CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Introduction

This chapter will deliberate and describe the results obtained from testing the variables. The

chapter analyses inferential as well as descriptive statistics. For this study, data was retrieved

from the World Bank, United Nations Departments of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA),

and the Central Bank of Nigeria. The data employs annual data series and spans a period of 39

years, from 1981-2020. The results that shall be interpreted and presented consist of: descriptive,

correlation matrix, unit root test, cointegration test, ARDL long run and short run,

autocorrelation, normality test, multicollinearity test and Heteroskedasticity test.

4.2 Descriptive Statistics

Table 4.1

AGDP ALF EM IM REM TO

Mean 8176939 37280670 879824.5 293151.1 8.23E+09 32.12799

Median 4932757 42067874 224502.0 184023.0 1.19E+09 33.87182

Maximum 17544148 62259271 13300000 1314845. 2.43E+10 53.27796

Minimum 2303505 1271504 109524.0 69581.00 2424527. 9.135846

Std. Dev. 5459749 19941283 2158238. 331703.1 9.74E+09 12.29255

Skewness 0.507403 -0.752848 4.982129 2.125078 0.476097 -0.330826

Kurtosis 1.675889 2.238122 28.90082 6.504654 1.332404 2.254798

Jarque-Bera 4.638500 4.745960 1283.565 50.57736 6.145914 1.655184

 Probability 0.098347 0.093203 0.000000 0.000000 0.046284 0.437100

Sum 3.27E+08 1.49E+09 35192979 11726043 3.29E+11 1285.120

Sum Sq. 1.675889 1.55E+16 1.88E+14 4.29E+12 3.70E+21 5893.166

Dev.

Observations 40 40 40 40 40 40

Source: Author’s creation (2022)

Before regressing the model, it is necessary to examine the data features. Descriptive statistics

define the various characteristics of the data set in this study. The table is divided into three

sections: measures of central tendency, measures of dispersion, and measures of normality. The

mean, median, maximum, and minimum are the constituents of the central tendency measure.

The mean of a data set is also known as the average; it is calculated by adding the values of the

observations and dividing by the number of observations. The median is then determined by

obtaining the middle value after arranging the observations in ascending or descending order.

Furthermore, the highest value in the series per variable is referred to as the maximum, while the

lowest value in the series per variable is referred to as the minimum.

The standard deviation is the best measure of dispersion because it provides a comprehensive

and accurate result. The standard deviation measures the distribution's deviation from the mean.

When the standard deviation is low, data tend to cluster around the mean, whereas when the

standard deviation is high, it spreads out.

Skewness and kurtosis are classified as measures of normality and are commonly referred to as

shape statistics. Going further, skewness measures the level of symmetry in distribution.

Skewness is calculated as the mean minus the mode divided by the data set's standard deviation.

In the data mentioned above set, agricultural GDP (AGDP), emigration (EM), immigration (IM)
and remittances (REM) with values of 0.507403, 4.982129, 2.125078 and 0.476097 are

positively skewed. This means that the right tail of a graph is longer and has a higher proportion

of values than the mean. Contrarily, the agricultural labour force (ALF) and trade openness (TO)

has values of -0.752848 and -0.330826, respectively, indicating that they are negatively skewed,

the left tail of the graph is longer, and the majority of their values are lower than the mean.

The sharpness of the distribution is referred to as kurtosis. It depicts the distribution's peakedness

(thickness) or flatness (thinness). Kurtosis with a value of 3 in a normal distribution is said to be

mesocratic. Any value (distribution) greater than three is referred to as leptokurtic, while any

value (distribution) less than three is referred to as platykurtic. ALF (2.238122), REM

(1.332404), AGDP(1.675889) and TO (2.254798) are platykurtic and have values less than three;

however, EM (28.90082) and IM (6.504654) have values greater than three and are leptokurtic

and have a peaked curve.

The Jarque-Bera test is a goodness-of-fit test that determines if a given data sample has the same

skewness and kurtosis as a normal distribution. It also has a probability value that indicates the

test's significance. Using 5% as the significance level, any value less than 0.05 indicates

significance, and thus the null hypothesis is rejected. Any probability value greater than 0.05 is

considered insignificant, and thus the null hypothesis is not rejected. A probability value of less

than 5% (0.05) indicates that the data set is not normally distributed. As a result, trade openness

(TO), Emigration (EM), immigration (IM) and are not normally distributed, with probability

values of 0.437100, 0.000000, 0.000000, respectively. Meanwhile, Agricultural GDP (AGDP),

Agricultural labour force (ALF) and remittances (REM) are normally distributed with the value

of 0.098347, 0.093203 and 0.046284

4.2 Pearson’s Correlation

Pearson's correlation coefficient is used to measure and assess the magnitude of a relationship

between two or more variables. The closer the correlation coefficient value is to one, the stronger

the intensity and relationship between the variables, according to this correlation method. As a

result, the correlation matrix indicates the degree and orientation of the interaction between the

variables under consideration. "A positive correlation coefficient indicates a direct relationship

between the two variables, whereas a negative correlation coefficient indicates an inverse

relationship".

Table 4.2: Pearson’s Correlation

AGDP EM IM TO REM ALF

AGDP 1.000

EM -0.0116374 1.000

IM 0.60397027 0.1591994 1.000

TO 0.60813461 -0.1321035 0.82887940 1.000

REM -0.0068518 0.3825321 0.36239452 0.17591177 1.000

ALF 0.46437958 0.3817661 0.72109579 0.56716651 0.76999078 1.000

Source: Author’s creation (2022)

The correlation matrix measures the relationship between employed variables in a study. It also

assesses the magnitude of the association. The coefficient of the correlation runs between 1 and -

1. This range is further subdivided into three groups. In absolute terms, a coefficient of 0

suggests that there is no correlation between the variables and a value of 1 implies a perfect -

correlation between the variables. A coefficient that ranges between 0 and 0.25 denotes a weak

correlation; one that runs between 0.25 and 0.75 reveals an intermediate correlation. One that

ranges between 0.75 and 1 implies a high correlation between the variables. A coefficient with a

negative sign denotes a negative or inverse relationship between the variables.

Furthermore, the table reveals a weak negative relationship between agricultural GDP and

emigration, trade openness and emigration, remittances and agricultural GDP with values of -

0.01,-0.13 and -0.00, respectively. However, there is an intermediate positive relationship

between immigration and agricultural GDP, trade openness and agricultural GDP, and

agricultural labour force and agricultural GDP with the correlation coefficient value of 0.60,

0.60 and 0.46, respectively. In addition, there is a weak negative correlation between trade

openness and emigration, with correlation values of -0.13. An intermediate positive correlation

exists between remittances and immigration with a coefficient value of 0.36. Thus, from the

values above, as agricultural GDP increases, emigration reduces, immigration reduces, and

remittances fall.

4.3 Empirical results and discussion

This study will conduct an empirical analysis to meet the study's objectives and ensure that the

impact, relationship, and importance of the impact are fully established to make informed
judgments and policies. This section presents and interprets the results of the unit root tests,

diagnostic tests, and cointegration tests.

4.3.1 Unit Root Test

A unit root test determines whether a variable in a time series is stationary or non-stationary. The

null hypothesis states that the variable has a unit root problem and is non-stationary. In contrast,

the alternative hypothesis states that the variable does not have a unit root and is stationary.

Given that most time series is not stationary, at least at varying levels, the use of these variables

leads to bias and thus spurious regression (a regression run with non-stationary variables), which

renders the results almost insignificant and eventually affects decision making, forecasting, and

prediction (Gujarati, 2003). Therefore, in this study, the Philips-Perron method of unit root test

will be used, and the appropriate judgment regarding the use of the variable in the model will be

made. It is sufficient to say that a variable is considered stationary if the Philips-Perron test

statistic value is less than any of the test critical values at various levels of significance.

