




































 
 

 

19 
© 2020 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 
 

Economy 
Vol. 7, No. 1, 19-24, 2020 

ISSN(E) 2313-8181/ ISSN(P) 2518-0118 
DOI: 10.20448/journal.502.2020.71.19.24 

© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

    
 

 
 
 
Causality of Fiscal Policies and Per Capita Income Development: Evidence from the 
Nigerian Economy 

 
Suoye Igoni1    
Itotenaan Henry Ogiri2 

 

 
( Corresponding Author) 

 
1Department of Banking And Finance University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria. 

 
2Co-Ordinator, Ph.D. International Collaboration Postgraduate Business School Gregory University, Uturu, 
Nigeria. 
 

Abstract 
The growing dependency among the working population of Nigerians and basic infrastructures 
decay despite the upward budgetary allocation initiated to this study. The purpose of this study is 
to examine the response of Nigerians welfare to budgetary increase. The study, therefore, 
measures the causality of selected Fiscal policies- Government Capital Expenditure (GCX) and 
Government Recurrent Expenditure (GRX), and its prevailing development on per capita income 
(PCI) development in the Nigerian economy. The study employed data sourced from the Central 
Bank of Nigeria over the period 1981-2016. The Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) and Granger 
Causality tests were applied. The results of the ADF test shown are stationary at first levels 
differenced. The results of the Granger Causality test indicate government recurrent expenditure 
(GRX) significantly promotes per capita income (PCI). The study concludes that GRX constitutes 
a significant variables policy that predicts per capita income development. The study recommends 
that the Federal Ministry of finance provide employment and business credits assistance to reduce 
the level of the unemployment rate.  Recurrent expenditures like wages and salaries as well as 
transfer payments should be prompt to help invigorate small businesses in Nigeria. 

 
Keywords: Fiscal Policy, Granger Causality, Per Capita Income, GCX, GRX & Nigeria. 

JEL Classification: Fiscal Policy is macroeconomic indicator, Granger Causality is test model, Per Capita Income is a 
measurement of development, GCX is project expenditure provided in government budget, GRX is recurrent expenditure 
salaries and administrative expenses in the budget, Nigeria is the country of study.   

 
Citation | Suoye Igoni; Itotenaan Henry Ogiri (2020). Causality of 
Fiscal Policies and Per Capita Income Development: Evidence from 
the Nigerian Economy. Economy, 7(1): 19-24. 
History:  
Received: 7 February 2020 
Revised: 9 March 2020 
Accepted: 13 April 2020 
Published: 1 May 2020 
Licensed: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons 

Attribution 3.0 License  
Publisher:  Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 
 

Acknowledgement: Both authors contributed to the conception and design of 
the study. 
Funding: This study received no specific financial support. 
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of 
interests. 
Transparency: The authors confirm that the manuscript is an honest, 
accurate, and transparent account of the study was reported; that no vital 
features of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the 
study as planned have been explained. 
Ethical: This study follows all ethical practices during writing.   

 

 

Contents 
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 
2. Literature Review ............................................................................................................................................................................ 20 
3. Methodology ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 
4. Results Presentation and Discussions of Findings ................................................................................................................... 22 
5. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 23 
6. Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................................................ 23 
References .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 24 
 

 
 
 

 

 

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.20448/journal.502.2020.71.19.24&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2017-01-14
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
https://www.asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/Economy/article/view/1562
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3749-1563
https://www.asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/Economy/article/view/1562
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3749-1563
https://www.asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/Economy/article/view/1562
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3749-1563


Economy, 2020, 7(1): 19-24 

20 
© 2020 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

Contribution of this paper to the literature 
This study contributes to existing literature by examining the response of Nigerians welfare to 
budgetary increase. 

