ATTENTION:
BEFORE YOU READ THE CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW,
PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL
PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE
COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953,
08168759420
impact of government
expenditure
on economic growth in nigeria
(1970 – 2010)
ABSTRACT
The objective of this study is to analyze the
impact of government expenditure on economic growth in Nigeria. Because of the
complex link between governments spending and economic growth, both descriptive
and econometric analyses are used in the study. The descriptive analysis of the
study explores the relationship between government spending and economic growth
in Nigeria over the period of the study.
The study also observes that from early 1970s, oil revenue became the
major source of revenue earnings for the government, and government expenditure
fluctuates in response to fluctuations in crude oil earnings.
Government expenditure and economic growth
also fluctuate in line with the earnings from crude oil. The study uses
econometric analysis to examine the impact of the various components of
government expenditure (consumption expenditure, government investment,
government investment on human capital) including other control variables like
capital stock, labour force, and private investment from 1970 – 2010 using
vector error correction (VEC) model of regression analysis. The results show
that consumption expenditure depresses economic growth while government
investment and private investment t stimulate economic growth. While the
remaining three variables (government investment in human capital, capital
stock and labour force exert insignificant impact on economic growth. The
results show that the coefficients of GIt-1 and GIt-2 are
4.317 and 6.125, respectively and that of private investment (PIt-1
and Pit-2) are 5.224 and 4.219. The goodness of fit, indicated by
adjusted R-Square is over 91 percent, while F-statistic is 22.86. The study recommends that government
investment spending should be judged based on social cost and benefit; that
public investment should be made to enhance private investment activities; and
that competent and qualified personnel should be attracted into the public
service for effective and efficient execution of government development
programmes.
KEYWORDS: GOVERNMENT
EXPENDITURE, ECONOMIC GROWTH
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Title Page i
Approval iii
Certification iv
Dedication v
Acknowledgement vi
Abstract vii
Table of Contents viii
List of Tables ix
List of Figures ix
CHAPTER ONE
1.1
Background to
the Study 1
1.2
Statement of
the Problem 3
1.3
Research
Questions 6
1.4
Statement of
Research Objectives 6
1.5
Significance
of the Study 7
1.6
Statement of
Research Hypothesis 10
1.7
Scope and
Limitations of the Study 11
1.8 Definition of Terms 13
CHAPTER two
2.0 Introduction 18
2.1 Theories of Economic Growth 19
2.1.1 Factors
Determining Economic Growth 19
2.1.2 Patterns
of Growth 29
2.2 The Nature and Constituents of Government
Expenditure 32
2.3 Public Expenditure Growth 38
2.4
The Impact
of Government Spending on Economic Growth 45
2.5.1 Government
Spending and Economic Growth in Nigeria 54
2.5.2 Trends
in Total Government Expenditure
and GDP in Nigeria 56
2.6 Structure
of Government Expenditure 69
2.7 Functional Sectorial Classification 76
2.8 Empirical
Literature 83
2.9 Theoretical
Framework 99
CHAPTER THREE
3.1 Research
Design 105
3.2 Model
Specification 105
3.3 Estimation
Procedure 107
3.4 Data
Discussions 118
3.5 Sources
of Data 120
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 PRESENTATION OF RESULTS AND
ANALYSIS
4.1 PRESENTATION
OF RESULTS
4.2 INTERPRETATION
OF RESULTS
4.3 TEST
OF HYPOTHESIS
4.3.1 EXPLANATION
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
5.0 INTRODUCTION
5.1 DISCUSSION
OF RESULTS
CHAPTER SIX
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.0 INTRODUCTION
6.1 SUMMARY
OF MAJOR FINDINGS
6.2 CONCLUSIONS
6.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
6.4 AREA
FOR FURTHER STUDIES
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
LIST OF TABLES
2.5.1 EXPENDITURE
AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDP - - 59
AND GDP
ANNUAL GROWTH RATE
2.5.2 FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT SOURCES OF - - - 61
REVENUE (OIL
AND NON-OIL REVENUE)
2.6.1 GOVERNMENT
RECURRENT AND CAPITAL - - 71
EXPENDITURES
AS PERCENTAGES OF TOTAL
2.6.2 GOVERNMENT
RECURRENT AND CAPITAL - - 72
EXPENDITURES
AS PERCENTAGE OF GDP
2.7.1 FUNCTIONAL
DISTRIBUTION OF GOVERNMENT - - 77
EXPENDITURE
4.1 UNIT
ROOT TEST - - - - - - - 106
4.2 COINTEGRATION
TEST - - - - - - 108
4.3 VECTOR
ERROR CORRECTION MODEL (VECM),
USING NGDP
AS A DEPENDENT VARIABLE - -
109
LIST OF FIGURES
2.5.1 TREND
IN NOMINAL GDP AND TOTAL - - - 57
GOVERNMENT
EXPENDITURE
CHAPTER ONE
1.1 Background to
the Study
The relationship between
government expenditure and economic growth has continued series of debate among
scholars. Keynes (1936) argues that the solution to economic depression is to
induce the firms to invest through some combination of reduction in interest
rates and government capital investment including infrastructure.
