Determination Of Money Supply In Nigeria

Project and Seminar Material for Economics

Determination Of Money Supply In Nigeria


Money supply is one of the important macroeconomic variables. The control of money supply is an essential tool in conducting monetary policy within the monetary targeting framework. The success of monetary policy critically depends on the controllability the monetary authority has over money supply.

In view of this, this research work aimed at identifying the variables that determine money supply in Nigeria, specifies the correct relationships between these variables and money supply as well as to provide statistical evidence vis-a-vis the relationship in Nigeria, and also examines the most current important issues and questions in Nigerian money supply determination. Thus, the thesis lays emphasis in monetary policy as well as the viability of money supply and its determination in Nigerian economy. The period covered is 1983 to 2008.

In the course of determining the relationship, the study applied the econometric technique- Ordinary least squares Estimates (O.L.S.E), Error correction model(E.C.M) to time series data. More so, correlation matrix, percentage proportion and co-integration technique using, the unit root and granger causality test is used to verify the stationarity of the time series in order to avoid analyzing inconsistent and spurious relationship in the model, thus, ascertain whether past value helps to explain current value.

From the regression result, it was found that all the variables put forward i e money supply in the last period, domestic credit to public sector, domestic credit to private sector, net foreign assets and net of other items were significant in explaining money supply determination in Nigeria. By implication, Using Standard Granger Causality test, this study demonstrates that money supply in Nigeria for the period 1980-2003 is not exogenously determined.

Chapter One

1.0. Introduction

1.1 Background To The Study

Money supply mechanism has been receiving increasing attention than any other subject matter in the field of monetary economics in recent years. Because of the importance of money supply via monetary policy in achieving macro-economic objectives of nations (developed and developing), persistent concern has always been given among monetary economists including Ajayi (1972), Mckinnon (1973), Shaw (1973), Oyejide (1974), Fry Mathieson (1980), Ojo (1993), Ghatak (1995), Odedokun (1996), Levine (1997), Tomori (1984) ,Asogu (1998) , Ogun and Adenikinju (2004), and Owoye and Onafowora (2007) to the process of money supply and its determination.

The control of money supply is an important policy tool in conducting monetary policy within the monetary targeting framework. The success of monetary policy critically depends on the degree of controllability that the monetary authority has over money supply. The implicit assumption is that the central banks can determine the growth of money supply, and the level of money stock is the product of two components: the monetary multiplier and the monetary base. The monetary base is the quantity of government-produced money. It consists of currency held by the public and total reserves held by banks. Doguwa (1994).

According to Bhole (1987), Monetarists in general, argue that the monetary authorities can exercise effective control over the stock of money while the non-monetarists on the other hand, hold that the determination of stock of money is part of the simultaneous solution for all variables in the financial and real sectors of the economy. He further states that apart from policy action by the central banks, money stock is determined by the behaviour of the public in various asset and commodity markets. Opposing such non-monetarist arguments, the monetarists argue that the behavioural patterns of the public and the banking system are stable and predictable enough to permit the monetary authorities to control the stock of money. While such opposing views have been widely debated, empirical evidence on the issue is critical to conducting monetary policy in practice.

Akhtar, (1997) and CBN, (1995), opine that monetary policy influences the level of money stock and/or interest rate, i. e. availability, value and cost of credit in consonance with the level of economic activity. Macroeconomic aggregates such as output, employment and prices are, in turn, affected by the stance of monetary policy through a number of ways including interest rate or money; credit; wealth or portfolio; and exchange rate channels

However, Akinnifesi and Philllip (1978), in their effort, to examine the determinants and control of money stock in Nigeria, argue that, monetary authorities apply discretionary power to influence the money stock and interest rate to make money either more expensive or cheaper depending on the prevailing economic conditions and policy stance, in order to achieve price stability. This is why Wrightsman (1976), concludes that monetary policy is nothing but a deliberate attempt to control the money supply and credit conditions for the purpose of achieving certain broad economic objectives. In general, most monetary authorities or central banks have been saddled with controlling inflation, maintaining a healthy balance of payments position to safeguard the external value of the domestic currency and promoting economic growth.

While attempting to identify the appropriate definition of money in Nigeria, Ojo (1978) adopted Chetty’s theoretical approach with the use of 1961-79 data and found that the wider definition of money is more appropriate when measuring national income in the Nigerian economy. Uchendu (1997) however, in an attempt to establish a relation between monetary base and money supply defines money supply from the Central Bank balance sheet accounting framework as (M1) is the sum of currency in circulation C, and deposits D. Thus, M1= C+D, and from the broader definition M2 = C+D+TD, where TD = time deposit

More so, Nnanna, (2002) and Ojo, (2001) in the process of identifying the assets and liabilities of the financial sector, define money supply (M2) which is the expanded of narrow measure of money (M1) to include time and saving deposits at the money banks (DMBs) which is also term Quasi-money (QM) which are not directly useable as a means of payment but can in practice be converted into generally acceptable means of payment. Thus, M2 = M1 + QM

In general terms, money supply could be defined as comprising narrow and broad money. The narrow money (M1) includes currency in circulation with non-bank public and demand deposits or current accounts in the banks. The broad money (M2) includes narrow plus savings and time deposits as well as foreign denominated deposits (CBN, 2010).

However, Ogunmuyiwa and Ekone (2010), in analyzing the relation between money supply and economic growth, opined that the broad money measures the total volume of money supply in the economy. Thus, excess money supply (or liquidity) may arise in the economy when the amount of broad money is over and above the level of total output in the economy. They further stress that the need to regulate money supply is based on the knowledge that there is a stable relationship between the quantity of money supply and economic activity that if its supply is not limited to what is required to support productive activities, it will result in undesirable effects such as high prices or inflation

Oyejide (2004), stresses the importance money supply in the study of inflation and its effect on aggregate demand. Availability of money makes demand effective i.e. it enable such demand to be translated to reality. But if production level in an economy cannot sustain the level of aggregate demand. The excess demand will bid up general price level thereby bringing about inflation. Hence, the need to maintain suitable balance between this is done to provide for easy analysis.

Government aspiration towards the achievement of broad economic objectives could be pursued by means of monetary policy strategy among others. Monetary policy refers to a combination of measures designed to regulate the value, supply and cost of money in an economy, in consonance with the expected level of economic activity Nnanna, (2001). Some other theorists refer to monetary policy in terms of the central bank actions to influence and/or target some measures of the money stock. However, the definition of monetary policy often incorporated in theoretical models focus more on the measure of high powered liabilities of the central bank. This definition was the foundation of the monetarist revolution in the 1960s and 1970s (Rasche and Williams, 2007: 447).

In another strand, monetary policy is perceived as the high powered liabilities of the central bank. Such proponents ordinarily refer to monetary policy as the central bank actions to influence and/or target short-term interest rates or nominal exchange rate. However, Sargent and Wallace (1975) have contended that in a model with “rational expectations”, the price level (and all other nominal variables) could be indeterminate if the central banks set targets for nominal interest rates, because the economy would lack a “nominal anchor”. McCallum (1987) advanced the argument and showed that an appropriately defined interest rate rule which include a “nominal anchor” would avoid such indeterminacy.

In the US, in the early years of Greenspan, interest rate rules that include a ‘nominal anchor’ in the form of a desired or target inflation rate became the basic specification of ‘monetary policy’ in theoretical discussions. These various definitions of monetary policy are influenced in part by developments in monetary theory and in part by interpretations of monetary history. Thus, the changing role by the definition of monetary policy is but something of a moving target. Rasche and Williams (2007:448).

In the last three decades the discourse on the effectiveness and role of monetary policy is still a major debate in macroeconomics. The risk of ‘monetarism’ subsequent to the works of Friedman and Schwartz (1963); Anderson and Jordon (1968); Meltzer (1976 and 2003) have presented several planks. Firstly, some monetarists contend that sustained inflation was a monetary phenomenon and that central banks should be held accountable for maintaining price stability. The contention here is that central banks should control the stock of money in the economy rather than focus on targeting short-term nominal interest rates as a mechanism to achieve long-run inflation objective. (The reason for this is that, in a fiat money economy, the money stock provided the nominal anchor for the system (Rasche and William, 2007).

