Financial Sector Reform: A Panacea to Capital Market Growth
Chapter One
objective of the study
The broad objective of this study is to evaluate the financial sector reforms in the Nigerian economy and their impact on the growth of the capital market. Specifically, the study aims to:
- To examine the effect of financial sector reforms on capital market growth.
- To ascertain the long and short-term effects of the ongoing reforms to the capital market.
Chapter Two
Literature review
Conceptual review
The capital market
The capital market is a network of financial institutions and facilities that interact to mobilise and allocate long term savings in an economy. The long term funds are exchanged for financial assets issued by borrowers or traded by holders of outstanding eligible instruments. Therefore, it provides services that are essential to an economy mainly by contributing to capital formation through financial intermediation, financial advisory services and managerial skill development. In Nigeria, the capital market provides funds to industries and governments to meet their long term capital requirements for fixed investment like buildings, plants and other public infrastructure (Odoko, Adamu, Dina, Golit & Omanukwue, 2004). The Capital market is a market that involves buying and selling medium to long-term securities (i. e. ordinary shares, preference shares, bonds and debentures). According to Odoko et al,(2004) the market is sub divided into the commodity and stock market. The stock market trades in shares, bonds and funds like mortgage loans and project loans while the commodity market trades in agricultural, precious metals, etc. Through products offered by Collective Investment Schemes (CIS), The capital market also provides for indirect investments in securities. For businesses and governments to perform well and prosper, they require stable source of long term funds which isn’t available in the money market (the banking system). For instance, businesses need to expand their factories to remain competitive, and governments need provide such socio-economic infrastructures as roads, rails, hospitals, schools, bridges etc. to be relevant. This type of long term funding can only be provided by a vibrant capital market. Noteworthy roles of the capital market comprise pooling of resources as savings, liquidity formation, risk variation, enhanced information distribution and acquisition and corporate control motivation. When these functions are improved and effective, services of the capital market increase the rate of economic growth (Yadirichukwu & Chigbu, 2014; Okereke-Onyiuke, 2000). Operators in this market comprise: Brokers/Dealers, Issuing houses, Registrars, Underwriters, Trustees and Portfolio/fund managers. This market is sub-divided into two: The primary segment of the capital market is the market for fresh issue of securities by companies who need funds for business expansion or governments who need funds for infrastructure. The secondary market is a market for buying and selling of shares which the investors have already bought from the primary market, so the proceeds from sales go to the divesting shareholder and not the company whose share is being traded.
An overview of financial sector reform in Nigeria
The measures for the reform of the financial sector in Nigeria were adopted within an overall context of comprehensive Structural Adjustment Programs (SAP) comprising stabilization measures and other measure designed to institute market systems for efficient resource allocation. This implies the elimination or reduction of the excessive controls, which had been in vogue in the proceeding two decades to levels that could sustain growth and development. Financial and trade liberalization was the cornerstones of SAP The financial liberalization was designed to provide a more flexible policy framework for the management of the emerging adverse intemational economic developments. Such as the drastic decline in the price of crude oil, other minerals, primary commodity exports, and the growing protectionisen as well as the impact of rising interest rates on the country’s external debt burden. The reform was expected to promote financial savings, reduce the distortion in investment decisions and induce more effective intermediation between savers
The reforms in Nigeria’s banking sector, and the broader financial sector, emerged out of a need to expand and strengthen the sector, positioning it for growth and stability. These reforms occurred across several phases:
Phase I: Deregulation Era (1986-1993)
This period, known as the Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) era, marked the initial reforms in Nigeria’s banking sector. In 1986, one of the major reforms was the liberalization of credit allocation policies. By 1987, the sectors eligible for bank credit allocation had been streamlined to two categories: priority sectors, which included agriculture, manufacturing, exports, and solid minerals, and other sectors. Additionally, this phase saw the deregulation of banking licenses. The aim was to address the dominance of three major banks—First Bank, Union Bank, and United Bank for Africa (UBA)—and to encourage competition, creativity, and efficiency in banking services. However, this measure led to an increase in the number of banks and bank branches, eventually triggering a banking crisis marked by inadequate capital and a rise in non-performing loans within the sector. In January 1987, Nigeria’s banking sector introduced interest rate deregulation, allowing banks to set their own rates for deposits and loans, with a suggested 3% spread. By August that year, the restrictions on both lending and deposit rates were removed. However, this fully deregulated system faced backlash by November 1989, as producers raised concerns about the widening spreads and high lending rates. In response, the government intervened by lowering the minimum rediscount rate (MRR) from 18.5% to 15.5%, setting a maximum lending rate of 21%, and capping the spread at 7.5%. When banks expressed concerns that these caps would harm the industry, the government lifted the ceiling on lending rates in 1992 and increased the MRR to 17.5%, signaling a preference for higher interest rates. Consequently, banks raised lending rates by over 50% to 31.2%, while deposit rates only increased slightly. In 1993, with an additional MRR hike to 26%, banks increased lending rates again to 39.1%, while deposit rates saw minimal change. This significant spread of 22.4% frustrated the government, which then abandoned the market-based interest rate policy due to producer complaints. In 1989, a new auction system for treasury bills was also introduced. This allowed for competitive bidding and was intended to align treasury bill rates with other money market rates, curb inflation from government borrowing, and enhance the effectiveness of treasury bill rates as a monetary control tool.
