EFFECT OF PRIVATIZATION AND THE PERFORMANCE OF AEFDC IN NASARAWA WEST SENATORIAL DISTRICT

Date

2022-02-02

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Abstract

This study examined the relationship between privatization and performance of AEDC with references to Nasarawa west senatorial district. The study adopted a survey design. Out of three hundred and forty-two copies of questionnaire administered, two hundred and forty-three (243) were collected and analyzed. Pairwise, a hypothesized relationship was tested using pairwise correlation that allows test of relationships between variables. The findings revealed that privatization has positive significant relationship with performance of power sector in Nasarawa West Senatorial District. Specifically, the study revealed that privatization has positive significant relationship with quality of electricity and electricity supply infrastructure in Nasarawa West Senatorial District. The study further concluded that privatization of power sector moves in the same direction with quality of electricity and electricity supply infrastructure. Based on the findings and conclusion, the study recommends that AEDC management should be working round the clock to improve on the quality of their services to ensure constant electrAdullahi icity supply in Nasarawa West Senatorial district which will in turn reduce the cost of doing business that will subsequently, lower prices of goods and services for the benefit of both Organization and customers, if it desires to improve their performance. And also Licenses and a level playing field should be open by Federal Government so others; independent power producers and other genuine investors in the power business can have access to the Nigerian power market for more competitive environment.

Description

Keywords

Privatization, Power Sector, service delivery, Abuja Electricity Distribution Company.

Citation

Akinbola, O. A., Zekeri, A. and Idowu, H. A. O. (2017): “The power sector and its impacts on industrialization of businesses in Nigeria”, Archives of Business Research, 5(12), 294-305. Aminu, I., & Peterside, Z.B., (2015). The Impact of Privatization of Power Sector in Nigeria: A Political Economy Approach. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, Vol 5 No 26. Anyebe, A.A., (2001) “Readings in Development Administration’’ Shereef Salem Press Zaria. Ayodele, A.I. (2004) “Commercialization and Privatization of Public Enterprises: The Case of Communication Sector”. A paper presented at Sectoral policy Analysis and Management course. National Centre for Economic, Management and Administration, Ibadan. Behn, R. D., (2003). Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different Measures. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 586-606. Carl O. (2015). Privatization of public enterprises in Nigeria: impact on employees’ performance and managerial implications. International Journal of Research Granthaalayah vol (2) 23-35. Ezeani, E.O (2004) Industrial Democracy in Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, Nigerian Journal of Public Administration and Local Government.Vol.6.No.1. Fredrick, M.M. (2015). Influence of methods of privatization on financial performance of firms listed in Nairobi stock exchange. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management. Vol. III, Issue 11, Licensed. Ganiyu, A. A., Adebayo, W.E., Oluwatomi, A.A, Sulaimon, O.,& Lukman, A. (2018). Analysis of power sector performance: Nigeria Asacase study. Mathematical Theory and Modeling.Vol.8, No.8. Igbokwe P.I. (2017). Privatization in Nigeria: A Re-Examination. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention. Vol.6 PP.19-30 Kayode, A. (1986) Public Enterprises and the SAP. Policy Implementation and Implication in Philips and Ndekure (eds) NISER Ibadan. Marx K. (1968) Preface to a contribution to the Critique of Political Economy in Marks and Engels, Selected Works in one Volume, London, Lawrence and Wishart. Musa, P.D (2005). Public enterprises and the challenges of privatization in Swaziland, African Journal of Public Administration and Management, 16(2): 47-87.

Collections