This claim that
increasing government expenditure promotes economic growth is not supported by
all scholars. A number of prominent authors especially of the neoclassical
school argue that increased government expenditure may slow down the aggregate
performance of the economy because in an attempt to finance raising
expenditure, government may have to increase taxes and or borrowing. The higher
income tax may discourage or may be a disincentive to additional work which in
turn may reduce income and aggregate demand. In the same manner, high corporate
tax leads to increase in production costs and reduce profitability of firms and
their capital to incur investment expenditure.
On the other hand, increased government borrowing (from the banks)
required to finance its expenditure may compete and crowds-out private sector
and this reduce private investment in the economy. Sachs (2006) argues that
among the developed countries, those with high rates of taxation and high
social welfare spending perform better on most measures of economic performance
compared with countries with low tax low rates of taxation and low social
services spending. Hayek (1989) however countered this argument saying that
high levels of government spending in addition to harming, does not, through
social welfare engendered fairness, economic equality and international
competitiveness. This argument is in line with Sudha (2007) who points out that
countries with large public sectors have grown slowly. Thus, there is no
general consensus among scholar on the impact of increasing government
expenditure on economic growth.
According to the Revenue
Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission – RMFC (2011) the federal
government of Nigeria spends 52.2% of total government revenues. The remaining
revenues are shared among the Federating States and Local Government Areas
(LGAs) on the basis of detailed sharing formula.
The level of increase of
government revenue from oil revenue and non-oil revenues including borrowing
from internal and external sources has significantly affected the level of
government expenditure in Nigeria over the years under review. For instance,
the total recurrent expenditure increased from ₦716.1 million in 1970 to ₦4.8
billion naira in 1980 and further to ₦3.3 trillion in 2010. The government
capital expenditure rose from ₦187.8 million in 1970 to ₦10.163 billion in 1980
and further to ₦1.76 trillion in 2010 (CBN, 2010, 2012).
The Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) per capita of Nigeria expanded by 132% between 1960 and 1969 and
rose to a peak growth of 283% between 1970 and 1979 (National Bureau of
Statistics – NBS, 2010). The high levels of inflation and unemployment rates
resulted in fiscal imbalance between 1979 and 1983 with negative consequences
on balance of payment. The level of increase in external loans further
accelerated the debt over-hand situation and other problems. The problems were
so severe that restructuring of the economy was inevitable. As a result, a
comprehensive economic reform programme was introduced in 1986. In the period
between 1988 and 1997 – a period of structural adjustment and economic
liberalization, the GDP responded to economic adjustment policies and grew at a
positive rate of 4% (Onakaya et al, 2013). The real GDP growth shows that on
aggregate basis, when measured by the Real Gross Domestic Product (RGDP) grew
by 7.8% in 2010 (NBS, 2010; CBN, 1980, 2010, 2012).
The mismatch between the
performance of the Nigerian economy and massive increase in government total
expenditure over the years raises a critical question on its role in promoting
economic growth and development. Some authors contend that the link between
public expenditure and economic growth is weak while others report varying
degree of causality relationship in Nigeria (Onokaya et al, 2012). The question
which arises therefore is what is the relative contribution of capital
expenditure and recurrent expenditure on economic growth in Nigeria? This
thesis aims at investigating the impact of government expenditure (recurrent
expenditure and capital expenditure) on economic growth in Nigeria from 1970 –
2012.
1.2 Statement of
the Problem
The relationship between
government expenditure and economic growth has continued to generate series of
debate among scholars. Government performs two functions – protection (and
security) and provision of certain public goods (Abdullahi, 2000; Yousif, 2000;
Nurudeen and Usman, 2008). Protection function consists of the creation of rule
of law and enforcement of property rights. This helps to minimize risks to criminality,
protect life and property and the nation from external aggression, defense,
roads, education, health, power and communication to mention but a few.
Some scholars argue that
increase in government expenditure on socio-economic and physical structures
encourages economic growth. For example, government expenditure on health and
education raises the productivity of labour and increase the growth of national
output. Similarly, expenditure on infrastructure such as roads, communications,
power etc reduces production costs, increases private sector investment and
profitability of firms, thus fostering economic growth. Supporting this view,
scholars such as Keynes (1936), Ram (1986), Barro (1990), Sachs (2006), Ranjah
and Sharma (2008), Cooray (2009) conclude that expansion of government
expenditure contributes positively to economic growth.
However, some scholars
did not support the claim that increasing government expenditure promotes
economic growth, instead they assert that high government expenditure may slow
down overall aggregate performance of the economy in that in the bid to finance
rising expenditure, government may have to increase taxes and/or borrowing. The
higher income tax may discourage or be a disincentive to individual working for
long hours or searching for additional work which in turn may reduce income and
aggregate demand. In the same way, higher corporate tax (profit tax) tends to
increase production costs and reduces the profitability of firms and their
capacity to incur investment expenditure. Moreover, if government increases
borrowing (especially from the banks) in order to finance its expenditure, it
will compete (crowds-out) away the private sector, thus reducing private
investment. It was further argued that in a bid to score cheap popularity and
ensure that they continue to remain in power, politicians and government
officials sometimes increase expenditure and investment in unproductive
projects or in goods that the private sector can produce more efficiently.
Thus, government activity sometimes produces misallocation of resources and
impedes the growth of national output. In fact, the studies by Laudau (1986),
Hayek (1989), Henrekson (2001), Mitchell (2005) and Sudha (2007) suggested that
large government expenditure has negative impact on economic growth.
In Nigeria, the
government expenditure has continued to rise due to receipts from oil revenue
(Petroleum profit tax and royalties) and non oil revenue (company income tax,
custom and excise duties, value added tax [VAT] and others) (CBN Statistical
Bulletin, 2012). And increased demand for public (utilities) goods like roads,
communication, power, education and health. Besides there is increasing need to
provide both internal and external security for the people and the nation.
Available statistics
show that total government expenditure (capital and recurrent) and its
components have continued to rise in the last few decades under review. For
instance, government recurrent expenditure increased from ₦716.1 million in
1970 to ₦4,805.2 million in 1980 and ₦3,310,343.38 million in 2010 (see
appendix 1). In the same manner, the composition of government recurrent
expenditure shows that expenditure on general administration, defense, National
Assembly, internal security, agriculture, construction, transportation and
communication, education and health increased during the period under review.
Moreover, government capital expenditure rose from ₦187.8 million in 1970 to
₦883,874.75 million in 2010 (see appendix 1). Furthermore, the various
components of capital expenditure (that is economic services, social service,
defense, agriculture, transport and communication, education and health) also
show a rising trend between 1970 – 2012.
Unfortunately, rising
government expenditure has not translated to meaningful growth and development,
as Nigeria ranks among the poorest countries of the world. In addition, many
Nigerians have continued to wallow in abject poverty, while more than 60.9% of
over 163 million population poor. The Business Day Newspaper of Tuesday 14
February, 2012 reported that the percentage of Nigerians living in abject
poverty – those who can afford only the bare essentials of food, shelter and
clothing – rose to 60.9% in 2010 as compared to 54.7% in 2004. Although the
Nigerian economy is projected to be growing, poverty is likely to get worse as
the gap between the rich and the poor continues to widen. Couple with this, is
dilapidated infrastructure (especially roads and power supply) that has led to
the collapse of many industries, including high level of unemployment.
