11.the impact of cooperative financing on millennium

Research Journal of Finance and Accounting www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1697 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2847 (Online)
Vol 2, No 11, 2011

The Impact of Cooperative Financing on Millennium
Development Goal of Poverty Eradication: Lessons from
Nigeria
Onaolapo A . R Oladejo Moruf *
Department of Management and Accounting, Faculty of Management Sciences
Ladoke Akintola University o Technology, Ogbomoso, Oyo State, Nigeria.
* E-mail of the corresponding author: moolad02@yahoo.co.uk

Abstract
Despite the efforts and resources devoted to fighting poverty by the Nigerian government empowerment
programmes, the problem has remained intractable. Significant among the medium for poverty alleviation
models are users-owned organizations (Cooperative societies) designed as individual self-help and
empowerment vehicles for micro-credit delivery. Testing the Cooperatives strategies in Nigeria is expected
to give insight into the state of poverty in the continent of Africa and provide measuring guide to
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) relating to poverty reduction. This paper attempts to investigate
the impact of cooperative financing method on the attainment of MDGs objective as regards poverty
reduction. Data collected from the stakeholders in cooperative organizations in Nigeria were analyzed
using descriptive statistics, regression analysis and Chi Square to establish the relationship between
cooperatives financing, poverty reduction and its significance as a criterion for achieving the MDGs
objectives. Causality was found between the tested variable especially cooperative credit assistance and
poverty alleviation. The paper recommends that government policy should acknowledge the micro credit
power of cooperatives and integrate this into its micro financing policy-focus.
Keywords: Poverty, Poverty-Eradication Finance, Cooperative Financing Method, MDG

1. Introduction
It has been realized in the recent years that there are limits to which government can singly promote
development. Effective cooperative development is essential to nation’s growth but its impact on achieving
the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) relating to poverty eradication is a subject of concern to
scholars and practitioners. The Nigerian economy is characterized by large percentage of the poor as
reiterated by the National Poverty Eradication Program (NAPEP, 2010), which put the level of poverty at
67% in line with the World Bank report of 1999.
Taking a cue from the African Development Bank (ADB, 2003) survey in 1997, Nigeria had 70.2 % of her
population living just above one United State of America Dollar (USD) per day and 90.8% below two USD
a day using the international poverty line criteria. The Nigerian situation represents a developmental
experience characterized with poverty. According to Alabi and Ahiawodzi (2007), the frustrations of
accessing credit facilities from formal systems compel the poor and informal business entrepreneurs to
resort to different non-banking and informal arrangements to access funds for their operations. This has
serious implications for a country like Nigeria where the economy is largely characterized by micro and
small businesses as observed by Basu et al (2004).

Further to this is the observation of Kevin, Louis &Mark (2000) that one means for the entrepreneurial
firms to overcome the constraint of access to credit is by cooperating with either other entrepreneurial firms

19

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

or possibly with larger, established, resource-rich firms. The extent to which the cooperative method can
be used to facilitate the MGDs relating to poverty reduction as declared by the United Nations summit of
2000 shall be the crux of this study.

1.1 Statement of the problem

Poverty is a multidimensional and very complex phenomenon, which requires a multifaceted response.
Despite the efforts and resources devoted to fighting poverty by the Government empowerment
programmes, the problem has remained intractable. A major obstacle to Cooperative development in
Nigeria is policy neglect. The Nigeria government is not attracted to the cooperative financing strategies
and has in most cases preferred some other economic groups similar to this in her poverty eradication
programme. There are some factors that affect the performance of Cooperative Societies in discharging
micro credit roles effectively and perhaps the reasons for lack of interest by the policy makers in Nigeria.
Generally the capacity of Cooperative Societies to provide fund to the poor and low income group is
limited by inadequate capital base (Asaolu 2004). The other critical element according to Akinwunmi
(2006) was leadership. If there is purposeful leadership, and managers of cooperatives are transparent,
dedicated and truly serving, the society can compliment existing micro-credit financing tools. Other
problems affecting efficiency of the medium is the prevalent embezzlement of the little fund available
making members to lose interest in this viable economic method.

Poor accounting and record keeping has crippled the activities of most cooperative societies in Nigeria
(Asaolu 2004, Oladejo 2008, Lawal 2006).As user-owned organizations, cooperatives have been used as a
model for individual self-help and empowerment that strengthens bonds leading to greater community
awareness and involvement and as such become a vehicle for micro credit delivery. Testing the
Cooperatives strategies in Nigeria is expected to give insight into the state of poverty in the
continent of Africa. Few studies that exist in Nigeria (Asaolu 2004) (Akinwumi 2006) regarding
cooperatives impact on poverty eradication did not test its impact on Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs). These few studies failed to emphasize the significance of Cooperative finance and how it affects
the attainment of MDG objectives of poverty eradication.

This paper remains germane as it explores the impact of Cooperative Societies financing as a vehicle for
achieving the MDGs objectives of poverty eradication in Nigeria. Findings as regard the significance of
cooperative financing are expected to proffer solution to the problem of poverty alleviation and government
policy direction.

On the basis of the research problems stated above, this study therefore examines
(i) The impact of Cooperative financing method on MDGs
(ii) The extent that Cooperative financing method facilitates MDGs objective relating to poverty
eradication
The following null hypotheses are to be tested in order to achieve the objectives of the study
• Ho: There is no significant relationship between cooperative method and poverty reduction.
• H2: There is no significant difference between the effect of the lending policies of cooperative
societies and other credit windows available to small and medium scale enterprises.

The present section constitutes the introduction to the study while subsequent section examines the
conceptual and theoretical underpinnings as well as analyzes findings relating to the study. The last section
of the study is devoted to summary, conclusion and making recommendation as related to findings.

20

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

2.0 Literature and Theoretical Framework

Cooperative movements are among the largest organized segments of civil society, and they play
crucial roles across a wide spectrum of human aspiration and needs. Cooperatives provide vital health,
housing and banking services; they promote education and gender equality as well as protect the
environment and workers’ rights.

The U.S.A Cooperative Business Survey Report (2005) revealed that the economic impact of U.S –based
cooperative businesses is significant, reflecting the ubiquity of co-operatives, the large number of
Americans who are their owners or customers, and the role they play in generating business activity,
including jobs and economic growth. For the six key sectors that are the focus of this report, agriculture,
credit unions, farm credit, electric utilities, grocery and housing, the data are impressive. From the report,
there are 21,367 cooperatives in the six sectors. These cooperatives have more than 127.5million members.
Cooperatives in these six sectors employ considerably more than 500,000 Americans, with aggregate
payrolls of more than $15 billion annually. These cooperatives generate total annual revenues in excess of
$211.9million. Among individual sectors Agriculture co-operative for instance has a gross business
volume of more than $111 billion per year and 2.8 million members. The Farm Credit System has
approximately $125 billion in assets and $96 billion in outstanding-loans.

Kevin, Louis and Mark (2000) using a seven-nation (Australia, Finland, Greece, Indonesia, Mexico,
Norway, and Sweden) sample, found that entrepreneurs from feminine, collective, and uncertainty-avoiding
societies have a greater appreciation for the strategic importance of cooperative strategies than their
counterparts. Moreover, entrepreneurs from feminine societies place greater emphasis on partner
commonality in terms of objectives and values to ensure cooperative success, whereas those from
individualistic societies emphasize contractual safeguards.

According to Narayan and Petesch (2009) co-operatives are in many countries playing significant social
and economic parts in national economics, thus ensuring not only personal development a reality, but
contributing to the well-being of the entire population at the national level. Co-operatives have
significantly contributed to economic growth throughout the world. Furthermore, the United Nations
estimated in 1994 that the livelihood of nearly 3 billion people, or half of the world’s population, was made
secured by co-operative enterprises. Nearly 800 million individuals are members of cooperatives today,
compared with about 184 million in 1960. They account for an estimated 100 million jobs and are
economically significant in a large number of countries providing foodstuffs, housing, financing and a wide
variety of consumer services as put by International Labour Conference, Report (2001)

The major emphasis in Cooperative according to Akinwunmi, (2006) is oneself-help, thus people cooperate
because they realize that it is extremely difficult to achieve some goals by doing it alone. Asaolu (2004)
also argued that the cooperative society is potentially an important instrument of social transformation,
especially in the rural areas as they have proved to be useful in achieving increasing domestic production of
food, industrial raw materials, manufactured products and equitable distribution of farm inputs, farm
products and other commodities that are central to MDGs. This paper believes that Cooperative financing
are the most practical tools to adopt to meet the needs of the people in all spheres of development.

2.1 The Millennium Development Goals

21

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

To tackle the complex phenomenon of poverty among others, in the year 2000, the United nations agencies
collectively identified a concise set of eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) such as to eradicate
extreme poverty and hunger, achieve universal primary education; promote gender equality and empower
women; reduce child mortality;improve maternal health; combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases;
ensure environmental sustainability; and develop a Global Partnership for Development. These objectives
have become important tools for Cooperation in support of national polices to reduce and eliminate
poverty, as regard the target of halving extreme poverty by 2015. Unfortunately, the task is huge
and poverty is gaining ground. It is generally questioned whether financially sustainable microfinance
operations reach the “near poor” and the “upper poor” as posited by Yunus (2008) The answer to this key
question has profound implications for the relevance of microfinance to the global achievement of the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015 which encapsulate seven key agenda as noted above.

2.2 Concept of Poverty

Poverty according to Townsend Cited in IPC (2006) is basically a condition of deprivation experienced by
human beings characterized by a situation whereby resources of individual or families are inadequate to
provide socially acceptable standard of living. A poor person is believed to typify someone who does not
have enough to eat, vulnerable to high mortality rate; (low life expectance) low educational opportunities
exposed to poor drinking water; inadequate health care, unfit housing and lacks active participation in
decision making process within his/her environment. Oyeasnmi etal (2010).

Poverty from a national perspective is a reflection of glaring defect within an economy as evidenced in
mass penury, pauperization of the working class, mass unemployment and poor welfare service. The
Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN)/ World Bank 1999 described poverty as a vicious circle, that manifest in of
underdevelopment which keeps the poor in a state of destitution until the circle is broken (CBN 1999).

The level of income, access to credit as well as purchasing power are often combined with selected social
indicators including access to health care delivery, education and basic infrastructure, to determine or
measure extent of poverty. Previous literatures have identified specific benchmarks to measure poverty
level including Sen index, PX weighted measurement, Human Development Index, Food Security Index
(FSI) Integrated Poverty Index (IPI), Basic needs Index (BNI) Relative Welfare Index (RWI), the Physical
Quality of Life Index (PQLI) and the Sustainable Fisheries Livelihood Approach (SFLA); World Bank
(1996) Oyesanmi et al (2010) and UNDP (2006) All these studies study however limit themselves to
accessibility of credit for undertaking sustainable venture as a measure poverty reduction. The extent of
success attained by a given poverty alleviation medium has not be given the level of attention it deserves
especially as it relates to its efficacy.

2.3 Nigerian Cooperative Development Policy: Highlights and Problems

The Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (2002) issued a policy on cooperative
development in August 2002 to facilitate economic development in Nigeria. The policy takes cooperatives
as unique organization with both social and economic objectives, uphold the principles of cooperatives as
adopted by ICA, 1995 and adopt cooperatives as a vehicle for national development. The policy reviewed
the performance of cooperative sector since the inception of formal cooperation in Nigeria in 1935.

Highlights of the performance of the cooperative sector to date include among others:

22

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

• Development of export crops production in quality and quantity leading the way to foreign
exchange earnings from cocoa, palm produce, groundnuts, cotton, rubber etc.
• Minimization of exploitation of producers by middlemen and traders.
• Development of indigenous banking which favorably compete with foreign banks and break their
monopoly in financial intermediation. We have cooperative bank (now Skye Bank, Nigerian
Agricultural Credit, Cooperative Rural Development Bank (NACRDB ) etc.
• Mobilization of enormous financial resources from small cooperative savers thus creating thrift
and credit systems that have helped millions of small scale industrialist to establish businesses and
become house owners.

3.0 Methodology

The research techniques adopted in this study was basically designed to achieve the stated objective.
Survey research design was chosen with complementary application of secondary data given the nature of
the sampled elements and the variables that are being studied without making any attempt to control or
manipulate them. .Data were collected from a sample of cooperative stakeholders in Oyo state to determine
the relationship between Cooperative method and MGD relating to poverty reduction in Nigeria. The
independent variable is Cooperative financing method while the dependent variable is the poverty
reduction. Relationship between cooperative financing and poverty reduction was premised on the extent to
which selected (sample) members of the cooperative societies apply their financial assistance to run small
and Medium scale enterprises (SME). In order to test the extent to which cooperative financing has
aided participating SME owners descriptive statistics and analysis of regression statistics were employed
using, the following model/ equation:

Y = α+ β1X1+ β2X2+ β3X3+ β4X4+Ei

Where Y= The dependent variables i.e periodic earnings of participating SME owners.