Table 4.1: Unit Root Test

Variables PP Result

Levels First

Difference

LAND -0.323550 *-5.877709 I(1)

LEM -0.213376 -5.557346* I(1)

LIM 3.556018 -6.482297* I(1)

LREM -0.894730 *-6.334771 I(1)

LTO -1.724665 *-7.158296 I(1)

LALF *-6.162910 -6.661511* I(0)

 * ***Significant at 1%, and 10%respectively

As can be seen in Table 4.3 above, the outcome of the Philips-Perron test states that remittances

(REM), emigration(EM), immigration (IM), agricultural GDP(AGDP) and trade openness (TO)

are not stationary at levels I (0). This indicates that none of the values was significant at 1%, 5%

and 10 % at levels; however, the probability of the t-statistic was insignificant. This shows that

we fail to reject the null hypothesis; therefore, there is a unit root problem.

Agricultural labour forces (ALF) is the only variable stationary at level, i.e. I (0). Remittances

(REM), emigration (EM), immigration (IM), agricultural GDP, and trade openness (TO), on the

other hand, are all stationary at the first difference, i.e. I (1). Because the stationarity levels are a

combination of I (0) s and I (1) s, the ARDL approach can be taken to estimate the model.

4.3.2 ARDL Cointegration Test

The Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model incorporates lagged forms of the variables to

generate short-run and long-run dynamics. On the other hand, a cointegration test is required to

demonstrate that the variables have a long-term relationship. In this study, the ARDL F-bound

test is used to determine whether the independent and dependent variables in the model have a

long-run association. The test results are summarized in Table 4.5.

Table 4.4: ARDL F-bounds Test Results

F-statistic Significance Level I(0) I(1)

21.25595 10% 2.08 3

 5% 2.39 3.38

1% 2.7 3.73

Source: Author’s creation (2022)

At all levels of significance, the F-statistic of 21.25595 is greater than the values of the lower and

upper bounds (i.e. 1 per cent, 5 per cent and 10 per cent). As a result, we conclude that the F-

statistic is significant at 1%, and thus the null hypothesis, which states that there is no long-run

relationship, is rejected. As a result, in this study, there is a long-run relationship between the

dependent variable and the independent variables.

Since cointegration has been established, an error correction form of the model can be formed.

For the result to be reliable, the error correction coefficient (CointEq (-1)) should be negative and

significant at 1%. The results of the error correction form are shown in Table 4.6 below.

Table 4.5: Error Correction Form

Variable Coefficient Probability

DLAGDP(-1)) 0.371625 0.0775**

DLAGDP(-2)) -0.123202 0.5543

DLAGDP(-3)) 0.663043 0.0454**

D(LALF) 0.028243 0.6237

D(LALF(-1)) 0.058615 0.3898

D(LALF(-2)) 0.035569 0.5313

D(LALF(-3)) 0.095104 0.2437

D(LEM) -0.825329 0.0353*

D(LEM(-1)) -0.700107 0.0398*

 D(LEM(-2)) -0.387525 0.1602

D(LEM(-3)) -0.526302 0.0808**

D(LIM) 1.000361 0.0109*

D(LIM(-1)) 0.652457 0.0227*

D(LIM(-2)) 0.378771 0.0704**

D(LIM(-3)) 0.582051 0.0455*

D(LREM) -0.066875 0.0914**

D(LREM(-1)) -0.043808 0.1194

D(LREM(-2)) -0.039790 0.1614

D(LREM(-3)) -0.039207 0.1004***

D(LTO) -0.230482 0.0109*

D(LTO(-1)) 0.066363 0.3409

D(LTO(-2)) -0.046641 0.4340

D(LTO(-3)) -0.091189 0.1603

Cointiq(-1)* -0.433949 0.0041*

*, **, *** represent significance at 1%, 5% and 10% respectively.

