A Study of Agricultural Companies Development in Nigeria: A Systematic Literature Review

Introduction

In the early 1960s, shortly after independence, Nigeria was at the same level as countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore in terms of economic growth and development. While most of these countries have diversified their economy through structural transformation [4] and has become an emerging economy, Nigeria has failed to diversify and improve its economy, thereby resulting to increase in the level of poverty and unemployment in the country [1]. The Nigeria economy can be regarded as a developing economy rather than an emerging economy like India, China, and Malaysia because its industrial base is underdeveloped. The World Bank (2018) classified the developing nations as those countries with less than $4,035 per capita income. Therefore, in line with the World Bank definition, Nigeria can be regarded as a developing nation because her per capita income of $1960 is less than $4,035. Also, based on the World Bank report of 2018, Nigeria Human Development Index (HDI) is at 0.534 in the form of living standard, education and average life expectancy of 56 years which is low when compared with other emerging economies such as Malaysia with a HDI of 0.804 and life expectancy of 77 years.

The Nigerian economic progress has been impaired due to the neglect of the agricultural sector which underpinned the economic growth and development of the nation in the early sixties [5] by the Nigerian government because of the discovery of oil in commercial quantity [1]. Consequently, the country has been unable to match its economic growth with the rapid population growth thereby resulting in a country that used to be an exporter of agricultural products now importing food and other agricultural produce from other countries around the world. However, in many developing nations such as Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia, agriculture has played a vital role by addressing challenges like poverty, food insecurity and as a significant source of foreign exchange earnings [6] through transformational policy in their agricultural sector [7].

Therefore, Nigeria being an agricultural country [5] needs to establish economic policies that will promote the agricultural companies’ development. The development of sustainable policy will lead to an increase in agricultural produce and application of modern technologies in the agricultural sector which will, in turn, lead to an increase in national productivity [8]. The economic retreat by the Federal government of Nigeria on economic policy proposal, further confirms the need for a transformational agricultural policy as the President of Nigeria Muhammed Buhari (2016) stated that “it is obvious to Nigerians that food production and self-sufficiency of the country requires urgent action as for so long the government policies on agriculture have been half-hearted and suffered inconsistencies’’. It is therefore imperative that the growth and development of Nigeria’s economy depends largely on the development of Nigeria’s agricultural sector and not on crude oil whose price fluctuates from time to time globally. Nonetheless, emphasis should be upon the type of economic policies and mechanisms used by government agencies in the quest for growth and development of the agricultural sector rather than the broadbrush approach used in the past [9,10]. However, Memon and Tahir [11] believe that the performance of a business in terms of increase in output, increase in sale revenue, higher return on capital employed, growth of assets and increase in earnings per share of companies are the traits of growth and development in any sector of the economy. Mokhtar also agrees that an upward movement in these factors (return on capital employed, assets, and earnings) will indicate a positive impact of economic policy on the company growth and development, while the opposite indicates negative impact.

Therefore, Nigeria being an agricultural country [5] need to develop its agricultural sector through transformation mechanisms [7,4] such as the transition from a semi-subsistence agricultural system to a mechanized agricultural system and development of an appropriate entrepreneurial regulatory framework that will lead to the development [1,3,5,12] of the agricultural companies in the country. Moreover, most developing countries such as Congo DR and Nigeria that have failed to transform their agricultural sector has remained trapped in hunger, poverty, and economic stagnation [12]. Against the background, this study will assess the impact of economic policies on the development of agricultural companies in Nigeria.

The Methodology for SLR

The literature review stages are crucial to academic investigation and serve as a blueprint for the research. The main purpose of conducting a literature review is to develop the blueprint that will assess the previous study within the area of research [3]. To ensure the development of a reliable blueprint, a systematic literature review was adopted for this study. The systematic literature review is an evidence-based, inclusive, and explanatory [3,13] form of scientific and transparent stages of a review that will further enhance the output of this study. Ahmad & Omar [14] are of the opinion that a systematic literature review will eliminate the rule of thumb through the provision of an audit trail of the review. Therefore, reviewing literature systematically entails identification of data requirement, selection of literature, research papers classification and description, paper content analysis, and referencing, and reporting of findings [2]. For the effective development of the review, the systematic review methodology prescribed by Tranfield [2] and Harrison [3] was adopted. The review stages include review planning, review exercise, and reporting the outcomes were followed.

Stage 1: Review planning

At the commencement of the literature review an extensive discussion was undertaken with the expert panel to determine the breadth and criteria for the search. The initial discussion aided the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of literature. However, in line with the research title, the review questions were strictly adhered to determine what to include and what to exclude in the process of the systematic literature review. The exclusion and inclusion criteria aided the identification of relevant evidence. The review questions were based on the following.
a) Economic policies in developing economies b) Impact of economic policies on corporate sector development
c) Agricultural policies development in Nigeria
d) Agricultural companies’ development in developing economies

The Review Questions:

a. Are the national economic policies used to aid the development of the agricultural sector in developing nations?
b. What are the impacts of agricultural policies on agricultural companies’ development in developing nations?
c. What are the impacts of the regulatory framework on agricultural policy implementation in Nigeria?
d. Have policy transmission mechanisms been used to influence agricultural policy implementation in Nigeria?

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria:

A. Inclusion Criteria:

a. The paper must be written in English
b. The title of the paper must be related to economic policies in developing economy
c. The study must have been published between 1960 and 2020 (both years inclusive)
d. The study should focus on the review guidelines

B. Exclusion Criteria:/

a. Papers with the main focus on a developed economy
b. Working papers
c. Conference proceedings

Stage 2: Conducting the Review/

For this study, the literature search commenced by adopting the review strategy as discussed with the expert panel and using the keyword identified in the process of initial narrative review. The search string and keywords are shown in Table 1.

Table 1:Search strings.

The above search strings were used in addition to Boolean such as agricultural policy and economic development in developing nations, impact agricultural policy on companies or corporate development in Nigeria etc. to search for literature in the nine databases listed in Table 2. The databases were considered because they are rich and suitable for social and management research (Table 2).

Table 2:Sources of literature.

Analysis and Quality Assessment:The selection of the literature from the database was based on the title of the study as indicated under the search code in Table 1. The exclusion and inclusion criteria were also taken into consideration during the search. Nonetheless, 78 papers were initially sourced from the databases and later streamlined to 47 papers after the abstract screening in line with the title of the study. These papers were critically reviewed and analyzed to determine the risk of bias of individual papers and the level of evidence reported. During the process of review and analysis, additional themes were generated from the papers analyzed and further searches were conducted based on the theme generated and related journals included in the references. Upon scooping up the references of the initial papers sourced an additional 31 papers were identified out of which 17 were identified as suitable and relevant to this study. Overall, 64 papers were reviewed and analyzed. To ensure the quality of assessment all the papers that meet the inclusion criteria were reviewed at least twice to ensure criticality and compliance with the prescribed review processes. The reference details of the papers were also extracted and cross-checked to avoid transposition errors and it was discovered that there were no errors and duplication of papers. However, there seems to be no mention of structure or methodology adopted in some of the papers reviewed including those from the same database which makes it difficult to analyze the underlying methodology adopted by the authors.

Stage 3: Reporting and Dissemination

This stage involves synthesizing the studies through the descriptive analysis of the methodology, conclusion, and findings from the literature reviewed. The analysis is used to provide answers to the review questions. Furthermore, the findings from the literature review are used to justify further investigation and development of a questionnaire for primary data gathering. Other forms of quantitative analysis such as the pie chart and bar chart are also used to analyze the facts extracted from the review. The quantitative analysis will entail information like geographical distributions of papers reviewed, frequency of the papers and analysis of the methodologies adopted by the authors [1,3- 7,9,10,12,15-55] (Table 3).

Table 3:Summary of findings from the literature reviewed.

Descriptive Analysis

Contribution Based on Geographical Distribution

The highest number of papers (20) reviewed for this study originated from Nigeria. Fifty-two countries are represented with second and third highest number of papers originated from Malaysia (12) and United State of America (10) respectively. The other papers reviewed are spread across other developing nations with few developed countries. Thus, a high number of papers have been developed on developing economies but few on agricultural development. Nonetheless, Figure 1 shows the distribution by country of the papers reviewed.

Figure 1:Distribution by countries of the papers reviewed.

Figure 2 shows that among papers reviewed the papers between 2011 and 2020 have the highest frequency of 28 followed by 2001 to 2010 with a frequency of 14. This signifies that the review is based on a recent trend in corporate development in developing nations.

Figure 2:Frequency of paper by ten years interval.

Literature Source

The 54 papers reviewed are spread across different journals, but just eight of the journals can be credited with at least two with World development journal having the highest with frequency of 4. This can be seen in Table 4.