α= Is the intercept of the regression line which means the earnings of the SME owners when all
others factors

affecting operations are held constant.

β1 = The slope of the regression line when only variable X1 (Capital base) is changed with all
other variables held constant.

β2 = The slope of the regression line when only variable X2 (working capital) is changed with
other variables held constant.

β3 =The slope of the regression when only variable X3 (Cooperative loan) is changed with all other
variables held constant.

β4 =The slope of the regression line when only variable X4 (other financing sources) is changed
with all other variables held constant and /ei= stochastic error term.

The study area was restricted to ten-major cities and towns in Oyo State Nigeria. The cities and towns
which were randomly selected out of many cities and towns that made up the thirty-three local government
area of Oyo State include Ibadan; Ogbomoso, Shaki, Iseyin Oyo, Lanlate, Igbo-Ora, Igboho, Fiditi and
Moniya. The choice of Oyo-State was informed by the prevalence of cooperative activities as a means for

23

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

generating self-help financing among artisans; farmers, civil-servants, traders and small scale business-
owners in these areas. For effective coverage and cost minimization a random sampling technique was
used to select a total of twenty-five cooperative societies while a purposive sampling technique was
adopted in selecting five respondents from each society.

Administered questionnaire is designed to solicit respondents’ opinion on the perceived potential benefits
of cooperative financing as tools for economic empowerment, comparative access to micro-credit between
cooperative window and other conventional financing sources; and its effectiveness as a means for poverty
reduction.

The return rate for completed questionnaire was 83 percent as we were able to get back 104 usable
questionnaire out of 125 personally administered to our respondents which were employed for final
analysis in this study.

Data collected from the questionnaire were analyzed, summarized, and interpreted accordingly with the aid
of descriptive statistical technique using simple percentages. A non-parametric statistical test; Chi-square
was used to test the formulated hypothesis. Symbolic representation of chi-square is given below:

X2 = ∑(fo-fe)2

Where X2 = The output of the Chi-square

Fo = Frequency observed

Fe= Frequency Expected

The test adopted 95 confidence level where the degree of Freedom is determined using (r-1)(c-1) with r=
row total, c= column total and level of significance = 0.01, Critical region= X2t(0.01,(r-1)(c-1), The basis
for rejection or acceptance of null and alternate hypothesis is as follows, If X2t >X2 while X2c represent
Chi-square calculated Accept Ho, otherwise when X2c>X2t reject Ho, X2t represents chi-square tabulated.

The trends patterns and relationship among data were identified and interpreted.

4.0 Result and Discussions

The study examines the impact of cooperative financing on MDG of poverty alleviation and investigates
the extent such cooperative strategy has been able to influence poverty level. Special statistical package
such as the SPSS was employed using the regression analysis to run an ordinary least square of study
variables. Furthermore a non-parametric statistical test, that is the chi-square was also used to test
formulated hypothesis. Findings from the three objectives and research questions are presented below:

4.1 Relationship Between cooperative societies and poverty alleviation in the study area:

The coefficients of the regression equation from the analysis of the study variables are presented in
tables 4.0 and 4.1

Table 4.0 Coefficient of the regression equation

24

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

Variables Coefficients Error t-stat P-value
Capital Base(X1) 1.076 0.123 8.771 4.22E-15
Working Capital (X2) 0.284 0.302 0.942 0.348
Cooperative financing (X3) 0.793 0.094 8.476 2.33E-14
Other financing (X4) 0.309 0.111 2.784 0.006

From the result generated above; the initial regression coefficient equation now reduces the study
regression equation to:

Yi= 42064.98 + 1.076X1 + 0.284X2+0.793X3+ 0.309X4.

In particular cooperative financing (X3) has the highest positive coefficient of 0.793 out of the three
operational financing sources namely, working capital; cooperative finance and other financing.

A test of significance formulated to predict the participants earnings adopts the ANOVA-test and found out
the following:

Table 4.1 ANOVA scores on the Regression Equation.

