Financial Development and Entrepreneurship Growth in Nigeria

Financial Development and Entrepreneurship Growth in Nigeria

LINUS, Justin Ogbonna¹, LAWAL, Faith Chidinma^2*, Rasheed Azeez³, Sunday O Okafor⁴, Ifeanyi Ozioma Patricia⁵

¹Department of Business Administration Southwestern University, Nigeria

²Department of Banking and Finance University of Nigeria

³Department of Industrial relations and human resource Management. Lagos State University, Nigeria

⁴Teesside University International Business School, Middlesbrough, England

⁵Federal College of Agriculture, Ishiagu

^*Corresponding author

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.12030073

Received: 02 March 2025; Accepted: 13 March 2025; Published: 16 April 2025

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the response of entrepreneurship to financial development using Nigeria as the geography of interest. The study deployed relevant estimation techniques especially the autoregressive distributed lag model with entrepreneurship growth as the dependent variable and bank development, institutional development and insurance sector development as the independent variables.  It was found that bank and institutional development positively and significantly affect entrepreneurship growth while insurance sector growth negatively affects entrepreneurship growth. This implies that  while bank development and institutional development drive entrepreneurship growth, insurance sector development inhibits growth. This study is a significant contribution to the role funding plays in driving business activities especially in the informal sector.

Keywords: Entrepreneurship growth; bank development; institutional development; Nigeria; ARDL

INTRODUCTION

The fundamental nature and place of entrepreneurs, which cuts across every macroeconomic facet of the nation in an economy, cannot be overemphasized. This can largely be attributed to evidence pointing to the constructive incursion of entrepreneurship in an economy which manifest through reduction of unemployment by means of job creation and promotion of output level across sectors in an economy, thus stimulating growth and fostering national development as asserted by Zubair (2014), Gbenga, Ita, Eja, Ojah & Okon(2023) and Baig, (2007). Entrepreneurial endeavours are largely dominated by the private sector and usually mushrooms on the small-scale enterprises and other sectorial activities like the agricultural sector that host few employees and are characterized by small capital base Nwajiaku, Ananwude and Obi-Nwosu (2020).  The financial systems of African countries are petite, trivial and expensive, with limited outreach. This is not just limited to financial development indicators, it is also extended to firm and provides data on household with regards to the use of formal financial (Beck & Cull, 2014). In addition, financial system in developing countries and from the African continent in particular witnessed a dramatic changes in the last past two decades in market set up and stability (Abiola, 2012). There are many reasons to believe that huge differences across the African continent starting from well-developed financial set up in middle-income countries such as Mauritius and South Africa, to narrow banking systems offering only the most rudimentary financial services in impoverished countries like the Central African Republic and South Sudan (Dandago & Muhammad, 2014). Small Medium Enterprises are least likely able to secure loans than large firms; however they have rely on internal or private funds in order to launch their enterprise, and as result 50% of formal SMEs don’t have access to formal loans. This means that the financial gap is even larger when micro and informal enterprise are taken into account. Overall approximately 70% of all Micro Small and Medium Enterprises in emerging markets mainly countries of the South lack access to credit, while the gap varies across region; it is particularly very wide in Africa and Asian Countries (Akingunola, 2011). The current total credit interval for both formal and informal SMEs is estimated to be $ 2.6 trillion (World Bank, 2015). The determinant of entrepreneurship ideally represent issues or factors in the borderlines between the strictly personal level factors and the external level factors affecting entrepreneurship which are regarded as a support system. (Abdelgawad and Zahra 2013) In regards to government support policies and agencies, it was assumed that since the Federal government is in the frontline to contribute towards entrepreneurship development, it should create ways for the availability of resources within its capability. Such resources include the provision of the conducive business environment to organizations and society that will enhance entrepreneurship development. Supporting agencies in relation to entrepreneurial practice is targeted at encouraging entrepreneurship by providing a suitable environment for the entrepreneurs. It was perceived that entrepreneurship development can be attain through procedures and rules that will regulate entrepreneurial activity with the aim that entrepreneurship is the solid rock of a nation’s path to industrialization (Ogundele, 2012) Entrepreneurship agencies supporting system are being seen as a key for attaining economic development through wealth creation, employment creation, and good competitiveness of the existing SMEs.