There are some other monetarists from the above group who equally believed that inflation control was not the only concern of the monetary authorities. Anderson and Carlson (1970) viewed monetary policy as having significant effects on short-run fluctuations in real output, though it does not affect long-run output growth. Meltzer (1976, 2003) among others believe that monetary policy was responsible for the historical cyclical fluctuations in real output.

In the 1970s and early 1980s, macroeconomics witnessed the plantation revolution of the “rational ineffectiveness proposition” of the New Classical Macroeconomics. Some common works during this era were Sargent and Wallace (1975); Fischer (1977); Taylor (1980), among others. The initial interpretations of the rational expectations paradigm were that, if expectations are rational, they would render monetary policy ineffective in influencing real output both in the short-run and long-run. Thus, monetary policy has no role in output stabilization. Further demonstration eventually revealed that it was the interaction of the rational expectations and perfectly flexible wages and/or prices assumptions that generated the “policy ineffectiveness proposition”. This integration of ideology saw an emergence of a new thought known as the “New Keynesians”. The popularity of the New Keynesian models has eventually eroded the monetarist tenets of how monetary policy affects economic activity. Money in this cycle is less often spoken about especially when included in the discourse on “inflation”. King (2002) equally cited in Rasche and Williams (2007:449) notes that:

“There is a paradox in the role of money in economic policy. It is this: that as price stability has become recognized as the central objective of central banks, the attention actually paid by central banks to money has declined” (p. 162).

The implication of this is that although monetary policy is essential in economic growth and development process of modern economies, its role in macroeconomic policy objective is becoming more passive. This is because its fundamental role has been streamlined to price stability and in recent times inflation targeting.

In contemporary literature and policy discussions, on some economies (New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, Thailand, UK, Chile, Hungary, Colombia, Canada, etc), more attention is given to the role of an inflation objective in a central bank ‘policy rule’ as the nominal anchor. This constitutes the basis of the discussion on inflation targeting. Inflation targeting is a framework for policy decisions in which the central bank makes an explicit commitment to conduct policy to meet a publicly announced numerical inflation target within a particular time frame (Egbon, 2006).

As so far reported in the literature on inflation-targeting, a number of inflation targeting countries as listed above have recorded effectiveness in their monetary policy and that central banks that have announced explicit numeric inflation objectives have been quite effective in achieving the stated inflation stabilization objective (Rasche and Williams, 2007); however, this is not without some problems in the implementation.

In Nigeria, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) is the sole monetary authority. Its core mandate is to promote monetary and price stability and evolve an efficient and reliable financial system through the application of appropriate monetary policy instruments and systemic surveillance. The 1958 Act establishing the Central Bank of Nigeria gave it the following specific functions (which have endured in the 2007 CBN Act):

  • Issuance of legal tender currency notes and coins in Nigeria;
  • Maintenance of Nigeria’s external reserves;
  • Safeguarding the international value of the currency;
  • Promotion and maintenance of monetary stability and a sound and efficient
  • Financial system in Nigeria; and
  • Acting as banker and financial adviser to the Federal Government.

According to Omotor, (2007), embedded in these objectives are two separate but highly related roles: A developmental role and financial surveillance (stability) role. The roles demand, among others, that the CBN focuses on both price stability and growth. In order to ensure the realization of the goals of price stability and economic growth, the CBN deploys its monetary policy instruments in such a way as to ensure optimality in inflation and growth outcomes. It follows, therefore, that the efficient conduct of monetary policy is a major responsibility of the Central Bank of Nigeria. This is also true of most central banks.

Monetary policy therefore, involves the adjustment of money stock, to influence the level of economic activity and inflation in a desired direction Teigen, (1995). It is a combination of measures designed to regulate the value, suppliers and the cost of money in an economy in line with the expected level of economic activity Ojo, (1992). Monetary policy is construed to be actions by the monetary authorities to influence the national economic objectives by controlling or influencing the quantity and direction of money supply, credit and the financial accommodation for growth and development programmes, on the one hand, stabilizing various sectors of the economy for sustainable growth and developments, on the other hand.

Monetary policy is also defined by Johnson (1962) as policy employing the central bank’s control of the money supply as an instrument for achieving the objectives of economic policy. Similarly, from a synthesis of most of the literature and in the context of the Nigerian situation, Ubogu (1985) defines monetary policy as an attempt by the monetary authorities to influence the level of aggregate economic activities by controlling the quantity and direction of money and credit availability.

An issue which has occupied the minds of governments for decades is the effectiveness of monetary policy in influencing economic variables, and money supply is a key variable to the understanding of monetary policy and its effectiveness. The majority of studies on finance in Less Developed Countries (LDCs) have concentrated on long or medium-term issues, but studies on short-term issues of money and finance have been sparse. Empirically-oriented studies in this area have been hampered by the lack of concrete information and data (Fakiyesi, 1999). Moreso, in Nigeria, research in the area of monetary policy especially on money supply determinants have been minimal when compared with the efforts into other components of the financial sector such as financial reform, trade liberalization and exchange rate. Even when research is available on money supply, the emphasis has been on the portfolio, stability, and mechanism of money supply.

Ajayi (1972), in a critique, examines the money multiplier Approach to money supply determination. In a related issue, Ajayi and Ojo (1981), analyze money supply in Nigeria, and specified behavioural model that exist among the money stock, high-powered money and money multiplier. Tomori (1984), among other issues, examines the proportion of money stock in Nigeria that is accumulated by the Central Bank. Uchendu (1997), investigates the relationship between money supply and base money in Nigeria, and tends to explain the stability of the relationship. More so, Doguwa (1994), analyses the stability of money multiplier in Nigeria by comparing the explanatory powers of the regression of the growth of money stock on the monetary base. While, the CBN’s Research Department (1990, 1991), Oriesotu (1993), Oke (1993, 1994), tend to articulate theoretically, the basis for the operation of the indirect method of monetary control in Nigeria, Akinnifesi and Phillip (1978) and Oriesotu (1993), examine the implication of the indirect approach on monetary stock control in Nigeria. Ogun and Adeenikinju (2004), investigate and analyze the process of money supply mechanism in Nigeria. Equally, efforts have been made to investigate the impact of the impact of money supply on economic growth in Nigeria, Ogunmuyiwa and Ekone (2010).

It is also well-known that in less-developed countries, there is a tendency to predicate monetary and financial policy on models are which are in the spirit of the money multiplier analysis (Taylor, 1974; Coats and Khatkhate, 1978; Ajayi, 1981 and Fry, 1978). This is in spite of the fact that when policies are predicated on such models, they do not reflect the true structure and process of money supply in these countries. These models tend to misrepresent; therefore the true nature and process of money supply and thereby likely to mislead policymakers. It is therefore with this background in view, that this study is undertaken.

1.2 The Statement of the Problems

An understanding of the potency of monetary policy and transmission mechanism of the aggregate money is very important to the success of monetary policy. An efficient implementation requires policy makers to know the direction the policy could take to impact on the macro economy and the time lag of the impact. Key policy issues in the current policy framework arise. For example, do changes in reserve money actually lead to change to money broadly defined (M2) and/or inflation? If so, how long do these changes take to impact inflation? Thus inflation would then aid policy maker to know which instrument are useful and which time horizon should be used to target inflation.

Conducting monetary policy is a difficult task since it affects the economy with a lag. Achieving goals requires some ability to peep into the future. Consequently, decision makers should make forecast to assist in policy formulation. To conduct this forecast, most central banks take a number of variables into account. An aspect of this thesis attempts to evaluate the information content of monetary aggregate used by the central bank of Nigeria to target inflation and other key variables such as interest rate, domestic dept and exchange rate, which have the potential of being useful indicators of inflation. The more open the economy, the greater the importance of the exchange rate in the policy process and the more important this variable becomes as an optional policy tool.

Thus, the very nature of economic activity in Nigeria gives room for so many questions and problems that beg for urgent attention.

  1. There is inflationary acceleration in money supply in the country.
  2. There is unstable general price level which is always moving up
  3. There is high level of unemployment in the country
  4. There is wide gap between saving rate and interest rate which is not encouraging savings as well as deterring borrowing.

The level of economic activity in the country coupled with the global financial crisis show that there are plethora problems in the economy Thus, there is need for effective monetary policy vis-à-vis the estimation of money supply, which is an unavoidable task of Economists.

