`

ENTREPRENEURSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES AS PANACEA

TO UNEMPLOYMENT IN NIGERIA

By

Bisayo Oluwatosin Otokiti (M.Sc., B.Sc.)

Lecturer, Department of Business and Entrepreneurship

Kwara State University, Malete,

Kwara State, Nigeria

E-mail addresses: busyayo02@yahoo.com or bisayo.otokiti@kwasu.edu.ng

Blessing Akinsia (B.Sc.)

Researcher, Department of Business and Entrepreneurship

Kwara State University, Malete,

Kwara State, Nigeria

E-mail address: blairsyn@gmail.com

1

ABSTRACT

This study is concerned with the effective use of entrepreneurship development

programme as meaningful tools to ameliorating the current acute and perpetually

increasing unemployment rate in Nigeria. This study examines the roles and

contribution of entrepreneurship development programmes in Nigeria. It also

examined the degree to which entrepreneurship activities can serve as veritable

solution to unemployment in Nigeria. The study used secondary data obtained

from established government institutions. With the use of descriptive statistical

tools- percentage, frequency count tables, inferential statistical tools of analysis

precisely Pearson correlation was used to test formulated hypothesis. The study

established that entrepreneurship development programmes have a positive

significance on employment generation and capable of being solutions to

unemployment in Nigeria. The empirical study of this research work also reveals

that entrepreneurship is a necessary ingredient for stimulating growth. The

conclusion therefore, is that creation of enterprises through entrepreneurial

development programmes contribute more to employment generation, income

earning and economic empowerment as well as overall economic growth. It is

therefore recommended that entrepreneurship development and entrepreneurial

orientation should be more rigorously pursued by government in order to reduce

unemployment and by extension accelerate economic growth and development in

Nigeria.

Key Words: Entrepreneurship Development Programmes, Panacea,

Unemployment

2

1. INTRODUCTION

Many scholars have written widely on entrepreneurship and its importance to employment

generation. In order to highlight its uniqueness in relation to the growth and development of a

given economy, entrepreneurship has been variously referred to as a “source of employment

generation”. This is because entrepreneurial activities have been found to be capable of making

positive impacts on the economy of a nation and the quality of life of the people (Adejumo,

2000, Chinonye, 2013). Studies have established its positive relationship with stimulation of

economic growth; employment generation; and empowerment of the disadvantaged segment of

the population (Reynolds, 1987, Thomas and Mueller, 2000, Oluremi and Gbenga, 2011.)

Nigeria as a country has numerous businesses and investment potentials due to the abundant,

vibrant and dynamic human and natural resources it possesses. Tapping these resources require

the ability to identify potentially useful and economically viable fields of endeavour. The world

and most particularly developing nations like Nigeria is currently facing serious employability

challenge and widespread decent work deficits, a development that is capable of increasing the

spread of poverty.

According to Doreo (2013) unemployment rate in Nigeria is growing at the rate of 16% per year

with the youth negatively impacted the most and accounting for three times the general

unemployment. The International Labour Organization (ILO 2014) asserted that over 900 million

persons in the world are living below $2 a day. It is estimated that 456 million workers around

the world are living in extreme poverty (below $1.25 a day). The ILO further stated that the

situation would worsen in Africa unless concerted and conscious efforts are made by the

governments at all levels. About 400 million new jobs would be needed over the next decade to

avoid a further increase in unemployment, adding that it was high time the people, the

government (that the private and the public) invested more in productive job creation rather than

continuing with excessive recurrent expenditures, the intensity of unemployment within the

global economy can be seen from the fact that unemployment rate is steadily increasing each

year. In the African continent, unemployment has risen with South Africa, having a higher rate

than Nigeria at 25 per cent, Angola at 25per cent, Botswana at 17.5per cent, Egypt at 11.8 per

cent, Kenya at 11.7 per cent and Namibia at 51per cent. Nigeria’s rate increased from 21.5 % in

3

2010 to 23.9 % in 2011 but the nation has experienced a reduction of 0.2% in 2012 (23.7%) and

a further 1.2% reduction in 2013 (22.5%). Evidence abound that such reduction was as a result of

many entrepreneurial activities and developmental programmes initiated by the government.

(Onugu, 2013). This reduction notwithstanding, government critics are strongly of the opinion

that the rate of unemployment in the country is still very high and urgent attention is required to

reduce this to single digit (Ngozi, 2013).

Such high unemployment situations lead to serious security problems for the respective nation.

Nigeria is still one of the poorest countries in the world and has one of the highest rates of youth

unemployment in sub-Sahara Africa, and despite its alleged strong economic growth

(Chukwubuikem, 2008). The great need for entrepreneurship development programmes in

Nigeria today, more than ever, is necessitated by the rate of unemployment and its effect on both

the people and the nation.

The objective of this study is to examine the link between entrepreneurship development

programmes and reduction in unemployment in Nigeria; Also, this paper further examined the

contribution of entrepreneurship development programmes in Nigeria.

Hypothesis

H0: There is a significant relationship between entrepreneurship development programmes and

employment generation in Nigeria.

H1: There is no significant relationship between entrepreneurship development programmes and

employment generation in Nigeria.

2. CONCEPTUALISING AND CONTEXTUALIZING ENTREPRENEURSHIP DEVELOPMENT

2.1 Entrepreneurship and Unemployment

Entrepreneurial opportunities are not just the result of the push effect of (the threat of)

unemployment but also of the pull effect of produced by a thriving economy full of opportunities

(Parker, 2004; Van Stel & Thurik & Verheul & Baljeu, 2007; Thurik et al, 2008.). The

relationship between unemployment and entrepreneurship has been shrouded with ambiguity.

There are many views on the relationship between unemployment and entrepreneurial activity

( Audretsh & Carree & Van Stel & Thurik, 2005; Baptista & Van Stel & Thurik, 2006). The

4

simple theory of income choice, which has been the basis for numerous studies focusing on the

decision confronted by individuals to start a firm and become an entrepreneur (Evans &

Jovanovic, 1989; Blanchflower & Meyer, 1994; Blau, 2000; Evans & Leighton, 2011) suggests

that increased unemployment will lead to an increase in startup activity on the grounds that the

opportunity cost of not starting a firm has decreased. This effect has been referred to as the

refugee or shopkeeper effect. However, the unemployed people tend to possess lower

endowments of human and social capital and entrepreneurial talent required to start and sustain a

new firm which may lead to early exit (Lucas, 1978, Jovanovic, 1982, Baptista & Van Stel &

Thurik, 2006; Thurik, 2007).

High unemployment may also imply lower levels of personal wealth reducing the likelihood of

becoming self-employed or the survival in the initial stages of business ownership (Hurst &

Lusardi, 2004; Van Stel & Thurik & Verheul & Baljeu, 2007). High levels of unemployment

may correlate with low economic growth leading to a low number of entrepreneurial

opportunities (Audretsch, Thurik & Verheul & Wenneker, 2002; Baptista & Van Stel & Thurik,

2006). A low rate of entrepreneurship may also be a consequence of the low economic growth

levels, which also reflect higher levels of unemployment (Audretsch, 1995; Audretsch & Carree

& Thurik, 2001). While some studies find that greater unemployment serves as a catalyst for

startup activity (Reynolds & Miller & Makai, 1995; Reynolds & Storey & Westhead, 1994;

Hamilton, 1989; Highfield & Smiley, 1987; Yamawaki, 1990; Evans & Leighton, 2010 & 2011),

but much of studies has found that unemployment reduces the amount of entrepreneurial activity

(Audretsch & Fritsch, 1994; Audretsch, 1995; Audretsch & Carree & Thurik, 2001). There are

lots of claims that start-up activity influences unemployment. The positive effect of

entrepreneurship on economic performance has been referred to as the Schumpeter effect (Van

Stel & Thurik & Verheul & Baljeu, 2007). New firm startups hire employees, resulting in

subsequent decreases in unemployment (Picot et al, 1998; Pfeiffer & Reize, 2000a; Audretsch &

Carree & Thurik, 2001). Entrepreneurship may influence economic performance in different

ways. Entrepreneurs often play a vital role in the early evolution of industries by way of

introducing new products or processes and, in the long term, enhancing productivity through

increasing competition (Van Stel & Thurik & Verheul & Baljeu, 2007). The resulting learning

process speeds up the discovery of the dominant design for product-market combinations. The

learning does not solely apply to the experimenting entrepreneur (Baptista & Van Stel & Thurik,

5

2006). Knowledge spillovers play an important role in this process (Audretsch & Aldridge &

Oettl, 2006; Audretsch, 2007; Van Stel & Thurik & Verheul & Baljeu, 2007).

Self- employed individuals tend to work longer hours than wage-employed people and may be

more productive as their income is more clearly linked to working effort (Van Stel & Thurik &

Verheul & Baljeu, 2007; Carree & Thurik, 2003 ; Carree & Verheul & Thurik, 2007). The

ambiguities found in the empirical evidence reflect these two conflicting forces. For example,

Evans and Leighton (1990) found that unemployment is positively associated with a greater

propensity to start a new firm, but Garofoli (1994) and Audretsch and Fritsch (1994) found that

unemployment is negatively related to new-firm startups, and Carree (2001) found that no

statistically significant relationship exists. Audretsch & Thurik (2000); show that an increase in

the number of business owners reduces the level of unemployment. They identify a Schumpeter

effect in terms of the positive impact on employment resulting from the entry of new firms

(Audretsch & Carree & Thurik, 2001).