Table 4:Journals with highest frequency of publications.

Analysis of Methodology

Analysis of findings from the literature reviewed showed 55% adopted the qualitative method, 22.5% quantitative method while 22.5% adopted a mixed method. Also, data collection instruments were 39% questionnaires, 24% interviews, 21% case studies and others were 16%. Figures 3 & 4 show the pictorial diagram of the methodology adopted.

Results

Are the National Economic Policies used to Aid the Development of the Agricultural Sector in Developing Nations?

The review showed that national economic policies in most developing nations do not have a significant impact on the development of the agricultural sector. As indicated in Table 5 forty two of the papers reviewed answered question one in part or as a whole. The papers revealed there was no significant development in the agricultural sector as a result of neglect of the agricultural sector by the government [1,24], lack of inclusion of all stakeholders in policy formulation and implementation [27], lack of adequate and reliable data [14] and incidence of corruption. However, some of the papers such as Adams and Daneji suggested a way out of this conundrum as the development of an appropriate regulatory and legal framework that is based on the economic reality of a developing nation like Nigeria (Table 5).

Table 5:Use of national economic policies to aid the development of the agricultural sector.

What are the Impacts of Agricultural Policies on Agricultural Companies’ Development in Developing Nations?

Twenty-eight of the papers reviewed were identified to have answered review question two (Table 6). The review findings show that agricultural companies’ output, profitability and return on capital employed were volatile over various agricultural policies and programs in most African nations [20] and some of the established agricultural policies are inconsistent and cannot reduce or eradicate poverty in most developing nations [28]. Nonetheless, some of the authors [7,10] recommended the development of a tailor-made policy rather than a broad-brush approach that will influence the development of agricultural companies in the developing nations (Table 6).

Table 6:The impacts of agricultural policies on agricultural companies’ development.

What are the Impacts of the Regulatory Framework on Agricultural Policy Implementation in Nigeria?

Twenty-four papers answered review question three (Table 7). The findings revealed that Nigeria agricultural sector just like any other developing nation lacks agricultural regulatory framework [5,12], The weak regulatory framework in existence is not being complied with due to structural defect [15,17] and the intervention of government in form of price regulation has further distorted the pricing mechanism in the country [50,54,56]. However, most of the authors such as Storey [9] recommended the use of a stepby- step approach in the development of an agricultural regulatory framework [19,27,37] and the adoption of external policy framework developed by international agencies such as FAO and World Bank which can help minimize the incidence of the weak regulatory framework [33] (Table 7).

Have policy transmission mechanisms been used to influence agricultural policy implementation in Nigeria?

Twelve papers provided a solution to review question four (Table 8). The identified papers findings revealed that there is disintegration between agricultural agencies and the agriculturist involved in the use of agricultural data and information. Lack of appropriate policy transmission mechanism and effective communication between the policymakers and the agricultural stakeholder [29,34] and lack of adequate funding and provision of the appropriate policy transmission mechanism. Furthermore, Dardek [34] recommends a way out of the ineffective policy transmission mechanism as the development of an effective policy transmission framework that will influence effective communication between policymakers and the agrarian in Nigeria [34] (Table 8).

Table 7:Impacts of the regulatory framework on agricultural policy implementation in Nigeria.

Table 8:Using policy transmission mechanisms to influence agricultural policy implementation in Nigeria.ss

Conclusion

The literature reviewed was able to provide insightful answers to the review questions and many more. The review showed that agricultural companies in the most developing nation such as Nigeria have not been able to make significant development given the large potentials of arable land and other renewable resources. From the review, it was discovered that the lack of significant development of agricultural companies in Nigeria was as a result of neglect of the agricultural sector, lack of agricultural development regulatory framework, over-dependence on crude oil revenue, lack of adequate data for agricultural planning, use of broadbrush policy, lack agricultural policy transmission mechanism, the incidence of corruption in the country, poor return on agricultural investment and lack of inclusion of all stakeholders in agricultural planning. It was also discovered that Nigeria can draw a lesson from the Malaysia palm oil development experience. Malaysia is a developing oil nation with poor economic development up till early 70s [34] just as Nigeria, but Malaysia, through its agricultural development program, has been able to reduce poverty and increase the standard of living of the citizen which has placed the country among the upper-middle-income country. Therefore, a pragmatic approach to agricultural company development in Nigeria will lead to a decrease in the rate of unemployment, food sufficiency and an increase in foreign exchange generation. However, Nigeria being a multi-cultural nation with various ethnic groups spread across the regions need to be evaluated on a regional basis. Therefore, future research can be carried out on other regions to determine the impact of economic policy on agricultural companies’ development in other regions [57-85].

Funding

This research is fully self-funded research and has received no grant from any entity.

References

• Adams OA (2016) Diversification of Nigeria economy through agricultural production. JEF 7(6): 104-107.
• Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidence informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of management 14(3): 207-222.
• Harrison C, Paul S, Burnard K (2016) Entrepreneurial leadership: A systematic literature review. International Review of Entrepreneurship 14(2): 235-264.
• Barrett CB, Mutambatsere E (2005) Marketing board. The New Pelgrave Dictionary of Economy 2: 1-13.
• Afolabi A (2015) The effect of entrepreneurship on economy growth and development in Nigeria. Int J Devel Eco Sust 3(2): 49-65.
• Adeola RG, Adetunbi SI (2015) Farmers' perception of sustainable agriculture in South-West Nigeria: Implication for rural economy. International Journal of Applied Agricultural and Apicultural Research 11(1&2): 86-92.
• Divanbeigi R, Saliola F (2016) Regulation and transformation of Agricultural. Food and Agri Organ Pp1-22.
• Mau V (2014) Challenges of Russian economic policy: modernisation or acceleration? (Perestroika or uskorenie). Post-Communist Economies 26(4): 437-458.
• Storey D (1994) Understanding the small business, London, Routledge.
• Talbot S, Reeves A (1997) Boosting the Business Birth Rate in Scotland: Evidence from the Lanarkshire Development Agency’s Entreprenuership Programme. Quarterly Economic Commentry 22(2): 26-35.
• Memon MA, Tahir IM (2012) Performance analysis of manufacturing companies in Pakistan. Business Management Dynamics 1(7): 12-21.
• Hazell P, Poulton C, Wiggins S, Dorward A (2010) The future of small farms: Trajectories and policy priorities. World Development 38(10): 1349-1361.
• Sawyerr E, Harrison C (2019) Developing resilient supply chains: lessons from high-reliability organisations. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 25(1): 77-100.
• Ahmad S, Omar R (2016) Basic corporate governance models: a systematic review. International Journal of Law and Management 58(1): 73-107.
• Luken RA (2006) Where is developing country Industry in sustainable development Planning? Sustainable Development 14: 46-61.
• Cervantes Godoy D, Dewbre J (2010) Economic Importance of Agriculture for Poverty Reduction. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Working Papers 23: Pp26.
• Ibietan J (2011) Public policymaking process: Agricultural and rural development policies in Nigeria (1960 to date). International Journal of Studies in the Humanities 8(9): 95-108.
• Micah LC, Ruth T (2014) Assessing the relationship between regulatory framework and forensic accounting, the Nigerian experience. British Journal of Economics, Management and Trade 4(12): 2095-2106.
• Bergh VR (2000) Towards an institutional legal framework for regulatory competition in Europe. Kyklos 53(4): 435-466.
• Iwuchukwu JC, Igbokwe EM (2012) Lesson from agriculture policies and programmes in Nigeria. Journal of Law, Policy, and Globalization 5: 11-22.
• Birner R, Resnick D, (2010) The political economy of policies for smallholder agriculture. World Development 38(10): 1442-1452.
• Akpan JD, Eyo MF (2018) Anti-corruption war under President Muhammadu Buhari in Nigeria: The arsenal, casualties, victories, and corruption perception appraisal. Global Journal of Politics and Law Research 6(3): 32-47.
• Akinkunmi MA (2017) Nigeria’s economy growth: Past, present and determinants. Journal of Economic and Development Studies 5(2): 31-46.
• Estrada F, Papyrakis E, Tol RS, Gay Garcia RS (2013) The economics of climate change in Mexico: implications for national/regional. Climate Policy 13(6): 738-750.
• Muhammad AC, Muhammad AF, Muhamma BD, Iqra A (2011) Globalization and its impact on the world economic development. International Journal of Business and Social Science 2(23): 291-297.
• Byerlee D, De Janvry A, Sadoulet E (2009) Agriculture for development: Toward a new paradigm. Annual Review of Resources Economics 1(1): 15-31.
• Satar MS (2016) A policy framework for social entrepreneurship in India. JBM 18(9): 30-43.
• Owombo PT, Akinola AA, Ayodele OO, Koledoye GF (2012) Economic impact of agricultural mechanisation adoption: Evidence from maize farmer in Ondo State Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture and Biodiversity Research 1(2): 25-32.