Df Sum of squares Means square F
Regression 4 1.83E+12 4.57E+11 1508.477
Residual 146 `4.43E+10 3.03E+08
Total 150 1.87E+12

From the table 4.1 it is evident that F-cal (1508.77) is significantly higher than F-tab (5.1785), hence we
reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis which states that there is a significant
difference between the earnings of sampled SME using cooperative financing and those who do not

4.2 Results of the questionnaire administered are presented in tables 4.2 and 4.3

25

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

Table 4.2

Perception of Cooperatives Potential Benefits

AGREED UNDECIDED DISAGREED
Economic empowerment through
cooperative financing method 40 49 06 07 02
38.46% 47.12% 5.77% 6.73% 1.92%

Cooperative as major providers of 36 52 03 08 05
fund to poor and small business 34.61% 50.0% 2.88% 7.69% 4.81%
Cooperative as widely spread 32 48 08 12 04
30.76% 46.15% 7.65% 11.54% 3.855%
Preference for cooperative loan by the 25 44 11 08 16
poor 24.04% 42.31% 10.57% 7.69% 15.38%
Convenient credit access in 28 51 06 05 14
cooperative as compared to bank loans 26.92% 49.04% 5.77% 6.25% 13.46%
Source: Field Survey 2011

From the table above it can be seen that 85.58% agreed in the economic empowerment capacity of
cooperative, 8.65% disagreed while 5.77% were neutral, showing that cooperative method has capacity for
economic empowerment, 84.61% agreed that cooperative is a major provider of fund to the poor and small
business while 12.5% disagreed and 2.88% were neutral indicating the significance of cooperatives as
major provider of capital for the poor and low income group. 60.6% attested to the widespread acceptance
of cooperative finance, 79.055 saw cooperative as a widely spread MFIs, 15.39% disagreed while 7.65%
were neutral supporting that cooperatives are common financing tools 66.36% of the poor preferred
cooperative loan to bank, 23.07% disagreed while 10.57% were neutral an indication that cooperatives loan
is often preferred by the poor than banks-credit 75.96% agreed to the convenience as regard to access to
credit in cooperative, 19.71% disagreed while 5.77% were neutral which proves that cooperative method
provides convenient access to micro credit, findings from the responses to the questionnaire indicate to a
large extent the positive perception of potential benefits that the poor and low income derive from
cooperative credit window. This findings also buttressed significance of cooperative financing as tools for
poverty alleviation.

Table 4.3

Impact of Cooperative Financing as tools for achieving MDG Poverty Reduction

Agreed Neutral Disagreed

Assessment of Cooperative 20 60 08 12 04
financing of promoting MDG 19.23% 57.69% 7.69% 11.54% 3.84%
Cooperative method as tool of 24 48 18 18 08
MDG relating to poverty 23.06% 46.15% 12.30% 12.30% 7.69%
10. Capacity of Cooperative 14 55 09 20 06
method for MDG 12.98% 53.36% 7.21% 19.23% 3.36%
Source: Field Survey 2011

26

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

From the above table, it can be seen that 76.92% agreed that cooperative method possesses power of
promoting MDG 15.34% disagreed while 7.69% were neutral, showing that Cooperative method has power
for promoting MDG. 69.21% agreed on Cooperative method as a veritable tool of achieving MDG relating
to poverty and 20.19% disagreed while 10.6% were neutral an indication that cooperatives is a veritable
tool of achieving MDG relating to poverty. 66.34% agreed on that cooperative finance that cooperatives
has the Capacity for MDG relating to poverty and reduction 25.0% disagreed while 8.65% were neutral; an
indication that cooperatives have the capacity for MDG objective of poverty reduction relating to poverty.

Test of Hypothesis

Ho1: There is no significant relationship between corporative financing and poverty reduction. The result of
the Chi-square analyzed to measure discrepancies between the observed and expected frequency as well as
the level of significance of the tested hypothesis as regard findings from tables 4.2 and 4.3 are presented
below

Table 4.3 Chi-Square

O E O-E (O-E)2 (O-E)/2/E
223 145.6 776 5990.76 41.14
345 145.6 199.4 39760.36 273.07
41 `45.6 -104.6 10941.16 75.15
62 145.6 -83.6 6988.96 48.00
57 145.66 -88.6 7849.96 53.91
728 728.0 491.27
Since X2c = 491.27 Critical region = X2 t(0.01,4)=13.2767 level of significance: 99%

Hence, X2c > X2t i.e. 491.27 > 13.2767

Statistically; findings from the above indicates that expected value is greater than observed value, with
calculated X2cal 491.27 being greater than tabulated X2tab 13.2769 thus one can conclude that the expected
value remain significant at a critical level of 99%; an indication that cooperative financing has the tendency
to reduce poverty if properly harnessed.

