Abstract
This article describes the data for examining the influence of government expenditure and revenue on Nigerian economic growth. Data were extracted from the World Bank database and Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Statistical bulletin. The data are available with this article. The data is related to the research article “Newly proposed estimator for ridge parameter: an application to the Nigerian economy” (Lukman and Arowolo, 2018) but not discussed in detail. This data article will assist economists in identifying factors that will affect the economy of a country, especially in the African region.
Keywords: Expenditure, Economic growth, Revenue, Ridge parameter
Specifications table
| Subject area | Statistics and Economics |
| More specific subject area | Ridge regression; shrinkage estimators, Econometrics |
| Type of data | Table (Excel Format) |
| How data was acquired | Secondary data obtained online from the World Bank and CBN database. |
| Data format | Raw, filtered and analyzed |
| Experimental factors | The data were analyzed using the gross domestic product as a proxy for economic growth, government expenditure disaggregated into recurrent and capital expenditure, revenue disaggregated into oil and non-oil revenue. |
| Experimental features | Data included are collected from published data online |
| Data source location | Global data |
| Data accessibility | All the data are in this article as a supplementary file. |
| Related research article | [1] Lukman AF, Arowolo OT. Newly proposed estimator for ridge parameter: an application to the Nigerian economy. Pakistan Journal of Statistics. 2018 34(2):91–98. |
Value of the data
-
•
The data will be useful for modelling purposes, especially relating to the Nigerian economic growth.
-
•
The data can be used to establish a relationship between capital expenditure, recurrent expenditure, and gross domestic product.
-
•
It can also be used to examine the impact of oil and non-oil revenue on economic growth.
1. Data
The data consists of real gross domestic product from the World Bank database. Recurrent expenditure on economic services, Recurrent expenditure on transfers, Recurrent expenditure on social and community services, capital expenditure on economic services, capital expenditure on transfers and capital expenditure on social and community services, oil and non-oil revenue from the CBN Statistical Bulletin for Nigeria covering a period of 1970 to 2013 (see Supplementary Table 1). Real GDP is expressed in current US dollars while other variables extracted from the CBN bulletin are expressed in billion nairas.
2. Experimental design
2.1. Design
The data on the gross domestic product was obtained from the World Bank׳s World Development Indicators (WDI) [5]. The data that provides detail on government expenditure and revenue were extracted from the database of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Statistical Bulletin [6]. The gross domestic product was expressed as a function of government expenditure and revenue. The regression model is defined as follows:
| (1) |
where is the gross domestic product, represent Recurrent Expenditure on Economic Services
represent Recurrent Expenditure on Social and Community Services, represent Recurrent Expenditure on Transfers, represent Capital Expenditure on Economic Services, represent Capital Expenditure on Social and Community Services, represent Capital Expenditure on Transfers, represent Oil Revenue and represent Non-oil Revenue.
2.2. Method of data analysis
The descriptive statistics are presented in Table 1 while Fig. 1 shows the trends each of the variables follow. Table 2 provided the unit root test for the data for the original form of the data and their first difference. Cointegration test of the all the variables is provided in Table 3. The long-run estimates are provided in Table 4 using ordinary least squares (OLS). Articles [1], [2], [3], [4] suggested the use of a ridge estimator as an alternative to OLS. Readers can access article [1], [2], [3], [4] for further details. The ridge regression estimate is also provided in Table 4.
Table 1.
Descriptive statistics of government expenditure, revenue and economic growth data.
| Statistics | y | x1 | x2 | x3 | x4 | x5 | x6 | x7 | x8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 6.295 | 2.416 | 2.995 | 4.482 | 2.464 | 3.639 | 2.859 | 5.198 | 4.685 |
| Median | 5.900 | 2.248 | 3.079 | 4.487 | 2.534 | 4.742 | 3.199 | 5.124 | 5.483 |
| Maximum | 8.078 | 6.333 | 6.738 | 7.274 | 6.422 | 6.226 | 6.727 | 8.213 | 7.050 |
| Minimum | 5.035 | −1.772 | −1.238 | 1.221 | −1.437 | −0.421 | −4.483 | 1.558 | 1.411 |
| Std.dev | 0.868 | 2.662 | 2.749 | 1.995 | 2.106 | 2.325 | 2.171 | 2.272 | 1.971 |
| Skewness | 0.771 | −0.172 | −0.264 | −0.281 | −0.034 | −0.430 | −1.142 | −0.236 | −0.429 |
| Kurtosis | 2.431 | 1.669 | 1.694 | 1.721 | 1.746 | 1.506 | 5.275 | 1.687 | 1.628 |
| Jarque–Bera(P-value) | 3.825 (0.148) | 2.679 (0.262) | 2.809 (0.245) | 2.762 (0.251) | 2.233 (0.327) | 4.208 (0.122) | 14.294 (0.000) | 2.759 (0.252) | 3.710 (0.156) |
Fig. 1.
Time series plot of the dataset.
Table 2.
