Project Reports

July 23, 2012

Policy Simulation Of Measles Immunization Programs For Children In Borno State

Despite the efforts made by the Nigerian government, policy makers and other stakeholder to increase children vaccination against infections, measles vaccination coverage remains very low. While this problem is more profound in the northern part of Nigeria, its present form in Borno State even requires urgent attention. This study is an attempt to expose the issue. It conducts […]

Download Label
March 13, 2018 - 4:00 am
application/pdf
549.52 kB
v.1.7 (stable)
Read →

Despite the efforts made by the Nigerian government, policy makers and other stakeholder to increase children vaccination against infections, measles vaccination coverage remains very low. While this problem is more profound in the northern part of Nigeria, its present form in Borno State even requires urgent attention. This study is an attempt to expose the issue. It conducts a policy simulation exercise on two measles immunization programs for children of age 9-23 months free immunization against measles with media awareness campaign (PolicyA) and free immunization against measles with house to house campaign (Policy B) to boost children measles immunization coverage. The study estimates the relative cost and the effectiveness measure such as the health benefits morbidity avoided and mortality averted. In what follows, it compares the cost per child covered and the cost-effectiveness ratios of the policy alternatives. The cost per child indicates that policy A has a lower cost and lower level of coverage, while policy B has a higher cost and a higher level of immunization coverage. In terms of cost of treating measles and the value of statistical life (VSL), the results of the cost effectiveness analysis show that both policies are efficient. However, policy A has a lower cost effectiveness ratio than policy B.




Related

 

Portfolio Diversification Between Developed And Less Developed Economies

This study examines the hedging effectiveness of portfolio investment diversification between developed and developing economies; with focus on the Nigerian stock asset vis--vis the stock assets of the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK). Its main contribution is in the analysis of optimal portfolio diversification using optimal portfolio weight (OPW) and optimal hedging ratio (OHR). Empirical findings show that the OPW and OHR are low, which indicates impressive potential gains from combining Nigerian stock assets in an investment portfolio with US and UK stock assets. In addition, exchange rate volatility is found to pose stern limitation on the potential benefits of this portfolio diversification arrangement. It is therefore recommended that the monetary authority in Nigeria should pursue policies towards reducing exchange rate volatility to the barest minimum. This will possibly attract more investors from developed economies who might be willing to combine Nigerian stock in their investment portfolio to minimize portfolio risk.

Nigeria Economic Update (Issue 16)

Recently released World Economic Outlook by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects economic activities to increase significantly in developing countries- especially Nigeria. Annual real output is expected to grow by 0.8 percent in 2017 from the contraction of 1.5 percent in 20161. Improvement in economic activities is hinged on prospective favorable effects of continued increase in commodity export price (Crude oil is expected to increase to $55 per barrel in 2017 compared to $46 in 2016).

Nigeria Economic Update (Issue 45)

Recently released report by Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI)shows a significant decline in revenue allocation across the three tiers of government for 2016H1 (January to June). Specifically, total disbursements dropped (year-on-year) by 30.45 percent to N2.01 trillion in 2016H1. The drop in revenue allocations is accountable to the decline in both oil and non-oil revenue. While lower oil revenue was triggered by the drastic fall in oil price and production in 2016H1, lower non-oil revenue was driven by the decline in tax revenue occasioned by contraction in economic activities in the review half-year.