HYPOTHESIS ll

HO2: Cooperative financing method will not facilitate MDGs objective relating to poverty
eradication.

From the results and findings in tables 4.2 the following Chi square table was constructed to test
hypothesis ll at 99% level of significance:

27

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

Chi-Square Table

O E O-E (O-E)2 (O-E)/2/E
130 145.6 -15.5 243.36 1.67
327 145.6 181.4 32905.96 226.00
63 `45.6 -82.6 6822.76 46.86
139 145.6 -6.6 43.56 0.30
69 145.6 -76.6 5867.56 40.27
728 728.0 315.10
Findings from the table are similar to the above and indicate that we reject Ho, and accept H1 thus a
conclusion can be drawn that proper Cooperative financing method will facilitate MDGs objective relating
to poverty eradication.

5.0 Summarize, Conclusion and Recommendation

The summaries of all the findings revealed that cooperative method has economic impact and is a veritable
approach to poverty reduction in line with the earlier studies (Akinwunmi 2006, Oludimu & Fabiyi 1993).
Nigerian government is reluctant to use cooperative channel of micro credit in line with world feeling on
cooperative model. While the stakeholders perceived Cooperatives as the bank for the people providing
financial assistance to the poor. Our findings also indicate that Cooperative strategies would make positive
impact on the achievement of MDGs, because more than other financing windows the low income earners
and the poor it provides a widely spread, veritable and easily accessible credit medium in Nigeria. Apart
from the convenient access to credit afforded by the Cooperative scheme, there is no problem of location
and identification of loan beneficiaries; a factor that has constituted loan recovery problem and incidence
of non-performing loan in kindred financial institutions. However, there is the need for constant review and
updating of Cooperative policy and law to meet the world dynamics.

According to the United Nations Millennium Summit in the year 2009, an important part of the preparation
for the achievement of these World goals is to make micro credit available to over 50% of the world’s
population. The study concludes from the extensive literature review on the significance of cooperatives to
poverty eradication and concludes that it is a powerful tool for achieving MDGs. Despite the understanding
of the developmental potentials of Cooperatives evidence , government readiness to adopt the Cooperative
strategies for micro credit delivery is yet to be observed. Instead, alternative economic groups have always
been organized by the Government to deliver micro credit to the target poor.

In the light of the above, the following suggestions may be found useful:

• Government should integrate Cooperative Financing Method in its Microfinance policy and
specify the microfinance role of Cooperative movement.
• Government should include Cooperative strategies in MDGs plan so as to cater for the large
percentage of the poor and low income group that belong to Cooperatives.
• Government should adopt policies and a legal framework that support cooperatives and are
consistent with their nature and values.
• The institutional framework capable of providing rapid, simple and affordable registration
process of cooperatives should be put in place.

28

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

• To achieve the most effective polices, governments should consult cooperative and workers’
organizations when drafting or revising legislation or regulations that affect the work of
members and the capacity of co-operatives to create employment and income.

References

Akanji O.O. (2006): “ Microfinance as strategy for poverty reduction”, CBN Economic and Financial
review, 39 (4), www.cbn.ng/economicreview

Akintoye I.R and Oladejo M,O (2008): “Theory of micro enterprises. The Nigeria experience”,
International Journal of Social Sciences, University of Uyo, Akwa Ibom state Nigeria, 3 (7).

Akinwumui, J. (2006): “Road Map to re-engineering Cooperatives in Nigeria” A paper Presented at the
South West Cooperative leaders conference, organized by cooperative federation of Nigeria South West
zone at Obisesan Hall, Ibadan September 7th, 2006.

Alibi Joshua, Alabi G, Ahiawodzi (2007): “Effect of Susu – a traditional micro finance Mechanism on
the Organize and Non-organized micro and small enterprises (MSEs) in Ghana”: African Journal of
Business Management, Vol 1(8) pp 201-208, Nov. 2007. http/www.academijournals.orgs/AJBM

Anyanwu, C.M (2004):” Microfinance Institution in Nigeria: policy, practice and potentials”. Paper
Presented at the G24 Workshop on Constraints it growth in Sub-Saharan African, Pretoria, South Africa,
November, 29-30, 2004.

