An Appraisal of the Role of Government in Poverty Alleviation in Nigeria
CHAPTER ONE
Objectives of the Study
The broad objective of the study was to assess the of the role of government in poverty alleviation in Nigeria. The specific objectives were to:
- describe the socio economic characteristics of the NAPEP participants;
- examine the extent of people’s participation in the activities being implemented by NAPEP in the study area;
- assess the impact of NAPEP on the poverty alleviation in the study area, and
- identify the constraints encountered in the implementation of the programme in the State.
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Socio-economic Characteristics of the Participants in Various Development Programmes
In a study on the impact of poverty reduction programmes in Nigeria Joseph (2005) found that few young people were engaged in poverty eradication programmes. He also found that most of the participants in poverty eradication programmes in Nigeria were middle aged men and women who were between the ages of 51 and 60 years. Joseph (2005) further showed that the overall average age of the rural dwellers was 60, and that the rural population contained a disproportionate number of people who have passed their prime age or who were retired civil servants whose productivity on the farm was likely to be low.
In a related study conducted in Bauchi State, Idi et al. (2006) found that the participants were older, with a mean age of 48.6 years with the non-participants having a mean age of 45.33 years. In the same vein, Fidelis (1998) in his work “An appraisal of poverty eradication strategies in Nigeria” reported that the ages of the participants were between 30-59years with non- participants in the age group of 21-30years. His study concluded that the young ones were not interested in rural poverty eradication programmes as they had migrated to the cities to seek for white collar jobs. Similarly, an impact study of poverty eradication programmes in Abia -State, conducted by Nwachukwu et al. (2007) reported that the participants of the programmes within the age group of 30-39 years were only 5%, while those above the age group of 50 years were 53%. Eze et al. (2009) in their impact assessment of the Community-Based Poverty Reduction Agency (CBRA) and the Civil Resources Development and
Documentation Centre (CRDDC) in Ebonyi State showed that 72.03% (majority) of CBRA and 64.42% of CBRA participants were 50 years and above, implying that the participants in the government planned development programmes were elderly in the area. Fasina et al. (2004) in their study of the impact of the Youth in Agriculture Programme in Ondo State revealed from their findings that 50.9% of the respondents were between the age of 20 and 35. Followed closely by those between 35-40years (39.2%) leaving only 10% of the respondents below the age of 35.
In another impact study, Ekwe et al. (2006) revealed that the average age of the participants was 43 years with (62.81%) of them in their middle age group (41-50) years. Similarly, Ogunwale et al. (2006) in their study reported that 36% of the participants were in the age range of 40-49, 13% were below 39years, while 16.7% of them were above 60years of age. Sabo (2005) in a study of the impact of women in agriculture programme in Borno State Nigeria, found that majority of the respondents (52%) were within the age range of 40 to 50 years. Eze et al. (2009) in their study of a poverty eradication programme in Ebonyi State reported that about 93.31% of the participants were married while only about 6.69% of them were unmarried; singles, widows or divorced. Sabo (2005) and Agwu et al. (2009) in their separate study reported that majority of the participants (90%) and non participants (75.3%), respectively were married.
Nwachukwu et al. (2007) also has it that in terms of family size, participating farmers fell between 5-9 persons. On the household size their study revealed 0-5 members, 6-10 and above 10 was put at 25%, 63.8% and 11.25%, respectively. Agwu et al. (2009) reported that (55.0%) have family size of between 6-10 members. Sabo (2005) has it that the average family size according to her findings was put at between 5 and 10 members. The large family size of participants as indicated by the findings above implies more labour supply and utilization on the farm which can subsequently translate into high productivity on the farm, thus increasing participants income and further better their livelihood.
Eze et al. (2009) studied the impact of poverty eradication programmes, which include the Community-Based Poverty Reduction Agency (CBRA) and the Civil Resources Development and Documentation Centre (CRDDC) in Ebonyi State. They found that majority (60.7%) of CBRA participants were male while the CIRDDC had 46.88% of the participants as males. They also recorded a near equal ratio of 51.88% and 48.12% for male and female participants respectively. Similarly Agwu et al. (2009) in an impact study reported that slightly more than half of the respondents interviewed were males. These studies indicate that more males participate in poverty eradication activities than females. Nwachukwu et al. (2007) in their study found that in terms of income levels, participants were better when compared with their non-participating counterparts. Agwu et al. (2009) showed that 76.3% of their respondents had above 10 years of farming experience. Similarly, Sabo (2005) in a study of the impact of the women in agriculture programme in Borno State Nigeria found that 34% had farming experiences ranging from 16 to 20years.
Idi et al. (2006) in their findings reported that the participants of the programme were more educated with tertiary education (43.3%) than the non-participants (26.6%).
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
Research design
This study made use of descriptive research design in assessing the role of government in alleviating poverty.