 
1. Introduction 

The challenge of the rapid growth of the unemployment rate, the unstable balance of payment equilibrium and 
the poor living standard persist in Nigeria. Despite the lofty expectations from the fiscal policies, authorities appear 
no significant impact in the Nigerian economy development. Nigerian government through the fiscal policy in 2018 
presented by His Excellency, President Muhammadu Buhari as reported by Steven (2017) in the Highlights of 

2018 FGN Budget of Consolidation Presentation Speech,  projected revenue of ₦11.983 trillion and expected 

capital and recurrent expenditures of ₦2.428 trillion and ₦3.494 trillion respectively. Others were debt services 

₦2.014 trillion, statutory transfer of about ₦456 billion and sinking fund ₦220 billion.  The problem of per capita 
income in comparison with developed countries despite huge budgetary allocation is still nothing to write home 
about. The Federal government of Nigeria in an attempt to control these national instabilities established 
ministries and departments. This serves as a regulatory agency with the responsibility to collaborate with the 
ministry of finance to maintain stable economic growth rate through the application of fiscal policies and improve 
per capita income of Nigerians. Fiscal policy is a vital instrument used by the government to influence and 
maintain a stable desired economic growth and development. Economists have been well aware of its two-side 
effects in promoting economic growth. Previous studies have found no consensus on the impact of fiscal policy on 
economic growth rate. The effects of fiscal policy although are confirmed as positive in most of the studies. 
However, the degree of such impact depends on the absorbable capacity of the host country, which consists of the 
class of human capital, infrastructure, financial and institutional development as well as trade policies. 

The attempt for considering the relationship between fiscal policy and regulations in determining the economic 
growth in per capita income has remained important. Some economists believe that while government consumption 
hurts the economic growth of any economy. That is if those government investments can be considered one of its 
paramount beneficial factors. Tsoukis and Miller (2003) in their studies, include the determinant factors of 
economic growth as tax rate, public capital, and recurrent expenditures. The inclusions of taxes were based on the 
notion that the size of government is limited by the need to finance such spending. Most studies have utilized 
aggregate measures of government size in the form of growth in government consumption as a ratio to GDP. The 
study by Seymour and Oral (1997) addresses the issue of the impact of the composition of fiscal policy on growth 
through the framework developed by Devarajan, Swaroop, and Zou (1996). Their analysis evaluates which 
categories of fiscal policy are productive, and which categories can be pruned during fiscal adjustment. 

According to Ogbole, Amadi, and Essi (2011) only 14 percent contribute to GDP during deregulation than 
regulation periods in fiscal policies. Most Nigerians have doubts about full compliance with the budget. And it 
seems there are pockets of misappropriation. Abata, Kehinde, and Bolarinwa (2012) were a concern for budgetary 
malpractices in the government sector and such employed theoretical exploration. These efforts have not yet 
healed the injuries of Nigerians welfare.  

This problem of low per capita income has generated questions on whether its causes are related to 
overpopulation, wrong statistical information, and low level of production by the citizens or improper policies 
management on the side of the government. There is a serious concern to the negative turning point of the 
Nigerian economy in these recent times. The most recent is the recession between 2016 and 2017. Several 
researchers have variedly evaluated this problem but conflict in results prevails. 

In the light of the above, there is an urgent need to evaluate the extent to which these selected fiscal policies- 
government capital expenditures, and government recurrent expenditures and how these variables promote 
growth rate in per capita income or support each other using recent data within Nigeria. The above key issues 
constitute the core problem and motivation for this study. This study hypothesized that fiscal policies did not 
significantly direct per capita income in the Nigerian economy. The study sought to answer the question: To what 
extent does fiscal policy significantly granger causes per capita income in the Nigerian economy? To examine this 
question, the study intends to evaluate the Causality of Fiscal Policies and Per Capita Income Development in the 
Nigerian economy. 
 

2. Literature Review 
Scholars of the fiscal school of thought have been in a battle on its efficacy of a better policy for regulations. 

The combination of both monetary and fiscal policies for refocusing economic growth and combating distress 
makes it important. At the time of great depression, a good number of economists confirmed that fiscal policy 
vehicles played complementary roles with monetary. 

Although, according to public interest theory analyzed by Hertog (1999). The public interest theory of 
regulation emphasized that government policies may be efficient when market failures are present and private law 
offers no efficient solution. This theory assumed that market failures exist and that regulation is the most effective 
means of combating unbalance situations. This theory further explains that regulation can be accounted for as an 
efficient solution to an unbalance environment due to market failures. 

So, regulation is imperative when economic activities are unbalanced. An unbalance situation may result in 
structural unemployment which could lead to low per capita income. And to achieve a desirable per capita income, 
there is every need for proper regulations gears towards economic stabilization. Stabilization of the trade cycle can 
be desirable to prevent the decline of production and employment such that different social groups are unequally 
affected by the economic rise and fall. The theory of unbalance as it is stated, that the trade cycle policies are put 
together with instruments of budgetary and monetary policies, Snowdon, Vane, and Wynarczyk (1994). 

Fiscal policy remains a vital instrument used by the government to influence and maintain a stable desired 
economic growth and development. Economists have been well aware of its two-side effects in promoting economic 
growth. Previous studies have found no consensus on the impact of fiscal policy on economic growth rate. The 



Economy, 2020, 7(1): 19-24 

21 
© 2020 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

effects of fiscal policy although are confirmed as positive in most of the studies. However, the degree of such impact 
depends on the absorbable capacity of the host country, which consists of the class of human capital, infrastructure, 
financial and institutional development as well as trade policies.  

The attempt for considering the relationship between fiscal policy and regulations in determining the economic 
growth in per capita income has remained important. Some economists believe that while government consumption 
hurts the economic growth of any economy. That is if those government investments can be considered one of its 
paramount beneficial factors. Tsoukis and Miller (2003) included the determinant factors of economic growth as 
tax rate, public capital, and recurrent expenditures. The inclusions of taxes were based on the notion that the size 
of government is limited by the need to finance such spending. Most studies have utilized aggregate measures of 
government size in the form of growth in government consumption as a ratio to GDP.   
 

2.1. Empirical Review 
The debate on fiscal policy on Nigerian per capita income development has generated a number and different 

opinions. The work conducted by Michael and Olufemi (2017) employ OLS and St. Louis's evaluation to examine 
the relative impact of fiscal policy using government expenditure has a negative and insignificant influence on 
GDP.  Again, Anyalechi, Onwumere, and Boloupremo (2017) show no evidence of a significant impact of fiscal 
policies on the Nigerian economy. Conversely, Monogbe, Achugbu, and Davies (2016) identify that fiscal policies 
regulations promote the Nigerian economy process, but failed to establish the aspect of per capita income. 

However, Victor (2017) uses a set of theoretical approaches to determine the extent of fiscal policy regulations 
on the inflation rate and GDP in Nigeria. The results show a weak level of regulation. There was no coordination 
during periods of high inflation and GDP. Furthermore, Morakinyo, David, and Alao (2018) applied the Ordinary 
Least Square (OLS) and Vector Error Correction model to find out the impact of fiscal policy instruments on 
Nigerian economic growth. The results revealed a negative relationship between recurrent expenditure and public 
domestic debt, while capital expenditures and external debt showed a positive long-run relationship. The study 
however opined for effective debt management formulations.   

 In light of the above, it can be observed that fiscal policy is an accepted avenue to impact the Nigerian 
economy positively. Its core objective of adding value to per capita income has not been achieved. This subject 
matter has manifested to concerned academic debate. The few studies in Nigeria reviewed here indicates a mixture 
of results and conclusions. These results can largely be said to have followed the same pattern. Hence, the above 
studies were only interested in short-run relationships and lags events, and this was more reasons for employing 
OLS, VAR, Co-integration, and Auto-Regressive Distributed Lag (ARDL). Largely, these studies omit to examine 
the extent to which fiscal policy development promotes growth rate in per capita income.    
 

3. Methodology 
The study adopted the ex-post facto research design. The study employed secondary data to measure the causal 

impact of fiscal policies on per capita income in the Nigerian economy. The fiscal policies included government 
capital and recurrent expenditure. 