Unit root test of the dataset.
| Variable | Statistics | Intercept | Intercept and trend |
|---|---|---|---|
| Value | 0.4291 | −2.3519 | |
| P-value | (0.9813) | (0.3963) | |
| Value | −5.3024 | −6.6646 | |
| P-value | (0.0001) | (0.0000) | |
| Value | −1.1737 | −2.5399 | |
| P-value | (0.6739) | (0.3083) | |
| Value | −6.8465 | −6.8692 | |
| P-value | (0.0000) | (0.0000) | |
| Value | −1.4312 | −3.5514 | |
| P-value | (0.5533) | (0.0502) | |
| Value | −4.6616 | −4.8760 | |
| P-value | (0.0009) | (0.0026) | |
| Value | −1.2654 | −1.6835 | |
| P-value | (0.6336) | (0.7360) | |
| Value | −7.1575 | −7.2801 | |
| P-value | (0.0000) | (0.0000) | |
| Value | −0.1080 | −4.4655 | |
| P-value | (0.9404) | (0.0061) | |
| Value | −8.3017 | −8.3030 | |
| P-value | (0.0000) | (0.0000) | |
| Value | −0.9523 | −1.5575 | |
| P-value | (0.7583) | (0.7880) | |
| Value | −5.9018 | −5.8174 | |
| P-value | (0.0000) | (0.0000) | |
| Value | −4.1788 | −2.3917 | |
| P-value | (0.0027) | (0.3752) | |
| Value | −4.9088 | −4.8914 | |
| P-value | (0.0006) | (0.0032) | |
| Value | −1.2166 | −1.8630 | |
| P-value | (0.6549) | (0.6507) | |
| Value | −7.8282 | −7.9323 | |
| P-value | (0.0000) | (0.0000) | |
| Value | −1.0269 | −1.0042 | |
| P-value | (0.7320) | (0.9297) | |
| Value | −5.7478 | −5.7949 | |
| P-value | (0.0000) | (0.0000) |
Table 3.
Cointegration test of the dataset.
| Hypothesized No. of CE(s) | Eigenvalue | Trace statistic | 0.05 Critical value | Prob.** |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| None* | 0.961076 | 345.9040 | 197.3709 | 0.0000 |
| Atmost 1* | 0.918395 | 251.7656 | 159.5297 | 0.0000 |
| Atmost 2* | 0.859054 | 179.0955 | 125.6154 | 0.0000 |
| Atmost 3* | 0.795576 | 122.2736 | 95.75366 | 0.0002 |
| Atmost 4* | 0.622168 | 76.23442 | 69.81889 | 0.0140 |
| Atmost 5* | 0.572335 | 48.00854 | 47.85613 | 0.0484 |
| Atmost 6* | 0.412339 | 23.37552 | 29.79707 | 0.2281 |
| Atmost 7* | 0.226481 | 7.958979 | 15.49471 | 0.4698 |
| Atmost 8* | 0.017488 | 0.511646 | 3.841466 | 0.4744 |
Significance at 10%.
Significance at 5%.
Table 4.
Long Run Estimates of government expenditure and revenue on economic growth.
|
Ordinary least squares estimator |
Ridge estimator |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regressors | Coefficient | Std.error | t-stat | VIF | Regressors | Coefficient |
| const | 4.185 | 2.03318 | 2.058 | const | 7.5728 | |
| −0.411 | 0.371829 | −1.104* | 98.101 | 0.4938 | ||
| −0.203 | 0.315069 | −0.6454 | 74.622 | −0.3482 | ||
| −1.073 | 0.758466 | −1.415 | 230.034 | 0.829 | ||
| 0.519 | 0.205811 | 2.523** | 18.863 | 0.293 | ||
| 0.054 | 0.261852 | 0.2069 | 36.848 | 0.138 | ||
| 0.037 | 0.0799120 | 0.4606 | 2.953 | −0.044 | ||
| 1.991 | 1.21072 | 1.645 | 757.146 | −1.455 | ||
| −0.724 | 0.479498 | −1.510 | 89.515 | 0.139 | ||
| Jarque−Bera test of normality | 1.260 (0.5327) | k | 0.0033 | |||
Significance at 10%.
Significance at 5%.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledged the following institution (World Bank and CBN database) that made these data available. Also, appreciate Landmark University for financial support and provision of enabling working environment.
Footnotes
Transparency data associated with this article can be found in the online version at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.08.191.
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found in the online version at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.08.191.
Contributor Information
Adewale F. Lukman, Email: adewale.folaranmi@lmu.edu.ng.
Matthew O. Oluwayemi, Email: oluwayemi.matthew@lmu.edu.ng.
Transparency document. Supplementary material
Supplementary material
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary material
References
- 1.Lukman A.F., Arowolo O.T. Newly proposed estimator for ridge parameter: an application to the Nigerian economy. Pak. J. Stat. 2018;34(2):91–98. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Lukman A.F., Ayinde K. Some improved classification-based ridge parameter of Hoerl and Kennard estimation techniques. Istat. J. Turk. Stat. Assoc. 2016;9(3):93–106. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Lukman A.F., Ayinde K., Ajiboye S.A. Monte-carlo study of some classification-based ridge parameter estimators. J. Mod. Appl. Stat. Methods. 2017;16(1):428–451. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Lukman A., Ayinde K. Review and classifications of the ridge parameter estimation techniques. Hacet. J. Math. Stat. 2015;46(5):953–967. [Google Scholar]
- 5.World Bank, World development indicators, 2015.
- 6.Central Bank of Nigeria statistical bulletin, 2015.
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Supplementary material
Supplementary material