Methods of Data Collection and Sources
The study made use of primary and secondary data. The Primary data were obtained through the use of structured questionnaire administered to the participants and nonparticipants, as well as checklist for NAPEP officials, with the aid of well trained enumerators.
Population and sampling of the study
A study population is a group of elements or individuals as the case may be, who share similar characteristics. These similar features can include location, gender, age, sex or specific interest. The emphasis on study population is that it constitute of individuals or elements that are homogeneous in description (Prince Udoyen: 2019). In this study the study population constitute of residents in Kachia L.G.A, Kaduna state.
A study sample is simply a systematic selected part of a population that infers its result on the population. In essence, it is that part of a whole that represents the whole and its members share characteristics in like similitude (Prince Udoyen: 2019). In this study, the researcher used the simple random sampling to select 52 participants.
Instrumentation
This is a tool or method used in getting data from respondents. In this study, questionnaires and interview are research instruments used. Questionnaire is the main research instrument used for the study to gather necessary data from the sample respondents. The questionnaire is structured type and provides answers to the research questions and hypotheses therein.
This instrument is divided and limited into two sections; Section A and B. Section A deals with the personal data of the respondents while Section B contains research statement postulated in line with the research question and hypothesis in chapter one. Options or alternatives are provided for each respondent to pick or tick one of the options.
Reliability
The researcher initially used peers to check for consistence of results. The researcher also approached senior researchers in the field. The research supervisor played a pivotal role in ensuring that consistency of the results was enhanced. The instrument was also pilot tested.
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Socio-economic Characteristics of Respondents
Sex
Table 1 shows that majority (67%) of the participants were male, while 33% were female. About 65% of the non-participants were male while 35% were female. This implies that sex distribution for the participating respondents was skewed towards male in the programme. This indicates a dominance of male folk in the programme. This agrees with the findings of Emodi (2009) who found that majority of the respondents were male.
Age
Results of the analysis on age of the participants show that about 40% of the respondents were between the age range of 44-53 years. About 29% of the respondents were within the age range of 34-43 years. The result on the age of the non-participants shows that majority (46%) were between the age range of 44-53 years. This was followed by 35% that were within the age range of 34-43 years. This result agrees with that obtained by Erinle (1999) who noted that participants were younger in age when compared to their non-participating counterpart. The need for persons in this virile age to increase their income in order to cater for both personal needs as well as that of their dependants could have been the reason for their participation in the programme. This implies that majority of the participating respondents were within their middle age and were more likely to be more productive.
Marital status
It is evident from Table 1 that 62% of the participants and 58% of the non-participants were married. About 15% of the participants were widows and 6% were widowers. The result implies that majority of the participants have partners who could encourage them to participate in the programme for increased income. The percentage of widows and widowers indicates a high level of participation of vulnerable groups in the programme.
The result on the participant’s marital status tallies with the findings of Eze et al. (2009). They found that majority of the participants were married. The result of this study also agrees with the findings of Sabo (2005) which revealed that majority of the participants and the non-participants were married.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
This research was designed to assess the role of government in poverty alleviation in Kachia L.G.A, Kaduna State, Nigeria. The result of the descriptive statistics revealed that majority of the respondents were males (67% for participants and 65% for non-participants) with an age range of 23years and above for each group. Majority of the respondents (62% for participants and 58% for non-participants) were married. Most of the household sizes of the respondents range from 5-8 people per household which was 60% for participants and 52% for non-participants.
Majority of the respondents (94% for participants and 76% for non-participants) had one form of formal education or the other. Major occupation of respondents has it that 33% of the participants were farmers and 56% of the non-participants were traders. The result also show that all (100%) the participants had NAPEP schemes as their source of income apart from income from their major occupation while most of the nonparticipants have trading as their major source of income. All (100%) of the participants were members of cooperative society while the non-participants were non members. The land area cultivated by respondents ranged from 0.1-1.50 ha with 35% for participants and 33% for non-participants. All (100%) benefitted from NAPEP credit, while the non-participants did not benefit. Most of the participants (82%) had increased knowledge of NAPEP in 2010. All the participants received training on entrepreneurial skills and credit facility either in cash or in kind. The NAPEP officials visited the participants for at most 3 times in a year for participants while the non-participants did not get any visit. The constraints faced by the implementers of the programme are corruption, delay in release of fund by the Federal government and poor loan repayment culture on the part of the beneficiaries. Double difference estimator (DDE) method was used to test for the impact of NAPEP on the income of the participants using nonparticipants as the control group. The DDE analysis result revealed that the income of participants after the intervention increased by N143,118 (134%) after the intervention (from N106,556 before the intervention to N249,675 after the intervention). Income of the non-participants increased by N21,776 (22%) after the intervention (from N98,351 before the intervention to N120,127 after the intervention). The difference between participants and non-participants (DDE) [(143,118)] – [(21,776)] equals to N121,342, it was positive and statistically significant (p <0.01) as such the null hypothesis was rejected; the implication was that there was a significant difference between the income of participants and non-participants after the intervention.