Thurik et al. (2007) examine the relationship between entrepreneurship and unemployment in

Japan .They find that, although Japan‘s unemployment rate has been influenced by specific

exogenous shocks, the effects of entrepreneurship on unemployment are not different when

compared to other OECD countries. They find that entrepreneurship significantly lowers

unemployment but that it takes a lag of four yearly data (VanStel & Thurik & Verheul & Baljeu,

2007). VanStel & Baptista & Thurik, (2006) examine the relationship between entrepreneurship

and unemployment, as measured by the variation in business ownership rates, and

unemployment in Portugal. It concludes that Portugal has been a relative outlier in regard to the

effects of entrepreneurship on unemployment when compared whit the OECD average. They

found that the industrial re- structuring effects brought about by increases in business ownership

rates probably do not have a significant impact on the reduction of unemployment. Thurik

(2003), the influence of industrial structure, more specifically of entrepreneurship, is investigated

on the level of unemployment in the UK. It will be concluded that the UK is a relative outlier

when using a simple model of the relationship between unemployment and the rate of business

ownership. The model is calibrated using recent data of some 23 OECD countries. It

underestimates the decrease in unemployment in the UK in the period 1982-1990. Thus, while

there are not just theoretical reasons, but also empirical support as well, that while

6

unemployment leads to increased entrepreneurial activity, entrepreneurship leads to reduced

unemployment. Unraveling the relationship between entrepreneurship and unemployment is

crucial, because policy is frequently on assumptions that do not reflect this ambiguity (Baptista

& Thurik & Van Stel, 2006).

2.2 Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth

For many developing countries, entrepreneurship has been a powerful engine of economic

growth and wealth creation, and is crucial for improving the quality, number and variety of

employment opportunities for the poor, it has several multiplier effects on the economy, spurs

innovation, and fosters investment in people, which is a better source of competitive advantage

than other natural resources, which can be depleted (Versloot, 2007). Entrepreneurs create new

enterprises, new commercial activities, and new economic sectors. They generate jobs for others;

they produce goods and services for society; they introduce new technologies and improve or

lower cost outputs; and they earn foreign exchange through export expansion or the substitution

of imports (Carree & Thurik, 2002). The importance of entrepreneurship development through

new business formation for economic growth has been recognized since Schumpeter (1934).

The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, a research program aimed at assessing the national

level of entrepreneurial activity in selected countries, conducted an entrepreneurship and

economic growth study on 48 countries in 2008 (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, 2008).

According to the study, the economic growth of a country is directly correlated to its level of

entrepreneurial activity. In particular, there is a high correlation between economic growth and

entrepreneurial activity in industrialized countries. For instance, the American economy is well

known for its flexibility, adaptability, and grasping of opportunity partly because of a prevalence

of entrepreneurial culture in the United States. According to the report, Countries that are able to

replenish the stock of businesses and jobs and have the capacity to accommodate volatility and

turbulence in the entrepreneurial sector are best placed to compete effectively. Entrepreneurs

therefore play a key role in addressing poverty through their contributions to wealth and job

creation, economic advancement and social empowerment.

Gillis, (1996) and Burnett, (2000) assert that entrepreneurship is a necessary ingredient for

stimulating growth and in order to achieve successful economic development, a country must

7

experience both economic growth and "fundamental changes in the structure of its economy.

Despite their typically unappreciated role, entrepreneurs orchestrate these transformations and

create new channels for economic activity and employment. According to the Global

Entrepreneurship Monitor Report (2010), about 70 percent of an area’s economic performance

and well being is dependent upon how entrepreneurial the area’s economy is.

Ogundele, Olajide and Ashamu, (2008) argued that Entrepreneurship activities are very

fundamental to any meaningful development of an economy, many well meaning people and

leaders in the societies always clamour for the development of entrepreneurs that would bring a

turnaround in the economy. This explains the reason behind the government conscious policy

statements that are often made in this direction. However, it has to be noted that the benefit and

relevance of entrepreneur to accelerated economic growth cannot be achieved in isolation

without the existence of the right opportunities that serve as the wheel of its development.

Abdullahi, (2008) reported that Petrin, (1992) opined that for countries to accelerate their

economic growth and development, it is necessary for them to build up the critical mass of first

generation entrepreneurs because development is now being linked more and more to

entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship as argued by Abdullahi, (2008) stands as a vehicle to

improve the quality of life for individuals, families and communities and to sustain a healthy

economy and environment. However, the acceptance of entrepreneurship as a central

development force by itself will not lead to economic development and the advancement of

private enterprises until an enabling environment necessary for entrepreneurship to be rewarding

is created within communities. One of the goals of economic development strategies pursued by

successive Nigerian Governments has been the reduction of poverty through job creation. Many

government policies over the years for the achievement of the objective have been based on the

development of indigenous entrepreneurship. However, Ekpu, (2012) humorously observed

some of these policies have been like changing one structure for another much like ‘exchanging

a monkey for a baboon, recycling of ideas; a duplication of efforts which turn out to be of

doubtful relevance or simply a money-guzzling machine.”

Chukwuemeka, Nzewi and Okigbo, (2008) opined that a cursory look at Nigeria indicates that

she either lacks entrepreneurship ability or that government entrepreneurship oriented policies

are not effective. Ugwu, (2006) argues that most entrepreneurship related policies and

8

programmes in Nigeria fall short of appropriate development frameworks, some of the policies

are poor, frequent changing of policies and programmes and lack of clear entrepreneurial

development vision and commitment pose serious threat to entrepreneurship in Nigeria. Some of

the entrepreneurial related policies are good but the issue of poor environmental forces hinders

them, for instance electricity supply, water and good road network, uneasy access to finance,

high import tariff and other tariffs of government are not available to encourage entrepreneurs

Carree, ( 2002).

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Secondary data are the data collected by a party not related to the research study but collected

these data for some other purpose and at different time in the past. (Ghauri & Gronhaug,2005). A

variety of secondary information sources is available to researchers gathering data on an

industry, potential product applications and the market place. Quantitative research method was

adopted in analyzing data needed to examine entrepreneurship development progammes as

panacea to unemployment in Nigeria from the National Bureau of Statistics, Federal Bureau of

Statistics and Central Bank of Nigeria.

4. DATA PRESENTATION

From Table 2 and Table 3 (see apendix) it is seen that a correlation exist between the level of

employment generation and entrepreneurship in state whose spirit of entrepreneurial

development are high.

Hence the data on entrepreneurship indicate that states with high rate entrepreneurship includes:

Kano (9.8%), Kaduna (9.4%), Lagos (8.5%) Akwa ibom (7.4) and Anambra (5.7%) respectively

however from table 3 which is data on employment generation states with highest rate of

employment generated are as follows:- Kano (9.7), (Kaduna 9.5 %), Lagos (9.0%), Akwa ibom

(7.2 %)

Entrepreneurships has been characterized as productive and unproductive (Baumul, 2010).

Productive entrepreneurship contributes to economic growth while unproductive

entrepreneurship results in net reduction in social income and wealth.

9

However from the data on entrepreneurship rate by state, the state with high rate of

entrepreneurship could be categorized as productive as they contribute to a state output reducing

the chronic level of unemployment as show in table one. The high rate of entrepreneurship

leading to employment generation i.e job creation arises from establishment of ventures which in

turn employ individual with the required skill and as result social income is attained. As a way of

creating more jobs in the system, government initiated some policy in measures, key of which is

agriculture transformation agenda designed to boost employment generation by creading

agricultural value chain (Salako, 2011)

The hypothesis is formulated on the significant relationship between entrepreneurship

development programmes and employment generation in Nigeria was tested using Pearson-

product moment correlation coefficient at 0.05 level of significance.

There is no significant relationship between entrepreneurship development programmes and

employment generation in Nigeria.

Table 4: Entrepreneurship and Employment generation

Variable N mean D SD DF calculated p- value d r- value

Entrepreneurship 36 3.51 2.85 34 .781 .000 Ho: reject

Employment 36 2.98 1.93

As shown in Table 4, the p- value (.000) is less than the significance level (0.05) at 34 degrees of

freedom. Hence, there is no significant relationship between entrepreneurship development

programmes and employment generation in Nigeria is rejected. This implies that a significant

relationship exist between entrepreneurship development programmes and employment

generation in Nigeria. Entrepreneurship is an individual’s ability to turn ideas into action. It

includes creativity, innovation, and risk taking as well as the ability to plan and manage projects

in order to achieve objectives. Johnson (2001) submitted that entrepreneurship attitude and

10

behaviour entails openness to new information and making people, motivation, making

independent and self directed decisions, the ability to see opportunities in a rapidly changing and

uncertain environment, persistence, the motivation to achieve, technical know-how, personal

integrity, taking ownership and being accountable, the capacity to manage and organize as well

as specific category of actual characteristics.

The result of the study indicated that:

Entrepreneurship is seen as a key to Nigeria's growth and alleviation of poverty and

unemployment in the country. Therefore, promotion of such entrepreneurial enterprises in

developing economies like Nigeria is of paramount importance since it brings about a great

distribution of income and wealth, economic self-dependence, entrepreneurial development

employment and a host of other positive, economic uplifting factors (Aremu 2004). This position

is in line with (Adeyemi and Badmus 2001 and Schmitz 1982), they also argued that adequate

financing of entrepreneurial enterprises will reduce the unemployment level in Nigeria.

The roles and contribution of entrepreneurship development in Nigeria which forms the

backbone of national development are employment generation, gross national product, direct

creation of wealth by contribution to gross national product, provision of technological

innovation

5. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATION

From the findings of this paper has ascertained that the desired employment generation in a

nation can be achieved through the development and careful monitoring of entrepreneurial

activities, as entrepreneurial enterprises provides income, savings and employment generation.

This study identified higher level of employment in states within that exhibit high level of

entrepreneurial activities (kano with 9.8%, Kaduna 9.4%, lagos 8.5%, akwa ibom 7.4% e.t.c)

Furthermore this paper found that the roles and contributions of entrepreneurship in the Nigeria

economy forms the backbone of national development which ranges from; Employment

Generation, Direct Creation of Wealth by Contribution to the Gross National Product, Provision

of Technical Innovation. Also from table 3 ( hypothesis testing) the p- value .000 which is less

than 0.05 which is the significance level implies that the Ho is rejected and the H 1 is accepted

11

meaning there is a exist a relationship between entrepreneurship and employment generation in

Nigeria. In addition to the findings of this paper, deduced that entrepreneurship is seen as

significant engine for economic growth all over the world in creating job expansion, direct

creation of wealth and contribution to the gross national product as seen in the literature

reviewed on this study.

From the findings of this work the researcher make bold to recommend as following:

That there should be a process of or a program geared towards training youths in Nigeria in the

act of entrepreneurship. This is in lieu of the assertion that knowledge is power. We are aware

that there YOUWIN Nigeria, there is National Directorate of Employment and the inculcation of

Entrepreneurial Development Course in all Higher Institutions’ Curriculum in Nigeria but more

still need to be done as these platforms are just being institutional. They ought to be proactive

and pragmatic. If they cannot fit in the prescription, a new one can be created to take their place.