• Daneji MI (2011) Agricultural Development Intervention Programmes in Nigeria. Savannah Journal of Agriculture 6(1): 101-107.
• Diao X, Hazell P, Resnick D, Thurlow J (2007) The role agriculture in development - Implications for Sub-Saharan Africa. Research report no. 153. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Washington, DC.
• Jayne T (2019) Agriculture transformation in Africa: opportunity and challenges. Global Development.
• Zin RH (2014) Malaysian development experience: Lessons for developing countries. Institutions and Economies 6(1): 17-56.
• UNFCCC (2007) Climate change: Impact, vulnerability, and adaptation in developing countries. UNFCCC. Bonn, Germany.
• Dardek RA (2015) Transformation of Agricultural Sector in Malaysia through Agricultural Policy. FFTC Agricultural Policy Articles. Pp: 1-7.
• Hassan MS, Shaffril HA, Samah BA, Ali MS, Ramli,NS, et al. (2010) Agriculture communication in Malaysia: The current situation. American Journal of Agriculture and Biological Science 5(3): 389-396.
• Kajisa K, Maredia M, Boughton D (1997) Transformation versus stagnation in the oil palm industry: A comparison between Malaysia and Nigeria. Staff Paper 97(5): 1-19.
• Nuryartono N, Pasaribu SH, Panggabean PN (2016) Total factor productivity analysis of oil palm production in indonesia. International Journal of Economics and Finance Issues. 6(4): 1570-1577.
• Fitzherbert EB, Struebig MJ, Morel A, Danielsen F, Bruhl CA, et al. (2008) How will oil palm expansion affect biodiversity? Trend in Ecology and Evolution 23(10): 538-545.
• Gurden B (2017) The palm oil crisis in Nigeria and beyond. Ecologist.
• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Summary for decision makers. In Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis, 1-24. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
• Pretty J, Brett C, Gee D, Hine R, Manson C, et al. (2001) Policy challenges and priorities for internalizing the externalities of modern agriculture. Journal of environmental planning and management 44(2): 263-283.
• Coase RH (1960) The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics 3: 1-44.
• Chikhuri K (2013) Impact of alternative agricultural trade liberalization strategies on food security in the Sub-Saharan Africa region 40(3): 188-206.
• Ruffin R, Anderson M (1996) Externalities, market, and government policy. Dallas Economic Review Pp24-28.
• Yusuf SA, Rufai MA, Komolafe JO (2013) An evaluation of externalities linked to Nigerian forests. International Journal of Research in Agriculture and Food Science 1(1): 1-12.
• Novikova A (2014) Valuation of agricultural externalities: Analysis of alternative methods. Research for Rural Development 2: 199-206.
• Bauer PT, Yamey BS (1965) Specific policy measures affecting agriculture. In: Guillebaud CW and Friedman M. The economies of underdeveloped countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Pp209-234.
• Moss CB, Schmitz A (2013) Positive and negative externalities in agricultural production: The case of Adena springs ranch. Journal of Agricultural and Applied economics 45(3): 401-409.
• Williamson OE (1970) Administrative decision making and pricing: Externality and compensation analysis applied. National Bureau of Economic Research pp115-138.
• McChesney F (2004) What'd I say? Coase, Demsetz and the unending externalities debate. Law and Economic Research Paper Series 04(01): 1-32.
• Agbola AI (2014) Agricultural finance: A practical guide for lenders and entrepreneurs. Lagos: The CIBN Press.
• Williams G (1985) Marketing without and with marketing boards: the origins of state marketing boards in Nigeria. Review of African Political Economy 12(34): 4-15.
• Ajayi AT, Samuel AI, Abiodun R (2017) Produce buying and marketing board in Nigeria: Interrogating the fiscal role of Western Nigerian marketing board 1942 - 1962. European Journal of Management and Marketing Studies 2(3): 61-85.
• Kolawole MI (1974) The reform of commodity marketing boards in Nigeria: An analysis of new producer price policy. The Developing Economies 12(2): 155-168.
• Afroz A, Akhtar R (2017) Determinants of Malaysian farmers' choice of adaptation strategies for adapting to climate change in Kedah Malaysia. Asian Journal of Agricultural Research 11(4): 120 -127.