Aryeetey, E (1998): Information Finance prepared for private sector development background
Development paper prepared for African Development Report, 1998.

Asaolu, T. O. (2004): Evaluation of the performance of the Cooperative Investment and Credit
Societies(CICS) in financing Small-Scale Enterprises (SSEs) in Osun State, Nigeria. Central Bank
of Nigeria (2005): Micro finance policy, Regulatory and Supervisory Framework, December ‘(2005).

Basu ,A, Balvy R, Yulek M (2004),” Microfinance in Africa: experience and Lessons from IMF”. An IMF
Working paper.

CBN (1999) Study on poverty Assessment and Alleviation in Nigeria.

Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN 2009): Website; www.centralbank.org

Central Bank of Nigeria (2004): Microfinance policy, regulatory and supervisory framework, Policy
guideline, December, 2004.,2007pg 16

Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (FMARD) (2002): National Cooperative
Development policy Document, Abuja.

Hadiza, M (2005) “Micro Finance Development Funds” and the growth of micro finance Institutions”,
Nigeria Quarterly News letter of the International year of Microcredit 2005.

International Labour Conference, Report V (1): Promotion of cooperatives (2001).

29

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

International labour Office, (1960); Cooperative Management and administration Geneva.

International labour Office, (ILO) and the international Cooperative Alliance (ICA) (2004).

International Poverty Centre (2006) Poverty in Focus United Nations Development December 2006
(UNDP)

Imam, Hanva (2001) “Potential of Micro-credit” as poverty removal strategy, in Research and Policy
directions on poverty in Nigeria: centre for Gender and social policy studies OAU Ile-Ife.

Kevin, Louis, Mark (2000); Attitudes Toward Cooperative Strategies: A Cross-Cultural Analysis
ofEntrepreneurs. Journal of International Business Studies. https:/business. Highbeam.com

Micro Credit Summit Declaration and plan of Action, The world Summit on Microcredit, Washington D.C.
February, 1997.

NAPEP, (2010); National poverty Eradication Programme Report, Poverty Day, In Channel News October
2010. www.channelstv.com/busienss

Narayan, D and Petesch, P (2009): “An Empowering Approach to poverty Eradication”. Global Co-
operative Campaign against Poverty Issue.

Ojo, O (2009): Impact of Microfinance on Entrepreneurial Development: the case of Nigeria: The
International conference on Administration and Business. ICEA-FAA 2009 14-15 November 2009
The Faculty of Business and Administration University of Bucharest . http://conference.faa.ro

Oladejo, M. O & Adereti, A . S (2010): The impact of Information Technology on the Performance
of Micro fiancé Institution in Nigeria, journal of Economic Development and Managerial Studies, Vol. 1,
April 2010 edition. www.icidr.org

Oladejo, M.O. (2008): The Impact of Cooperative Societies as Micro credit Delivery Channel in the South
western Nigeria, Unpublished MSc thesis, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago Iwoye.

Olesin, Ayo (2007) “Making cooperative societies work for you”, Sunday business in Sunday Punch
Newpaper 18th February, 2007. pp7.

Olomola, A.S. (2002): Social capital, Microfinance group performance and poverty Implication Nigeria,
http://www.case .oxuk/conferences/2002-UPaGISSA/papers/olomola- case2002pdf.

Owojori, Adekunle and Oladejo, M.O. (2009):Re-Engineering Cooperative Societies For Sustainable Small
and Development, Nigeria. International Business Community Review.

Promoting Cooperatives: A Guide to ILO Recommendation 193”. Published by the Co- Operative
College for the Department of International Development, Manchester, UK,2004.

Reeves, M (2003) A wealth of opportunities in a world of limits: Free Enterprises. Economics of
Cooperation Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas; www. Dallasfed.org.

Townsend P (2006) Introduction, Compendium of best practices in poverty measurements. Expert Group
on poverty statistics (RioGroup) Rio De Jameiro September 2006

30

Vol 2, No 11, 2011

UK Department for International Development: “Things you probably didn’t know about co-ops” at
http://www. Developments.org.uk/co-op/do-you-know.htm

U.S.A Cooperative Business Survey Report (2005); The Impact of New Generation Cooperatives on Their
Communities Cooperative Business In the United States. A 2005 Snapshot Prepared by the National
Cooperative Month planning Committee October 2005, US Department of Agriculture, RBS Research
Report 177.

