TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page……………………………………………………………………… i
Approval Page………………………………………………………………… ii
Certification…………………………………………………………………… iii
Dedication……………………………………………………………………… iv
Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………… v
Abstract………………………………………………………………………… vi
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………… vii
List of Tables…………………………………………………………………… ix
List of figures………………………………………………………………… x
CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION………………………………….………………………… 1
- Background of the Study………………………………………………
- Statement of the Problem……………………………………………… 9
- Objectives of the Study……………………………………………… 14
- Significance of the Study……………………………………………… 15
1
CHAPTER TWO:
LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………………… 17
2.1 Youth Unemployment…………………………………………………… 17
2.2 Social and
Personal Well-Being………………………………………… 36
2.3 Budgetary Allocation
and Performance……………………………… 59
2.4 Gap
in the Literature…………………………………………………… 66
CHAPTER THREE:
METHODOLOGY
3.1. Theoretical
Framework………………………………………………… 67
3.2 Hypotheses…………………………………………………………… 72
3.3 Research Design……………………………………………………… 72
3.4 Population……………………………………………………………… 73
3.5 Sample Size and Sampling Technique………………………………… 74
3.6 Sample Frame………………………………………………………… 74
3.7 The
Validity and Reliability of Measuring Instruments…………… 75
3.8 Methods of Data
Collection …………………………………………… 75
3.8.1 Primary Sources………………………………………………………… 77
3.8.1a Interviews……………………………………………………………… 77
3.8.1b
Questionnaires………………………………………………………… 78
3.9. Methods of Data Analysis…………………………………………… 78
3.10 Logical Data Framework……………………………………………… 80
CHAPTER FOUR:
BACKGROUND TO POVERTY ERADICATION
IN NIGERIA
4. a. 1. Introduction
…………………………………………………………… 83
4.a.2. Regional Agricultural Programmes…………………………………… 86
4.a.3. Operation Feed the Nation (OFN)…………………………………… 87
4.a.4. Free and Compulsory Primary Education (UPE)………………………
88
4.a.5. Green Revolution ……………………………………………………… 89
4.a.6. Better Life Programme (BLP)………………………………………… 91
4.a.7. Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF)…………………………………………… 92
4.a.8. Family
Support Programme (FSP) …………………………………… 97
4.a.9. Agricultural Development Programme (ADP)………………………… 97
4.a.10.
River Basin Development Authorities (RBDAS)……………………… 99
4.a.11. Universal Basic Education Programme (UBE) ………………………… 100
4.a.12. Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP)………………………………
102
4.a.13. National Directorate of Employment (NDE)…………………………… 105
4.a.14. Directorate for Food, Roads and Rural
Infrastructures (DFRRI)…….. 116
4.a.15. Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP) ………………… 118
4.a.16. Directorate of Social Mobilization (MAMSER)………………………… 119
4.a.17.
National Accelerated Food Production Programme…………………….. 128
4.a.18. National Economic Empowerment and Development
Strategy (NEEDS) 128
4.a.19. Poverty Alleviation Programme (PAP)………………………………….. 130
4.a.20.
National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP)…………………… 132
CHAPTER FIVE:
The Impact of NAPEP’s
Programmes on Job Creation
and Poverty
Eradication in Abia State………………………… 137
5.1 Test of Hypothesis 1:The Implementation of
Youth Empowerment
Scheme
(YES) Has Not Reduced the Incidence of Youth Unemployment in
Abia
State …………………………………………………………… 137
5.2 Nature of Skills Provided……………………………………………….. 141
5.3 Number of Tricycles (keke) provided at
subsidized rate……………….. 142
5.4 Increase in
Youth Related Unemployment Rates……………………… 147
5.5 Increase
in Youth Related Criminality…………………………………. 148
CHAPTER SIX:
THE IMPACT OF NAPEP’S SOWESS
PROGRAMMESONIMPROVEMENT
OF SOCIAL AND PERSONAL WELL-BEINGOFABIA RESIDENTS……… 151
6.1 Test of Hypothesis 2:The Implementation of NAPEP’s SOWESS
Programme
Has Not Improved the Social and Personal
Well-Being of Abia Residents ..151
6.2 Availability of Mass Transit and Maintenance
Culture…………………… 154
CHAPTER SEVEN:
THE IMPACT OF BUDGETARY
ALLOCATION AND PERFORMANCENAPEP
ABIA STATE……………………………………………….…………………… 156
7.1 Test of Hypothesis 3: Poor Budgetary
Allocation to NAPEP Adversely
Affected Its Performance in Abia State………………………………………………….. 156
CHAPTER EIGHT:
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary…………………………………………………………………………… 164
Conclusions………………………………………………………………………… 165
Recommendations……………………………………………………………….. 168
Bibliography………………………………………………………………………. 169
Appendix ………………………………………………………………………… 188
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
PAGE
1…………………………………………………………………………………. 117
2………………………………………………………………………………….. 136
3………………………………………………………………………………….. 138
4………………………………………………………………………………….. 140
5………………………………………………………………………………….. 141
6………………………………………………………………………………….. 142
7………………………………………………………………………………….. 142
8………………………………………………………………………………….. 143
9………………………………………………………………………………….. 144
10………………………………………………………………………………… 145
11………………………………………………………………………………… 146
12………………………………………………………………………………… 147
13………………………………………………………………………………… 152
14………………………………………………………………………………… 153
15………………………………………………………………………………… 154
16………………………………………………………………………………… 156
17………………………………………………………………………………… 159
18………………………………………………………………………………… 160
19………………………………………………………………………………… 161
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
PAGE
1…………………………………………………………………………………. 116
2………………………………………………………………………………….. 127
EVALUATION OF NATIONAL POVERTY
ERADICATION PROGRAMME ON POVERTY ERADICATION IN ABIA STATE,NIGERIA,2001-2013
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
OF THE STUDY
Poverty
appears to be one of the worst universal problems of man. According to Ukpong
(1996) it humiliates and dehumanizes its victim.In fact, poverty is theoretically
and methodologically a difficult question, even as Lawal and Hassan (2012)
noted that the concept of poverty remains controversial both conceptually and
in practical measurement. The controversy stretches even to the debate over
whether it is to be poverty alleviation or poverty eradication.
Successive
Nigerian governments have had to contend with this hydra-headedchallenge which appearsto
have high casualties across age and gender brackets. The magnitude of poverty
in Nigeria is worrisome. The UNDP has classified the country as 141 poorest
nations on human development index. In its report, Nigeria is considered one of
the 20 poorest countries in the world with 70% of the population classified as
poor and 54.4% living in absolute poverty (UNDP-HDI, 2006; Ekugo 2006).
Recent
studies have revealed that the various campaigns against poverty are yet to
record any meaningful success. The UNDP report (2010) covering a period of
2000-2008 indicates that 64.4% of Nigerians live below poverty line, while the
country occupies 142nd position out of 147 countries in human
development index.
Available
evidence shows that poverty has been a serious problem confronting Nigeria since independence in 1960.The
poverty level in the country was about 15%, and by 1980 it had reached 28.1%.
In 1985, the poverty level was 46.3%, but dropped to 42.7% in 1992. As Ugo and
Ukpere (2009) have noted, with the termination of the democratic process by the
military government, the poverty level rose to 43.6% in 1995. A year after,
about 65% of the population was below poverty line, that is, about 67.1 million
Nigerians. In 1999 and 2000, UN Development Report revealed that Nigeria had
degenerated further as 87% of the population was below poverty line and the
country rated 154th on the world’s Marginal Poverty Index out of 172 countries
(Ekpu 2004).
According to the
Statistician General of the Federation, Dr. Yemi Kale, poverty in Nigeria is
rising with almost 100 million people living on less than $1 a day despite
strong growth(Subair, Vanguard, February 13:2012).
The National
Bureau of Statistics (NBS) boss said that the percentage of Nigerians living in
absolute poverty – those who can afford only the bare essentials of food,
shelter and clothing – rose to 60.9 per cent in 2010, compared with 54.7 per
cent in 2004.
Although Nigeria’s economy is projected to
continue growing, poverty is likely to get worse as the gap between the rich
and the poor continues to widen.It remains a paradox … that despite the fact
that the Nigerian economy is growing, the proportion of Nigerians living in poverty is increasing every year, Statistician General
of the Federation, Dr. Yemi Kale, told reporters at a press conference in
Abuja, on Monday. NBS estimates that this trend may have increased further in
2011 if the potential positive impacts of several anti-poverty and employment
generation intervention programmes are not taken into account (Subair, Vanguard, February 13:2012).
Subair reported him as
saying that the poverty rate in Nigeria might have risen to 71.5 per cent, 61.9
per cent, and 62.8 per cent using the relative, absolute and dollar-per-day
measures, respectively:
However, this will become clearer once the 2011
Annual Socio-Economic Survey is completed later in the year. Thus, using the
relative, absolute and dollar-per-day poverty measures, NBS estimates that
poverty may have further risen slightly to about 71.5 per cent, 61.9 per cent
and 62.8 per cent respectively in 2011.
Dr. Kale said that between 2004 and 2010,
Nigeria’s poverty rate had moved from 54.4 per cent to 69 per cent involving
112,518,507 Nigerians, adding that although the country’s Gross Domestic Growth
(GDP) had grown since then, it had little impact on the poverty situation (Subair, Vanguard, February 13:2012).
Thus applying the
United Nations’ definition of a poor person in dollar terms, the Statistician-General
disclosed that 51.6 per cent of Nigerians were living below US$1 per day in
2004 but this increased to 61.2 per cent in 2010.“Although the World Bank
standard now is US$1.25 per day, the old reference of US$1 per day was the
standard used in Nigeria at the time that the survey was concluded,” he said.
Nigeria has a huge
agricultural resource base which offers great potential for economic growth. It
has vast land that is available for mechanized agriculture. Irrigation is being
used only in the near arid parts of the north to increase yields.
Inspite of its huge
agricultural resources, growth and oil wealth, poverty is widespread in the
country and has increased since the late 1990s. Over 70 per cent of Nigerians
are now classified as poor with 35 per cent of them living in absolute poverty.
With limited social services and infrastructure poverty is particularly aggravated
in the rural areas, where up to 80 percent of the population live below the
poverty line. The country’s poor rural women and men depend on agriculture for
food and income. Nigeria is a huge importer of rice and other food items in
spite of its potentials for producing them to meet local demands and even for
export. Generally, agriculture is done by small-scale farmers who cultivate
small plots of land and depend on rainfall rather than irrigation systems. Majority
of the farmers are peasant women and aged men as the able bodied youths have
migrated to the urban centres for other jobs.Less than 1 hectare of land per
household is cultivated.
In spite of absence of earthquakes and other natural
disasters in Nigeria it has the unenviable reputation of being classified among
poorest nations of the world. Elsewhere these disasters deplete resources and
cause or increase poverty. Country Studies Project (2011) notes, concerning
Nigeria, that “About 57 percent of the population lives on less than US$1 per
day”, an index for measuring poverty across the world. It goes on to observe
that due to inflation, per capita GDP
today remains lower than in 1960 when Nigeria declared independence. In 2005
the GDP was composed of the following sectors: agriculture, 26.8 percent;
industry, 48.8 percent; and services, 24.4 percent. According to the report
Human capital is underdeveloped – Nigeria ranked 151 out of 177 countries in
the United Nations Development Index in 2004 – and non-energy-related
infrastructure is inadequate.
The percentage that
lives below the poverty margin tilts more towards the extreme situations. A
United Nations Human Development report says 64 percent of Nigeria’s population
live in abject poverty (UN 2010 Report).According to the UNDP report titled The
Real Wealth of Nations, Nigeria has a lot to do towards bridging the widening
gaps in poverty and gender inequality. According to the U.N resident
coordinator, Mr. Daouda Toure (UN 2010 Report), some other findings include
that Nigeria’s life expectancy at birth in 2010 was at 48.4 years, a little
rise from the 47.7 years recorded for the country last year, the Human Development
Index (HDI) at 0.423, which ranked the country 142 out of 169 countries with
comparable data.
Nigeria, the UN 2010
Report notes, did not make the very high Human Development rank, neither did it
make the High Human Development rating. It was not also ranked among the
countries that made it to the Medium Human Development strata. Nigeria found
itself in the lowest ranking nations in the Low Human Development category,
escaping from the bottom of the human development index by 27 positions. The HDI of sub-Saharan Africa as a
region increased from 0.293 in 1980 to 0.389 this year, placing Nigeria above
the regional average.
This
dismal position has attracted reasonable academic interest in the area of
poverty in Nigeria. One of such reports released in 2009 by the Fund for Peace,
an American independent non-profit research and educational organization that
works to prevent violent conflicts and promote sustainable security in the
world states that out of the 177 countries considered in the ranking Sudan,
Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Haiti, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Central
African, Iraq, Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Pakistan, and Yemen, Nigeria has once
again been ranked 14th most failed state in the world. A closer look will show
that Nigeria is struggling for position with some countries that are at war and
whose economies have been battered by such wars.
Economic
indicators from CBN say inflation rate in Nigeria as at September 2011 was
10.3(CBN, 2012).According to the 2011 result which is the seventh annual Failed
States Index report, Nigeria maintains its same position as that of last year,
except Kenya which is now more improved than Nigeria and moved out of its 13thposition
of 2010, while Yemen that was a step better than Nigeria, now in twelfth position,
a step poorer.
In the field of
economics the coexistence of vast wealth in natural resources and extreme
personal poverty, as is found in developing countries like Nigeria, is
described as “resource curse”.The term “resource curse” has come to
be more widely understood to mean an abundance of natural resources which fuels
official corruption resulting in a violent competition for the resource by the
citizens of the nation. Nigeria’s exports of oil and natural gas – at a time of
peak prices – have enabled the country to post merchandise trade and current
account surpluses in recent years. Reportedly, 80 percent of Nigeria’s energy
revenues flows to the government, 16 percent cover operational costs, and the
remaining 4 percent go to investors. However, the World Bank has estimated that
as a result of corruption, 80 percent of energy revenues benefit only 1 percent
of the population.
There are some who do
not even accept that there is poverty in Nigeria. For instance, Nwuke (2004:20)
quotes former Governor of Bauchi, Adamu Muazu, as saying that:
There is no poverty in Nigeria. We
have no business with poverty in Nigeria. I totally disagree with those people
who say Nigeria is in difficulty. We must know that we are endowed with so many
beautiful things people take for granted.
Such
denial of the pervasiveness of poverty in Nigeria fails the acid test when
juxtaposed against the findings of Nwuke
(2004:20) which claim that each year with depressing consistency; Nigeria is
declared among the 20 poorest countries in the world, its substantial wealth
notwithstanding.
Pointers
in Nigeria show that the number of those in poverty has continued to increase.
For example, the number of those in poverty increased from 27% in 1980 to 46%
in 1985; it declined slightly to 42% in 1992, and increased very sharply to 67%
in 1996. By 1999 when the Obasanjo civilian administration came to power,
estimates had it that more than 70% of Nigerians lived in poverty. That was why
the government declared in November 1999 that the N470 billion budgeted for
year 2000 was to relieve poverty. Before the National Assembly even passed the
2000 budget, the government got an approval to commit N10 billion to poverty
alleviation programme.In the 2001 budget, the government increased the allocation
to poverty alleviation programme by 150%. This idea of poverty alleviation was
received with high hopes especially given the speed with which the
administration tackled the fuel problem as soon as it came to power. Poverty
alleviation was seen as a means through which the government could revamp the
battered economy and rebuild self-esteem in majority of Nigerians who had been
dehumanized and traumatized through past military regimes(Ogwumike:2003).
Poverty
in Nigeria also has geographical perspective. According to the Nigeria’s Draft
Report on Millennium Development Goals, the Northern part of the country
accounted for the higher incidence of poverty which largely predominated in the
rural areas. Specifically, the report showed that the rate of poverty was as
high as 84% in states like Zamfara, Sokoto, Gombe and Bauchi during the period
1980-2004. In the Southern part, poverty had increased between 1980 and 1996,
but dropped in 2004. Infact, in all states, except Bayelsa, the rate of poverty
was more than half their population (Akintunde and Amaefule 2005).
Reviewing the period
2004-2010, Kale stated that while the North-West and the North-East geopolitical
zones had the highest poor, the South-West recorded the lowest with 59 per
cent. Whereas Sokoto tops the list of poor states with 86.4 per cent, Niger
followed with 43.6 per cent.
Comparatively,
while poverty showed as high as 72.2% in the North-east, it had the lowest in
the South-east with 26.7%. This confirmed the findings by the World Bank Study
in Nigeria which showed that there were differences between the North and South
with more concentration of the poor in the Northern zone (cited in National
Bureau of Statistics, 2005).
Successive
government efforts at eradicating the endemic poverty in Nigeria date back to
pre-Independence era. During the period, the colonial administration drew up
schemes, programmes and strategies and laid out resources for the first two 10
year development plan which ended in1955. The policies were targeted at local
processing of raw produce such as groundnuts, palm oil, hides and skin.
Following
independence, the periods between 1962-1968, 1970-1974, 1975-1980, and 1981-1985
aimed at provision of basic infrastructure, diversification of the economy,
reducing the level of unemployment rates, achieving dynamic self-sustaining
growth and raising the living standard of the people. Many of these programmes
includedOperation Feed the Nation (OFN) in 1976, Free and Compulsory Primary
Education (FCPE) in 1977, Green Revolution in 1980. Others include the
establishment of the People’s Bank of Nigeria (PBN), Community Development Bank
(CDB), Nigeria Agricultural Co-operative and Rural Development Bank, Family
Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP), among others. However, many of these
programmes failed because of corruption, lack of continuity, improper
implementation, poor supervision, etc.
As
a result of failure of the foregoing programmes to significantly reduce the
poverty index in Nigeria, and in compliance with the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) targets, the Obasanjo civilian regime established the National
Poverty Eradication Programme in 2001. In terms of structure NAPEP was designed
to involve all stakeholders in poverty eradication in Nigeria namely the
federal, states and local governments. Others include civil society
organizations, research institutions, the organized private sector, women
groups, and concerned individuals (Okoye and Onyeukwu, 2007).
As
a federal government sponsored project, NAPEP was subsequently launched in
various states of the federation, including Abia state and the federal capital
territory,Abuja. Incidentally, no serious empirical study has been conducted to
evaluate the activities of NAPEP and its impact towards poverty eradication in
Abia state. This study has been designed to bridge this gap in literature. The
broad aim of this study is to theoretically and empirically evaluate the impact
of NAPEP towards poverty eradication in Abia state within the period under
study.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page……………………………………………………………………… i
Approval Page………………………………………………………………… ii
Certification…………………………………………………………………… iii
Dedication……………………………………………………………………… iv
Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………… v
Abstract………………………………………………………………………… vi
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………… vii
List of Tables…………………………………………………………………… ix
List of figures………………………………………………………………… x
CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION………………………………….………………………… 1
- Background of the Study………………………………………………
- Statement of the Problem……………………………………………… 9
- Objectives of the Study……………………………………………… 14
- Significance of the Study……………………………………………… 15
1
CHAPTER TWO:
LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………………… 17
2.1 Youth Unemployment…………………………………………………… 17
2.2 Social and
Personal Well-Being………………………………………… 36
2.3 Budgetary Allocation
and Performance……………………………… 59
2.4 Gap
in the Literature…………………………………………………… 66
CHAPTER THREE:
METHODOLOGY
3.1. Theoretical
Framework………………………………………………… 67
3.2 Hypotheses…………………………………………………………… 72
3.3 Research Design……………………………………………………… 72
3.4 Population……………………………………………………………… 73
3.5 Sample Size and Sampling Technique………………………………… 74
3.6 Sample Frame………………………………………………………… 74
3.7 The Validity and Reliability of Measuring Instruments… 75
3.8 Methods of Data
Collection …………………………………………… 75
3.8.1 Primary Sources………………………………………………………… 77
3.8.1a Interviews……………………………………………………………… 77
3.8.1b
Questionnaires………………………………………………………… 78
3.9. Methods of Data Analysis…………………………………………… 78
3.10 Logical Data Framework……………………………………………… 80
CHAPTER FOUR:
BACKGROUND TO POVERTY ERADICATION
IN NIGERIA
4. a. 1. Introduction
…………………………………………………………… 83
4.a.2. Regional Agricultural Programmes…………………………………… 86
4.a.3. Operation Feed the Nation (OFN)…………………………………… 87
4.a.4. Free and Compulsory Primary Education (UPE)………… 88
4.a.5. Green Revolution ……………………………………………………… 89
4.a.6. Better Life Programme (BLP)………………………………………… 91
4.a.7. Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF)…………………………………………… 92
4.a.8. Family
Support Programme (FSP) …………………………………… 97
4.a.9. Agricultural Development Programme (ADP)………………………… 97
4.a.10.
River Basin Development Authorities (RBDAS)……………………… 99
4.a.11. Universal Basic Education Programme (UBE) …………… 100
4.a.12. Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP)………………………………
102
4.a.13. National Directorate of Employment (NDE)……………… 105
4.a.14. Directorate for Food, Roads and Rural
Infrastructures (DFRRI)…….. 116
4.a.15. Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP) ……… 118
4.a.16. Directorate of Social Mobilization (MAMSER)…………… 119
4.a.17. National Accelerated Food Production Programme………….. 128
4.a.18. National Economic Empowerment and Development
Strategy (NEEDS) 128
4.a.19. Poverty Alleviation Programme (PAP)…………………….. 130
4.a.20. National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP)……… 132
CHAPTER FIVE:
The Impact of NAPEP’s
Programmes on Job Creation
and Poverty Eradication in
