2016).
13. Central Bank of Nigeria, Annual Report and Statement of Account (2014).
14. Dunn, R. M., & Mutti, J. H., (2014). Trade and growth. In International Economics (6th ed) (221-241). London.
15. David. E., (2013). Oil Price volatility and its consequences on the growth of the Nigeria’s economy: An examination (1970-2010), Asian Economic and Financial Review, 3(5), 683 – 702.
16. Ezike, I., & Amah, P., (2011) Macroeconomic Impact of Trade on the Nigerian Growth: An European Journal of Business, Economics and Accountancy, 3(6),35
17. Ebo .S A.,(2013) Explaining African economic growth performance: The case of Nigeria. A revised interim report on Nigerian case study prepared for the African Economic Research Consortium Research, May.
18. Enoma,F., & Isedu, B., (2011) Determinants of non-oil export and economic growth in Nigeria: An application of the bound test approach. International Journal of Economics, 6(3), 45-70
19. Gbadebo, S., (2008). A paper presentation on Nigeria -US trade relations in the non-oil sector. International Academic Journal of Information Sciences and Project Management, 1(1), 231-242
20. Ikepeazu, C., (2017). Tackling the problems of manufacturing sector of the Nigeria economy. Article of the Nigerian Industrial Policy. Lagos
21. Joyad, L.O., (2014). Analysis of the relationship between economic growth and exports in Jordan. Journal of Welfare Economics, 4(2), 25-28
22. Mehrabadi, N., (2016). Analysis of the performance of non-oil export in India. An empirical analysis. Academic Journal of Economic Studies, 1(2), 15.
23. Nwezeaku, A., (2010). A paper presentation on accountability and transparency in public financial management in Nigeria Africa. Economic Research Consortium Nairobi.
24. Nyong, M. O., (2015). International economics: Theory, policy and applications. Calabar: Wusen Press Limited
25. Noula, E.O., (2015). Non-oil export promotion contraints– Enugu zone expérience. Enugu zonal office Bi-monthly Newsletter, 3(1). September/October.
26. Ogunmola, N.P., (2019). The Impact of non-oil export on economic growth in Nigeria (1986-2010): Unpublished research project submitted to the Department of economics, Caritas University, Amorji-Nike Enugu.
27. Okoh, R.N., (2014). Global integration and the economic growth of Nigeria. Central Bank of Nigeria Annual Report
28. Onayemi, S.O., & Akintoye, I. R., (2019). Diversifying the productive base of Nigeria, an econometric approach to the assistant of non -oil export promotion strategies. International Research Journal of Trade & Economies, 24 (10), 209–222.
29. Osuntogun, A., Edordu, C. C., &Oramah, B. O., (2017). Potentials for diversifying Nigeria’s non-oil exports to non-traditional markets. AERC Research Paper, No. 68.
30. Ojo, M. O., (2019). A review and appraised of monetary and other sectors policy measures in Federal Government budget for 2019″ CBN Bulletin, 23(1)
31. Ozoude, M., (2018). The contributions of non-oil export to the GDP of Nigeria: Asaba, Lincoln Publishers.
32. Obansa, S.A (2015). Impact of the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) on Nigeria’s Economy. African Update Newspaper, XII(2) (Spring 2005).
33. Porter, M.E., (1990). The competitive advantage of Nations. Harvard Business Review Harvard Business Review: https://hbr.org/1990/03/the-competitive-advantage-of-nations
34. Palley, S., (2003). Working paper/articles on pitfalls in the theory of growth: An application to the balance of payments constrained growth model. Journal of Economic and Public Finance. 15(1), 25-45
35. Robert C.A., (2019). The impact of non-oil export on the economic growth of Nigeria (1987 2017). International Journal of Public Administration and Management Research (IJPAMR), 2(1), 55-67