That there should be a government regulated means of entrepreneurial development sponsorship

devoid of politics and the likes that have crippled those erstwhile attempts to encourage

entrepreneurship development in Nigeria in terms of financial sponsorship as lack of access of to

finance is one of the major problems of entrepreneurship development in Nigeria.

That the government may not be able to create job enough for the teaming millions of Nigerian

unemployed youths, and therefore should embark upon massive youth development programmes

in all the states of the federation with entrepreneurial skills acquisition and entrepreneurship

development as a key target hence a viable intervening tool for unemployment.

That the general school curriculum should be remodeled to inculcate technical skill acquisition

which will help even secondary school graduates to have employable skills. Creation of more

entrepreneurship development programmes and proper monitoring and Cordination and the

KWASU entrepreneurship model should be recommended to other institutions to follow.

12

6. CONCLUSION

The paper work was carried out to ascertain the significance of entrepreneurship development

programmes as an alternative to unemployment between 2007 and 2013. This, in the course of

this research the problem of unemployment in Nigeria cannot be ignored among grandaunts

which constitute sixty percent (60%) of the total Nigerian population (FBS 2011) and these are

qualified graduates who are willing and able to work but cannot find a job and as a result no

income is gained. As a result of this the unemployed can easily be manipulated by politicians to

get involved in social vices.

Conclusively what makes entrepreneurship development programme significant is the ability to

create employment, commercial or industrial enterprise and this can be very crucial to the

advancement of social progress the creation of enterprises and their subsequent expansion

through successful development adds to the productive capacity of a nation (sum, cow, chen

2004).

.

13

Reference

(Eds), Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in organisational research

(pp. 323 -333). London: Sage.

(kamerscher and valentine, 2012) The relationship between growth, employment

and unemployment 1, no. 1, June- August:26-32. 311, pp.109-112.478.

Ackroy, S. and Hughes, J.A., Data collection in context (2004) Longman

Adejumo, G. (2001). Indigenous Entrepreneurship Development in Nigeria:

African Journal of Business Management, 4(6L 831-835.

Ajufo, B.I. (2013). Challenges of Youth Unemployment in Nigeria: Effective

Career Guidance as a Panacea. Afr. Res. Rev. 7(1); 307- 321. (2011).

Alanana, 0.0. (2003). Youth Unemployment in Nigeria: Some Implications for

the Third Millennium. Global Journal of Social Sciences, 2(lL 21- 26.

Allawadi, S.C. (2010). Entrepreneurship Challenges in 21st Century",

Indian Institute of Materials Management, Mumbai.

Anyakoha, I.L. (2006). Practical Tips for Economic Empowerment and

Survival, Nsukka: AP Express.

Awogbenle, A.C. & Iwuamadi, K.C. (2010). Youth Unemployment:

Baumol, W.J. (1993), Entrepreneurship, management, and the structure of payoffs,

Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Beverly Hills, CA; SAGE Publication.

Bryman, A. & Bell E. (2007). Business research methods (2nd ed.)

Cappelli, (1996) Distinctive Human Resource are Firms Core Competencies.

Organizational Dynamic. 24(3).

CBN (2010), Central Bank of Nigeria Statistical Bulletin, vol24 Central Bank of

Nigeria Annual Report and Statement of Account (various issues) Characteristics,

14

Prospects and Problems. Advance in Management:Journal

of Department of Business Administration, University of Ilorin, Ilorin

Adebayo, A. (1999). -Youth Unemployment and the National Directorate of

Employment, Self-employment Programmesll. The Nigerian Journal of

Economics and Social Studies, 41(1). Nigeria, 2(1):112-122.

CIA world factbook, 2011 macro economic data on Nigeria Available on

http://www.indexmundi.com/nigeria/employment_rate.html.Accessed on december

29, 2013.

Coghlan, P. and Brannick, C. (s2005). Research Methods in Business Studies.

Competitive Strategies and Growth Patterns of New Enterprises in Nigeria

Creswell, J.W. and Miller, D.L., 2000. Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry.

Damachi, N.A (2001). Evaluation of past Policy Measures for

Solving Unemployment Problems. Bullion, 25(4L 6-12.

Davies, D. and Dodd, J., 2002. Qualitative research and the question of rigor.

Drucker, P. (1998). The Discipline of innovation, Harvard Business Review,

May- June, pp. 67-72.

Egbuna, E.N. (2001). Food production: An Africa challenge. Central Bank

of Nigeria, Economic and Finance Review, 39(1): 13.

Entrepreneurial Orientation, and the Performance of Small and

Medium-Entrepreneurship Development Programme as an

Intervention Mechanism.

Fisher ,A. (2011), Employment Articles in Minnesota for CNN Money by Anne

Fisher in 2011 Harlow:Pearson Education Limited.

Hartley, J. (2004). Case study research. In Catherine Cassell & Gillian Symon

Hollister, R. & Goldstein, M. (1994). Reforming Labour Markets in the Near

15

East. New York: International Center for Economic Growth.