Source: Author’s creation (2022)

4.3.4 Regression Results

4.3.4.1 Short-Run Regression Analysis

The short-run results of the independent variable coefficients used in the model are shown in

Table 4.6 above. Some of the variables in their unlagged forms do not completely match the a
priori expectations. Although remittances (REM) were expected to be positive, it is negative.

Furthermore, immigration (IM) is positive, per the presumption that it would be positive. The

agricultural labour force (ALF) is positive, which corresponds to the a priori expectation.

Furthermore, Trade openness (TO) is negative, which is inconsistent with the a priori expectation

of being positive. Furthermore, emigration (EM) is negative, consistent with the a priori

expectation. Furthermore, in the short run, LEM, LTO and LIM can be significant, while the

other explanatory variables are insignificant.

It can also be seen that some of the lagged forms of the variables do not align completely with

the a priori expectations. The second and third lags of trade openness are negative, which is not

in accordance with the a priori expectation. The lagged form of REM is negative, which goes

against the a priori expectation that it would be positive. The lags of ALF are negative, which is

not in accordance with the a priori expectation, while the unlagged form of ALF is positive,

which is in accordance with the a priori expectation. Furthermore, the lagged form of emigration,

which is negative, is in line with the a priori expectation. The First lag of AGDP is positive,

which is in line with the a priori expectation.

In the short run, it can be seen that emigration (EM) is negative, as a 1% increase in emigration

results in a 0.82% decrease in agricultural output. The relationship is in line with the a priori

expectation as a rise in emigration leads to brain drain. This further implies that labour supply in

the agricultural sector will fall, and the production of agricultural commodities will fall, leading

to a fall in agricultural GDP. However, emigration significantly impacts agricultural GDP in the

short run.
In the short run, it can be seen that immigration (IM) is positive, as a 1% increase in immigration

results in a 1% increase in agricultural output. The relationship is in line with the a priori

expectation as a rise in emigration leads to an increasing labour supply and capital into the

agricultural sector, production of agricultural commodities will increase, and this will lead to an

increase in agricultural GDP. However, immigration significantly impacts agricultural GDP in

the short run.

In the short run, it can be observed that remittances (REM) are negative, as a 1% increase in

remittances results in a 0.06% decrease in agricultural output. The relationship is in line with the

a priori expectation as a rise in remittances leads to a decrease in agricultural GDP. Remittances

serve as capital received from households in rural areas. As remittances increase, people don't

invest the remittances into their agricultural businesses. Thus this reduces investment in the

agricultural sector causing agricultural GDP to fall. However, remittances significantly impact

agricultural GDP in the short run.

The error correction form is identified in the short-run ARDL, and the speed with which the

variables change from deviations to steady-state equilibrium is tested. The projected coefficient

for error correction form (CointEq (-1) should be negative and statistically significant, and the

absolute value should be less than one. The error correction form has a coefficient of -0.433949,

and the p-value is significant.

4.3.4.2 Long-Run Regression Analysis

We established that the dependent and explanatory variables had a long-run connection. As a

result, a long-run analysis was carried out, with the following results:

Table 4.6: Long Run Coefficients

ARDL Levels Equation

Restricted Constant and No Trend

Variables Coefficient t-statistic Probability

LEGAL 0.335 5.620 0.0025*

LOGIN -1.447 -4.717 0.0053*

LOGIN 2.894 8.018 0.0005*

LOGREM -0.065 -2.602 0.0481**

LOGO -0.057 -1.090 0.3252

Source: Author’s creation (2022)

*= 1% Significance ** 5% Significance

The ARDL model below displays the estimated long-run coefficients (elasticities) shown in the

table below.

The agricultural labour force is significant, which implies that it positively affects agricultural

GDP. An increase in the agricultural labour force leads to an increase in the production of

agricultural commodities; when the commodities are sold to satisfy the demand of the

consumers, it increases agricultural GDP.

Emigration is significant, and it negatively affects agricultural GDP. An increase in emigration

will lead to a fall in agricultural labour; this will further lead to a fall in agricultural output and

production. There is an inverse long-run relationship between emigration and agricultural GDP;

thus, the effect is statistically significant as the p-value of the coefficients is significant at 1 per

cent. Hence the impact is significant to the changes in agricultural GDP in Nigeria.