Phase II: Re-regulation or Reform Lethargy (Systemic Distress Period) (1994-1998)
This phase marked a return to pre-reform policies, starting with a restriction on issuing new bank licenses. This move, along with other factors, led to a reduction in the number of banks and branches, effectively stalling the growth of the banking sector. In 1994, a shift away from gradual, market-based depreciation of the official exchange rate resulted in a sudden devaluation. To address the widening gap between the official and autonomous exchange rates, the Nigerian government devalued the naira in an attempt to align both rates. This disparity prompted the government to ban the Autonomous Foreign Exchange Market (AFEM) in 1994 and reintroduce exchange controls. However, in 1995, AFEM was reinstated to operate alongside the official exchange rate, with the government allowing the official rate for specific uses, like pilgrimages and sports events. This dual system created inefficiencies in resource allocation, particularly in the public sector. In 1994, due to a significant spread between deposit and lending rates, the government reintroduced interest rate controls, capping lending rates while allowing banks to reduce savings rates. The initial goal of deregulating interest rates was to enable market-driven efficiency and better resource allocation by mobilizing idle funds. Yet, policy reversals occurred when lending rates became unmanageable, defining this period by frequent shifts between regulated and deregulated approaches.
Chapter Three
Methodology
Research Design
This research basically adopts the scientific method of regression in order to get a reliable result which will validate the purpose of this study. Similarly, research is an investigation undertaken in order to discover new facts and get additional information. This study adopts an empirical analysis in evaluating the impact of financial sector reform on capital market. In the face of capital market reforms regression frameworks with OLS estimation method is used in the empirical analysis as well as trend analysis of stylized fats on some of the indicators of capital market growth, to show the performance of the market. It examines critically the research design, sample size, sample technique, research instrument adopted and procedure for data collection methods used in analysing the data and tested the tentative research hypothese
Model Specification
In an attempt to examine the impact of financial sector on the growth of capital market.The study adopts the Financial Liberalization Hypothesis (or theory) which is an economic theory that argues that removing government controls and restrictions on financial markets and institutions fosters greater efficiency, economic growth, and capital market development. Ronald McKinnon and Edward Shaw first propagated the financial liberalisation theory in 1973. Oshikoya (1992) stated that financial liberalisation theory argued that the economy grows through financial deepening and financial sector reform, while McKinnon (1973), Shaw (1973) and Jayati (2005) argued that money supply and interest rate determine financial liberation. The specify model is modify to include some variables.
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Reference
- CBN; Annual Reports and Statement of Accounts.A Publication of Central Bank of Nigeria Garki Abuja. 2004.
- Akingbohungbe SS; The role of the financial sector in the development of the Nigerian economy. Paper presented at a workshop organized by the Center for African Law and Development Studies. 1996.
- Ekezie ES; The Elements of Banking: Money, Financial Institutes and Markets. Onitsha, Africana–Feb Publishers Limited. 2002.
- Mbat DO; Financial Management. Domes Associates Publishers. Uyo, Nigeria First Edition. 2001.
- Augusto T, Sergio S; Emerging Capital Markets and Globalisation. The Latin American Experience. Stanford University Press. Washington D.C. 2006.Imala OI; Challenges of Banking Sector Reforms and Bank Consolidation in Nigeria. CBN Bullion,2005; 29(2): 25 – 36.
- Onwioduokit E; Financial Liberalization and Savings Mobilization in Nigeria. CBN Bullion, 2006; 30(1): 52 – 62.
- Nnanna OJ, Englama A, Odoko FO; Financial Markets in Nigeria, Central Bank of Nigeria Publication. 2004.
- Manasseh, C. O., Ogbuabor, J. E., Anumudu, C. N., Abada, F. C., Okolie, M. A., & Okoro, E. O. (2018). The causal effect of stock market development, financial sector reforms, and economic growth: The application of vector autoregressive and error correction model. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 8(2), 357-369.
- Obunadike, K. O. (2012). The capital market as a tool for economic development: A case study of the Nigeria capital market (Undergraduate research project, Osun-State University, Osogbo). Department of Accounting, Banking, and Finance, College of Management and Social Science, Okuku Campus.
- Ikeobi, N. R. (2015). Challenges faced by individual investors in the Nigerian capital market. European Journal of Business and Management, 7(23), 1-10
- International Finance Corporation. (2016, July). Developing domestic capital markets. World Bank Group.
- Abere, M. A., Daramola, K. O., Ogunsanwo, O. F., & Adebayo, A. O. (2021). Effect of capital market development on economic growth in Nigeria. Fuoye Journal of Finance and Contemporary Issue, 1(1), 111-121