Despite Nigeria’s vast economic potential and entrepreneurial spirit, the country’s financial development remains hindered by: Low levels of entrepreneurship development, characterized by limited access to finance, inadequate business infrastructure, and insufficient entrepreneurial skills aside from Inadequate policy support and regulatory framework, failing to provide a conducive environment for entrepreneurial growth and innovation. Limited contribution of entrepreneurship to Nigeria’s financial development, as measured by GDP growth, employment creation, and poverty reduction. This study aims to investigate role of entrepreneurship development in Nigeria, with a focus on its impact on financial development, and to propose strategies for enhancing entrepreneurial activities and promoting sustainable financial growth.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Conceptual Review

Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurial Growth

The concept entrepreneur was derived from a French word entrepreneur meaning to undertake, go between or projector (Creswell, 2009). The concept of entrepreneur in the 17th century was a person who engaged in the contractual agreement with the constituted Authority of a Nation to perform a service or to supply a specific product. (Cantillon, 1755) The modern term came to stay in England in 1879. (Mill, 1849) During the 18th century research has shown that individual with capital was distinguished from the person who needed capital today regarded as (venture capitalist) the major reason for this differentiation was industrialization occurring in (Europe and Americas). In the 19th century, entrepreneur was not distinguished from the manager and it was viewed from the economic perspective. The entrepreneur organizes and operates an enterprise for profit or personal gain (Weber, 1904). During the 20th century, many theoretical speculations were postulated about entrepreneur role and his psychological attributes and personality which involves other factors that affect his performance and many more started with the work of Schumpeter that argue that entrepreneur creative and innovative individual was a decisive factor in the process of economic development. (Amstrong, 2009) Issues and findings on entrepreneur have been observed which attention is on Millennium Development Goals specifically in the Less Developed Countries (LCD). Amit et al. (1993) posit that entrepreneurship as the process of maximizing profit from new market and valuable resources in an uncertain business environment.

Entrepreneurship is regarded as an innovative process of converting an idea into marketplace reality by exploiting opportunities (Druncker, 1985). Ogundele (2012) emphasized that entrepreneurship is a process of emergence behaviour and performance of entrepreneurs. He further expresses that entrepreneurship refers to the activities of individual entrepreneurs.

The word Entrepreneurial is the adjectival form of the word entrepreneur. It is used to qualify a person, situation, an organization or a group of people who are exhibiting behaviour of entrepreneurs. An organization that is view as being entrepreneurial will exhibit in it structural and behavioural components those features that best describe organization and are established and managed by creative empire builder. Entrepreneur behaviour can be regarded as feelings attitudes, event, action and sentiment of the entrepreneur (Stevenson and Gumpert, 1985, Aguilera et al., 2019).

 Entrepreneur performance is referred to behaviour viewed from qualities of performance of what it takes to be successful (Moberg, 2014). He further highlights three dimensions of performance which are the practice of innovation, the practice of entrepreneurial management and the practice of entrepreneurial strategies which involves converting innovation into market place reality.

Agencies for Entrepreneurial Development in Nigeria

The National Directorate of Employment (NDE) as established by the federal government of Nigeria in November 1986 which reduce the unemployment rate among college graduate with strategies executed under four core programmes which are (1) The small-scale industries and graduate employment and vocational skills which is to assist the government in employment generation with the development of small scale enterprises in the rural areas of the country. This was to achieve five objectives which are: The graduate job creation; Mature peoples programme; skilled youth job creation loan scheme and the rural exportable craft for women (2) The Agricultural programme (3) National Youth employment and vocational skills development (4) Special public work programme (Okunsanmi, 1990) Moreover Peter Dara (1988) emphasized that NDE is also involved in the following activities (5) Promotion of international trading by finding markets for our products and for our factors of production (6) Entrepreneurship programme (EDP) in the Nigeria Educational system in the curriculum of tertiary institution (7) Intensification of rural employment creation. Ogundele (2012) noted that number of reasons were given for the exhibition pattern of perception regarding NDE which are as follows: Inadequate funding, lack of coordination of the programme by NDE staff, lack of adequate guidance, poor planning and execution of the programme, coercive attitude of NDE officials, loans falling into wrong hands, lack of adequate publicity and education of the public, there is a lot of waste and much cost not avoided, trainers are not trained etc. Ogundele (1987) emphasized that NDE is both a developmental and financing support system which other institution charged with financing responsibilities which are: Small industries credit scheme; The Nigeria Bank for Commerce and Industry(NBCI); Nigeria Industrial Development Bank(NIDB); National Economic Reconstruction Fund(NERFUND); Small and medium Entrepreneur Loan Scheme(SMELS); The peoples Banks and State government. Okeowo (2007) mentioned that Nigeria Opportunities Industrialization Centre (NOIC) was established in 1990 with his headquarter in Lagos that trains its students through the small enterprise development (SED) courses on how to establish their own business units after their training. Furthermore, Rural Agro-Industrial Development Schemes(RAIDS)was established in 1981 as a unit of the federal ministry of Agriculture, Water Resources and Rural Development with the world bank technical support (RAIDS,1988) RAIDS 1998 terms are as follows (1) To determine and develop small scale food processing and storage techniques to meet the needs of rural communities (2) Promote awareness of the needs of the small scale businessman in the field of agro industry (3) Provide skill training to both management and project staff in operational techniques. Moreover, Directorate of foods, Roads, and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI) which was established in 7th February 1986 with emphasis on rural industrialization through local raw materials and traditional skills or adapted technologies. Other agencies for entrepreneurial developments are Raw materials Research and Development Council (RMRDC) which was established in 1987 with the following aims which are noted as follows (1) To encourage the growth of research and development capacity (2) To draw up policy guidelines and action programmes on raw material acquisition exploitation and development (3) To advise on adaptation of machinery and processes for raw material utilization.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

There are numerous theories that are relevant to the discourse on the role entrepreneurship development of developing countries, Nigeria inclusive. To this end, the present study focuses on the Economic and the Resource Base Theory of Entrepreneurial Finance their growth theories having revealed the Keynesian Growth Theory and others.

Economic Theory

This theory presents entrepreneurship as a product of incentives that may arise from economic activities. From the economists´ point of view economic incentives are regarded as the main motivators for entrepreneurial activities. Entrepreneur is regarded as a human being who see business opportunities, making use of scarce resources as an opportunity. (Thomas, 2013) Entrepreneurship development occurs when economic conditions are sustainable. Moreover, economic incentives are being referred  to taxation policy, industrial policy, sources of finance and raw material, infrastructure availability, investment and marketing opportunities, access to information about market conditions, technology among others which has enhanced the positive responses of entrepreneur behaviour and performance (Ogundele, 2012). In precise terms, the economic theory links entrepreneurship to financial development as an incentive for business growth and development.

Keynesian Growth Theory

About the entrepreneurial financing, the Keynesian propositions stressed that demand management policies and strategies can and ought to be utilized to enhance macroeconomic execution and supportability. That is, macroeconomic approaches ought to include setting financial and monetary variables in every day and age at the qualities which are thought important to accomplish the government’s targets (Abata, et al., 2012). Albeit Keynesian hypothesis is of the perspective that the private part is innately temperamental, it is liable to visit and quantitatively critical aggravations in the segments of total interest. It is the errand of counter repetitive or adjustment strategies to counterbalance this private division unsettling influences thus keep genuine yield near its business sector clearing harmony time way (Olawunmi and Ayinla, 2007).  In this way, in view of the Keynesian financial development model, financing entrepreneurs ought to be a piece of macroeconomic strategies of government in which both the monetary and fiscal approaches ought to perceive to accomplish the wanted levels of monetary development and improvement of Nigeria. In perspective of this, Zeller and Sharma (1998) contended that microfinance can help in the change or foundation of family endeavour, possibly having the effect between mitigating neediness and financially secure life. Then again, Burger (1989) showed that microfinance has a tendency to settle instead of expansion of salary and tend to save as opposed to making occupations. In any case, Buckley (1997) arrived at the conclusion that there was little proof to propose that any huge and maintained effect of microfinance administrations on customers as far as entrepreneurial advancement, expanded salary streams or level of job. The core ideas are that change to access to microfinance and business sector for the needy individuals was not adequate unless the change or change is joined by changes in innovation as well as procedure.

Innovative Theory of Entrepreneurship

The innovative theory is one of the most famous theories of entrepreneurship used all around the world. The theory was advanced by one famous scholar, Schumpeter analyzed the theory proposed by Marshall, and he concluded that the theory was wrong. Schumpeter believes that creativity or innovation is the key factor in any entrepreneur’s field of specialization (See Gulani & Usman 2012).. He argued that knowledge can only go a long way in helping an entrepreneur to become successful. However, Schumpeter viewed innovation along with knowledge as the main catalysts of successful entrepreneurship . He believed that creativity was necessary if an entrepreneur was to accumulate a lot of profits in a heavily competitive market. Many business people support this theory, and hence its popularity over other theories of entrepreneurship(See  Hamilton, 2000).

