ABSTRACT
The CBN in its search
for a more robust, stronger and stable banking system, reeled out a 13 point
reform agenda in July 6, 2004 direct among other things, that operators in the
banking sub-sector should raise their capital base to N25 billion with full
compliance by December 31, 2005. Although the minimum capitalization segment of
the bank consolidation exercise has since been achieved, In the light of the
above, the study aimed at evaluating the impact of capitalization on the
banking industry and the Nigeria economy. However, the objective of the study
include: Examining the extent to which
Banking industry capitalization has boosted the Nigerian economy, whether the capitalization
of banking industry sector enhanced the banks lending ability, How the
capitalization had contributed towards the growth and development of the
Nigerian economy and to proffer recommendations, to ascertain this, banking
industry capitalization was used to correlate with industrial sector Gross
domestic product (GDP). The study covered a period of Eight years. Being an
Expo Factor research design, Regression Analysis was used to test the
hypotheses using the following variables: Banks lending rates; Banking industry
capitalization, manufacturing sector utilization rates, industrial sector Gross
(GDP) of the economy. The study found that, the capitalization of banking
industry had no significant positive impact on the growth and development in
the Nigeria economy as in a bid to survive in the highly competitive banking
industry. On the other hand, it was found out that, the capitalization enhanced
banks lending ability within the period. However, this was as a result from the
test model, although, the capitalization of banking industry cannot enhanced
banks lending, if capitalization of Banking
industry had no significant positive impact on the growth and
development in Nigerian economy.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
pages
Title
page i
Certification ii
Dedication iii
Acknowledgements iv
Abstract v
Table
of contents vi
List
of Tables xi
CHAPTER
ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study 1
1.2 Statement of Problem 4
1.3 Objectives of the Study 5
1.4 Research Questions 5
1.5 Research Hypotheses 6
1.6 The Significance of the Study 6
1.7 The Scope of the Study 8
1.8 Operational Definition of Terms 8
References
CHAPTER
TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Origin of Banking (An Overview) 10
2.2 Banking in Nigeria (A Historical perspective) 11
2.2.1 Origin 11
2.2.2 Other Developments 13
2.3 Bank capital (conceptual issues) 15
2.3.1 The Functions of bank capital 16
2.2.3 Development of indigenous banks
18
2.2.4 The ordinance of 1952 and its effect 20
2.4 The Origin of bank capital legislation in Nigeria 22
2.5 Bank Distress/failure in Nigeria
29
2.5 Banking Regulation in Nigeria 30
2.5.1 The Need for Regulation 30
2.5.2 The Effects of banking regulation in Nigeria 32
2.6 The Issues in Bank Recapitalization in Nigeria 35
2.6.1 Reasons for Consolidation 36
2.7 Bank consolidation: The Nigeria experience 37
2.7.2 Effects of Consolidation 39
References
CHAPTER
THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Design 44
3.2 Nature and Sources of Data 44
3.3 Population of the Study/size of sample 45
3.4 Model for Analysis 46
3.5 Method of Data Analysis
46
3.6 Limitations of the Study 47
References
CHAPTER
FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Data Presentation 50
4.2 Test of Hypotheses 66
4.3 Implications of results 70
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF
FINDINGS,RECOMMENDATION AND
CONCLUSION
5.1 Summary of Findings 72
5.2 Recommendations 73
5.3 Conclusion 74
References
Bibliography
LIST
OF TABLES
TABLE 4.1 Presentation of Data
for Analysis 50
TABLE 4.1.1
presentation
data for analysis 50
Table 4:1.2 Determination of bank Capitalization 53
Table 4.1.3a: Indicator of Banks lending to the manufacturing sector development 54
Table 4.1.4: Indicator of Banks Industry capitalization on the Economy 55
Table 4.1.5: Nigerian Average manufacturing capacity utilization rate and banking industry capitalization 56
Table 4.1.6a Ratio of annual Banks lending to the industry GDP of economy development 57
Table 4.1.7: Gross domestic products (GDP) at current basic price 58
Table 4.1.6b: Industrial sector GDP of the economy and Banks lending 59
Table 4:1.8: Industrial
sector GDP and its components 59
Table 4:1:9: Average Banks lending to the economy 60
Table 4:10: Determination of maximization rates percentage and prime rates percentage 61
CHAPTER
ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
OF THE STUDY
The
ultimate strength of a bank lies in its capital fund. Banking, like any other
business, requires adequate capital to function effectively (Nwankwo, 1991:45).
