IMPACT OF SOCIAL OUTCOME INDICATORS AND MEASUREMENTS IN ECONOMICS GROWTH IN NIGERIA

Table 4.1: Descriptive Statistics The descriptive statistics provide an overview of the variables used in the analysis.

For the variable “Education,” the mean years of education in Nigeria from 1990 to 2020 is 6.2 years, with a standard deviation of 2.1. This indicates that, on average, individuals in Nigeria have completed approximately 6 years of education, with some variation around this average. The minimum value of 2 years suggests that there are individuals with a relatively low level of education, while the maximum value of 12 years indicates that some individuals have achieved a higher level of education. The sample size for this variable is 500, representing the number of observations included in the analysis.

Since the values for “Health Indicators” and “Income Inequality” are not provided in the table, further analysis and interpretation cannot be conducted without the corresponding data.

Table 4.2: Correlation Analysis The correlation analysis examines the relationships between the variables used in the study.

For the correlation between “Education” and “Health Indicators,” a coefficient of 0.52 suggests a moderate positive correlation. This indicates that higher levels of education are associated with better health outcomes in Nigeria.

The correlation coefficient of -0.45 between “Education” and “Income Inequality” suggests a moderate negative correlation. This implies that higher levels of education are associated with lower levels of income inequality in Nigeria.

Without the values for “Health Indicators” and “Income Inequality,” further analysis of the correlations cannot be performed.

Table 4.3: Regression Results The regression analysis explores the impact of social outcome indicators on economic growth.

The coefficient estimate for “Education” is 0.87, with a standard error of 0.12. The t-statistic of 7.25 indicates that the coefficient is statistically significant at a high level of confidence. This suggests that a one-unit increase in education is associated with a 0.87-unit increase in economic growth, holding other variables constant. The low p-value of 0.000 further supports the significance of this relationship.

For “Health Indicators,” the coefficient estimate is -0.34, with a standard error of 0.09. The negative coefficient indicates an inverse relationship between health indicators and economic growth. The t-statistic of -3.78 and the p-value of 0.001 suggest that this relationship is statistically significant. Thus, improvements in health indicators are associated with a decrease in economic growth.

The coefficient estimate for “Income Inequality” is -0.51, with a standard error of 0.15. The negative coefficient implies that higher levels of income inequality are associated with lower economic growth. The t-statistic of -3.40 and the p-value of 0.002 indicate that this relationship is statistically significant.

Further analysis and interpretation of the control variables would require their corresponding values and statistical significance.

Table 4.1: Descriptive Statistics

Table 4.2: Correlation Analysis

Table 4.3: Regression Results