an econometric analysis of the determinants of
Post on 05-Oct-2021
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
JOHANNES KEPLER
UNIVERSITY LINZ
Altenberger Straße 69
4040 Linz, Osterreich
www.jku.at
DVR 0093696
Submission by Yaya Idris, BSc. Submission at Department of Economics Supervisor Dr. Jochen Güntner July 2021
An Econometric Analysis
Of the Determinants of
the iReal Exchange Rate
in Nigeria
Master’s Thesis
to obtain the academic degree of
Master of Science
in the Master’s Program
Economics
ii
Abstract
This thesis undertakes anieconometric analysis ofideterminants of theireal exchange irate in
iNigeria employingiannual dataifrom 1981 to 2019. The virtualideterminants of itheireal iexchange
irate are identified resting on existing literature, namely theinominal exchange irate,imoney supply,
iinflation rate, real GDP, iforeign reserves, openness,iglobal oil price, external debt, and
igovernment expenditure. iThe time seriesiproperties were itested using theiADF and PP unit roots
itests of stationarity.iThe variables areitested foricointegration, andirelationship coefficients were
estimated using aniAutoregressive DistributediLag (ARDL)iapproach and ErroriCorrection Model
i(ECM). Empirical results confirmed that the inominal exchange irate, inflation irate, and real iGDP
are positivelyiand significantly related to theireal exchange irate. Atithe same time, ithe money
supply,iforeign reserves, andiexternal debt are negatively and significantly related to theireal
exchange irate in Nigeria.iThe thesis alsoifound that moneyisupply and global oil price have lagged
cumulative effects onithe realiexchange rate in Nigeria. It is,itherefore, recommendedithat the
icentral authority ishould try to control the macroeconomic variables that directlyiinfluence the real
iexchange rateifluctuation andiinstitute the ilimit withiniwhich the iexchange rate canifluctuate in
iNigeria.
iii
Statutory Declaration
I hereby declare that the thesis submitted is my own unaided work, that I have not used other than
the sources indicated, and that all direct and indirect sources are acknowledged as references.
This printed thesis is identical with the electronic version submitted.
Linz, July 2021
Place, Date
Yaya Idris, BSc.
iv
Acknowledgement
My profound gratitude goes to my Supervisor Dr. Jochen Güntner for his support, helpful
comments, and guidance at every stage of this thesis. He supervised this thesis diligently,
exceptionally patient with me and inspiring me a lot. Thank you for everything Prof!
I am grateful to the coordinators of the master thesis seminar: Dr. Martin Halla and Dr. Rene
Böheim for itheir valuable icomments and input idiscussions. The roles of all staff and course mates
in the department of Economics, University of Linz, are also acknowledged.
Many thanks to my family and friends who have shown great interest in my academic, and for their
moral support and encouragement.
Above all, I give all glory and honor to Almighty God for life, grace and favor granted to me.
v
Contents
1 Introduction 8
2 Literature Review 10
2.1 iExchange Rate iPolicy in Nigeria ……………………………………………….11
2.2 Theoretical Framework ………………………………………………………….22
2.3 Empirical Review ………………………………………………………………..28
3 Data Description 30
3.1 Data Sources ……….……………………………………………………………30
3.2 Definition of Variables ………………………………………………………….31
3.3 Unit Root Test ….……………………………………………………………….32
4 Methodology 34
4.1 Log Linear/Model Specification ..……………………………………………….34
4.2 ARDL Model Specification …...………………………………………...............35
4.3 ECM Model ….………………………………………………………………….36
5 Empirical Results 37
5.1 Cointegration Test ……………………………………………………………....37
5.2 Short-run Aspect of iReal Exchange iRate in Nigeria…………………………....39
5.3 Diagnostic Test …………………………………………………………………..42
6 Conclusion and Policy Recommendations 43
7 References 46
vi
List of Tables
1. Arrangement of Events iniExchange RateiManagementiin Nigeria …………………….17
2. Naira Exchange Rate Movementiin the ForeigniExchange Market………….…………..20
3. Definitions and Sources of Variables ..…………………………………………………..31
4. Stationarity Test of the Variables (ADF test and PP test) ……………………………….32
5. Results of BoundsiTest for Cointegration …………………………………………….38
6. Estimated Long iRun Coefficients using iARDL Approach …………………………...39
7. Error iCorrection Model iRepresentation for the iSelected ARDL Model …………..…..40
8. Diagnostic Tests for Underlying ARDL (1 1 2 1 0 1 2 0 1 1) Model …………………....42
List of Figures
1. Nominal Bilateral Exchange Rate of Nigeria Naira against US Dollar …..……………..18
2. Real Bilateral Exchange Rate of Nigeria Naira against US Dollar….…………………...19
3. Monthly Fluctuation in Exchange Rate over time………………………...……………...19
4. Plot of CUSUM Test for Coefficients Stability of ARDL Model………...……………...42
5. Plot of CUSUMSQ Test for Coefficients Stability of ARDL Model…..………………...43
8
1. Introductioni
Theireal exchangeirate has resulted in uncertainty in achieving macroeconomic objectives in many
economies globally, both in developed and developing countries. Unstable real exchange rates lead
to fluctuations in short-term capital flows, which subsequently affect Central Bank’s net foreign
assets. From a policy descriptive standpoint, the exchange rate is essentially related with the
economic growth. The ireal exchange irate is critical in controlling the home economy's broad
distribution of production and consumption between foreign andi domestic goods. (Oriavwote iand
Oyovwi, 2012).
The realiexchange rate is definedias the nominaliexchange rate that takes the inflation idifferentials
among countries into account. In the long run, it is defined as nominal exchange rate that is
adjusted by the iratio of the foreign iprice level to the domestic iprice level. Theidecline in theireal
exchange irate can be represented as the realiappreciation of theiexchange rate (Ahmet and
Mehtap, 1997). While the nominaliexchange rate indicates theivalue of a local currency initerms
of foreign money, the realiexchange rateiis a crucial relativeiprice thatidetermines trading
countries'iinternational competitiveness.
The exchange rate variability has long been a contentious topic in both theory and practice. One
of the remaining difficulties to be tackled is toiinvestigate theideterminants of theiequilibrium real
iexchange rate. The breakup of the Bretton-Wood system in 1970s caused many countries'
currency rates to fluctuate. As a result, economists and policymakers continue to concentrate their
efforts on empirical studies of exchange rates. The quest to know what can be done to limit the
fluctuation in the values of currencies has been the major challenge for policymakers across the
9
world. What factors determined the instability in the real currency values has been the significant
policy issue, and how it can be predicted has been the reasons for extensive empirical research
since the 1970s. Important advances in econometrics, combined with the growing availability of
high-quality data, have sparked a flood of empirical work on the exchange rate (Ajao and Igbekoyi,
2013).
So far, the research efforts imade by numerous researchers ito understand the ibehavior of
exchange irate have imet with only ilimited success. Because the equilibrium level of the currency
rate is not easily observable, the concept of currency fluctuations remains subjective. The question
of what brings about equilibrium level of exchange rate does not have a straightforward answer.
The most difficult empirical problem in macroeconomics is measuring theidegree ofiexchange
irate variability. The monetary authorities do not have absolute control over the changes of theireal
exchange rate. Only certain events, such asiforeign capital movement,iincreased productivity
owing to technical innovation, and changes in trade conditions, among other fundamentals, drive
changesiin the realiexchange rate (Ajao and Igbekoyi, 2013). According to the literature, real
exchange rate depreciation may have an unanticipated negative impact on the international trade
balance. Exchange rate depreciation and demand management strategies would be required to
effectively rectify the foreign disequilibrium balance.
In Nigeria, theiexchange rateiis a vital indicator. Its traditional role in the monetary policy
formulation is necessary because Nigeria is an import-dependent developing nation. Nigeria's main
monetary authority has used a variety of exchange rate measures to attain its price stability goal
on many times. The effectiveness of these policies, however, has remained a question mark. The
problem confronting the iexchange rate imanagement in Nigeria is still the inability toidetermine
10
the precise Naira iexchange rate, which iwould ensure ithe attainment iof domestic and external
balances simultaneously onia sustainableibasis. Despite various steps by the government to
maintain exchange rate constancy,ithe nairaiexchange rateito the US dollar depreciated throughout
the 1980s (Oriavwote and Oyovwi, 2012). The decline in foreign reserves, speculators' activities,
the recent economic meltdown, weak non-oil export earnings, oil earnings fluctuation, unguided
trade liberation policies, and expansionary economic policies, along with other factors, have all
been ascribed to the continuous decline in the value of the Naira.
This thesis investigates the factors that impact Nigeria’s real exchange rate, focusing on the years
1981 to 2019. The major goal of this thesis is just to present a model for determining ireal exchange
irates in Nigeria and to explore the influence of changes in likely macro - economic drivers of ithe
exchange rates. Other than this introductory section, the rest of this thesis is divided into five
sections. The first focused on a literature review, which comprises empirical literature, theoretical
literature, and institutional framework. The second deals with data description and variables
definition and construction, while the third is on methodology and model specifications. The fourth
focuses on the results and discussion of findings, including diagnostic tests. The last but not the
least section deals with the conclusion and policy recommendations of the thesis.
2. Literature Review
Several studies have been advanced to describe the fundamental determinants of real exchange in
the past. In Nigeria precisely, several empirical works have been undertaken to identify the
possible sources of real exchange rate fluctuation. Thisichapter examines relevant literature on the
iexchange rate policy, strategies, and management iniNigeria and reviewsithe empirical literature
11
on theireal exchange rate. The empirical literature would be divided into theoretical review and
empirical review accordingly.
2.1 Exchange Rate Policy in Nigeria
Many countries whose currencies do not serve as international currencies need to accumulate
foreign exchange through various means to import goods and services, which are primarily
required to promote growth and development. Nigeria falls into this category of countries, as its
currency cannot easily be converted and, as a result, must necessarily earn foreign exchange via
export, investment, or foreign loans to promote growth and towards enhancing the welfare of the
citizens. Therefore, the foreign exchange becomes a crucial resource to manage macroeconomic
stability and avoid external reserve problems efficiently.
One of the goals of public policy in Nigeria is to strengthen the currency rate, which is an important
system for controlling foreign reserves. To put it another way, any country's foreign currency
market is managed under the framework of a foreign exchange policy, “which according to
Obaseki (2001), is the total of the institutional framework and measures maintained to stabilize
the exchange rate towards its desired level to stimulate the productive sectors, ensure internal
balance, curtail inflation, improve the level of exports, and attract direct foreign investment and
other capital inflows” (Oladapo and Oloyede, 2014). The excessive volatility, ireal exchange irate
overvaluation, and the desire for aimechanism forimarket-determined rates whereithe
governmentiis the exclusive source of foreign exchange are the most important arguments that
emergeiin theidiscussion ofiexchange rates and administration in Nigeria. (Ajao & Igbekoyi 2013).
12
Nigeria has implemented several exchange rate regimes which can divided into a distinct period
of the formally pegged system between 1970 and 1985 to a flexible system under SAP (Structural
Adjustment Program) in 1986 and the period after SAP with lots of mixed methods of the exchange
rate. Within the following time frames, the evolution and pattern of currency rate control in Nigeria
can be examined.
The 1960-1986 Period
Theifounding of theiCentral Bank ofiNigeria in 1959 was the first step toward managing Nigeria's
currency rate. The CBN was created with the purpose of managing the country's currency to
achieve stable national currency. The Nigerian Pound was maintained at par with the pound
sterling by the Central Bank Ordinance of 1959, and the CBN was given authority for buying and
selling foreign currency in Nigeria. The exchange irate policy's specific aims during that time were
to equilibrate the ibalance of ipayments and maintain ithe value of external ireserves. Maintaining
a steady exchange rate was especially important at early stage after the independence, as a result
the Nigerian Naira was set at one to one with the British Pound.
Another fixed parity with the US Dollar was maintained until 1974, when it was replaced in 1976
by an independent exchange rate management policy that tied the Naira to either the US dollar or
the British pound sterling. A policy of stable Naira appreciation was implemented during this time.
Nigeria consistently ran considerable external surpluses in the balance of payments over the
period, which supported the Naira's appreciation. Due to the shifting prospects of Nigeria's
economic situation in the later half of 1976, a policy reversal in regulating the naira exchange rate
was implemented. The degree of exchange control was reduced in 1981, owing mostly to a better
13
balance of payments because of good developments in the global oil market. The final phase of
Nigeria's currency rate control regime was from 1982 to 1985. Export receipts were regularly fewer
than import settlements in foreign exchange. Due to the necessary reliance on short-term external
loans to cover trade deficits, this resulted in a decline in external reserves and the building of
external indebtedness.
The 1987-1995 Period
The failure of the system to meet the exchange rate strategy's major objectives led to a policy shift
in 1987, when the Nigerian Naira was allowed to float. Between 1986 and 1993, the second-tier
foreign exchange market was adopted, resulting in the introduction of the ifloating exchange irate
system i(SFEM). Foreign exchange allocation and import license procedures were abolished with
the implementation of SAP, and foreign exchange transactions were submitted to market forces
via an auction system. The Naira was undervalued as a result of the new exchange rate regime,
which served to alleviate the overvaluation problem. When a foreigniexchange rate irises more
than iits equilibrium, itiis said to be overvalued, and wheniit depreciates more thaniits equilibrium,
it iis said to be undervalued (Aliyu, 2008).
As previously stated, exchange rate depreciation has resulted in a huge increase in the Naira pricing
of imported goods, which is expected to deter imports. Table 2 below shows that the exchange rate
was N4.02:US$1.00 a year after SAP was founded, but it depreciated to an average of N4.54,
N7.39, and N9.91 to US$1.00 in 1988, 1989, and 1991, respectively. In 1994 and 1995, it
depreciated further to N21.89:US$1.00 and N81.20:US$1.00, respectively.
14
The 1995-2000 Period
The autonomous foreign currency market (AFEM) was established at the start of this period. The
exchange irate strategy had to be totally reversed in 1994, with the ireintroduction of a fixed
iexchange rate iregime, due to the continual depreciation ofithe currency. Deregulation was
temporarily halted in 1994 when the exchange rate was fixed, but it was resumed in 1995 with the
"guided deregulation” of the iforeign exchange imarket through exchange rate liberalization and
the creation of a dualiexchange irate mechanism (Oladapo & Oloyede, 2014). The Naira's
exchange rate was set at N21.8861 = US$1.00 under this new arrangement. The government was
forced to reestablish the market-based strategy under the independent foreign exchange market
from 1995 to 1999 due to the economy's poor performance at the conclusion of that year. The
exchange rate fell from a fixed rate of N21.8881:US$1.00 in 1994 to an all-time high of
N81.20:US$1.00 in 1995, only a year after it was fixed, and then fell further to N82.00:US$1.00
in 1997 and N102.10:US$1.00 in 2000.
The 2001-2019 Period
With the advent of the interbank foreign currency market, this period began. iBetween 1999 and
i2001, the CBN returned to its pre-reform practice of trading iforeign iexchange at a fixed rate in
the iinterbank foreign iexchange market (IFEM), which was split iinto the iIFEM and ithe open
interbankimarket, whereibanks operated at easilyinegotiated exchange irates market. In the year
2001, the exchange rate in all markets depreciated. The Naira declined by 8.8 percent on average
during the IFEM, to N111.93:US$1.00. This was mostly due to a considerable increase iin import-
driven demand ifor foreign exchange as a result of higher government spending. Its overall foreign
exchange demand atithe IFEM for the year was $6.9 billion, up from $4.9ibillion in 1999. Between
15
Following the surplus liquidity caused byifiscal expansion, aiforeign exchange' crisis' erupted in
iApril 2001, when ithe CBNimade a minor adjustment toithe IFEM irate before successfully
mopping up ithe excessiliquidity. To ideal withithe crisis, the government sold enormous sums of
foreign currency,idepleting foreignireserves.
Theiparallel marketiexchange rate rose from iN140 to aniaverage of iN133ithroughout the rest of
2001 as a result of this and otheritighter monetaryipolicy measures, leaving a 21% disparity
ibetween the iofficial and analogous market prices. Between 2000 and 2005, it depreciated further
to N128.55. However, since 2003, the rate has been rather stable, with an increase between 2005
and 2008. The iCentral Bank resurrected the iDutch Auction iSystem (DAS) in 2002, a system that
attempted to introduce iSAP in the mid-1980s but failed. The ipremium between ithe parallel and
official rates has dropped dramatically since the present civilian administration removed ithe fixed
(nominal) exchange irate of the iAbacha period, from 28.98 percent to barely 9.83 percent.
The premium has decreased more when the DAS was implemented, to around 7.8%. This is
nevertheless high when compared to rates of less than 2% iin many other ideveloping countries. If
permitted to stay and perform correctly, the DAS should be able to drastically ireduce or eliminate
the iexchange irate premium. However, officials' fixation with maintaining ithe nominal exchange
rate's stability could be a stumbling blockiin allowing the pace to discover its true imarket value
i(Soludo, 2008). iThe average irate of the iNaira to the US appreciated iwith an average rate of
N128.10:US$1.00 at the iDutch Auction iSystem (DAS) iin 2006, based on recent idevelopments
in Nigerian currency rate policy.
16
Table 1: Arrangement of Events iniExchange Rate Administration iin Nigeria
s/n Year Event Remark
1 1959 –
1967
Fixed Parity Solely with the
British Pound Sterling
Suspended in 1972
2 1968 –
1972
Included the US dollar in the
iparity exchange
iThe aftermath of the 1967 idevaluation of the
Pound and the iemergence of a istrong dollar
3 1973 Revertito fixediparity with
the British iPounds
iDevaluation of ithe US dollar
4 1974 Parity to both pounds and
dollars
To minimize ithe effect of ithe devaluation of the
individual currency
5 1978 Trade (import) – The
weighted ibasket of icurrency
approach.
Tied to seven currencies; British Pounds, US
Dollars, German Mark, French Franc, Japanese
Yen, Dutch Guilder, Swiss Franc
6 1985 Reference on the dollar To iprevent arbitrage iprevalent in the basket of
currencies
7 1986 iAdoption of the second-tier
iforeign exchange imarket
Deregulation of the economy
8 1987 The imerger of the first and
second-tier markets
Merger of rates
9 1988 Introduction of ithe interbank
iforeign exchange imarket
iThe merger between the autonomous and the
FEM rates
10 1994 iFixed Exchange rate iRegulate the economy
17
11 1995 iIntroduction of the
iAutonomous Foreign
iExchange Market (AFEM)
Guided Deregulation.
12 1999 Re-introduction of the inter-
bank foreign exchange
market (IFEM).
iThe merger of ithe dual exchange rate, following
ithe abolition of the official exchange rate from
January 1st.
13 2002 iRe-introduction of the
iDutch Auction System
i(DAS).
Retail DAS was implemented at first instance
with CBN selling to end-users through the
authorized users (banks)
14 2006 –
2008
Introduction of iWholesale
Dutch iAuction System
(WDAS).
Further liberalized the market, Banks buy on
their own account to be sold to their customers.
Training was done twice weekly, unutilized
balance was sold to the CBN.
15 2009 –
2015
RDAS/WDAS Operated against the backdrop of the liberation
of the foreign exchange market. RDAS replaced
WDAS in order to curb unwholesome practices
by authorized dealers, stem exchange rate
volatility and demand pressure in the foreign
exchange.
16 2016 Interbank iForeign Exchange
Market (IFEM)i
IFEM handled allidemand for iforeign exchange.
The apex Bank intervened in the market to meet
genuine demands
18
17 2016 –
2018
Flexible Exchange Rate
Interbank Market
Operates as a single market istructure through
ithe inter-bank/autonomous iwindow. The
Exchange Rate is market driven, FX Primary
dealers (FXPD) introduced.
Source: Central iBank of Nigeria (2007, 2009, 2016); CBN Press Releases, various Years”
The currency rate of the Naira against the US Dollar has fallen by more than 800 percent since
Nigeria's independence, as shown in Figure 1. This means the Nigerian Naira is continuously
ilosing its value againsti Dollar. iThis situation iis almost true for the nature of Nigeria Naira
against iworldwide used iforeign currencies such as Euro, Pounds, Swiss, Franc, among others.
Fig. 1: Plot of Nigerian Nominal Exchange Rate
Figure 2 depicts the evolution of the Nigerian naira's real ibilateral exchange irate against the iUS
dollar from 1981 to 2019. Figure 3 reflects the month-to-month fluctuations in the Naira/Dollar
exchange irate showing ifrequent andi abrupt changes. We can observe frequent, sudden, and
haphazard ifluctuations in ithe exchange irate, with more ifluctuations in democratic iregimes than
military regimes, as democratic regime begins from 2009 till today.
02
46
lnnx
r
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020Year
Nominal Exchange Rate
19
Fig. 2: Plot of Nigerian Real Exchange Rate
Fig. 3: Plot of Nigerian Monthly official Exchange Rate against US Dollar
Table 2 below shows official exchange rate indicators in Nigeria, highlighting the ilevel of
exchange irate regime distortions. In the period between 1980 – 2018, the exchange rate
appreciated only six times. As of 2017 and 2018, the exchange rate had depreciated to about
N305.8:US$1.00 and N306.12:US$1.00 respectively, indicating about 99.7% devaluation over the
1980 exchange rate. The expansionary monetary andifiscal policies,iheavy debt iburden, weak
44.
55
5.5
6
lnrx
r
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020Year
Real Exchange Rate
20
iproduction base, over-reliance on the iimperfect foreign exchange imarket, input dependent
iproduction structure, ifragile export ibase, and weak non-oil export earnings, ifluctuations
inicrude oil revenues, an unguided itrade liberalization ipolicy,ispeculative activities, and
aggressive tactics (round-tripping) by authorized dealers, among other things, are all factors that
have been considered contributed to the misalignment of theireal exchange irate in Nigeria (Onoja,
2015)
Table 2: Exchange Rate Movement in the Foreign Exchange Market.
Official Foreign Exchange Market
Year “(1) Rate (N:$) (2) Depreciation/Appreciation (%)
i1980
i1981
i1982
i1983
i1984
i1985
i1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
i1992
0.55
0.62
0.67
0.72
0.76
0.89
2.02
4.02
4.54
7.39
8.04
9.91
17.30
-
11.2
7.5
6.94
5.26
14.6
55.9
49.8
11.5
38.6
9.3
19.9
42.7
21
i1993
i1994
i1995
i1996
i1997
i1998
i1999
i2000
i2001
i2002
i2003
i2004
i2005
i2006
i2007
i2008
i2009
i2010
i2011
i2012
i2013
i2014
i2015
22.05
21.89
81.20
81.20
82.00
84.00
93.95
102.10
111.93
121.0
129.5
133.5
132.15
128.65
125.83
118.57
147.3
148.3
151.8
155.5
155.3
156.5
191.8
21.5
-0.7
73.0
0.0
1.0
2.4
10.6
8.0
8.8
7.5
6.4
3.1
-1.02
-2.72
-2.82
-6.12
19.5
0.67
2.3
2.4
-0.13
0.8
18.4
22
i2016
i2017
i2018
253.5
305.8
306.12
24.3
17.1
0.10
Notes: In column 2, (-) shows appreciation of the Naira while positive value means
depreciation
2.2 Theoretical Framework
Currency has a price, which can fluctuate dramatically in a short period of time or remain stable
in comparison to other currencies over a lengthy period. The equilibriumiexchange irate is the
primary intention of every monetary authority, and it is the rate level that maintains simultaneously
the internal and external balance atithe same time. iThe equilibrium exchange irate is the irate at
which domestic economic growth, price stability asiwell as external sector competitiveness, are
achieved. Understanding the factors which influence ithe exchange irate, on the other hand, is
imore difficult toicome by or far too difficult to beifully described by a collection of theories. To
explain the model ofireal exchange irate determination, many theories have beeniproposed.
Traditional flow models, portfolio balance models, monetary approaches, Salter-Swan model, and
the purchasing power parity are among them.
According to theitraditional flowimodel, the exchange irate is primarily driveniby marketiforces
ofidemand and supply ofiforeign exchange, with equilibrium occurring when demand equals
isupply. As a result, trade and capital flows drive the exchange rate, which assumes that relative
income and interest rate differentials interact to produce the exchange rate. The portfolio balance
model, on the other hand, adopts an asset pricing approach to the exchange rate. The essential
concept is that local and foreign assets have a portfolio choice, which provides an arbitrage from
23
expected returns and defines the exchange rate equilibrium. The monetary approach is based on
the idea that fluctuations in foreign exchange rates can be associated to changes in the demand and
supply of money in two countries. Variation in the exchange rate is attributed to factors such as
income and expected rates of return, as well as other factors that influence the supply and demand
for national currencies. The interest rate differentials, relative money supplies, and relative income
are the three primary drivers of the exchange rate, according to the monetary model since income
determines supply and demand for monies.
Cassel (1918) proposed the buying power parity hypothesis, which remains a useful way of
thinking about exchange rates today. According to this hypothesis, the exchange rates of two
countries will be equal to their respective national price levels. TheiPPP isifounded on LOOP, or
the law of oneiprice, whichistates that identical or similar items should cost the same in all nations
if transportation expenses, tradeibarriers, and quota constraints are abolished (Hakkio, 1992).
This theory asserts thatithe exchange rate between the currencies of any two countries should be
the same as theiratio of the two countries' general price levels, implying ithat exchange rates adapt
to compensate for pricing differences between countries.
The most basic and often used extension isibased on the concept of irelative purchasing ipower
parity (PPP), which holds thatithe equilibrium exchange irate is proportionate to the irelative
purchasingipower of the national currencies involved (Agherli et al. 1991). TheiPurchasing Power
iParity (PPP) hypothesisihas dominated policy debates,imodels, and empirical research for
decades. Changes in the inominal exchange rate are entirely offset (at least after a period) by
24
ichanges in ithe ratio of iforeign to domestic iprice levels, according to the hypothesis (Ajao and
Igbekoyi, 2012).
The final and theoretically more appealing approach is the Salter-Swan model, which attempts to
situate the equilibrium rate within real economic fundamentals. The strength of movements in ithe
equilibrium ireal exchange rate's ultimate determinants (also known as real exchange rate
fundamentals) affects the exchange rate. This approach is closely related to the iFundamental
Equilibrium iExchange Rate introduced by Ricci, iFerretti, and Lee (2008). The iFEER iis defined
as ithe real exchange irate that achievesiinternal and externalibalances at the same time. It iis one
of ithe most widely used ideas in calculating equilibrium ireal exchange rates. Fundamentals can
partially explain real exchange rate behavior over imedium to ilong time ihorizons, according to
experts.
Changes in ithe equilibrium ireal exchange irate are thought to represent, in certain situations,
equilibrium conditions brought about by fundamental changes (Edward, 1992). Real exchange rate
volatility is caused by a variety of reasons. Openness of an ieconomy, production, inflation, interest
rates, local and foreign imoney supply, iexchange rate iregime, and monetary authority
independence are some of ithese characteristics (Stancik, 2007). Each of these factors has varying
degrees of influence, depending on the economic situation of a given country. As a result, countries
in transition (such as Nigeria) are more exposed to these factors, which might have an impact on
monetary policy decisions. In his examination of developing Asia countries, Juthathip (2009)
found that the actual exchange rate is governed by five main fundamental determinants.
iProductivity differences, openness, iterms ofitrade, netiforeign assets, andigovernment ispending
are among them. It is possible to argue that ireal exchange irates in quickly changing countries
25
will be influenced by these ireal shocks. The extent to iwhich differentishocks affect ireal exchange
irate behavior, on the other hand, iis determinediby country-specific characteristics. The itypical
method ito real exchange irate equilibrium modeling is to express the theoretical relationship
ibetween the real exchange rate and theimost essential "fundamentals," or real variables, that
determine its fluctuations.
iBased on the extant iliteratures, the partial analyses of the major ifundamentals considered in this
thesis, especially in relation with theireal exchange rate are discussed asifollow.
The Real exchange Rate
The ireal exchange irate (rxr) is defined as the ibilateral nominal exchange irate that is the adjusted
by the ratio of ithe foreign iprice level (pf) to the domestic price index (P). It is expressed
mathematically as,
rxr = e P
Pf
In line with this definition, a rise inithe real exchange irate index indicates aireal depreciation,
while aifall indicates aireal appreciation. It is a dependent variable in this study.
iThe NominaliExchange Rate
The iprice of one icurrency in iterms of another country's currency is known as the inominal
exchange irate. The inominal exchangei rate growth rate is projected toihave aipositive partial sign
on the real exchange rate. As a result, an increase or reduction in the inominal exchange irate
causes a rise or fall in the real exchange rate. The capacity of inominal exchange rate ifluctuations
to effect theireal exchange irate will be determined by how well macroeconomic policies are
26
aligned with the nominal exchange rate's goal. One strategy for accelerating real exchange rate
adjustment could be to modify theinominal exchange irate.
The Money Supply
The partial effect of domestic imoney supply on ithe real exchange irate is projected to be negative.
All exchange rate itheories agree that increasing the local money supply will lead the domestic
currency to devalue; the only difference is the transmission mechanism. Money supply has a
negative irelationship with the iexchange rate, and a rise in the imoney supply icauses the domestic
icurrency to depreciate. The normal exchange rate and the effective exchange rate both rise when
monetary policy is tight. The econometric evidence of the imoney supply effect on ithe exchange
irate, on ithe other ihand, is diverse and inconclusive. The impact of monetary policy on ithe real
iexchange rate is determined iby whether it is expansionary or contractionary. A rise in the money
supply, which represents an expansionary imonetary policy, puts upward pressure on domestic
prices, causing the ireal exchange irate to appreciate. If inflation does not adjust immediately under
a floating rate system, the increase in money depreciates the exchange rate. Under the fixed
exchange rate regime, however, an increase in money will result in a devaluation of the currency.
The Rate of inflation
Because differing trends in national inflation rates commonly produce payments imbalances,
several studies have concluded that inflation rate movement is at ileast as iimportant as any other
factor in affecting ireal exchange irate volatility. Because ithe real exchange irate is determined
using the inominal exchange irate and the iprice level, itiis desirable to include the direct effect of
inflation. Excess domestic credit raises theiprice level, resulting in aireal exchange irate
27
appreciation. As a result, inflationiis linked toithe exchange irate of the home currency against
theiforeign currency.
Real Growth of Domestic Product (Real GDP)
It is generally expected that the lower the level of economic development, the less developed and
inefficient would be both the goods market and the factor markets. Import demand elasticities are
low because domestic replacements for imported commodities are not available. Furthermore,
there is little opportunity for changing trade products supply between domestic and international
markets. There thus would appear to be reasons why the equilibrium ireal exchange irate would
vary negatively wiheithe degree of economic development.
Trade Openness
The openness of ithe economy is usedi as a iproxy for the trade policy and its partial expected
effect on the ireal exchange irate is negative. The general view is that trade liberalization
characterized by reductions in tariffs and/or the elimination of quantitative restrictions will lead to
increased trade. A rise in OPN (i.e., more open) therefore results in a real exchange rate
depreciation. If the economy is more opened and protection is reduced, the demand for domestic
goods and their prices will fall, thus resulting to exchange rate depreciation. An elimination of
import duties allows importers to buy more foreign exchange for the same level of total
expenditures. The resulting increased foreign exchange demand under a free-floating exchange
rate iregime leads to a idepreciation of ithe real exchange irate. Under ifixed exchange irate
regimes, the conversion of more foreign currency into domestic currency leads to the expansion
28
of imoney supply, a rise in domestic iinflation and an appreciation of ithe real exchange irate
(Obadan, 1994).
Government Expenditure
In establishing the behavior of the equilibrium ireal exchange irate, the expected sign ofithis
variable could be ipositive or negative. iIncreased government spending boosts domestic demand
for both tradables and nontradables, with excess idemand for nontradables pushing up costs and
causingireal exchange irate appreciation. The ireal exchange irate, on the other hand, will
depreciate if a bigger share of government spending is spent on the itradable sector irather than
nontradables consumption.
2.3 Empirical Literature
Many factors influence ireal exchange irate volatility, and the attempt to understand these factors
has resulted in a great number of empirical studies ithat have already proven to be useful in ithe
literature. Many factors, including output, inflation, interest rate, money supply, an economy's
openness, and the exchange rate regime, are listed as causing variations in ithe real exchange irate.
Nonetheless, the extent ito which each of these elements has an impact varies and is dependent on
ithe economic situation of a certain country.
Edwards (1989) pioneered the fundamentals models of real exchange rate setting for
underdeveloped countries. He discovered that only real variables affect the ilong-run equilibrium
real exchange rate while building a model of real exchange irate determination for calculating
29
equilibrium value for a ipanel of 12 developing nations. Real and nominal factors, on ithe other
hand, explained ireal exchange rate variations.
Excess idomestic credit creation, openness, and technological progress significantly contribute to
ireal exchange irate appreciation, according to Siddiqui et al. (1996), while estimating the
determinants of ireal exchange irate for Pakistan. They also find that increases iin governmental
expenditures lead to depreciation iin real exchange irate. Also, both monetary and real sector
variables significantly influence the stability route idetermination of the ireal exchange irate.
Chowdhury (1999) uses OLS to investigate ithe extent to which ireal and inominal factors may
explain the evolution of the ireal exchange irate in Papua iNew Guinea from 1970 to 1994. The
findings reveal ithat nominal devaluation has a significant iimpact on ireal exchange irate behavior.
The ireal exchange irate of Papua iNew Guinea appreciates due to net capital flow, foreign aid,
expansionary imacroeconomic ipolicies, and trade irestrictions. That, 1% iincrease in capital flow,
trade restriction, excess imoney supply over GDP growth icauses the real GDP to appreciate iby
0.35%, 0.08%, and 0.05%, respectively.
Mungule (2004) used the cointegration itechnique to investigate ithe determinants of ithe real
exchange irate in Zambia. He identified a long-run equilibrium relationship between ithe real
exchange irate and the iterms of trade, icapital inflow, the economy's proximity, and surplus
isupply of domestic icredit (i.e., the fundamental determinants).
The real exchange irate is governed by five major ifundamental variables ithat represent medium
to long-run fundamentals, according to Juthathip (2009)'s findings ifor developing Asia.
30
Differential productivity, openness, terms of itrade, net iforeign assets, and government spending
are all factors considered.
Oriavwote (2012) empirically tests the impact of changes in virtual determinants of ithe real
exchange irate in Nigeria using dataifrom 1970 to 2010. The nominal effective exchange irate,
capital flow, Nigeria's openness to international commerce, and real GDP are all major factors of
Nigeria'sireal effective exchange irate, according to the research. The ECMifindings suggestithat
rising prices, capital flow, capital accumulation, and trade openness all strengthen Nigeria'sireal
effective exchange irate.
From 1981 to 2008, Ajao and Igbekoyi (2013) investigate the drivers of ireal exchange irate
volatility in iNigeria. An error correctionimodel was used to evaluate ithe various ideterminants of
ithe real exchange irate in Nigeria after the volatility was determined using ithe GARCH (1, 1)
technique. GARCH parameters suggest ithat real exchange irate volatility shocks in Nigeria are
quite persistent. For the iperiod under iconsideration, government spending, trade openness, real
exchange irate, and ireal interest rate are all important factors of ireal exchange irate volatility.
This thesis builds on previous research by econometrically assessing the macroeconomic
determinants of ithe real exchange irate in iNigeria from 1981 to 2019.
3. Data Description
3.1 Data Sources
The analysis is based on thirty-nine years of data coveringithe period from 1981 until 2019 to
examine theibehavior ofithe real exchange irate and the relationship with its macro-economic
determinants. The time series in annual frequency were obtained from various publications of the
31
World Bank (WBI), the Nigerian Central Bank (CBN), and the Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries (OPEC).
3.2 Definitions and Sources of Variables
Previous research has found that macroeconomic variables may determine the long irun
equilibrium ivalue of the ireal exchange rate. Based on the prior findings in the literature, the
following variables are likely to play a key role in explaining the real exchange rate. These are
precisely defined, proxied, and constructed in the Table 3 below.
Table 3: Definition and Sources of Variables
Variable Notation Construction Source
iNominal Exchange
Rate
NXR Bilateral iExchange rate of iNigeria Naira
against ithe US Dollar
Central iBank
of Nigeria
Real iExchange Rate RXR Nominal Exchange Rate/ratio of
Consumer iPrice Index
CBN
Money iSupply MS Broad Money World Bank
Inflation Rate INF Domestic Rate of Inflation World Bank
Total Output RGDP Real Gross iDomestic Product World Bank
iTrade Openness OPN Import + Export / Real GDP World Bank
Oil Price OILP Global Oil Price OPEC
Foreign Reserves FXR Total External Reserves Stock of Nigeria World Bank
External Debt EXD Total stock of external debt World Bank
Government
iExpenditure
GEXP Government Total Expenditure (recurrent
andi capital)
World Bank
Source: Researcher’s Compilation
32
3.3 Unit Root Test
For using time series data in this study, running regression straight away can give us spurious
regression result, therefore, there is a need to check the stationary of the data. The stationarity
properties of these data are tested using Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) unit root test and Phillips
Perron (PP) test. The unit root test aims to ihelp determine whether ithe variables are stationary
and, if not, their order of integration. Table 4 shows the result of (ADF) and (PP) unit root tests,
respectively.
Table 4: Stationarity test of the variables (ADF test and PP test).
Variable Unit Root Test Conclusion
ADF PP
RXR
Level -2.987 -3.838
I(0) First Difference -3.870 -4.859
NXR
Level -2.182 -1.300
I(1) First Difference -3.813 -5.606
MS
Level -1.005 -1.196
I(I) First Difference -3.381 -3.862
INF
Level -3.979 -3.659
I(0) First Difference -6.890 -5.967
RGDP
Level 0.026 -3.289
I(1) First Difference -4.183 -3.615
OPN
Level -1.370 -3.591
I(0) First Difference -4.446 -6.215
33
OILP
Level -1.027 -2.315
I(I) First Difference -4.706 -5.915
FXR
Level -1.097 -3.245
I(1) First Difference -5.616 -5.439
EXD
Level -2.262 -2.359
I(1) First Difference -4.071 -4.517
GEXP
Level -0.344 -2.039
I(1) First Difference -3.442 -5.667
iCritical
Value
1% -3.594 -4.159
5% -2.936 -3.504
10% -2.602 -3.182
Source: Researcher’s Compilation
Both methods generally agree and show that several of the variables are not stationary except real
exchange rate, inflation rate (INF), and trade openness (OPN) variables that are stationary in levels.
All other variables are stationary after taking the first difference. At the ifirst differencing, ithe
calculated iADF and iPP test statistics reject the unit root's null hypothesis when icompared with
their icorresponding critical ivalues at 5%. Hence, the ADF and PP tests show ithat all variables
are iintegrated of order 0 or order 1, i.e., I(0) or I(I). This implies that I can apply the ARDL
methodology for the model.
34
4. Methodology
4.1 Model Specification
The ireal exchange irate is represented as a ifunction of the inominal exchange rate, money supply,
inflation rate, real iGDP growth, foreign reserves, itrade openness, the global oil price, and the
stock of external idebt as follows, ibased on the theoretical background and data availability:
RXR = f (NXR, MS, INF, RGDP, OPN, OILP, FXR, EXD GEXP) …………. (1a)
Where,
RXR = Real Exchange Rate
NXR = Nominal Exchange Rate
MS = Money supply
INF = Inflation Rate
RGDP = Real GDP growth
OPN = Trade Openness,
OILP = Global Oil Price
FXR = Foreign Exchange Reserves
EXD = External Debt Stock
GEXP = Government Expenditure
For empirical estimation, the general functional form in equation (1a) is specified in the following
log linear regression:
lnRXRt = α0 + α1lnNXRt + α2lnMSt + α3lnINFt + α4lnRGDPt + α5lnOPNt + α6lnOILPt
+ α7lnFXRt + α8lnEXDt + α8lnGEXPt + εt
Where, α0 = Constant term εt = error/stochastic term, αi, i = (1, 2, …,9), the parameters to be
estimated.
35
It is possible that ithe relationship ibetween the ireal exchange irate on the left and its
macroeconomic factors on the right is not strictly contemporaneous. As a result, as shown in the
Autoregressive iDistributed Lag (ARDL) model below, the regression accounts for time lags in
the link between ithe real exchange irate and its macroeconomic drivers.
lnRXRt = α0 + Σα1ilnNXRt-i + Σα2ilnMSt-i + Σα3ilnINFt-i + Σα4ilnRGDPt-i + Σα5ilnOPNt-i
+ Σα6ilnOILPt-i + Σα7ilnFXRt-i + Σα8ilnEXDt-i + Σα9ilnGEXPt-i + εt .... (2)
The model's optimal lag length would be determined using the Schwarz Bayesian Information
Criteria (SBIC).
4.2 Cointegration Analysis
The Autoregressive distributive ilag (ARDL) approach ito cointegration is being used to establish
the ilong run itrelationship between ithe real exchange irate and its macroeconomic determinants.
This approach is preferred because it can ibe applied ifor series of different orders of integration,
it also allows iflexibility to incorporate ithe required inumber of lags ineeded to describe the
behaviour of the variable of interest, as well it also good for a lower sample size.
The cointegration ibetween the ireal exchange irate and the mentioned variables is investigated
using the ARDL bounds testing approach established by Pesaran et al (2001). For empirical
inquiry, this method simultaneously provides long and short run estimations. The error correction
representation of the ARDL model below (i.e., equation(4)) is required for the correct definition
36
of such a relationship that will reflect the short run variations that may have occurred in estimating
the long run cointegrating equation.
ΔlnRXRt = α0 + Σα1iΔlnNXRt-i + Σα2iΔlnMSt-i + Σα3iΔlnINFt-i + Σα4iΔlnRGDPt-i
+ Σα5iΔlnOPNt-i +Σα6iΔlnOILPt-i + Σα7iΔlnFXRt-i + Σα8iΔlnEXDt-i
+ Σα9iΔlnGEXPt-i + 𝛅1ilnRXRt-1 +𝛅2ilnNXRt-i + 𝛅3ilnMSt-i + 𝛅4ilnINFt-i
+ 𝛅5ilnRGDPt-i + 𝛅6ilnOPNt-i + 𝛅7ilnOILPt-i +𝛅8ilnFXRt-i + 𝛅9ilnEXDt-i
+ 𝛅10ilnGEXPt-i + εt …(4)
Where the parameters 𝛅 = (𝛅1, 𝛅2, 𝛅3, … ,𝛅10), are the long-run coefficients, and the parameters α =
(α1, α2, α3, …, α9), are to capture any short-run relationship in the main ARDL model.
ARDL ibounds testing method to cointegration is applied by comparing the value of F-test of
ilagged level variables ithrough variable addition itest with ithe critical bound presented by Pesaran
et al., (1996, 2001). The lower bound is ithe critical value ifor I(0) variables as well as ithe upper
ibound is for I(I) variables. If the computed value of the F-statistics above the upper ibound critical
value, there is evidence ifor the existence of ilong run connection between ithe variables. If the
value is lesser than the ilower critical bound, there is evidence of ino long run connection. If the
value of iF-statistic is in the middle of the upper ibound and lower ibound, then it iis inconclusive.
Once the existence of cointegration is proven, the estimation of long run ARDL model and an error
correction model (ECM) that covers short-run dynamics was carried out. This model is stipulated
as follows:
37
ΔlnRXRt = α0 + Σα1iΔlnNXRt-i + Σα2iΔlnMSt-i + Σα3iΔlnINFt-i + Σα4iΔlnRGDPt-i
+ α5iΔlnOPNt-i + Σα6iΔlnOILPt-i + Σα7iΔlnFXRt-i + Σα8iΔlnEXDt-i
+ Σα9iΔlnGEXPt-i + 𝛅ECM(-1) + εt …….(5)
The long-run relationshipibetween the right-hand side variables and the left-hand side variable is
captured by ECM (-1), and while εt isithe error term, the ECM (-1) iis the error icorrection term.
The short run impacts are assessed using the coefficients of ithe differenced terms (αi) whereas
ithe coefficient of ithe error correction iterm (𝛅) variable contains iinformation on whether ipast
values of variables have an impact on current values. The ECM coefficient's sign, magnitude, and
significance indicate how possible each variable is to return to equilibrium.
5. Empirical Results
5.1 Cointegration Test
The existence of cointegration is examined using the ARDL bounds testing approach. While this
approach does not restrict all variables to be of the equal order of integration, it also allows
flexibility in the required number of lags. It is arguably suitable when the sample size is small.
The computed F-statistic of the bounds test is stated in Table 5 below. The iresults reveal ithat the
calculated F-statistic of 12.171 which is more than the upper bound of the critical values at 5%
and 10%, as Pesaran et al. (1997) calculated. This is evidence ifor the ipresence of a cointegration
connection, which implies ithe rejection of the inull hypothesis of no cointegration.
38
Table 5: Result of Bounds Test for Cointegration
5% Critical Value 10% Critical Value
K I(0) I(I) I(0) I(I)
9 2.14 3.30 1.88 2.99
Computed F-statistic – F(LNREE│LNNEER, LNMS, LNINF, … , LNGEXP) = 12.171
I proceed to estimate equation (4) for the long-run elasticities because the computed F-statistics
are above the critical value, indicating the existence of a long-run relationship. Table 6 shows the
results of the selected optimal lag length for the ARDL model (1 1 2 1 0 1 2 0 1 1) using Schwarz
Bayesian Information Criteria (SBIC) with a maximum lag of 2.
The computed long-run coefficients reveal that ithe real exchange irate and its determinants have
ailong-run relationship. iThe real exchange irate is influenced by the inominal exchange irate,
imoney supply, inflation irate, real GDP, foreign currency reserves, and the stock of external debts
in the ilong run. At 1% and 5% levels, the coefficients of global oil price, government expenditure,
and economic openness are not statistically different from zero. In the ilong run, the inominal
exchange rate, real GDP and, inflation rate are positively and significantly associated to the ireal
exchange rate. iThis means that a i1% increase in these variables is related with an iincrease of
1.287%, 1.219%, and 2.309%, respectively, in the ireal exchange rate.
The foreign reserves, money supply, and external debt are inegatively and significantly related to
the ireal exchange rate. Implying that a 1% increase in each of these variables iis associated with
a decrease of 1.033%, 0.561%, and 0.776%, respectively, in the real exchange rate. This imeans
39
that in the case of Nigeria, increases in money supply, foreign exchange ireserves, and external
debt iresult in real exchange irate appreciation during the sample period. Within the selected period
of 1981-2019, the inominal exchange irate, inflation, and ireal GDP all contributed to a
idepreciation of the ireal exchange rate in Nigeria.
Table 6: Estimated Long Run Coefficients Using ARDL Approach
Regressor Coefficient Standard Error t-statistic Prob.
LnNXR 1.2874 .12354 10.42 0.000
LnMS -1.0327 .11426 -9.04 0.000
LnINF 1.2189 .38006 3.21 0.005
LnRGDP 2.3092 .59351 3.89 0.001
LnOPN -0.3209 .16304 -1.97 0.065
LnOILP -0.0039 .31207 -0.01 0.990
LnFXR -0.5613 .17644 -3.18 0.005
LnEXD -0.7261 .27261 -2.68 0.016
LnGEXP 0.2462 .13589 1.81 0.087
5.2 The Short-run Aspects of Real iExchange Rate in iNigeria
The ARDL model's error correction irepresentation captures the short-run analysis of ithe real
exchange irate. While the ECM is useful for estimating the irelationship between imacroeconomic
variables and ithe real exchange rate, the goal is to illustrate the speed with which the rate is
adjusting to its equilibrium state.
40
Table 7i shows the estimates of ithe error correction model's short-run coefficients, with an
evaluation of the results confirming that the overall fit of the model is satisfactory at R2 = 0.9208.
This means that the model's independent variables collectively accounted for 92.08 percent of the
overall variation in the ireal exchange rate, particularly the significant short- and ilong-run
relationship between ithe nominal and ireal exchange rates.
In the short irun, the inominal exchange rate, imoney supply, inflation, trade openness, oil price,
and foreign debt are all strongly linked to the ireal exchange rate. iIn the short irun, the lagged
values of money isupply and global oil price were also highly related to the ireal exchange rate.
The coefficient of ECM(-1), as could be observed in the table, is negative (-0.146) and highly
significant (0.006). This means that the model has a self-adjusting mechanism that aligns the
variable's short-run dynamics with its long-run values.
Table 7: Error Correction iModel Representation for ithe Selected ARDL iModel
Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Prob.
C 1.41702 1.35054 1.05 0.308
ΔlnNXR 1.13633 0.04799 23.68 0.000
ΔlnMS -0.11777 0.04297 -2.74 0.000
ΔlnMS(-1) -0.13492 0.04966 -2.72 0.013
ΔlnINF 0.02240 0.00947 2.36 0.014
ΔlnOPN -0.07756 0.01679 -4.26 0.030
ΔlnOILP 0.08712 0.03383 2.57 0.000
ΔlnOILP(-1) -0.04748 0.02195 -2.16 0.019
ΔlnEXD -0.12349 0.03458 -3.57 0.044
ECM (-1) -0.14560 0.04669 -3.12 0.006
R2 = 0.9982 Akaike Info Criterion = -10.615
Adj R2 = 0.9964 Schwarz Criterion = -5.726
Log likelihood = 106.6061 F-statistic(18, 18) = 144.71
Durbin-Watson = 2.4852 Prob (F-statistic) = 0.0000
41
Most of the variables with statistically significant long-run coefficients also have statistically
significant short-run coefficients. In ithe short run, ithe real exchange irate is positively and
significantly related to the inominal exchange irate, inflation irate, and global oil price. A 1%
increase iin the oil price, nominal exchange irate, and inflation rate in the preceding year, is related
with increases in the ireal exchange irate of 1.136 percent, 0.022 percent, and 0.087 percent,
respectively, indicating a depreciation of ithe real exchange irate in the ishort run.
In the ishort run, a rise in the money isupply is related with a decrease in the ireal exchange rate,
both immediately and after one iyear. In the ishort run, an iincrease in external debt is related with
a decrease in the ireal exchange irate, as is observed in the long run. An iincrease in the lagged
value of oil price relates to a idecrease in ithe real exchange irate, also in ithe short run. iThe real
exchange irate appreciates the following year when the money supply and global oil price rise in
a particular year. It can be seen that in ithe long and short run, both monetary policy in iterms
of money isupply, and fiscal policy in terms of external debts can be exploited to effect the
equilibrium ireal exchange rate.
It is also worth noting that ithe nominal exchange irate and the ireal exchange irate in Nigeria are
linked. In both ithe long and short run, a idepreciation of ithe nominal exchange irate leads to a
depreciation of the ireal exchange rate. Nigeria's real exchange fluctuation would be stabilized by
effective control and management measures to stable the nominal exchange rate.
42
5.3. Diagnostic tests
There is no evidence of serial correlation or heteroscedasticity in the model, according to the
diagnostic test results (Table 8), and normality is not rejected. Since (P-value = 0.4226 > 0.05),
the variance of the residuals is constant, as per the heteroscedasticity test. The Jarque-Bera test of
normality shows that the model's residuals are normally distributed (P-value = 0.478 > 0.05). As
displayed in Figures 4 and 5, the cumulative sum of recursive residuals (CUSUM) and the
cumulative sum of squares of recursive residuals (CUSUMSQ) are within the critical boundaries
for the 5%, suggesting ithat the model's coefficients are constant across the sample period. As a
result, the model is clearly not mis-specified.
Table 8: Diagnostic tests for underlying ARDL ( 1 1 2 1 0 1 2 0 1 1) model
Fig. 4: Plot of CUSUM Test for Coefficients Stability of ARDL Model
Chi2 Statistic’s value p Value
Breusch-Godfrey LM test Serial correlation
Jarque-Bera test Normality
Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey: Heteroscedasticity
2,944
0.50
37.00
0.0862
0.478
0.4226
CUSU
M
Year
CUSUM lower upper
1981 2019
0 0
43
Fig. 5: Plot of CUSUMSQ Test for Coefficients Stability of ARDL Model
6. Conclusions and Policy Recommendation
Using data from 1981 to 2019, the goal of this master’s thesis was to investigate ithe relationship
between macroeconomic fundamentals and the ireal exchange irate in Nigeria. The importance of
ithe real exchange irate of Nigeria, as a growing and iimport-dependent economy, cannot ibe over-
emphasized. The need to earn foreign reserves to import inputs for production, which will ensure
economic growth and enhance citizens’ wellbeing, has been on the increase. iThe exchange irate
is the icost of acquiring foreign reserves, and its volatility has been hampering Nigeria's economic
growth. Various policies have been undertaken, and separate exchange rate regimes have been
practiced with numerous considerations, to achieve ithe macroeconomic igoal of price stability.
However, in Nigeria, the challenge with exchange irate management ihas been ithe inability to
identify the ilevel of the iNaira exchange irate that would iensure the simultaneous achievement
of sustainable internal andi external balances. Previous literature was reviewed regarding what
determines exchange rate movements in Nigeria both from theoretical and empirical perspectives.
The most debated variables ranging from monetary, fiscal, real, and nominal variables were
CUSU
M sq
uare
d
Year
CUSUM squared
1992 2019
0
1
44
selected and analyzed to achieve the purpose of this investigation. The nominal exchange rate,
foreign reserves, money supply, inflation rate, real GDP, trade openness, external debt,
government expenditure, and global oil price are all variables in my model. The data on these
variables were subjected to the Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) and Philips Perron (PP) tests to
look for unit roots. Apart from the ireal exchange irate, inflation, and openness, which are
stationary in levels, both techniques indicate that many variables are simply stationary in
differences.
The Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) bounds testing approach was used to assess the long-
run connection between the variables. iThe real exchange irate and the stated macroeconomic
fundamentals have a long-run irelationship, as per my findings. In the long run, ithe real exchange
rate iis influenced by the money supply, inflation rate, real GDP, foreign exchange reserves,
nominal exchange irate, and stock of external debts. During the period 1981-2019, the coefficients
of global oil price, government expenditure, and economic openness are not statistically
significant. The short-run aspects were examined using the ARDL's error correction
representation, and the results show that ithe nominal exchange irate, inflation rate, and global oil
price are all positively and significantly related to the ireal exchange rate. The increase in external
debt, money supply, and global oil price, instead, leads to ireal exchange irate appreciation.
As a result, it is suggested that the government should try and control these variables that have a
direct effect on real exchange rate variations. A limit on how much the exchange rate can fluctuate
should also be established. Since inflation has been identified as one of the causes linked to real
exchange rate depreciation, measures aimed at stabilizing the inflation rate should be implemented.
45
iThere is also a ineed for a review of the trade liberalization, which permitted all kinds of goods to
be imported into the country, resulting in heavy pressure on iforeign exchange ireserves and ithe
exchange rate. The sourcing, disbursement, and pricing of foreign exchange should be considered
as a significant part of the country's major policy objectives, with a particular focus on diversifying
the sources of foreign exchange inflow, particularly enhancing the supply of foreign exchange
from the non-oil sector, and effective demand management.
The productive sector should continue to receive priority in foreign exchange disbursement with
appropriate control measures to avoid round-tripping practice to the parallel market. Since the
investment inflow will generate more foreign reserves for the country, there is a need to encourage
an enabling environment that promotes investment into the country. The sectors such as
agricultural, mining, and industrial sectors should be reformed toward encouraging exports and
increasing investment inflows.
It is also suggested that efforts be made to enhance the consumption of goods produced in Nigeria,
including the use of locally sourced raw materials by Nigerian enterprises in order to boost foreign
exchange revenues. This implies that local industries should be encouraged to source their raw
materials locally (Oladapo, F. & Oloyede, J.A, 2014).
46
7. References
Adewuyi, A.O (2005). Trade and exchange rate policy reform and export performance of the real
sector: the case of Nigeria. Selected papers for the 2005 Annual Conference of the Nigeria
Economic Society.
Ahmet, N.K & Mehtap, K (1997). The real Exchange rate Definitions and calculation.
Central Bank of the iRepublic of Turkey: Research Department. No: 97/1
Ajao, M.G & Igbekoyi, O.E (2013). The iDeterminants of Real iExchange Rate Volatility in
Nigeria: Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. Vol 2, No. 1
Aliyu, S.U.R, (2008). Exchange iRate Volatility and Export iTrade in Nigeria: An Empirical
investigation. An MPRA paper No. 13490
Balassa, B. (1964). The iPurchasing Power iParity Doctrine: A reappraisal. Journal of iPolitical
Economy, 72, 584-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/258965
Boniface, A. (2012). iDeterminants of Real Exchange Rate in iPapua New Guinea. Working iPaper
BPNGWP2012/04. Bank of Papua iNew Guinea Port Moresby iPapua New Guinea
Central bank of Nigeria (2019). The iforeign exchange imarket and its management in Nigeria:
CBN Briefs, 2001 edition.
Chowdhury, M.B. (1999). The iDeterminants of iReal exchange rate iin Papua New iGuinea. Asia
iPacific Press ISSN 1441-9858, ISBN 0 7315 3618 5.
Edwards, S. (1994). Real and imonetary determinants of ireal exchange rate ibehaviour: theory
and evidence from developing countries. Institute for iInternational Economics, Washington
Ewubare, D.B and Merenini, C.D (2019). The Effect of Exchange Rate Fluctuation on Foreign
Trade-in Nigeria. International Journal of Scientific Research and Engineering
Development-– Volume 2 Issue 1.
Ibrahim U.A & Muazu A. (2020): Effect of Bureau De Change Establishment on the Stability of
iExchange Rates in Nigeria. European Journal of Business and Management. Vol.12,No.6,
Juthathip, J. (2009). Equilibrium iReal Exchange rate iMisalignment and iExport Performance in
47
Developing Asia: ADB iEconomics, Working Paper No. 15.
Mungule, K.O. (2004) The ideterminants of Real iExchange Rate in Zambia. African Economic
iResearch Consortium, Paper 146 Nairobi.
Obadan, M.I (1994). Foreign Exchange management and Stability of the Nigerian Economy,
1976-2016 CBN Bullion Vol. 40 No. 1-40.
Obaseki, P.J (2001). Meeting the foreign exchange needs of the ireal sector of the iNigerian
economy. A paper presented at the CBN Second Monetary Policy forum on the Theme:
Exchange Rate Determination and Foreign Exchange management in Nigeria, February 7.
Oladapo, F & Oloyede, J.A (2014). Foreign Exchange Management and the Nigerian Economic
Growth (1960 – 2012): Published by European Centre for Research Training and
Development UK
Onoja, J. E. (2015). A Dynamic Analysis of the Impact of Capital Flight on Real Exchange rate in
Nigeria. IOSR Journal of Economic and Finance. Volume 6. Issue 1, PP 31-35
Onwughai, E.A. (2010). Covid-19 and the Nigerian Economy: Evidence from the Foreign
Exchange Rate.
Oriavwote, V.E & Oyovvwi, D.O (2012). The Determinants of Real Exchange Rate in Nigeria:
International Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol. 4, No. 8, 2012
Pesaran, H.M., Shin, Y. & Smith, R.J. (2001). Bound Testing Approach to the analysis of Long-
Run Relationships. Working Paper. University of Cambridge.
Ricci, L.A., Forretti, G.M, and Lee, J. (2008). Real exchange irate and Fundamentals: Across-
Country Perspective, IMF Working Paper.
Sharmila, T. & Bangi, S. (2010). Stock Price and Foreign Exchange Rate in Malaysian Context
Solomon, T.N. (2015). The Effect Of Foreign Exchange Rate Fluctuations On Export Earnings:
Evidence From Flower Industry In Kenya. A research project submitted to the university
of nairobi
48
Stancik, J. (2007). iDeterminants of iExchange Rate Volatility: The Case of the New EU
Members’. iCzech iJournal of iEconomics and iFinance 56(9&10)56-56-72.
Wamukhoma, W.O (2013). The iEffect of Foreign Exchange Rate iFluctuations on Horticultural
Export iEarnings in Kenya.
Wasiu, A.Y., et al., (2019). Determinants of iExchange Rate in iNigeria: A Comparison of the
Official and Parallel Market Rates: Research Gate,
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337297446
Williamson, J. (1994). Estimates of FEERs in estimating equilibrium Exchange Rate by J.
Williamson (ed): Washington, Institute of International Economics.
top related