World Bank (1995); World Development report 1995, World Bank Washington.

World Bank (1996) Nigeria: Poverty in the midst of plenty. The challenge of Growth with inclusion. A
World Bank Poverty Assessment population and Human resources Division Report No 14733 Washing to
D.C

Yunus, Muhammed (2008): Grameen Bank, Microcredit and Millennium Development Goals;
www.grameen.com www.grameen-info.org. downloaded November 2011

BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF AUTHORS

1. DR ONAOLAPO ADEKUNLE RAHMON is a Senior Lecturer in the department of Management
and Accounting, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology (LAUTECH), Ogbomoso, Oyo state
Nigeria. He has his PhD in Management Science with specialization in Financial Management. He
is an associate member of the Chartered Institute of Bankers of Nigeria (CIBN). His research
interests include Banking, finance, Investment and development-economics.
2. MR OLADEJO MORUFU OLADEHINDE is currently a lecturer 1 in the department of
Management and Accounting, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology (LAUTECH),
Ogbomoso, Oyo state Nigeria. He has MSc in Accounting, MBA and BSc in Accounting from
Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago Iwoye- Ogun state Nigeria. He is an associate member as well
as examiner to both the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN), and the Chartered
Institute of Taxations of Nigeria (CITN). His research interests include accounting information
system, Financial Institutions Analysis and electronic payment system.

31

International Journals Call for Paper
The IISTE, a U.S. publisher, is currently hosting the academic journals listed below. The peer review process of the following journals
usually takes LESS THAN 14 business days and IISTE usually publishes a qualified article within 30 days. Authors should
send their full paper to the following email address. More information can be found in the IISTE website : www.iiste.org

Business, Economics, Finance and Management PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
European Journal of Business and Management EJBM@iiste.org
Research Journal of Finance and Accounting RJFA@iiste.org
Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development JESD@iiste.org
Information and Knowledge Management IKM@iiste.org
Developing Country Studies DCS@iiste.org
Industrial Engineering Letters IEL@iiste.org

Physical Sciences, Mathematics and Chemistry PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Journal of Natural Sciences Research JNSR@iiste.org
Chemistry and Materials Research CMR@iiste.org
Mathematical Theory and Modeling MTM@iiste.org
Advances in Physics Theories and Applications APTA@iiste.org
Chemical and Process Engineering Research CPER@iiste.org

Engineering, Technology and Systems PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Computer Engineering and Intelligent Systems CEIS@iiste.org
Innovative Systems Design and Engineering ISDE@iiste.org
Journal of Energy Technologies and Policy JETP@iiste.org
Information and Knowledge Management IKM@iiste.org
Control Theory and Informatics CTI@iiste.org
Journal of Information Engineering and Applications JIEA@iiste.org
Industrial Engineering Letters IEL@iiste.org
Network and Complex Systems NCS@iiste.org

Environment, Civil, Materials Sciences PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Journal of Environment and Earth Science JEES@iiste.org
Civil and Environmental Research CER@iiste.org
Civil and Environmental Research CER@iiste.org

Life Science, Food and Medical Sciences PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare JBAH@iiste.org
Food Science and Quality Management FSQM@iiste.org
Chemistry and Materials Research CMR@iiste.org

Education, and other Social Sciences PAPER SUBMISSION EMAIL
Journal of Education and Practice JEP@iiste.org
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization JLPG@iiste.org Global knowledge sharing:
New Media and Mass Communication NMMC@iiste.org EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's
Journal of Energy Technologies and Policy JETP@iiste.org Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP
Historical Research Letter HRL@iiste.org Open Archives Harvester, Bielefeld
Academic Search Engine, Elektronische
Public Policy and Administration Research PPAR@iiste.org Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate,
International Affairs and Global Strategy IAGS@iiste.org OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial Library ,
Research on Humanities and Social Sciences RHSS@iiste.org NewJour, Google Scholar.

Developing Country Studies DCS@iiste.org IISTE is member of CrossRef. All journals
Arts and Design Studies ADS@iiste.org have high IC Impact Factor Values (ICV).

11.the impact of cooperative financing on millennium

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Destacado

Destacado (7)

Similar a 11.the impact of cooperative financing on millennium

Similar a 11.the impact of cooperative financing on millennium (20)

Más de Alexander Decker

Más de Alexander Decker (20)

Último

Último (20)

11.the impact of cooperative financing on millennium