ILO Publication (2004). "Global Employment Trends for Youth",Geneva.

in Africa. New York: UN Secretariat. International Labour Office.

International Labour Organization (1982). Resolutions Concerning Statistics of

the Economically Active Population and Underemployment, adopted by the

13 International Conferences of Labour Statisticians.

International Labour Organization (2007). Global Employment Trends. Geneva:

Johnson, D. (2001), What is innovation and entrepreneurship? Lessons for larger

organizations, Industrial and Commercial Training, 33(4), 135-140.

Kerlinger, F.N. (2005) Foundation of Behavioral Research Mays, N & Pope, C

1995, Rigour in qualitative research, British Medical Journal,

Methodology: Dubai Printing Press.

Miyake, D. (2002), Implementing Strategy with the Balanced Scorecard: An

Introduction to the Strategy-Focused Organization, DM Review. Mullins,

Myers, R. (2009). Qualitative Data Analysis; A source book for new methods.

National Bureau of Statistics (2010), Macro-Economic Data in Nigeria. NBS,

Nigeria.

National Bureau of Statistics. (2010). Statistical News: Labour Force Statistics

No. 476. Abuja: The NBS Publication.

OECD, (2006) Promoting Pro-Poor Growth: Key Policy Messages .Paris, OECD.

Available on http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/0/61/37852580.pdf

Ogundele, O.J.K. and Olayemi, 0.0 (2004); Entrepreneurship Education and

Okafor, E.E. (2011) Youth Unemployment And Implications For Stability Of

Democracy in Nigeria. .Matanmi, S., and Awodun, M. (2005).An Asset of

Onyekpe, N. (2007). Managing youth at election: The constitution. A journal

16

of constitutional development 1(1): 76 - 87.

Osalor, P (2010). Entrepreneurialism: The Solution to Combating Youth Crime

in Nigeria. Vanguard, 28 March. Sarr MD (2000). Youth Unemployment

Osibanjo, O. (2006). Concept of Entrepreneurship: A paper presented at the

workshop on entrepreneurship and innovation for 200 level student in the

University of Ibadan, Ibadan.

Osibanjo, O. (2006). Concept of Entrepreneurship: A paper presented at the

workshop on entrepreneurship and innovation for 200 level student in the

University of Ibadan, Ibadan.

Otokiti, S. O. (2010). Contemporary issues and Controversy in Research

Oviawe, J.O. (2010) "Repositioning Nigerian Youths for Economic

Empowerment Through Entrepreneurship Education",European Journal

of Educational Studies, Vol. 2, No.2, pp.113-118. Oxford: Oxford

University Press

Penny, J. (2014) Human Resources , Journal on Best Job Interview,2,,pp 12

Qualitative Health research, 12(2), pp.279-289 Respondent –Driven

Sampling.” Sociological Methodology pg 193-239. SAGE Publications.

Salako, (2011) Enterpreneurship and Youth Unemployment in Nigeria: The

Missing Link‖.Global Journal of Management and Business Research, Volume 11

Issue 5 Version 1.0, April

Salganik, M.J. et al(2004). Sampling and Estimation in Hidden Populations Using

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, a., 2009. Research Methods for Business

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2007), Research Methods for Business

Schofield, J 1993, Increasing the Gseneralisability of qualitative research. In M

Hammersley (Ed.) Social research: Philosophy, Politics and Practice (pp.

200–225) Open University and Sage, London

17

Schoof, U. (2006). Stimulating youth entrepreneurship: Barriers and incentives to

enterprise start-ups by young people, ILO, SEED Working Paper No. 76.

Seale, C., 1999. Quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 5(4), pp.465-

Sized Business,” Strategic Management Journal 24:1307-1314. Social

Economic Reconstruction; Nigeria Journal of Curriculum and

Institution, vol. 12, no. 1, September.

Stevenson, H. (2007). A Perspective on Entrepreneurship, Harvard Business

Review, August-September, pp. 103-108. Students, Prentice Hall Students.

5:e ed. s.l.:Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Suleiman, A.S. (2006). The Business Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurial

Development, Small and Medium Enterprises, 2nd Edition. Kaduna:

Entrepreneurship Academy Publishing.

Tell magazine, (2014) creating vacancies for explosion, Accessed 31st, 2014

Theory into Practice, 39(3), pp.124-131Thousand Oaks: Sage

Todaro, M. (1992). Economics for a Developing World, (2nd Ed). England:

Longman Group, U.K. Limited

Trochim, W. (2006). Research Methods Knowledge base. Revised edition

using the Developing Economy Model. Lagos Organization Review, volume

Woolfolk, A. (1998). Educational Psychology, 7th ed. New York: AllyntBaran.

Wiklund, J. and Shepherd, D. (2003). "Knowledge-based Resources,

Yin, R. (2003). Case Study Research, Design and Methods (3rd ed. Vol.5).