The data is sourced from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Statistical Bulletin (various issues) over the period 
1981 to 2016. They consisted of Per capita income as a proxy for GDP growth rate and also, the selected fiscal 
policy variables which include government capital expenditure rate, and government recurrent expenditure rate. 
Given the objective of evaluating the interrelationship between those set of variables, the functional model is 
therefore stated as follows: 

                                                             (1) 
Taking PCI to be Per Capita Income indicator and Fiscal policies predictors such as government capital 

expenditure rate, and government recurrent expenditure rate, the study empirically estimate functional 
relationships as follows: 

                 ))                                                  )  
Where 
PCI = Per Capita Income over time. 
GRX = Government Recurrent Expenditure over time, t. 
GCX = Government Capital Expenditure over time, t . 

From the theoretical standpoint, this study is designed to prove the reality or otherwise of the social welfare 
policy using variables from the Nigerian economy. 

Generally, the regression form, following (Neter, Wasseraman, & Kutner, 1989), Equation 1 and 2 can be 
rewritten in econometric form, thus: 

                                                       ) 
This equation try explained that, to achieve higher per capita income it’s the proper combination of government 
capital and recurrent expenditures. 

Where all the variables are as stated above and    = the constant (the value of the dependent variable when all 

the regressors are at zero);   -     are coefficient of the independent variables and    is the noise or error term.  
The model's variables of this study consisted of monetary policy as a broad dependent variable that is being 

influenced in the per capita income, which serves as independent variables. The dependent variables of this study 
consist of the sustainable economic development of the Central Bank of Nigeria and serve as the proxy for per 
capita income.  The independent variables of this study consist of Government Recurrent Expenditure and 
Government Capital Expenditure of the Central Bank of Nigeria. They serve as the explanatory variables for the 
fiscal policies. 

The estimation procedure for this work followed Granger Causality, Inferences- Test of Hypothesis and 
Diagnostic/Reliability Tests considerations. These sets of tests are designed to validate the goodness of the data 
sets for Unit Root to be stationary at their particular orders.  The traditional (Dickey & Fuller, 1976) test is 
adopted to show the unit root properties of the series following equation specified.  



Economy, 2020, 7(1): 19-24 

22 
© 2020 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

Δyt= β1 + β2t +δyt-1 + αi


m

t 1

Δyt-1 + εt      

This is teat for stationary. Both the dependent variable (PCI), and independent variables of (GCX), (GRX) are subjected for test to avoid spurious data information.              (4) 

Where the test is for                     
 

3.1. Granger Causality Representation 
After establishing a possible causal relationship through the granger causality model will be used to test the 

level of support emanating from the fiscal policies. This will follow the form specified below: 
For the Model PCI as the dependent variable:  

                 ∑          

 

   

 ∑          

  

   

  ∑          

  

   

                                 ) 

 
The model above implies that the period’s value of X being GRX and GCX has an explanatory influence on the 

current value Y being PCI. 
All the variables are discussed above with combined modeling of the casual coefficients in the granger causality 

framework. 
The prior expectations from the model's tests of the hypotheses are given as follows: 
 

3.2. Hypothesis One 
Ho1:   There are no significant causal relationships between the per capita income and fiscal policies of government recurrent 

expenditure and government capital expenditure in Nigeria. 
Controlling for government recurrent expenditure and government capital expenditure as the explanatory 

variables of interest, the model for the hypothesis is presented thus: 

                                                                                   ) 
Therefore the prior expectation with regards to this will be greater than zero; i.e.          
This equation denotes that the independent variables employ are expected to be greater than 0, i.e. positive 

sign, since budget provision is an incremental to achieve the desired improve of per capita income in Nigeria. 
 

4. Results Presentation and Discussions of Findings 
 

Table-1. Data for per capita income (PCI), Government recurrent expenditures 
(GRX), government capital expenditures (GCX) in the Nigerian economy for the 
period 1981-2016.  This table is periodic information of per capita income, 
government capital, and recurrent expenditures rates in Nigeria from 1981 to 
2017. 

Year PCI GRX GCX 

1981 685.35 4.85 6.57 

1982 692.62 5.51 6.42 

1983 729.44 4.75 4.89 
1984 789.3 5.83 4.1 

1985 879.55 7.58 5.46 
1986 872.87 7.7 8.53 

1987 1270.27 15.65 6.37 
1988 1635.61 19.41 8.34 

1989 2460.59 25.99 15.03 
1990 2955.29 36.22 24.05 

1991 3367.27 38.24 28.34 

1992 5542.18 53.03 39.76 
1993 6960.2 136.73 54.5 

1994 8974.9 89.97 70.92 
1995 18595.84 127.63 121.14 

1996 25277.37 124.49 212.93 
1997 25603.91 158.56 269.65 

1998 24198.89 178.1 309.02 
1999 27757.66 449.66 498.03 

2000 38555.41 461.6 239.45 

2001 39131.13 579.3 438.7 
2002 55400.52 696.8 321.38 

2003 66245.95 984.3 241.69 
2004 86219.74 1110.64 351.25 

2005 106055.7 1321.23 519.47 
2006 131191.7 1390.1 552.39 

2007 143022.4 1589.27 759.28 
2008 164055 2117.36 960.89 

2009 163443.7 2127.97 1152.8 

2010 349791.7 3109.44 883.87 
2011 391174.5 3314.51 918.55 

2012 433955.8 3325.16 874.7 
2013 471456.1 3214.95 1108.39 

2014 510805.4 3426.94 783.12 
2015 525316.4 3831.98 818.35 

2016 551511.4 4178.59 634.79 

 

 



Economy, 2020, 7(1): 19-24 

23 
© 2020 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

4.1. Data Analysis 
4.1.1. ADF Unit Root Test Results 

The Results of the Unit Root Test as Presented in Table 2. 
 

Table-2. ADF - unit root test (Summary). 

Differenced 
Variables 

ADF - Test 
Statistic 

Test of Critical Level Order of 
Integration 

Probability 
Value 1% 5% 10% 

D(PCI) -4.779108 -3.639407 -2.951125 -2.614300 1(1) 0.0005 
D(GRX) -4.8124255 -3.639407 -2.951125 -2.614300 1(1) 0.0004 

D(GCX) -7.487938 -3.639407 -2.951125 -2.614300 1(1) 0.0000 

 

4.2. Test of Hypotheses  
4.2.1. Test of Hypothesis One 

Ho1: There is no significant unit root between per capita income and each of the government recurrent expenditure, 
government capital expenditure in Nigeria.  

Ha1: There is a significant unit root between per capita income and each of the government recurrent expenditure, 
government capital expenditure in Nigeria. 

In the table above the ADF test statistic of PCI (-4.779108), GRX (-4.8124255), and GCX( -7.487938) are 
greater than the test critical level -2.951125, -2.951125, -2.951125 at 0.05 test critical level respectively. Also, the 
probability values of 0.0005, 0.0004 and 0.0000 are all less than 0.05 significance levels. Hence, the null hypothesis 
that the variables have a unit root and non-stationary is rejected at the 0.05 level of significance. This is for the fact 
that the Augmented Dickey-Fuller test statistics are greater than its critical, and its probability value is less the 
0.05 level of significance as stated above. Thus, we can say that there exists no unit root among the variables in 
their first difference. 
 

4.3. Granger Causality Test Results 
The results of the Granger Causality Test as Presented in Table 3. 

 
Table-3. Granger causality test (Summary). 

Granger Causality Test using LAG 1 

 

                             
Ho2: Fiscal policies did not significantly granger cause per capita income development in the Nigerian economy. 
Ha2: Fiscal policies significantly granger cause per capita income development in the Nigerian economy. 
From the above results in Table 3, the probability values indicate no significant Causal relationship between 

fiscal policies and per capita income. The null hypothesis is accepted concerning them, while the alternate is 
therefore rejected. Hence government recurrent expenditure is shown to be responding and adjusting to trends in 
Per capita income while capital expenditure operates independently. Conversely, these findings could be a result of 
poor management of the Nigerian budget. Also, it could be an indication of overpopulation and unemployment 
causing high dependency indices resulting in the dropping of per capita income. More so, poor data management 
could be a factor.     
 

5. Conclusion 
From the findings, it can be concluded that government recurrent expenditures constitute the significant policy 

variables of interest to promote and manage the desired growth rate of per capita income in the Nigerian economy.    
And government capital expenditures only cause changes to government recurrent expenditures which constitute 
derived effect. Some factors that were considered to be responsible for these findings were lack of political will in 
the distribution of budgetary provisions. Secondly, the upward growth of population and unemployment were also 
identifying as possible factors. Finally, poor data management was also traced as a possible indicator. 
 