1.3 Objectives Of The Study

The main objective of this study is to investigate the effects of money supply on the Nigerian economy. Specific objectives of the paper include the following:

  1. To assess the effects of money supply on price level in Nigeria.
  2. To determine the effects of money supply on output in Nigeria.
  3. To analyse the effects of money supply on nominal interest rates in Nigeria.
  4. To analyse the effects of money supply on real interest rates in Nigeria.

1.4 Research Questions

The following research questions were formulated for the study:

  1. To what extent does an increase in money supply impact on price level in Nigeria?
  2. To what extent does a change in money supply impact on output in Nigeria?
  3. How far does a change in money supply influence the nominal interest rate in Nigeria?
  4. How far does a change in money supply influence the real interest rates?

1.5 Hypotheses Of The Study

For purposes of this work, the following Null hypotheses were tested with respect to the long run effects of money supply in Nigeria:

  1. HO1: A change in money supply does not have a significant and positive effect on price level.
  2. HO2: A change in money supply does not have a significant and positive effect on output.
  3. HO3: A change in money supply does not have a significant and positive effect on nominal interest rate.
  4. HO4: A change in money supply does not have a significant and positive effect on real interest rate.

1.6 Scope Of The Study

The scope of the study is outlined as follows:

  1. The sample period for this study is 1987-2013; a 26-year period. This is considered a good enough period of time for such an investigation. The period covers the post Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) era, up to 2013.
  2. To ensure strict adherence to the specifications of the theories, only the core variables of the theories have been used.

1.7 Significance Of The Study

This study indicates the validity of monetary theories, namely, quantity theory of money and liquidity preference theory, in explaining the determination of money supply in Nigeria. It is an addition to empirical literature on the subject matter and useful to students, instructors, researchers in the area, and monetary authorities. It will benefit these groups of people as follows:

(a) Students

It will expose students to a very useful area of research and provide a guideline to approach such researches. As students delve into the area, they will discover a whole vast area of research and this will diversify students’ scope of research and help break the monotony of concentrating on just a few areas of study.

(a) Instructors

To instructors, it will redirect interest in this area of study. Of course, the renewed interest will mean more research effort in the area and greater insights and innovations that will enhance the country’s monetary policy. Also, with more work in the area by students, the instructors will relish the benefit of diversification as against the monotony of reading works on just a few areas.

(c) Researchers

Researchers will benefit from the insights and results of the work. It will stimulate researchers’ interest in the area of money supply and the economy. Of course, such interest will result in more research in the area thereby increasing the stock of useful knowledge (Salter & Martin, 2001). The innovative ideas so generated will enhance the application of the tool of money supply to improve the health of the Nigerian economy. The study may also highlight some areas for further research.

(d) Monetary Authorities

Monetary authorities will benefit from the study as the results of the study will provide additional information to guide their policy making. Obviously, the renewed interest in the area will of course generate better ideas for better policies. Hence, the study will be useful to monetary authorities in selecting more appropriate policy measures for the country.

1.8 Limitations Of The Study

The study focusses only on the core variables of the theories, quantity theory of money (QTM) and liquidity preference theory (LPT), namely, money supply, output, price level, and interest rate, and does not include investment which is a vital element in the theories. The QTM assumes investment to be constant while the LPT argues it is not stating that a decrease in interest rate resulting from an increase in money supply causes investment to increase and through that an increase in output. Hence, LPT believes that investment is variable. Non-inclusion of investment as a variable thus constitutes a limitation of the study and will form an important basis for further studies in the subject matter.

Chapter Five

Summary Of Findings, Conclusion And Recommendations

5.1 Summary Of Findings

  1. Money supply causes price level in the long run in Nigeria. It has a positive and significant effect on price level.
  2. Money supply causes output in the long run in Nigeria. It has a positive and significant effect on output.
  3. Money supply causes nominal interest rate in the long run in Nigeria. It has a negative and non-significant effect on nominal interest rate.
  4. Money supply causes real interest rate in Nigeria, but only in the short run. It has a negative and non-significant effect on real interest rate.