Immigration is significant, which implies that it positively affects agricultural GDP in Nigeria.

When immigration increases, the number of labour and capital rises because immigrants bring

skills, labour and capital into the economy. This resource helps in the development of the

agricultural sector. The immigrants invest their resources into the agricultural sector. This

facilitates the production of agricultural goods to meet demand. This further increases

agricultural GDP. There exist a positive relationship between IM and AGDP. This states that an

increase in immigration will lead to an increase in agricultural GDP. There is a direct long-run

relationship between immigration and agricultural GDP; thus, the effect is statistically significant

as the p-value of the coefficients is significant at 1 per cent. Hence, the impact is significant to

the changes in agricultural GDP in Nigeria.

Remittances also have a significant value, which negatively affects agricultural GDP. When the

number of remittances received by Nigerian households increases, households will not use the

remittances received to purchase farm implements and buy arable land to support their

agricultural businesses. The resultant effect of this is that it will lead to a decrease in agricultural

output (AGDP) as investment in the agricultural sector decreases. There exist a positive

relationship between LREM and AGDP. This states that an increase in the number of remittances

will lead to an increase in agricultural GDP. There exists a direct long-run relationship between

remittances and agricultural GDP. However, it is statistically significant as the p-value of the
coefficients is significant at 1 per cent. Hence the impact is significant to the changes in

agricultural GDP in Nigeria.

Furthermore, there exists a negative relationship between IM, TO and GDP. This thus states

increase in trade openness and immigration will lead to a decrease in AGDP in the long run.

However, the effect of TO (Trade openness) does not significantly impact agricultural GDP in

the long run.

The long-run coefficients (elasticities) are highlighted in the table above.

A 1 per cent increase in LOGALF leads to a 0.03 per cent increase in agricultural GDP in the

long run. A 1 per cent increase in LOGEM will lead to a 1.44 per cent increase in agricultural

GDP in the long run. A per cent increase in LOGIM will cause a 2.89 per cent decrease in

agricultural GDP in the long run. Furthermore, a percentage increase in LOGREM will lead to a

0.065 per cent decrease in agricultural GDP in the long run. Lastly, a per cent increase in

LOGTO will cause a 0.05 per cent decrease in agricultural GDP in the long run.

4.4 POST-ESTIMATION ANALYSIS

This section will address autocorrelation, normality, heteroscedasticity and multicollinearity.

Serial correlation occurs when there is a positive correlation between the disturbance terms at

two different times. (Salvatore, 2021)

Multicollinearity occurs when an econometric model has a strong correlation between two or

more decision variables. (Hanck et al., 2019). Multicollinearity makes it difficult for explanatory

factors to demonstrate their unique influence on the criterion variable.

Heteroskedasticity is a problem that emerges when the variance between a regression fit and the

original mean function it estimates is uneven. (Angrist & Pischke, 2017).

The normality test will be conducted to know if the distribution is normal, and this will be done

using the Jarque Bera.

Table 4.7: Post Estimation Results

Diagnostics Test F-statistic Probability

Autocorrelation Test 2.039619 0.1030

Heteroscedasticity Test 0.670986 0.6481

Normality Test 0.646953

Source: Author’s creation (2022)

The null hypothesis (H0) of the autocorrelation test run states that there is no autocorrelation,

while the null hypothesis (H0) of the heteroscedasticity test states that there is no

heteroscedasticity and that the distribution is normal. According to the table above, none of the

tests rejects the null hypothesis. As a result, we conclude that the model lacks autocorrelation

and heteroscedasticity, has a normal distribution, and thus has relevant econometric properties.