Empirical Review

A Review of Empirical studies on the role of entrepreneurship development in Nigeria’s financial development:

Gbenga, et al. (2023) investigated entrepreneurship development on poverty alleviation in Nigeria. Desk survey method was used to gather relevant information while chi-square tool was adopted to statistically analyze the relationship between entrepreneurship development and poverty alleviation. The findings revealed that entrepreneurial activities had a positive and significant relationship with poverty alleviation; there was a significant relationship between entrepreneurship and economic growth and poverty alleviation; there was a significant relationship between entrepreneurship effectiveness and efficiency with poverty alleviation.

Nwajiaku, et al. (2020) examined the effect of financial deepening on entrepreneurial growth in Nigeria. Following the approach of the Granger Causality test with Autoregressive Distribute Lag (ARDL) technique of model estimation using data from 1986 to 2018, there is no significant effect of financial deepening on entrepreneurial growth. Entrepreneurial growth was found to have positively and significantly influenced financial deepening through banking and insurance sector deepening. Consequently, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) should encourage commercial banks to lend more for entrepreneurial activities which will in turn improve our gross domestic product. This can be achieve if the CBN can lower its monetary policy rate to a single digit as against the current double digit (14%).

Kowo, et al (2019) explored the role of entrepreneurship agencies in enhancing entrepreneurship development in Nigeria. This paper investigates the challenges, problems facing the entrepreneurship agencies in Nigeria. The research paper utilized an explanatory qualitative approach based on the in-depth interviews with ten Nigerian Organizations based in Ogun State Nigeria. The research also brought to knowledge the several challenges with entrepreneurship agencies in Nigeria including poor planning and execution of the programmes, general indiscipline of the officials and beneficiaries, inadequate funding, lack of coordination of the programme. The study demonstrates the need for the Federal Government of Nigeria, Organizations and Entrepreneurs to see the importance and perceived benefits of entrepreneurship agencies for entrepreneurship development.

Adelekan, et al (2016) examined Small & Medium Scale Enterprises (SMEs) with seamless structures can bring about a significant contribution to the increase in employment generation, the creation of wealth reduction of poverty, durable economic growth and development in many nation across the globe. The pre-occupation of this study, therefore, is to assess specific financing options available to SMEs in Nigeria and their contribution to economic growth. The paper leans on secondary sources of data which was generated from Central Banks of Nigeria Statistical Bulletin and World Development Indicators (WDI, 2015). Asymmetric auto-regressive distributed lag (ARDL) was employed to determine the asymmetric effect of finance for SMEs on economic growth in Nigeria. It was found that entrepreneurship through SMEs reduces poverty, creates jobs and contribute to economic growth.

It is clear that the review of empirical studies on entrepreneurship development in Nigeria’s financial development has diverse conclusions. The methods applied in their analysis are also varied from one another. It is against this backdrop that this study tries to fill the blatant lacuna in literature by taking into cognizance the partial decomposition of finance for entrepreneurship which is decomposed into positive and negative components of entrepreneurship financing.

METHODOLOGY

This study investigates the impact of financial development in Nigeria on the development of the entrepreneurship. using documented evidence from Nigeria.

The datasets for this study are drawn from secondary sources which include World Development Indicator and Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM). In the case of this study, the coverage period is 20years from 2003 to 2023. Aside, being quantitative, the datasets are time series in nature as they follow an annual frequency.

The functional relationship examined by this study is presented thus:

ENT DEV=f(FD)

Where:

FD = Financial Development

ENT DEV = Entrepreneurship Development

f = functional notation

Financial development  is further divided and proxied by bank development (CPSGDP), Market Development (MCAPGDP) and Insurance sector development (PREMGDP) The equation rewritten using the Autoregressive Distributed Lag model as the main estimator appears as follows:

<div>
\(
\text{ENTDEV}_t = \beta_0
+ \sum_{n=1}^{k} \beta_{1} \Delta \text{ENTDEV}_{t-n}
+ \sum_{n=1}^{k} \beta_{2} \Delta \text{CPSGDP}_{t-n}
+ \sum_{n=1}^{k} \beta_{3} \Delta \text{MCAPGDP}_{t-n}
+ \sum_{n=1}^{k} \beta_{4} \Delta \text{PREMGDP}_{t-n}
+ \rho_1 \text{ENTDEV}_{t-n}
+ \rho_2 \text{CPSGDP}_t
+ \rho_3 \text{PREMGDP}_t
+ \rho_4 \text{MCAPGDP}_t
+ \varepsilon_t
\)
</div>

Where:

 = the constant or the intercept,  are the coefficient of the short run parameters.

 are the coefficient of long run parameters,  is indicative of the lagged time series,  = error term, ,

To estimate the models as specified using the described variables, some analytical steps were

followed:

The first step described as the preestimation tests contains some tests and descriptive processes that represent the first relevant steps in showing the adequacy of data for analyses. These include basic descriptive statistics, unit root tests, correlational analyses and other relevant standard tests.

Secondly, the study adopts a main estimation method that would show the elasticity of youth unemployment to armed conflict. The ARDL regression form is considered the appropriate estimation method given its superiority over other estimation methods. Majorly, ARDL accepts a combination of variables with different orders of integration especially I(0) and I(1), in addition, it models long run and short run changes simultaneously.

Thirdly, a collection of diagnostic tests is used to validate the estimates for the purposes of inference. Tests for autocorrelation, model stability and heteroscedasticity including normality of the residuals were conducted to ensure that the results follow the asymptotic framework of the deployed estimation method.

Lastly, decisions were made at the 0.05 level of significance while Eviews served as the software

RESULTS

The basic descriptive statistics were computed and reported as shown in table 1 below.

Table 1: Summary of Basic Descriptive Statistics

Variables	Mean	Std. Dev.	Skewness	Kurtosis	Jarque-Bera	CV
ENTDEV	0.7161	2.31	0.12	1.58	2.18	0.31
CPSGDP	352.21	677.32	-0.08	1.39	2.74	0.52
M3GDP	13.32	28.95	0.80	1.85	4.01	0.46
PREMGDP	107369	290185.9	0.51	2.34	1.56	0.37

Source: Computed by the author using E – views.

In Table 1 above, premium to gross domestic product ratio presents the highest mean of 107369 with entrepreneurship reporting the least figure of 0.72. This is not unconnected with the low level of documentation for entrepreneurship activities in Nigeria like in most developing countries. The level of dispersion among the series is shown by the relative standard deviation which stands at values below 1 or 100%. This is evidence in favour of the fact that the series are without extreme values that have adversely affected their distributional properties.

Next, we ascertained the degree of linear association of  the variables using correlational matrices as reported in table 2. The table’s cells each display the correlation between two variables.

Table 4.3: Correlational matrix

Variable	ENTDEV	CPSGDP	M3GDP	PREMGDP
ENTDEV	1.00	0.68	0.45	-0.53
CPSGDP	0.68	1.00	0.77	0.14
M3GDP	0.45	0.77	1.00	-0.24
PREMGDP	-0.63	0.14	-0.24	1.00

Source: Extracted from E-views

 A positive correlation is found between the outcome variable and the bank and institutional development while insurance development negatively correlates with entrepreneurship development. This means that entrepreneurship shares a positive comovement with bank and institutional development while the reverse is the case for insurance development.

The stationarity test was conducted to examine the stationarity properties of the variables under study to avoid running a false regression. The test used is Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) following the Traditional Unit Root Test. The Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF), a test that adheres to the conventional unit root test and breakpoint consistent technique, were utilized. The decision were based on a 5% level of significance.

Table 3: Unit Root Test Results

	Test stat	Critical Values@			INF
		1%	5%	10%
ENTDEV	-5.39	-4.39	-3.61	-3.243	I(0)
CPSGDP	-6.18	-4.39	-3.61	-3.24	I(0)
M3GDP	-5.19	-4.42	-3.62	-3.25	I(0)
PREMGDP	-7.28	-4.39	-3.61	-3.24	I(1)

Source: Extracted from E-views

From table 3 above, entrepreneurship development, bank development and institutional development were found to have attained stationarity at levels while insurance development  was found to be stationary at first difference. This is a justification for the adoption of the Autoregressive Distributed Lag Model (ARDL) econometric technique and summary of the ARDL regression results is presented in table 4.

The table outlines the key ARDL results including the coefficients, statistical significance and implications of the variables in the model.