Moreover, macroeconomic indicators like balance of payments, imports
obligations, inflation rates, exchange rate, and national savings reveal that
Nigeria has not fared well in the last couple of decades under review. Given
the issues raised above, this research seeks to examine the impact of
government expenditure on economic growth in Nigeria using GDP as dependent
variable, and recurrent expenditure, capital expenditure and other controlling
variables such as import, export, foreign direct investment to examine the impact of government
expenditure on economic growth in Nigeria from 1970 to 2012.
1.2
Research Questions
The research questions formulated to guide this study are:
i.
Does government
consumption expenditure exert any significant impact on economic growth in
Nigeria?
ii.
Has
government investments spending contributed to economic growth in Nigeria?
iii.
Has
government investment on human capital development influenced economic growth?
iv.
Does capital
stock in Nigeria impact significantly on economic in Nigeria?
v.
Has labour
force influenced economic growth in Nigeria?
vi.
Has private
investment any significant impact on economic growth in Nigeria?
1.4 Statements
of Research Objectives
Government expenditure
is a crucial instrument for economic growth at the disposal of policy makers in
a developing country like Nigeria. Current circumstances obliged the proper
allocation and efficient utilization of government expenditure as the reward is
greater likewise, the penalty for bad policy in this respect is greater than
ever before in the realm of globalization. In a nutshell, government
expenditure could adversely affect economic growth, if its allocation and
utilization are not properly addressed.
This study is aimed at
establishing empirically, the relationship between the following components of
aggregate production function and economic growth in Nigeria using Barro’s
(1990) model:
i.
The impact
of government consumption expenditure on economic growth in Nigeria.
ii.
The impact
of government investment expenditure in Nigeria.
iii.
The
influence of government investment expenditure on human capital development on
economic growth in Nigeria.
iv.
The impact
of capital stock on economic growth in Nigeria.
v.
The impact
of labour force on economic growth in Nigeria.
vi.
The impact
of private investment on economic growth in Nigeria.
1.5 Significance
of the Study
The study investigates
the impact of government expenditure on economic growth in Nigeria. Many people
have carried out studies on government expenditure and how it affects economic
growth in Nigeria. But we are trying to add a new dimension to it by breaking
down the explanatory variables into government consumption expenditure,
government investment, and government investment expenditure on human capital
development, stock of capital, Labour force and private investment. The most
closely related works are outlined below.
Nurudeen and Usman (2010) studied the impact of government expenditure
in Nigeria using data from 1977-2007 and ECM method. The variables used are
recurrent expenditure and capital expenditure on defense, agriculture,
education, transport and communication. He did not make use of aggregate
production function since labour and capital are excluded. This study
consolidates expenditures on human capital (education and health). It also
fails to aggregate the other government investment and consumption spending in
Nigeria. Usman, Mobolaji, Kilishi, Yaru and Yakubu (2011) examine the impact of
public expenditure on economic growth in Nigeria for the period of 1970-2008
using aggregate production function of Barro (1990). The study classified government
expenditure into administration, education, transport and communication. Just
like Nurudeen and Usman (2010), they did not aggregate government expenditure
on human capital. The study also did not consolidate government investment and
government consumption expenditure into separate categories.
Maku (2009) examines the link between
government spending and economic growth from 1970-2006 using Ram (1986)
production function. The study classified government expenditure into
education, health, government consumption spending and private investment. In
the course of the analysis, the study kept both education and health spending
separately but analyses them jointly as if they were consolidated. Our study is
an improvement over these studies since our study integrates both education
spending and health spending to indicate human capital development.
This study is distinct from all other studies
because it classifies government expenditure into non-productive and productive
government expenditures based on Barro (1990) classifications. The
non-productive expenditure relates to all government consumption expenditure
excluding health and education. The productive government expenditure relates
to government expenditures on human capital development and government
investment.
Secondly, the study is based on long period
of analysis from 1970-2010, which is a sufficient time frame for the analysis
of the problem of the study.
Thirdly, we believe that this study will
provoke and pave a way for further studies in the area as it reveals the
difficulty in resolving the empirical question of the impact of government
spending on growth.
Fourthly, this study incorporates the most
recent data and employs both qualitative analysis and a more advanced
econometric technique (vector error correction) model to study the impact of
government spending on economic growth. Thus the outcome of this study will
provide result and policy implication to policy makers by bridging the
aforementioned gap.
1.6 Statement of Research Hypothesis
The
hypotheses formulated to guide this study are:
i)
Government
consumption expenditure has no significant impact on economic growth in
Nigeria.
ii)
Government
investments do not impact on economic growth in Nigeria.
iii)
Government
investments on human capital development do not influence economic growth.
iv)
Capital
stock in Nigeria does not have significant impact on economic in Nigeria.
v)
Labour
forces do not contribute significantly to economic growth in Nigeria.
vi)
Private
investments do not have any significant impact on economic growth in Nigeria.
1.7 Scope
and Limitations of the Study
This study is restricted to the impact of
government expenditure on economic growth in Nigeria from 1970-2010.
One of the limitations of this study arises
from lack of agreement on the causes of economic growth. Economists are not yet
certain about the relative importance of elements which influence economic
growth. Without such knowledge, it is difficult to make a meaningful conclusion
on the impact of government expenditure on economic growth.
Another
limitation of the study is that it does not explicitly consider the quality of
government spending, which is probably the most important factor. The calibers
of the civil servants and the conditions in which they function have impact on
creative and efficient use of public resources. Unproductive public spending
can take various forms, including spending on wages and salaries of
unproductive or ghost workers. Public spending is also unproductive when
government expenditures do not reach designated spending objectives. This
happens for example when government officials are corrupt and seek bribes for
preferentially selecting beneficiaries of government programmes, for
authorizing private investment projects etc.
The
econometric result of this study is also limited by the quality of the data.
This limitation arises from the problem of inconsistency of data as reported by
different institutions and even by different departments in the same
institutions.
The limitations of this study lies in the following areas:
The data used for the study covers only the
period of 1970-2010, no matter the relevance of time series data for any period
before or after this period for this analysis, are not considered
The variables included in the study are nominal
gross domestic product (NGDP), government consumption expenditure (GCE),
government investment (GI), government investment on human capital development
(GIHC), capital stock (KAP), labour force (LAB) and private investment (PI).
NGDP is used as explained variable while GCE, GI, GIHC, KAP, LAB and PI are the
explanatory variables. No matter the relevance of other variables in explaining
the impact of government expenditure on economic growth, they are not included.
1.8 Definition
of Terms
Aggregate
demand: A schedule or curve
which shows the total quantity of goods and services, demanded at different
prices.
Aggregate
production function: this is a
function showing the maximum output of a country given a set of inputs,
assuming that these inputs are used efficiently.
Capital
expenditure: Refers to
spending on fixed assets such as roads, schools, hospitals, building, plant and
machinery etc, the benefits of which are durable and lasting for several years.
Capital
stock: Means the total value
of the fiscal capital of an economy; including inventories as well as
equipments.
Capital: Human made resources (machinery and
equipment) used to produce goods and services.
Classical
economics: The macroeconomic
generalizations accepted by most economists before the 1930s which led to the
conclusion that a capitalistic economy would employ its resources fully.
Current
expenditure: Refers to
spending on wages and salaries, supplies and services, rent, pension, interest
payment, social security payment. These are broadly considered as consumable
items, the benefits of which are consumed within each financial year.
Dependent
variable: A variable in which changes
as a con sequence of a change in some other (independent) variables.
Direct
relationship: The
relationship between variables which change in the same direction.
Economic
growth: Increase in real output
or in real output per capita.
Economic
growth: Means increase in an
economic variable, normally persisting over successive periods. The variable
concerned may be real or nominal GDP.
Economic
model: A simplified picture of
reality representing an economic situation.
Economic
policy: Course of action intended
to correct or avoid a problem.
Economic
resources: Land, labour, capital
and entrepreneur which are used in the production of goods and services.
Expanding
economy: An economy in which the
net domestic investment is greater than zero.
Fiscal policy: The use of taxation and government spending
to influence the economy.
Government
expenditure: Refers to
the expenses that government incurs for its maintenance, for the society and
the economy as a whole.
Government
expenditure: Spending by government
at any level. It consists of spending on real goods, and services purchased
from outside suppliers; spending on employment in state services such as
administration, defense and education; spending on transfer payment to
pensioners; spending on community services; spending on economic services.
Gross
Domestic Product (GDP): Refers
to the money value of goods and services produced in an economy during a period
of time irrespective of the people.
Growth
model: It is a simplified
system used to stimulate some aspects of the real economy.
Growth
rate: The proportional or
percentage rate of increase of any economic variable over a unit period,
normally a year.
Independent
variable: The variable causing a
change in another variable.
Industrially
Advanced Countries (IACs): Countries
such as the US, Canada, Germany, Japan and Nations of Western Europe which have
developed market economies based on large stocks of technologically advanced
capital goods and skilled labour force.
International
Monetary Fund (IMF): The
international association of nations which was formed after the World War II to
make loans of foreign monies to nations with temporary payment deficits and to
administer adjustable pegs.
Investment: Spending for capital goods and addition to
inventories.
Keynesian
economics: The macroeconomic
generalization which lead to the conclusion that a capitalistic economy does
not always employ resources fully.
Labour
productivity: Total
output divided by the quantity of labour employed to produce the output.
Market
failure: Refers to a label for
the view that the market does not provide panacea for all economic problems.
Market
forces: The forces of supply
and demand, which determine equilibrium quantity and price in market.
Monetarism: An alternative to Keynesianism; the
macroeconomic view that the main cause of changes in aggregate output and the
price level fluctuations is the money supply.
Neo-classical
economics: The theory that,
although unanticipated price level changes may create macroeconomic instability
in the short-run, the economy is stable at the full employment level of
domestic output in the long-run because of price and wages flexibility.
Nominal
GDP: Means GDP at current basic prices less
indirect taxes net of subsidies.
Poverty: Inability to afford an adequate standard of
consumption.
Price
level: The weighted average of
prices paid for the final goods and services produced in an economy.
Rate of
interest: Prices paid for the use
of money of for the use of capital.
Transfer
expenditures: refer to
expenditures on pension, subsidies, debt interest, disaster relief packages,
etc. transfers are seen as redistribution of resources between individuals in
the society, with the resources flowing through public sector as intermediary.
PLEASE, print the following instructions and information if you
will like to order/buy our complete written material(s).
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)
After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account
below, send the following information to
08068231953 or 08168759420
(1) Your project topics
(2) Email Address
(3) Payment Name
(4) Teller Number
We will send your material(s) immediately we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 0046579864
Bank: GTBank.
OR
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 2023350498
Bank: UBA.
HOW TO IDENTIFY SCAM/FRAUD
As a result of fraud in Nigeria, people don’t believe there are
good online businesses in Nigeria.
But on this site, we have provided “table of content and chapter
one” of all our project topics and materials in order to convince you that we
have the complete materials.
Secondly, we have provided our Bank Account on this site. Our Bank
Account contains all information about the owner of this website. For your own
security, all payment should be made in the bank.
No Fraudulent company uses Bank Account as a means of payment,
because Bank Account contains the overall information of the owner
CAUTION/WARNING
Please, DO NOT COPY any of our materials on this website
WORD-TO-WORD. These materials are to assist, direct you during your
project. Study the materials carefully and use the information in them to
develop your own new copy. Copying these materials word-to-word is CHEATING/
ILLEGAL because it affects Educational standard, and we will not be held
responsible for it. If you must copy word-to-word please do not order/buy.
That you ordered this material shows you have agreed not to copy
word-to-word.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953 or 08168759420
AFFILIATE LINKS:
myeasyproject.com.ng
easyprojectmaterials.com
easyprojectmaterials.net.ng
easyprojectsmaterials.net.ng
easyprojectsmaterial.net.ng
easyprojectmaterial.net.ng
projectmaterials.com.ng
googleprojectsng.blogspot.com
myprojectsng.blogspot.com.ng
https://projectmaterialsng.blogspot.com.ng/
Comments
Post a Comment