• Pattinger TI (2016) Problem of agriculture- Market failure. School of economics.
• Akindola R (2017) Military incursion, tribalism, and poor governance: The consequences for development in Nigeria. Mediterranean Journal of Social Science 8(2): 151-155.
• Adeniran JO, Yusuf SA, Adeyemi OA (2014) The impact of exchange rate fluctuation on the Nigerian economic growth: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences 4(8): 224-233.
• Adetuyi A, Borode AD, Adebowale A (2022) Climate Change: Policy support for national adaptation plan in Sub Saharan Africa. WSEAS Transaction on Enviroment and Development 18(8): 737-745.
• Barro Robert J (1995) Inflation and economic growth. National Bureau of Economics Research. 5326: 1-34.
• Barua SK, Jussi L, Jussi U, Jari K (2014) On the economics of tropical deforestation: Carbon credit markets and national policies. Forest Policy and Economics 47: 36-45.
• Bradley A (2010) The abolition of the Milk Marketing Board pp. 1-2.
• Bray FJ (2018) US speaks in Nigeria being the giant of Africa. Daily Post.
• CITA (2004) Companies Income Tax Act, Cap C21, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (2004) (CITA).
• Egbochuku S (2001) Nigeria, Unlocking the future. Business Confidential: Nigeria’s Business Newsletter 27(35): 8.
• Ezekwezili O (2012) Nigeria loses $400billion to oil thieves. Vanguard Daily Post.
• Fardmanesh M (1991) Dutch disease economics and oil syndrome: An empirical study. World Development 19(16): 711-717.
• Fouka G, Mantzorou M (2011) What are the major ethical issues in conducting research? Is there a conflict between research ethics and the nature of nursing? Health Science Journal 5(1): 3-14.
• Ghosh A, Phillips S (1998) Warning: Inflation may be harmful to your growth. IMF Staff Papers 45(4): 672-710.
• Guetzkow J, Lamon M, Mallard G (2004) What is originality in humanities and social science? American Sociological Association 69(2): 190-212.
• Ijewereme OB (2015) An anatomy of corruption in the Nigeria public sector: Theoretical perspectives and some empirical classifications. Sage Open 5(2): 1-16.
• ILO (1993) http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/stat/res/index.htm
• Isola L, Oluwafunke AI, Victor A, Asaleye A (2016) Exchange rate fluctuation and the Nigeria economic growth. Danubius Journals 35(2):738-750.
• John DE, Akpan BS, Parick VI (2012) Empirical relationship between trends in cash crop output volatility and agricultural policy period in Nigeria. International Journal of Economic 1(11): 57-65.
• Kulawczuk, Poszewiecki (2011) Behavioral finance of entrepreneurship. How framing can influence the propensity of small businesses to apply financial instruments. Case of Poland. International Conference on Micro & Macro Economics Research. Pp: 1-66.
• Manning C, Roesad K (2007) The manpower law of 2003 and its implementing regulations: Genesis, key articles, and potential impact. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 43(1): 59-86.
• Mehrad A, Zangeneh TM (2019) Comparison between qualitative and quantitative research approaches: Social science. International Journal for Research in Education Studies 5(7): 1-7.
• Mehdi P, Movahed MS (2014) Estimating the effect of exchange rate fluctuations on real sectors of the economy (Industry Sector). Journal of Applied Science and Agriculture 9(2): 539-549.
• Meramveliotakis G, Milonakis D (2018) Coasean theory of property right and law revisited: A critical. Science & Society 82 (1): 38-66.
• Onwuegbuzie AJ, Frels RK (2015) Using Q methodology in the literature review process: A mixed research approach. International Journal of Education 1(2):90-109.
• Osakwe CO (2010) National agricultural information management system in Nigeria: a conceptual framework. Library Review 52(9): 444-451.
• Riaz A, Zafar Z (2018) Determinants of unemployment in less developed countries. SHS Web of Conferences 48(10): 1-6.
• Roriz M, Padez C (2017) Ethical regulation of research and the challenges of ethnography practices. Etnografica 21(1): 75-95.
• Samuel UE, Udo BE, Imolemen KI (2018) The implication of naira devaluation to the Nigeria’s economic development. Business and Economic Journal 9(1): 343-349.
• Utomi J (2019) Delta State: Oil price is forcing country to agriculture.