Yin, R. K. (2003a) Applications of case study research, 2nd edition, London,

Yin, R. K. (2003b) Case study research: Design and methods, 3rd edition, London,

18

Table 1: Unemployment Rates by states in Nigeria 2007- 2013

State 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Abia 10.9 14.5 14.5 15.5 11.2 13.5 14.6

Adamawa 11.9 29.4 29.4 31.4 18.4 17.9 29.4

A/Ibom 13.5 34.1 34.1 36.1 18.4 15.3 34.1

Anambra 11.1 16.8 16.8 17.8 12.2 10.8 11.1

Bauchi 7.3 37.2 37.2 39.2 41.4 23.9 37.2

Bayelsa 6.9 38.4 38.4 40.4 23.9 16.0 38.4

Benue 67.4 8.5 8.5 9.5 14.2 10.8 9.5

Borno 7.8 27.7 27.7 29.7 29.1 5.8 27.7

C/River 11.8 14.3 14.3 15.3 18.2 16.9 29.4

Delta 18.9 18.4 18.4 20.8 27.2 13.8 16.4

Ebonyi 11.5 12.0 12.0 13.0 23.1 10.9 9.8

Edo 5.1 12.2 12.2 13.2 35.2 8.6 10.6

Ekiti 15.6 20.6 20.6 22.6 12.1 8.7 20.6

Enugu 11.5 14.9 14.9 15.9 25.2 20.0 20.5

Gombe 10.5 32.1 32.1 34.1 38.7 15.6 32.1

Imo 7.6 20.8 20.8 22.8 35.9 21.5 20.8

Jigawa 17.4 26.5 26.5 28.5 35.9 21.6 26.5

19

Kaduna 5.9 11.6 11.6 12.6 30.3 14.1

Kano 12.7 27.6 27.6 29.6 21.3 19.4 27.6

Katsina 5.8 37.3 37.3 39.3 28.1 19.3 37.3

Kebbi 11.8 12.0 12.0 13.0 25.3 15.2 27.4

Kogi 16.5 19.0 19.0 21.0 14.4 12.5 22.8

Kwara 16.4 11.0 11.0 12.0 7.1 7.5 16.5

Lagos 10.2 19.5 19.5 20.5 8.3 15.5 19.1

Nasarawa 7.6 10.1 10.1 11.1 36.5 8.1 12.1

Niger 17.0 11.9 11.9 12.9 39.4 3.6 19.1

Ogun 3.9 8.5 8.5 9.5 22.9 2.3 23.8

Ondo 5.8 14.9 14.9 16.9 12.5 6.7 19.9

Osun 6.3 12.6 12.6 13.6 3.0 14.7 15.7

Oyo 6.5 14.9 14.9 15.9 8.9 8.3 10.2

Plateau 8.7 7.1 7.1 8.1 25.3 2.9 6.2

Rivers 4.7 27.9 27.9 29.9 25.5 25.0 24.2

Sokoto 12.1 22.4 22.4 24.4 17.9 6.4 22.4

Taraba 5.9 26.8 26.8 28.8 12.7 14.0 26.8

Yobe 19.9 27.3 27.3 29.3 35.6 13.6 27.3

Zamfara 12.8 13.3 13.3 14.3 42.6 50.8 47.5

FCT 16.4 21.5 21.5 23.5 21.1 16.4 21.5

Nigeria 14.6 19.7 19.7 21.5 23.9 23.7 22.5

Source: NBS (2010); CBN Annual Report and Statement of Account (various issues)

The umemployment rate from 2007 was 14.6% and increased to 19.7% in 2008 and remained

19.7% in 2009 and increased to 21.5% in 2010 and to 23.9% in 2011 and reduced to 23.7 in

2012 and also reduced to 22.5 in 2013.

