A comparative discourse of sustainable finance options for agribusiness transformation in Nigeria and Brunei: implications for entrepreneurship and enterprise development

Abstract

PurposeThe growing adoption of sustainable finance for inclusive agribusiness requires a cross-country comparison. In this paper, a comparative discourse of sustainable finance (SF) options for agribusiness transformation in Nigeria and Brunei is attempted; as well as examining the implications on entrepreneurship and enterprise development in both countries.Design/methodology/approachA mixed research method was adopted for this cross-country comparative analysis. To gain deeper insight into agribusiness and SF, the authors sourced the required data from scholarly articles, texts, World Bank data (2000–2016), national policy documents, working papers, national development plan reports, and other online resources on agribusiness and SF. The authors adopted mixed data (non-numeric and numeric data) because they allow for combining content analysis and secondary data in quantitative analysis (Williams and Shepherd, 2017). This mixed method approach follows a three-stage, namely: Data sourcing, Data development and conversion and Data analysis.FindingsThis discourse based on the mixed data produced four findings. Firstly, it was found that both countries have different statuses in the agribusiness sector, but Brunei had better growth performance in the crop, food, livestock, cereal production indices compared to Nigeria. Secondly, the challenges facing agribusiness in both countries include inadequate funding, misuse/mismanagement of land resources, deployment of extractive farming practices, application of ozone-depleting chemicals and pesticides among others have harmed the vegetation, the farmland, and the chemistry of the ocean resulting in low productivity. Thirdly, the SF options that are suitable for agribusiness transformation are green loans, green bonds, green credit, green investment funds, green mortgage scheme and other green financial support instruments given mostly as grants, subsidies and tax reliefs. The key guidelines for entrepreneurs seeking SF options for agribusiness are Principles 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10 of the EPs.Research limitations/implicationsThe main limitation of the study is that the analysis and interpretation of the findings are based on descriptive statistics. However, future research should consider using rigorous econometric tests such as the Co-Integration Test, Test of Causality and Inferential Statistics that would enhance stronger generalisation and prediction.Practical implicationsThe practical implication is that agribusiness transformation through sustainable finance options (SFOs) would bring about a structural change from the current subsistence agricultural practices to large-scale agriculture practices characterised by the deployment of agricultural information systems (AGRIS), precision agriculture and agricultural technologies. Flowing from the first implication, the nexus between agribusiness and SFOs will systematically improve agricultural productivity in the areas of crop production, fishing, livestock and forestry in both countries. Thirdly, an improved agribusiness would boost food production and availability thereby mitigating the rising trends in food insecurity, food inflation, food poverty, and ultimately will help actualize SDG 1(No poverty), SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), and SDG 3 (Good Health and Wellbeing).Originality/valueThe authors contribute to the literature on SF and agribusiness in emerging economies by identifying an inclusive strategy that matters for agribusiness transformation in high-income and low-income economies.