ABSTRACT

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1       BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Globally, the activities of banks reflect their unique roles as the engine of growth in any economy. The role which comes from both banks and non-banks financial intermediaries and the regulatory framework in stimulating economic growth is widely recognized especially in developmental economics. Uboh (2005) set the pace for the landslide of other works on the interdependent and the relationship between banks and economic growth.

Stressing further, the pioneering work of Guiley and Shaw (1956) on the relationship between real and financial developments shows that financial intermediaries, monetization and capital formation determine the path and pace of economic growth and development of any country. Nevertheless these pivotal roles have not been highly noticeable in Nigeria. The scenario arises as a result of poor performances of Nigeria commercial banks. According to Soludo (2004), “The Nigeria banking system today is fragile and marginal. The system faces enormous challenges which if not addressed urgently could snowball into a crisis in the near future”. Soludo identified the problems of the banks, especially those seen as feeble, as persistent liquidity, unprofitable operations and poor asset base.

Imala (2005) posited that the objectives of banking system are to ensure pure stability and facilitate sustainable rapid economic development. Regrettably, these objectives have remained largely unattained in Nigeria as a result of some deficiencies in the banking system. This phenomenon has necessitated continuous financial sector

2

reforms globally. In 1988, an international agreement among the banking authorities known as Basle agreement was reached. The main objective of this was to apply a common set of rules for capital adequacy in order to minimize the risk of bank failures. In compliance with the Basle agreement, the governor of Central Bank of Nigeria Professor Charles Soludo announced on July 6, 2004 that the banking sector should increase their capital base with about 100% (from initial capital base of ₦2 million to a

whopping ₦25 billion). The policy directives of this initiative according to the C.B.N Governor are ita alia.

(i)                 To strengthen the commercial banks thereby intensifying the growth of the economy.

(ii)               To encourage competition locally and internationally in conformity with the new trend of globalization.

The kernel of this argument is that with this new policy of recapitalization, banks that cannot meet the required amount will have to merge with bigger or stronger ones. Following the implementation of the policy, an unprecedented process of recapitalization has taken place in Nigerian sector shrinking the number of commercial banks from 89-25 banks. No other event is more challenging than this recapitalization policy in the history of Nigeria banking. Prior to the reformation, the state of Nigeria banking sector was very weak. It’s fragile and marginal being plagued by persistent liquidity, unprofitable operations, poor asset base and intermittent failures. It was expected that the reform should promote efficiency, better banking performance, operational stability, profitability and reduce bank failures.

3

According to Imala (2005), the current structure of the banking system has promoted tendencies towards banking effectiveness and efficiency particularly at the retail level.

1.2       STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The Nigerian banking system has undergone remarkable changes over the years, in terms of the number of institutions, ownership structure, as well as depth and breadth of operations. These changes have been influenced largely by the challenges posed by deregulation of the financial sector, globalization of operations, technological innovations and adoption of supervisory and prudential requirements that conform to international standards. As at the end of June 2004, there were 89 deposit banks operating in the country, comprising institutions of various sizes and degrees of soundness. Structurally, the sector is highly concentrated, as the ten largest banks account for about 50 percent of the industry’s total assets/liabilities. Most banks in Nigeria have a capitalisation of less than $10 million. Even the largest bank in Nigeria has a capital base of about US $240 million compared to US $526 million for the smallest bank in Malaysia. The small size of most of our banks, each with expensive headquarters, separate investment in software and hardware, heavy fixed costs and operating expenses, and with several branches in few commercial centres – lead to very high average cost for the industry. This in turn has implications for the cost of intermediation, the spread between deposit and lending rates, and puts undue pressures on banks to engage in sharp practices as means of survival.

4

Inspite of the efforts pulled together by the regulatory authorities to revitalize the institution, Nigerian banking sector continued to witness pockets of distress that led to the consolidation reform agenda.

Moreover, while copious studies and reports have provided results for pre and post consolidation exercise in Nigeria, comparatively, little has been done to provide a comprehensive assessment on how the consolidation, merger and acquisition would impact on bank services.

It is therefore, necessary to undertake a critical study of how the impact of recapitalization exercise by the Central Bank of Nigeria towards enhancing the performances of commercial banks in Nigeria can lift the economic standards of this country.

1.3       OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The set objective of this study is as follows: