appraise the role of government in poverty alleviation in Nigeria

TABLE OF CONTENT Preliminary page Title page Approval page Dedication Acknowledgement Abstract Table of content CHAPTER ONE 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background of the study 1.2 Statement of the problem 1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 1.5 SCOPE OF RESEARCH 1.6 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES 1.7 Limitation of the study 1.8 Definition of terms----------------------------10 CHAPTER TWO 2.0 Literature review------------------------------11 2.1 Introduction-----------------------------------11 CHAPTER THREE 3.0 Research design and methodology------------ 29 3.1 Introduction----------------------------------- 29 3.2 Research design------------------------------- 30 3.3 Source/methodology of data collection-------- 31 3.4 Population and sample size-------------------- 31 3.5 Sample technique ------------------------------32 3.6 Validity and reliability of measuring instrument33 3.7 Method of data analysis------------------------33 CHAPTER FOUR 4.0 Presentation and analysis of datA 4.1 Introduction------------------------------------ 34 4.2 Presentation of data----------------------------34 4.3 Analysis of data-------------------------------- 34 4.4 Test of hypothesis ----------------------------- 41 4.5 Interpretation of result-------------------------41 CHAPTER FIVE 5.0 Summary, conclusion and Recommendation---42 ABSTRACT The study is to appraise the role of government in poverty alleviation in Nigeria with a special reference to National Poverty Eradication Programme NAPEP. The researcher used primary and secondary source of data for collection of data from the respondents. The responses from the administered questionnaire were analyses in chapter four and hypothesis formulated in chapter one were tested and the decision were made and alternative hypothesis was accepted and the null hypothesis was rejected. From the study it was discovered that the empowerment programmes of government have lifted a lot of the citizens out of abject poverty. The findings also show that lack of proper implementation of government policies on poverty alleviation has hindered the achievement of the programme. It was also discovered that one of the basic problems identified to be militating against the efficient operations of the programme is “inadequate facilities and logistic support”. Based on the findings it was recommended that necessary facilities, equipments and logistics should be provided to the programme to enhance better performance most especially if the self-reliance objective of the programmes is to be achieved. The credit schemes should be properly funded, strengthened and made to provide basic loans to grandaunts of various skill acquisition programmes, to enable them establish own business. Also, it was recommended that there is the need for an effective monitoring of the entire activities of the programme at all stages of implementation. In this way, diversion of fund/resources to other uses as well as mismanagement of resources will be checked. Table of content CHAPTER ONE 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background of the study BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY Prior to the commercial mining of fossil oil in Nigeria, the economy depended mainly on agricultural products for its domestic food supply and foreign exchange earnings. This situation however, changed as the advent of oil boom led to the neglect of the agricultural sector. In addition, the nation’s economic policies during the oil boom period paid little or no attention to the non-oil export sector. The result of this neglect was that Nigeria turned from being a major agricultural exporter and largely self-sufficient in food in the 1960s to a net food importer in the 1970s (Atoloye, 1997). The World Bank Report on Poverty and Welfare in Nigeria (World Bank, n.d.) which described the undesirable effects of developing one sector on the activities in other sector(s) of the economy provided a good illustration of the crisis in Nigeria. The report revealed that though Nigeria has abundant land, oil and natural resources, many of her citizens are still very poor (World Bank, n.d.). The Bank observed that the country’s earnings of about U.S. $200 billion between 1970 and 1990 from oil had impacted little on the welfare of the people, especially the poor, as the oil revenue had not been wisely invested in productive ventures to provide a sustainable stream of benefits to the poor. The economic depression in the economy became glaring as the growth rates in the nation’s gross domestic product (G.D.P.) which averaged 10 percent between 1970 and 1973; and 8% between 1974 and 1980 did not only decline but became negative from 1980 with an average of -6% between 1980 and 1984 (Osagie, 1992). According to Central Bank of Nigeria and World Bank (1999), as from the late 1970s, the nation has had to contend with deteriorating terms of trade, excessive importation and debt over-hang, amidst adverse economic environment caused by oil shocks and world economic depression. The Nigerian government in a bid to curb the depression adopted the Structural Adjustment Programme (S.A.P) in 1986. The cardinal objectives of S.A.P included: diversification of the productive base of the economy so as to curtail dependence on the oil sector and imports to achieve a fiscal and balance of payments viability over the medium term; laying a solid foundation for non-inflationary growth and lessening the importance of non-productive investments in the public sector efficiency; intensifying the growth potential of the private sector and attracting fresh foreign loans (Egwim, 1989). During the implementation of the Structural Adjustment Programme, it was realised that unintended negative effects of the programme such as accentuation of income inequality, unequal access to food, shelter, education, health and other necessities of life became more prominent in the Nigerian state with the poor being the most affected group (National Planning Commission,1995). As pointed out by Demery and Addison (1988), adjustment policies could affect the poor adversely in two ways: First, in the short-run, adjustment policies may reduce the real income and consumption of poor groups. They cited a World Bank study as having compared such initial adverse effects to a ‘crossing of the desert’ in which those who were least able to cope with the crossing require some temporary relief to tide them over. Secondly, in the long run, some poor groups may not benefit from the processes put in place by the adjustment effort. To Demery and Addison (1988), adjustment policies shape development and influence the distribution of income for years into the future and will have different effects on the poor. This view has been buttressed by Atoloye’s (1997), who argued that marginalisation of the middle class in Nigeria’s economic growth process especially since the introduction of S.A.P. had disrupted the traditional economic link between the middle class and the low-income group (those mostly affected by poverty) by which the former complemented the latter. Hence, the problem associated with the Structural Adjustment Programme has gone beyond ‘crossing of the desert’ as the marginalization of the middle class, has, in addition to disruption of the economic link between this class and the low income group (the poor) led to the emergence of the new poor. It is the realization of the adverse effects of S.A.P. on the poor that prompted the introduction of policies and programmes to alleviate poverty and provide safety-nets for the poor in the economy (National Planning Commission, 1995). These programmes include: the National Directorate of Employment (NDE); the People’s Bank; the Community Bank Scheme; the Better Life Programme (BLP)/Family Support Programme (FSP); Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP); the Directorate for Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI); the Primary Health Care (PHC); the Federal Urban Mass Transit Scheme; the National Agricultural Land Development Authority (N.A.L.D.A); the Poverty Alleviation Programme (P.A.P) and now, the National Poverty Eradication Programme (N.AP.E.P). According to Odejide (1997); Anyanwu (1997); Aku, Ibrahim and Bulus (1997), the following can be categorized as poor: (1) illiterates, (2) wage earners, (3) households headed by older people and women whose nutritional needs are not being met adequately, (4) residents of isolated rural areas that lack essential infrastructure and (5) those who fall below the poverty line and whose incomes cannot afford their basic needs. Others are urban squatters and ‘street’ children, ethnic minorities and all those who are not only marginalized and deprived but also suffer economic, political, social and cultural persecution; those who have lost their jobs and youths who have not been able to find employment as a result of economic reforms under the SAP. Though most Nigerians are quick to attribute the causes of failures of policies and programmes to corruption and implementation bottlenecks, it is expected that the trickle down effects of these policies and programmes should have at least reduced poverty instead of the present situation where NPC (1995), Onibokun and Kumuyi (1996) opined that government policies and programmes have not only aggravated the level of mass poverty in Nigeria but that poverty has been continuous and worsening. This is affirmed by data from Federal Office of Statistics (1999). These data indicate that while no State in Nigeria had more than half of its population categorized as poor in 1980, by 1996, only one state (Rivers) had less than half of its population categorized as poor. The nation’s general picture depicts a continuous rise in poverty incidence. While in 1980 only 27. 2% of the Nigerian population were said to be poor, the proportion increased to 46.3%, 65.6% and 80% in 1985, 1996 and 1998 respectively. Though the trend according to Ogwumike (2001) and World Fact Book (2004) declined to 70% and 60% in 1999 and 2000 respectively, the fact that over 50% of the Nigerian population was still categorized as poor implied in the words of Kwanashie (2000) that the level of poverty has remained unacceptable. The high incidence of poverty in Nigeria has become a concern to policy makers and indeed all well-meaning Nigerians because, as argued by United Nations Development Programme (2001), it has not only increased from 27. 2% in 1980 to 80% in 1998 but it is estimated to be rising by 10% in every 3 years. In addition, despite several efforts by government, non-governmental organizations, international donor agencies, the nation’s poverty situation has become worse judging by different indices. The nation’s pathetic poverty situation amidst rich resources endowment coupled with efforts to alleviate it has been summarized by Ali-Akpajiak and Pyke (2003:6) as follows: all documentation, official or otherwise shows that poverty in Nigeria in all forms is rising at an increasingly fast pace. Nigeria’s social statistics rank it among the worst in south Saharan Africa even though it possesses the greatest natural resources… Given that Nigeria is the seventh largest exporter of oil in the world, these revelations are distressing… The poverty profile of Nigeria does indeed present a very sombre picture of a rich nation in decline. The nation’s poverty situation becomes more disturbing when compared with nations that are similarly or even less endowed with resources as it has been described by Kwanashie (2000) as one of the poorest nations in the world despite its abundant resources. Nigeria is world’s seventh largest exporter of oil, sixth largest producer in OPEC, Africa’s largest oil exporter and the fifth biggest source of United State’s oil imports. This enormous wealth is a good potential for effective alleviation or reduction and possibly eradication of poverty (National Planning Commission, 2004; Oil Statistics, n.d.; Thomas and Canagarajah, 2002). Yet, Nigeria is not only one of the poorest countries in the world but also in Africa and indeed in south Saharan Africa. As long as majority of Nigerians remain poor, accompanied by limited social development, the nation’s great natural wealth not withstanding, it will be difficult for the country to meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) argued National Planning Commission (2004). From the foregoing, the World Bank’s ‘crossing of the desert’ has not only become an illusion but got more Nigerians ‘trapped in the desert’ as poverty has turned to be a widespread phenomenon in the country. It is an irony to witness worsening poverty level amidst efforts to alleviate it. Thus, the reality of persistent poverty in Nigeria along side various poverty alleviation programmes has compelled one to re-think the dynamics of the role of government in intervening to minimize social and economic inequalities, especially for rural people who are predominantly poor and in places where the poor people are located. It is in the light of this that a research into the appraisal of poverty alleviation programmes in the study area is considered worth while most especially that majority of the people in the study area are not only farmers but also rural dwellers. 1.2 Statement of the problem Poverty alleviation programmes in an economy are aimed at improving the welfare of those who are categorized as poor. The poverty alleviation programmes considered in this study have been in place for about nineteen (19) years. However, available statistics do not appear to be suggesting any remarkable improvement in the poverty situation in Nigeria. Nigeria has consistently been classified among the poorest countries in the world. According to 2005 World Bank report, Nigeria has been rated as the second poorest country in the world, only better than Ethiopia which was reported as the poorest in the world. In fact, World Bank’s, United Nations Development Programme’s, International Monetary Fund’s and Federal Office of Statistic’s figures show an increase in overall poverty level. This research is therefore designed to examine this phenomenon of a myriad of poverty alleviation programmes without commensurate results. Specifically, the study is aimed at providing answers to the following questions. (i). What is the extent of coverage of selected poverty alleviation programmes in the study area? (ii). How do benefiting communities/individuals perceive these programmes? (iii). Have poverty alleviation programmes reduced poverty incidence among beneficiaries in the study area? (iv). Have these programmes brought about a reduction in poverty levels in the study area? (v). How sustainable are these poverty alleviation programmes? 1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES A way of studying the performance of any poverty alleviation programme in a particular area is by comparing its targeted objectives to achievements. This will enable one ascertain the extent to which such a strategy has contributed in reducing or eradicating poverty in the area. Since many poverty alleviation programmes have been adopted in Nigeria, it is necessary to examine the contribution of each of them to poverty alleviation in specific areas of the country. This will go a long way to reveal the effectiveness or otherwise of the programmes in alleviating poverty in such areas and the nation at large. The objective of this research is to determine whether or not Nigerian poverty alleviation programmes have significantly contributed to alleviation of poverty in Benue, Nasarawa and Plateau states. Within the framework of the above, the research has specifically sought to: a. Identify Nigeria’s poverty alleviation programmes between 1986 and 2003 with the aim of finding out the ones that have been most beneficial to the poor in the study area. b. Identify the beneficiaries of such programmes and the location of the beneficiaries within the sampled states. c. Find out if the target population of such programmes in policy-making are actually reached in implementation. d. Examine the performance of such programmes in alleviating poverty in the study area. e. Find out if, in fact, poverty alleviation programmes have significantly led to poverty reduction in the research area or not. f. Identify reasons for non performance of the programmes, if indeed they have not performed well, and suggest possible remedial measures. 1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY It is the intention of this study to unveil problem areas in the implementation of poverty alleviation programmes as well as to proffer policy recommendations that would benefit both the governments and relevant poverty alleviation agencies in their quest for poverty alleviation and/or eradication in the three states and Nigeria in general. Examination of strategies used in implementing poverty alleviation programmes in Nigeria which have had little or no impact on the poverty situation in the country are expected be of significance to those that are saddled with the planning and implementation of ongoing and future poverty alleviation programmes. It is hoped that this study has provided answers to questions asked on the fate of the poor in the study area amidst government poverty alleviation programmes. It is the intention of the study to stimulate further investigations into the problem of persistent rise in poverty incidence in Nigeria with a view of eradicating poverty in the country. 1.5 SCOPE OF RESEARCH The study covers the period 1986 to 2003. The poverty alleviation programmes covered are those implemented by the government of Nigeria. Specifically, the study has attempted to appraise the activities of the National Directorate of Employment (NDE), the People’s Bank of Nigeria (PBN) and the Primary Health Care (PHC). For the purpose of this study, they are treated as poverty alleviation programmes since they have been aimed at providing safety nets for the poor. The choice of these three programmes is predicated on the fact that they seem to cover larger population unlike many that have been hijacked by the privileged class. Each of the three states (Benue, Nasarawa and Plateau) in the study area was divided into two zones and in each zone; one local government area was randomly picked for the study. In selecting the local government areas to be covered, both rural and urban areas were considered to enable us ascertain the proportion of beneficiaries of these programmes in both areas. The choice of these states is based on the fact that prior to 1976, they were all in one state (Benue - Plateau). It is thus necessary to embark on a poverty study in these states that had a common socio-political background. It is however important to note that although the work initially desired to study five local government areas in each of the three states, discussions during the seminar presentations led to the need to reduce the number of local government areas in each state to two due to limited time and financial resources. The reduction in number of local government areas has not in anyway affected the expected result as the programmes being studied are not restricted to selected local government areas by the policies that established them. 1.6 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES This research has been pre-occupied with finding out the extent to which poverty alleviation programmes have reduced poverty in Benue, Nasarawa and Plateau states. Specifically, the research was centered on three hypotheses. While the first hypothesis dealt with the proportion of beneficiaries who live below or above the poverty line, the second and third hypotheses which are stated in chapter four focused on examination of statistical significance. Hypothesis 1 Ho1: Poverty alleviation programmes have not significantly reduced poverty in the three states. Hi1: Poverty alleviation programmes have significantly reduced poverty in the three states. Where: Ho1 is the null hypothesis and Hi1 is the alternative hypothesis. The apriori expectation of the hypothesis is that, if more than 50% of the sampled population lived below the poverty line at the time of data collection, the null hypothesis was to be accepted and the alternative hypothesis rejected but if less than 50% lived below the poverty line, the null hypothesis was to be rejected in favour of the alternative hypothesis 1.8 Limitation of the study Some problem were encountered during this research\ project work such as: 1. TIME CONTRAINT; The researcher has no sufficient time to frequent the area of study due to compiled academic works facing him. he also has limited time in fixing the facts collected during the research work. 2. INFORMATION CONSTRAINTS The research encountered high compliance from the case study (Imo state) due to secrecy of some information. 3. FINANCIAL CONSTRAINT The researcher has problem financing this work. This was due to the fact that during this work, there was drastic increase in the cost of living, transport, printing and binding of project. However, I thank God for making me (researcher) to finish the work and present it fairly. 4. Another problem the researcher has was getting the recent three –five financial statements (annual report) of the company to aid this work.