The DDE analysis result show that the level of living of participants after the intervention increased by N155,745 (200%) after the intervention. While the nonparticipants level of living increased by N19,714 (20%) after the intervention (from N94,159 before the intervention to N113,873 after the intervention). The difference between participants and non-participants (DDE) [(155,745)] -[(19,714)] equals to N136,031, it was positive statistically significant (p < 0.01) as such the null hypothesis was rejected; the implication was that there was a significant difference between the level of living of participants and non-participants after the intervention. Hypotheses tested were both rejected because there is significant difference in income and livelihood of participants. Thus, the programme has made significant impact on the income and livelihood of its participants in the study area.
Conclusion
The findings revealed that participants were stable than their non-participating counterparts because the income of participants was higher, as it increased by N143,118 (134%) than that of the non-participants which only increased by N21,776 (22%) after the programme intervention. Also the level of living of participant increased by N155,745 (200%), while that of non-participants increased by only N19,714 (20%). This marked an immense acceleration in the development of the participants in terms of level of living. The result implies that the participants were more comfortable as they had more household basic needs and assets, means of transportation and farming implements which reduce drudgery in farming, and translates into increased income and better level of living among the participants. This indicates that the programme has made considerable positive impact on the lives of the participants in the study area.
Recommendations
Based on the findings of this study the following recommendations were made:
- In order to ensure sustained income generation, better level of living among the NAPEP participants, it was recommended that NAPEP and its activities should be left to continue even after the administration that initiated it.
- It was found that the major constraints facing participants of NAPEP were insufficient funds. To this end, it is recommended that NAPEP should increase the amount of soft loan or credit facility to participants.
- Untimely arrival and costly nature of inputs were observed from the study. In view of this, it is recommended that NAPEP should make inputs available to the participants on time and at subsidized rate.
- It was observed that non repayment of loan was an impediment to the scheme. As a result, NAPEP should set up a special monitoring and recovery committee to monitor the disbursed loan, right from when it is been disbursed throughout the period the money will be with the beneficiaries till it’s being paid back and/or recovered.
- The findings reveals the absence of good quality storage and processing facilities. The government and private investors through NAPEP should construct/build a cottage industry in the study area, to ease the plight of its participants.
- Education is a key factor in reduction of rural poverty in general, whether the households are headed by men or women. Welfare levels increase as educational attainment increases. Household heads without any formal education are always the poorest among the rural farming households (Ike 2012). Hence, there is the need for improved extension programme in the state so that the NAPEP participants can improve themselves.
- Large household size was found to have relationship with poverty especially where the household head engages in agriculture for livelihood and income. Hence, there is the need for efforts at further sensitizing the populace on the need to control birth and to remove all cultural beliefs that tend to lead to overpopulation should be encouraged through proper advocacy.
REFERENCES
- Abdullahi, H. (2005). Effect of Sassakawa Global 2000 on Small Scale Maize Farmers in Kaduna State. Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Sociology, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Nigeria. PP.1-30
- Adegbehin, J. O., Chikwendu, D. O., Omotayo A. M., Arokoyo, J. O, Akpoko, J. G., Umaru, M and Dafwang, I. I. (2001). Impact of the Training and Visit in Nigeria: The Nigeria Journal of Agricultural Extension and Research Liaison Services (NAERLS) Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria PP. 43-51.
- Agbamu, J. U. (2006). Essentials of Agricultural Communication in Nigeria. Malthouse Press Limited, Lagos. PP.180-186.
- Bob, P. (2002). Theory of Citizens Participation, Yales University Press, United States of America, pp.1-6.
- Burt, S. (1993). In: Joseph I. O. (2005). An Assessment of Impacts of Poverty Reduction Programme in Nigeria as a Development Strategy. PhD Dissertation of St. Clement University of Turks and Caicoos, Island 1-50.
- Cummings, L. L. (1977). Emergence of the Instrumental Organization in: P.S. Goodman and J.H. Pennings (eds.) New Perspective on Organizational Effectiveness. San Francisco California Jossey-Boss Publishers pp.56-62.
- Dhanarajan, G. (2001). Evaluation Consideration for On-line ESL Courses. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. viii, No.3, March 2002. http://itesij.org/
- Fidelis, O. O. (2001). An Appraisal of Poverty Reduction Strategies in Nigeria. In: Central Bank of Nigeria Economic and Financial Review Vol. 39. No.4.
- Garuba, M. (2009). In: Titus, O. G. and Samuel, O. E., (1995). The Synthesis of Comparative Extension Systems. Published by Emmy Press Ltd. Ibadan,Nigeria, pp. 1-40