Table 4.8: Test result for multicollinearity

Variable Coefficient Variance Uncentered VIF Centered VIF

ALF 0.001327 31.38341 1.452080

EM 1.52E-13 2.365253 2.020812

IM 4.78E-12 2.701010 1.499656

 REM 4.62E-21 2.164985 1.250423

TO 0.002963 10.22660 1.277345

C 18.36457 53.73029 NA

Source: Author’s creation (2022)

The centred VIF values must be less than 10 for multicollinearity to exist. If the value is greater

than or equal to 10, it indicates that the model contains multicollinearity. The values of the

centred VIF for all variables in table 4.9 are less than 10. As a result, the model does not exhibit

multicollinearity.

4.4 Discussion of Findings

The results of our long-run analysis in the previous section will be discussed in this subsection in

relation to the hypotheses listed in Chapter 1.

4.4.1 Test of Hypothesis 1

The effect of immigration on Nigeria’s agricultural GDP will be analyzed in the short and long

run.

The null hypothesis states that immigration does not significantly impact Nigeria's agricultural

GDP. The long-run and short-run analysis results show that immigration has a significant

positive impact on agricultural GDP in Nigeria. Immigration is significant at 1%. Hence, the null

hypothesis is completely rejected, and the alternate hypothesis, which states that immigration has

a significant impact on agricultural GDP in Nigeria in the long run, is accepted.

As the number of immigrants increases, they bring in their skills, labour and capital. This

resource helps in the development of the agricultural sector. The immigrants invest their
resources (skills, labour and capital) into the agricultural sector. This facilitates the production of

agricultural goods to meet demand. This further increases agricultural GDP. These findings go in

accordance with the findings of Mansur and Mansur (1987) in that their findings showed that

immigration has a positive and significant impact on agricultural GDP.

Test of Hypothesis 2

The null hypothesis states that emigration does not significantly impact Nigeria's agricultural

GDP. This would be analyzed both in the short run and long run. The result from the long run

and short run analyses indicate that emigration significantly negatively impacts agricultural GDP

in the long run.

Emigration causes brain drain, and a loss of manpower, an increase in emigration will lead to a

fall in agricultural labour, which will further lead to a fall in agricultural output and production

as labour is an important factor of production in Nigeria's agricultural sector.

The short-run analysis results indicate that emigration has a negative and significant impact on

agricultural GDP. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected, and the alternate hypothesis, which

states that emigration has a significant impact on Nigeria's agricultural GDP, is accepted.

Test of hypothesis 3

The effect of remittances on Nigeria’s agricultural GDP will be analyzed in the short and long

run.
The null hypothesis states that remittances do not have a significant impact on Nigeria's

agricultural GDP. The results from the long run and short run analysis show that remittances

have a significant negative impact on agricultural GDP in Nigeria. This finding is in accordance

with the findings of Raju, Chandan, and Naveen (2014). However, this is because migrant

remittances received by a household may not be used to invest in their agribusiness and purchase

farm implements to boost agricultural output. Thus the null hypothesis that remittances do not

have a significant impact on Nigeria's agricultural GDP should be rejected, and the alternate

hypothesis that remittances have a significant impact on Nigeria's agricultural GDP should be

accepted.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION

This research examined migration and remittances' impact on Nigeria's agricultural GDP. This

chapter focuses on summarizing the findings of this research based on which conclusions are

drawn, and recommendations are made.

5.1 Summary

Agricultural GDP was used as the dependent variable in this research to evaluate the impact of

migration and remittances on agricultural GDP in Nigeria. Agricultural GDP was expressed as a

function of immigration, emigration, agricultural labour force, remittances and trade openness in

this study which used yearly data from 1981- 2020. This study's model was built on the Lewis
model. The Lewis model illustrates the effect of migration on the agricultural sector, which is the

main objective of this research.

The Autoregressive Distributed Lag Model (ARDL) was used to examine the effect of migration

and remittances on agricultural GDP, and the results obtained using empirical estimate

techniques are summarized below.

I. The stationarity of the variables utilized in the study was determined using the Philips-Perron

unit root tests. Except for the agricultural labour force (ALF), the data showed that all variables

were stationary at the first difference.

