TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title
page I
Certification II
Dedication III
Acknowledgements IV
Table
of contents VI
Chapter one: Introduction
- Background of the study
- Statement of the problem
- Objective of the study
- Significances of the study
- Scope of the study
- Limitation of the study
- Definition of terms
Chapter two: Literature Reviews
2.1 The chapter of privatization
2.2 Organizing for privatization
2.3 Planning for privatization
2.4 Purpose of privatization
2.5 Benefits of privatization
2.6 Implications or privatization of
government
of parastatals
2.7 Method of privatization develop
2.8 Marketing implication of privatization
Chapter three: Data Presentation
and Analysis
3.1 Historical background of privatization
3.2 Brief history about the company
3.3 Method of data collection
3.4 Method of analysis
3.5 Analysis of data
Chapter Four: Data Presentation
Analysis
4.1 Historical background
4.2 Brief history
4.3 Data presentation and analysis
4.4 Discussion of finding
Chapter Five
5.0 Summary, conclusion and recommendation
5.1 Summary of findings
5.2 Conclusion
5.3 Recommendations
References
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
Essentially, privatization can be
viewed as a systematic and programme withdrawer of government from these
business or activities which private individual or companies can perform more effectively
and efficiently than government agencies or business organization. In other
words, privatization is most commonly defined as the transfer of government
industries to the private sector, implying that the predominant share in
ownership of asset of transfer lies, with private shareholders.
However in view of the lack luster performance of public enterprises in Nigeria and the limited scope of the private sector participation in some keys enterprises government seek to the higher to ugly tried by encouraging increase private sector participation. The strategy for achieving this object is the privatization appeals to the most prevalent and important to our nation economy. The purpose of this research work is to evaluate both positive and negative implication in privatization all government parastatal and moreover, to provide corrective measure. However, the implication of privatization in Nigeria lies with reference to decree No 25 1988 (amended 1999) which provides the legal backing for the technical committee of privatization, and thus began the major paradigm shift in the conceptualization, of public enterprises in Nigeria. This study however discoursed that only a few successful enterprises such as flour mill, African petroleum, national oil and chemical company limited where partially privatized the commercialization of enterprises such as NEPA, NITEL and NNPC.
Hardly show any significant
improvement in their operation and economic performance, the project shows that
employment levels were affected by privatization. Between 1989 and 1993 the
public sector accounted for more job losses than privatize companied privatized
sector still have lower employment level. The sharp increase in price between
1984 and 1992 did not create sufficient increment is gross earnings for 1994,
but the result reveals that a reduction in public sector would haven effect (at
least in the short time) an prices. Result show that privatization has or
resources utilization. Higher to capital employment ratio has not been affected
and this also reveals that price increase in excess of 20% accursed immediately
after privatization. However, are gone for good. It is one this rate that the
study that privatization is the most appropriate economic recipe to achieve the
much desired human development and good government.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The statement of the problem for this
research work is theoretically evaluates the problem facing government
parastatals. Among this problems are:
– Unsatisfactory
service because of their erratic supply (e.g. and water supply is irregular).
– Corruption
and his management leading to law productivity.
– Dependence
on continue finding from government revenue
– Inequity in income and wealth
distribution
– Poor
services, arrogance/insensitivity to customers. All these and other were
against business or companies privatization concept and practice.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY