Import Prostitution Industrialization In Nigeria

Import substitution industrialization has the potential to dramatically boost the development of a country or to act as a detriment. In countries with large enough populations and income levels to allow for the consumption of locally produced products, ISI was successful. Latin American countries such as Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico had notable success with ISI. The difference between benefitting and suffering from ISI depends on the country’s management ability, something that is not Nigeria’s forte. The notoriously turbulent nature of Nigeria’s government following its independence precluded the country from potentially reaping the benefits of structuralist policies. Nigeria regained its civil rule in 1999 after about fifteen years of uninterrupted

Despite coming to the IMF for help, the Nigerian administration did not implement all necessary conditions imposed by the institution, such as keeping barriers on imported goods. Due to the overwhelming opposition from the Nigerian people, only minor adjustments were made. Because of this diversion from the agreed agenda, the IMF as well as the World Bank and external creditors imposed punitive measures on the Nigerian Government which only served to aggravate the already explosive political situation. It was only two administrations later in 1986, during the mandate of the Babangida regime, that the IMF conditions were fully

The devaluation of the Naira (the Nigerian currency) was undertaken in order to reduce the value of the currency against imported goods and to make exported goods cheaper. The removal of subsidies especially as regards petroleum, would release Government revenue and allow it to use the funds elsewhere whilst being able to profit from an increase in exports. This was also seen as one way of removing Government interference from the running of the economy. Through privatization, Government involvement would also diminish which was believed to cause price and market distortions, inefficient allocation of resources and stagnation. Trade liberalization signified the removal of tariff barriers on imported goods hence eliminating regulations impeding foreign investment. Laws passed in the 70’s to indigenize the Nigerian economy were overturned (Paradoski, 2007). Free trade was expected to foster efficiency and growth (Okome, 2005). The Babangida Regime, as stated above, implemented these adjustments through its commitment to privatization and commercialization during its rule from 1985 to 1993. The liberalization of the financial sector began in 1986 when the ruling regime eased restrictions on interest rates, bank ownership, foreign exchange and capital movements as well as privatizing banks and insurance companies (Lewis & Stein, 1997). Amendments were made to the Nigerian