II. The F-bounds test was then performed, revealing a long-run relationship between migration,

remittances, and agricultural GDP in Nigeria, which validated the adoption of the ARDL model

approach.

III. Autoregressive Distributive Lag Model shows that in the long run, there is a positive

relationship between emigration and agricultural GDP, agricultural labour force and agricultural

GDP. There is a negative relationship between IM and AGDP, TO and AGDP, and REM and

GDP.

IV. Long-run analysis shows that emigration significantly negatively impacts agricultural GDP.

This indicates that as emigration increases, agricultural GDP decreases. This goes in accordance

with the a priori expectation. The analyses also showed that immigration has a significant

positive relationship with agricultural GDP. This goes in line with the a priori expectation of

being positive. It was also discovered that remittances significantly negatively impacted

agricultural GDP.
V. The ECM test revealed that the agricultural labour force had a positive and significant impact

on agricultural GDP in the short run, and immigration had a significant positive impact on

agricultural GDP in the short run. Furthermore, emigration significantly negatively impacted

agricultural GDP in the short run. Remittances negatively and significantly impacted agricultural

GDP in the short run.

5.2 Conclusion

The purpose of this paper was to determine the effect of migration and remittances on Nigeria's

agricultural GDP between 1981-2020. The first null hypothesis, which stated that immigration

has no significant impact on agricultural GDP, was rejected, and the alternative hypothesis,

which states that immigration has a significant impact on agricultural GDP, was accepted.

Additionally, the second hypothesis, which states that emigration has no significant impact on

agricultural GDP, was rejected as the study found a significant effect on agricultural GDP.

In conclusion, migration is still a global phenomenon and a big bone of contention for many

economies. The impact of migration on agricultural GDP, as in Nigeria, cannot be determined at

a glance. This is because the impact of migration on agricultural GDP is multifaceted. For

example, the study found that international emigration causes brain drain and a loss of

manpower, which negatively impact agricultural growth and GDP. On the other hand,

remittances from Nigerians in Diaspora were found to account for a reasonable amount of our

GDP.

Furthermore, the study mentioned earlier showed that immigration contributed positively to

development by facilitating the introduction of FDIs, increasing foreign investment, encouraging

industrialization and increasing national income through tourism. The question today is what the

net effect of migration is and how the government can optimize it to benefit agricultural GDP.
The government must pay attention to migration (immigration, emigration, and rural-urban

migration) and remittances received to improve agriculture sector performance and increase

agricultural GDP.

5.3 Recommendations

The following recommendations have been made based on the findings of the analysis conducted

in this study to increase agricultural GDP in Nigeria, consequently promoting the growth and

performance of the agricultural sector.

I. The government should provide technical assistance and capacity development to support

smallholder family farmers and rural youth.

II. The government should intensify its effort in developing the agricultural sector to prevent

the brain drain of labour in the agricultural sector. The government should allocate for the

development of the agricultural sector. The government can do this by giving farmers

access to credit facilities (agro-based loans), making land available to farmers and

providing fertilizer subsidies.

III. Sustainable agricultural practices should be adopted to limit the impact of climate

change, promote the management of natural resources and increase agricultural

productivity. Agricultural programs should be made to train farmers on new cropping

techniques, methods and machines that will improve agricultural production.

IV. Rural residents should be educated on ways to use their remittances for investment in

natural resource management and agriculture. Rural residents should be enlightened on

financial inclusion and literacy.

5.4 Limitation of the Study

The study's major limitation was data availability, mainly due to poor data collection and

documentation in Nigeria. There is limited literature on the impact of migration and agriculture

in Nigeria.

5.5 Suggestions for Further Studies

This research concentrated on some aspect of migration because of the difficulty in obtaining

data, as seen in the literature review in chapter 2, migration can be analyzed from different

perspective. Therefore, using other forms of migration (internal migration such as rural-urban

migration urban-urban-urban, rural- urban etc.) can be used for further studies.