Table 2: Data on employment by states 2007- 2013

S/N States 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total %

1 Abia 13038 23903 26076 28250 30423 45634 49980 217304 3.5

2 Adamawa 3523 6458 7045 7632 8220 12329 13504 58711 0.9

3 Akwa ibom 26943 49396 53886 58377 62867 94301 103282 449053 7.2

4 Anambra 19676 36073 39352 42631 45910 68866 75424 327932 5.2

20

5 Bauchi 3324 6094 6648 7202 7756 11634 12742 55399 0.9

6 Bayelsa 12132 22242 24264 26286 28308 42462 46506 202201 3.2

7 Benue 774 1419 1548 1677 1806 2710 2968 12903 0.2

8 Borno 4789 8780 9578 10376 11174 16761 18357 79814 1.3

9 Cross river 12001 22002 24002 26002 28002 42003 46003 200015 3.2

10 Delta 9720 17820 19440 21061 22681 34021 37261 162004 2.6

11 Ebonyi 7900 14483 15800 17117 18433 27650 30283 131666 2.1

12 Edo 17941 32892 35882 38872 41862 62793 68773 299014 4.8

13 Ekiti 11238 20603 22476 24349 26222 39333 43079 187299 3.0

14 Enugu 8113 14874 16226 17578 18930 28395 31100 135216 2.2

15 Gombe 2576 4722 5152 5581 6010 9015 9874 42930 0.7

16 Imo 6188 11345 12376 13408 14439 21658 23721 103135 1.6

17 Jigawa 3469 6360 6938 7516 8094 12142 13298 57817 0.9

18 Kaduna 35869 65760 71738 77716 83694 125541 137497 597815 9.5

19 Kano 36438 66803 72876 78949 85022 127533 139679 607301 9.7

20 Katsina 3181 5832 6362 6892 7422 11134 12194 53017 0.8

21 Kebbi 901 1651 1802 1952 2102 3153 3453 15013 0.2

22 Kogi 2263 4149 4526 4903 5280 7920 8674 37715 0.6

23 Kwara 5251 9627 10502 11377 12252 18378 20129 87516 1.4

24 Lagos 34022 62373 68044 73714 79384 119077 130417 567031 9.0

25 Nassarawa 5004 9174 10008 10841 11675 17513 19181 83396 1.3

26 Niger 3587 6576 7174 7772 8370 12555 13751 59785 1.0

27 Ogun 11371 20847 22742 24637 26532 39798 43589 189516 3.0

28 Ondo 4615 8461 9230 9999 10768 16153 17691 76917 1.2

29 Osun 4997 9160 9993 10826 11659 17488 19153 83275 1.3

30 Oyo 17839 32705 35678 38651 41624 62437 68383 297317 4.7

31 Plateau 11851 21727 23703 25678 27653 41479 45430 197521 3.1

32 Rivers 17951 32909 35901 38893 41885 62827 68810 299175 4.8

33 Sokoto 1713 3140 3425 3711 3996 5994 6565 28543 0.5

34 Taraba 6447 11820 12894 13969 15043 22565 24714 107453 1.7

35 Yobe 711 1303 1422 1540 1659 2488 2725 11847 0.2

21

36 Zamfara 2269 4159 4537 4915 5293 7940 8696 37810 0.6

37 FCT Abuja 7033 12893 14066 15238 16410 24615 26959 117213 1.9

Source: Federal Office of Statistics ( 2007 - 2013)

Table 3: Data on entrepreneurship by states in Nigeria, 2007-2013

S/N States 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total %

1 Abia 18937 34717 37873 41030 44186 66279 72591 315612 4.3

2 Adamawa 4087 7494 8175 8856 9537 14306 15669 68124 0.9

3 Akwa ibom 32222 59075 64445 69815 75186 112779 123519 537041 7.4

4 Anambra 24697 45277 49394 53510 57626 86439 94671 411613 5.7

5 Bauchi 4027 7383 8055 8726 9397 14095 15438 67121 0.9

6 Bayelsa 18731 34340 37462 40584 43706 65559 71803 312185 4.3

7 Benue 793 1453 1586 1718 1850 2775 3039 13213 0.2

8 Borno 5274 9669 10548 11427 12306 18459 20217 87899 1.2

9 Cross river 12697 23277 25393 27509 29625 44438 48670 211610 2.9

10 Delta 11346 20801 22692 24583 26474 39712 43494 189103 2.6

11 Ebonyi 18727 34332 37453 40574 43695 65543 71785 312109 4.3

12 Edo 14646 26851 29292 31733 34174 51262 56144 244103 3.4

13 Ekiti 11353 20814 22706 24598 26491 39736 43520 189218 2.6

14 Enugu 1202 2204 2404 2604 2804 4207 4607 20032 0.3

15 Gombe 3126 5731 6252 6774 7295 10942 11984 52104 0.7

16 Imo 7624 13977 15248 16518 17789 26684 29225 127065 1.7

17 Jigawa 4081 7482 8163 8843 9523 14284 15645 68021 0.9

18 Kaduna 40908 74998 81816 88634 95452 143179 156815 681803 9.4

19 Kano 42789 78446 85578 92709 99841 149761 164024 713149 9.8

20 Katsina 3673 6733 7346 7958 8570 12855 14079 61213 0.8

21 Kebbi 1262 2314 2525 2735 2945 4418 4839 21038 0.3

22 Kogi 3253 5963 6505 7047 7589 11384 12468 54210 0.7

23 Kwara 5949 10906 11897 12888 13880 20820 22803 99142 1.4

24 Lagos 37080 67981 74161 80341 86521 129781 142142 618007 8.5

25 Nassarawa 5526 10131 11052 11973 12894 19341 21183 92102 1.3

22

26 Niger 4033 7394 8066 8738 9411 14116 15460 67218 0.9

27 Ogun 12013 22023 24025 26028 28030 42045 46049 200212 2.8

28 Ondo 5886 10792 11773 12754 13735 20602 22564 98105 1.3

29 Osun 5448 9988 10896 11804 12712 19068 20884 90802 1.2

30 Oyo 18684 34255 37369 40483 43597 65395 71624 311407 4.3

31 Plateau 13089 23996 26178 28359 30541 45811 50174 218147 3.0

32 Rivers 23520 43121 47041 50961 54881 82321 90161 392006 5.4

33 Sokoto 1929 3536 3857 4179 4500 6750 7393 32145 0.4

34 Taraba 7273 13334 14546 15758 16970 25455 27880 121216 1.7

35 Yobe 781 1432 1562 1692 1823 2734 2994 13019 0.2

36 Zamfara 2462 4514 4924 5334 5745 8617 9438 41033 0.6

37 FCT Abuja 7260 13311 14521 15731 16941 25411 27832 121007 1.7

Source: Smedan (2007- 2013)

23