6. Recommendations  
In light of the above findings, the study, therefore, suggested the below recommendation: 
1. Nigerian Federal ministry should create employment opportunities or provide credits for businesses to 

reduce the rate of the unemployment rate.   
2. Recurrent expenditures like transfer payments, salaries and wages should be promptly are paid to also help 

invigorate small businesses to improve the standard living of Nigerians citizens. 
3. Those in public trust should in bide the political wellness to collate the right information and upon 

according without fear or favor.   
 

 

Pairwise Granger Causality Tests 
Date: 09/09/18   Time: 19:14 
Sample: 1981 2016  

Lags: 1   

 Null Hypothesis: Obs F-Statistic Prob. 

 GCX does not Granger Cause PCI  35 20.6876 7.E-05 

 PCI does not Granger Cause GCX 0.04106 0.8407 

 GRX does not Granger Cause PCI  35 14.0626 0.0007 

 PCI does not Granger Cause GRX 4.01362 0.0537 

 GRX does not Granger Cause GCX  35 0.24016 0.6274 

 GCX does not Granger Cause GRX 10.4680 0.0028 



Economy, 2020, 7(1): 19-24 

24 
© 2020 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

References 
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), 75-88. 
Anyalechi, K. C., Onwumere, J. U. J., & Boloupremo, T. (2017). Fiscal policy and the Nigeria economy: An econometric review. International 

Journal of Business and Management, 12(4), 186-196. 
Devarajan, S., Swaroop, V., & Zou, H. (1996). The composition of public expenditure and economic growth. Journal of Monetary Economics, 

37(2-3), 313-344. 
Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1976). Distribution of Estimators for time series regression with a unit root. Journal of American Statistical 

Association, 74(366), 427-431. 
Hertog, J. D. (1999). 5000 general theories of regulation: Economic Institute/CLAV: Utrecht University. 
Michael, A. A., & Olufemi, A. A. (2017). Evaluating the relative impact of monetary and fiscal policy in Nigeria using the St. Louis Equation. 

Acta Universitatis Danubius. OEconomica, 13 (1), 40-50. 
Monogbe, T. G., Achugbu, A., & Davies, N. L. (2016). Fiscal policy, co-integration and economic stability in Nigeria (Preliminary 

Investigation). International Journal of Advanced Academic Research/Social & Management Sciences, 2(10), 1-16. 
Morakinyo, F. O., David, J. O., & Alao, J. A. (2018). Impact of fiscal policy instrument on economic growth in Nigeria. International Journal of 

Economics and Financial Management, 3(1), 14-29. 
Neter, J., Wasseraman, N., & Kutner, M. H. (1989). Applied linear regression models (4th ed.). USA: Richard D. Iwin Inc. 
Ogbole, O. F., Amadi, S. N., & Essi, I. D. (2011). Fiscal policy: Its impact on economic growth in Nigeria 1970 to 2006. Journal of Economics 

and International Finance, 3(6), 407-417. 
Seymour, D., & Oral, W. (1997). Impact of government expenditures and economic Growth in the OECS: A disaggregated approach. 
Snowdon, B., Vane, H. R., & Wynarczyk, P. (1994). A modern guide to macroeconomics: An introduction to competing schools of thought, Alder-shot. 

UK and Brookfield, US: Edward Elgar. 
Steven, A. (2017). Highlights of 2018 FGN budget of consolidation presentation speech. Asset Management Research. Retrieved from: 

www.infocusinternational.com. 
Tsoukis, C., & Miller, N. J. (2003). Public services and endogenous growth. Journal of Policy Modeling, 25(3), 297-307. 
Victor, O. U. (2017). Monetary and fiscal policy coordination in Nigeria: A set theoretic approach. Academic Journal of Economic Studies, 3(1), 

48-58. 

 

 
 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Asian Online Journal Publishing Group is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. 
Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article. 

 

http://www.infocusinternational.com/