Though by nature, banking is a highly leveraged industry, the degree of
leverage averaging 88% and 95% in the United States, compared with between 24%
and 70% of non financial firms (ibid). life of a bank like any other business,
it plays the role of a cushion for losses resulting from crystallization for
the various risks a business entity is exposed to (Imala, 2004:74). Adequate
capital is required to maintain public confidence by standing ready to absorb
unexpected or unusual losses not absorbed by normal earnings (Nwankwo,
1991:45). Thus, it has often been said that the primary function of bank
capital is to protect the depositor against loss. How true is this statement?
Although
such statements contain an element of truth, they do not adequately express the
complete nature of the protective functions of banks capital funds. Most weak
looking bank assets can be phased out with relatively little loss given
sufficient time, competent management, reasonable earnings, and the workings of
the business cycle (Liewellyn, 1999:5). Therefore, the primary function of bank
capital is to keep the bank open and operating so that gain and earnings can
absorb losses in other words, to inspire sufficient confidence in the bank of
the part of depositors and the supervisor so that it will not be forced into
costly liquidation. In this sense, capital services to protect the stockholder
as much as, if not more than the depositor (ibid).
The
other functions of bank capital, is that of purchasing fixed assets and working
capital. In fact put in another ways, capital is needed to supply put in
another way, capital is needed to supply the working tools of the bank’s
banking quarters, equipments needed to begin operations and the working
capital.
Thus
for a bank to function effectively it needs sufficient and adequate capital.
This capital is defined by Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) 2004:1 as paid – up
capital and serves unimpaired by losses. Therefore banks owe some basic
responsibilities to their communities. The traditional functions which they
render in form of financial intermediation, must be effectively delivered to
retain the confidence of their client. The bank must also sustain the interest
and confidence of the public by being sufficiently responsive to their needs;
housing all maturing obligations avoiding actions that will lead to distress
and failure in the system. Banks must also meet the credit needs of their
customers and thus sustain the productive process (Nzotta, 1999:282)
Thus
bank capital serves tripartite functions viz; protective, regulative and
operational. The protective function is to protect depositors against the risk
of non – payment of deposits on demands while the regulatory function is that
of meeting up with the monetary authorities requirement and helps the
authorities assess a banks health. The operational functions has to do with the
procurement of what banks need to take off business, which means that the
operational function is to kick- start the banking operations.
Meanwhile,
in the Nigerian environment bank capital legislation did not start, until the
introduction of banking ordinance in 1952.
According
to Uche (1998:30), before 1952 there was no legal minimum capital requirement
for banks operating in the Nigeria colony. Despite this fact, foreign banks
were able to operate in the Nigeria colony without any banking failure.
However, things changed with the advent of indigenous banks, most of who were
poorly – capitalized, poorly staffed and in most cases interested with fraud.
In the opinion of the writer, the above tripartite malaise of the indigenous
banks contributed to their failures. This led the colonial government to invite
G.D Paton, a consultant for the bank of England, to investigate the Nigeria
banking environment with the possibility of introducing regulation. A minimum
share capital was subsequently recommended.
The
outcome of that legislation was disastrous. This was rendered by “Uche”
(1998:31) thus “the resultant effect was that banks that could not meet up with
the dead line for re-capitalization failed – mass failure with at least 17
indigenous banks failing in 1953/54. Ever since, there have been recurring bank
capital legislations.
The
banks were still setting for the new minimum capital requirement, when the big
bang Twenty five billion naira (N25bn) capitalization was announced.
This represents an increase of 1250 percent
from that of two billion naira (Uche, 1998:31-32. Eke, 2005:1).
What were the reasons for
the continual increments have any desired effect on the economy and the
industry?
Reports have shown that, with any increment on the banks capitalization, course such inflation that makes nonsense of the increase (if Uche, 1998:32). To what extent has the minimum capital legislation prevented bank failures? How has depositors fared in the aftermath? What are the likely consequences of the recently introduced, N25bn minimum capital legislation? These and many more is what this study is set to enquire.