5.2 Conclusion

The results of this study have shown that monetary policy management which involves management of money supply is an effective tool for controlling the Nigerian economy. This is because analysis of evidence indicates that changes in money supply impact on the economy by impacting on macroeconomic variables such as output, price level, nominal and real interest rates in line with theoretical propositions of both Keynesians and monetarists. Thus, monetary theories of quantity theory of money and the Keynesian liquidity preference theory applied to the Nigerian economy have successfully explained the impact of money supply on the economy.

5.3. Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are hereby proffered:

  1. Monetary authorities should retain the use of monetary policy as an instrument for controlling the economy.
  2. It could be seen from the results that increases in money supply not only increase output significantly, but also do the same to price level. Significant increases in price level amount to high inflation which is undesirable. Hence, monetary authorities should seek to increase money supply in line with our productive capacity. The government should strive, on the other hand, to increase the country’s productive capacity by providing necessary infrastructure and enabling environment for businesses to thrive.
  3. Again, it could be seen from the results that money supply does not significantly impact on interest rates and this will always affect the targeted growth. Hence, there is need for monetary authorities to have a flexible interest rate intervention policy that will enable intervention, as occasion serves, to ensure that the productive sector adequately accesses money for investment. This will help attain the desired growth by increasing productivity.
  4. The researcher recommends further research on the subject matter in the area of determining the constancy or otherwise of velocity of money in Nigeria. This will complement the present study.

5.4 Contribution To Knowledge

The study differs from all others in two distinct ways as follow:

  1. All the papers reviewed either simply determined causality without showing the magnitude and direction of impact of money supply on the variables, or did an estimation model showing magnitude and direction of impact of money supply on the variables without first determining causality. The problem with the former is that causation is determined but the degree and nature of impact are not shown which makes the studies not fully adequate for decision making. On the other hand, showing the size and kind of impact with, say OLS, without first determining causality can lead to illusions or false relationships as correlation does not imply causation. This study differs from all these studies by first determining causality between money supply and other variables before applying the OLS regression model to estimate the size and kind of effect it has on the variables, if any. This produces a more dependable result for decision making.
  2. It resolves the controversy on the impact of money supply on the interest rate variable.The controversy is that nominal and real interest rates tell different stories. The Keynesians believe that money supply impacts only the nominal interest rate while the monetarists claim that the impact of money supply on real interest rate is a more realistic result for decision making since real interest rate discounts for inflation. All the other studies on the issue either used one or the other of interest rate variants in their analyses. This study simply resolves the controversy by including both nominal and real interest rate variables in its analyses, thus presenting both results for comparison at a glance.
  3. The study is an addition to empirical literature on money supply and its effects on the Nigerian economy.
  4. The study, by applying the two major monetary theories jointly to the Nigerian economy, is a contribution to geographical application of monetary theories. Other studies apply either one or the other of the theories.

5.5 Areas Of Suggestion For Further Studies

The following areas are suggested for further study

  1. Relationship between money supply and velocity of money in Nigeria
  2. Money supply and employment in Nigeria
  3. Measuring interest rate volatility using volatility models like GARCH
  4. Cross country study of the impact of interest rate deregulation.

Project Material Download

5,000 5000

The Complete Material Will Be Sent to You in Just 2 Steps

Quick & Simple…

Step One Purchase

Make Payment (Through Transfer) of ₦5,000 to Any of the Account Below

Access Bank PlcAcc No: 0811003731
Samphina Academy
Current Account
Zenith BankAcc No: 1225513212
Samphina Academy
Current Account

Or CLICK HERE To Pay With Debit Card

CLICK HERE To Purchase Material ($15)
Make Payment of 120 GHS to 0553978005 | Douglas Cloud Osabutey | MTN MoMo

Step Two Purchase

Send the Following Details on WhatsApp ( 08143831497) After Payment

  1. Payment Details

  2. TOPIC: Determination Of Money Supply In Nigeria

The Complete Material Will Be Sent To You On WhatsApp After Receiving Your Details
T & C Apply

  Contact Our Help Desk

Need a Different Topic? Perform a Quick Search

List of Related Works

Click on Any Topic to Preview the Content

Samphina Academy

Samphina Academy is an Online Educational Resource Center that is aimed at providing students with quality information and materials to aid them in succeeding in their academic pursuit.