Table 4: Summary of ARDL regression results

Variables	Coefficient	Std. Error	t-Statistic	p-Values
C	2.16	0.45	4.79	0.000
CPSGDP	0.08	0.09	2.62	0.017
M3GDP	0.01	0.002	2.30	0.033
PREMGDP	-0.04	0.05	0.77	0.345
JOINT STATISTICS AND DIAGNOSTIC TESTS
R-squared	85.4%
Adjusted R-squared	83.3%
F-statistic	32.55
BGLM	2.19
RESET	1.18
HET	1.08
CS/SS	STABLE

Source: Extracted by the author from E-views 10

The joint statistics are displayed at the lower part of  table 4 above. The R² of the model indicates test of goodness of fit. The Adjusted R-Squared measures the proportion of the change in the dependent variable that is jointly accounted for by the independent. The model is considered to have a good fir given the R-squared figure of 85%. F-stat which is greater than 2.5 (32.55) which indicates that the model is statistically significant.

The likelihood of first order and higher order autocorrelation is ruled out by the Durbin Watson statistics and the BG-LM test for higher order autocorrelation. The insignificant p-value of the BG-LM test shows that there’s no higher order autocorrelation for the model. BPG (HET) is a test for heteroscedastic residuals. The insignificant p-value of the BPG test suggests that the model is without heteroscedastic residuals. The Ramsey RESET (Regression Error Specification Test) is insignificant (>0.05) which suggests that there is no specification error or misspecification in the model. The diagnostic tests for the residuals, coefficients and the stability of the model return with results that confirm that the model aligns with the relevant underlying assumptions.

In looking at the elasticity of entrepreneurship development to the independent variables, bank development proxied by credit to the private sector as a ratio of economic growth, positively and significantly affects entrepreneurship development. This is also the case for institutional development (M3GDP). The response rate of entrepreneurship development to bank development and institutional development stands at 8% and 1% respectively for every unit change. These changes are found to be significant as shown by the p-values that are less than the 0.05 level of significance. Insurance development measured by the quotient of total premium over economic growth is a negative influencer of entrepreneurship development. This suggests that insurance and its risk management attachment show a reducing effect on entrepreneurship drives. Specifically, every unit increase in insurance and risk management drives, entrepreneurship growth is hampered by 4%. This findings are consistent with Ogbo  & Agu (2012) and Idam (2014) who in separate studies found entrepreneurship to be a significant function of economic development of which financial development is an integral part.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This study investigates the response of entrepreneurship to financial development using Nigeria as the geography of interest. It focused on how funding sources can catalyze the growth of entrepreneurial activities in a growth seeking economy like Nigeria. The study deployed relevant estimation techniques especially the autoregressive distributed lag model which is superior to a good number of other estimation techniques. An array of pre-estimation and diagnostic tests were also deployed to confirm the validity of the research estimates.

Findings arising from this study hold that while bank development and institutional development drive entrepreneurship growth, insurance sector development inhibit growth. This is not unconnected to the fact that the business activities in the Nigerian economic space is risk infested and the more funds go into risk mitigation like insurance, the less the funds that would have been available to drive entrepreneurial growth.

This study is a significant contribution to the role funding plays in driving business activities especially in the informal sector. This calls for multidimensional funding on the part of the government and other stakeholders for the sake of accentuating the growth level of the Nigerian economy.

REFERENCES

1. Abata, M. A., Kehinde, J. S., & Bolarinwa, S. A. (2012). Fiscal/monetary policy and economic growth in Nigeria: A theoretical exploration. International Journal of Academic Research in Economics and Management Sciences, 1 (5). 75
2. Abdelgawad, S.G., Zahra, S.A, Velikowa, S.S. & Sapienca, H.J. (2013). Strategic leadership and entrepreneurship capability for game change. Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies, 20(4), 394-407.
3. Abiola Babajide (2012). “Effects of Microfinance on Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs) Growth in Nigeria” Asian Economic and Financial Review Vol.2, No. 3, pp. 463-477.
4. Adelekan,A., Arogundade, S.T., & Dansu, O.O. (2016). Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth in Nigeria: Evidence from Small and Medium Scale Enterprises (SMEs) Financing using Asymmetric AutoRegressive Distributed Lag: Global Journal Commerce and Management Perspective. G.J.C.M.P., Vol. 5 (3):43-50.
5. Aguilera, R.V., Marano, V. & Haxhi, I. (2019). International Corporate governance: A review and opportunities for future research. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(4), 457-498.
6. Akinola, A.O. (2013). Entrepreneurship in Nigeria-funding and financing strategies. European Journal of Accounting Auditing and Finance Research. 1(4). 115128.
7. Akingunola, R. O. (2011). “Small and medium scale enterprises and economic growth in Nigeria: An assessment of financing options”, Pakistan Journal of Business and Economic Review, 2(1).
8. Amstrong, M. (2009). Amstrong Handbook of Human Resources Practice (11th Ed). London: Kogan Page Limited.
9. Baig, A. (2007). Entrepreneurship development for competitive small and medium enterprises. Report of the APO Survey on Entrepreneur Development for Competitive Asian Productivity Organization. Pp 45-76.
10. Beck, T., & Cull, R. (2014). SME finance in Africa. Journal of African Economies, 23(5), 583-613.
11. Buckley, G. (1997). Microfinance in Africa: Is it either a problem or the solution? World Development, 25(7), 1081-1093. Burger, M. (1989). Giving women credit: The strengths and limitations of credit as a tool for alleviating poverty. World     17(7), 1017-1032.
12. Creswell, J.W. (2009). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Qualitative and Quantitative Research. (2nd Ed.).
13. Clausen, T. H. (2006). Who identifies and exploits entrepreneurial opportunities? Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo. Retrieved from www.ccsr .ac.uk /method/festival/…/paperTommyClausenpdf.
14. GEM (2008). GLOBAL Entrepreneurship Monitor Executive Report 2008. GEM.
15. Gbenga, L.S., Ita,E., Eja, B.G.E., Ojah, E.O., & Okon, C.J. (2023). Entrepreneurship Development on Poverty Reduction in Nigeria. Paradigm Academic Press Law and Economy ISSN 2788-7049 SEP. 2023 VOL.2, NO.9
16. Gulani, M. G., & Usman, A. (2012). Financing small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs): A challenge for entrepreneurial development in Gombe State. Asian Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 2(9).
17. Hamilton, B. H. (2000). Does entrepreneurship pay? An empirical analysis of the returns to self-employment. Journal of Political Economy, 108(3), 601-631. [28].
18. Harper, M. (1991). The role of enterprise in poor countries. Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice, 15(4), 7-11.
19. Morris, M. H. & Lewis, P. S. (1991), Entrepreneurship as a significant factor in social quality of life Nigeria. Journal of Business Research, 23(1), 21-36.
20. Idam L.E (2014). Entrepreneurship Development in Nigeria: A Review. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM) e-ISSN: 2278-487X, p-ISSN: 2319-7668 Volume 16, Issue 1. Ver. IV (Jan. 2014), PP 01-07.
21. Natziger, W. E., (2017). African capitalism: A case study of Nigerian entrepreneurship. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.
22. Nwajiaku, E. O., Ananwude, A. C., Obi-Nwosu, V. (2020). Financial Deepening and Entrepreneurial Growth in Nigeria: A Time Series Analysis (1986-2018), International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and        Management Sciences 10 (2):257-263.
23. Ofili, O. O (2014). Challenges facing entrepreneurship in Nigeria, International Journal of Business and Management. 9(12). 258-274.
24. Ogbo, A. & Agu, C.N. (2012). The Role of Entrepreneurship in Economic Development: The Nigerian Perspective. European Journal of Business and Management ISSN 22221905.
25. Ogundele, O.J.K (2012). Management and Organization: Theory and Behaviour, 2nd Edition, Lagos: Malofin Nominees.
26. Ogundele, O.J.K and Hassan, O.R (2010). Ingredients for global dominance in Africa Entrepreneurship. Journal of Oriental and African Studies, 9,123-145.
27. Okafor, R.G. & Onebunne, I. (2012). Review of financial challenges of Nigerian entrepreneurs in an attempt to reduce financial institutions risk perception index of small firms: Evidence from survey data. Developing Country Studies. 2(11). 197-204.
28. Olawunmi, O. & Ayinla, T.A (2007). Fiscal policy and Nigerian economic growth. Journal of Research in National Development 5 (2).
29. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
30. Walras, (2014). Elements of pure economies or history of social wealth. London: George Allen and Urwin Ltd.
31. Zeller, M. & M. Sharma (1998). Rural finance and poverty alleviation. Washington, DC. USA: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). pp. 22-28
32. Zubair, A. (2014). Entrepreneurship and economic development in Nigeria: Evidence from small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) financing. International Journal of Business and Social Science. 5(11), 215-230.