An Assessment Of The Socio Economic Indicators Of Poverty In Kaduna North Local Government Area


Price: 2000 Naira (BSC, MSC)




1.1 Background of the Study

One of the major issues in development is how to tackle rural poverty. The constraints to developing rural areas as well as the problems of this critical sector have come to loom very large. Rural areas present problems that are paradoxical of its natural resource endowment. Rural communities are marginalized in terms of most basic elements of development. The inhabitants tend to live at the margin of existence and opportunities as most rural communities lack portable water, electricity, health care, educational and recreational facilities and motorable roads.

Attempts to put rural areas on the course of development in Nigeria over the past decades have not yielded much impact. Conditions have continued to worsen and poverty has become a major issue in the rural areas inspite of their potentials. A common thread that runs through the various perceptions of “poverty” connotes material and non-material deprivation and lack of control over resources to meet essential needs. If the incidence of poverty runs counter to the development aspiration, its alleviation or eradication becomes a worth-while endeavor in any socio-economic system irrespective of ideology and structural/organizational nomenclature. Poverty alleviation has become a prime focus of economic policy, policy research, analysis and development management. The need becomes particularly compelling in developing countries where poverty is most dehumanizing (Obadan, 2003).

Therefore a major concern to governments, multilateral institutions and policy makers in different countries is to identify appropriate strategy for poverty alleviation in the rural areas so as to bring about rural development.

1.2 Statement of Problem

Poverty in Nigeria has been on the increase as statistical data available indicated. At the attainment of independence in 1960, the rate stood at about 15% of the population and by 1980 it grew to 28.1%. In 1985 however, the poverty level was 46.3%, it dropped to about 43% by 1992. The percentage however increased to 66% in 1996 and to about 70% in 2000 (Igbuzor, 2006a, NAPEP 2001). In fact, between 1990 and 2005, the country recorded an average of about 70.8% of the populace living in poverty (UNDP, 2006). There were numerous institutional and policy frameworks set up by various governments to curtail such poverty situation in the country. These measures covered almost all sectors of the economy such as education, health, agriculture, transport, housing and the financial (Overt, 2001). Some of the measures were through the introduction of programmes such as the Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), Directorate for Food, Roads, and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI), National Directorate of Employment (NDE), and Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP) among others.

The increased rate of poverty in the country and the inability of the existing poverty eradication measures to significantly erase poverty led to the establishment of the NAPEP in January, 2001 to serve as the highest poverty eradication body in the country. This body coordinates and monitors activities of all poverty eradication institutions in the country.

Unfortunately, even with the adoption of poverty eradication measures, poverty still persisted in the country. In 2002, the HDR of the UN indicated that no fewer than 70% of the Nigerian population lived below the poverty line and the country was ranked as 148th out of 173 countries in terms of HD. By 2009, it was placed as the 19th country with poor HDI out of 177 countries and 20th out of 134 developing countries in terms of Human Poverty (UNDP, 2009). In addition, the country had the highest number of poor people in Africa and the third in the world after china and India (Igbuzor, 2006a). In 1992, the poverty incidence for Kaduna State was 32.0% while in 1996, it rose to 67.7%. In the country as a whole, the incidence increased from 28.10% in 1980 to 46.1% in 1985, then dropped slightly to 42.7% in 1992 and skyrocketed to 65.6% in 1996. Among the six geo-political zones, the North-West of which Kaduna State is included has the highest poverty index of 72.2% (NPC and NAPEP: 2009). Estimating this poverty incidence by profile of people by state using the poverty incidence and the result of 2006 population figures showed that out of a total population of 6,113,503 in Kaduna state, an estimated 3,062,865 are poor people. This constitute about 50.1% of the entire population of the State (NBS, Abuja, 2014). The fundamental question of this study is that, to what extent has implementation strategy of NAPEP contributed to its failure or success to eradicate poverty among Nigerian citizens and particularly, Kaduna State? This is the central problem which the research investigated.

1.3 Aim and Objective of the Study

The main aim and objective of this study is to examine the assessment of the socioeconomic indicator of poverty in kaduna north local government area. In the bid to achieve that, the following secondary objectives were developed in order to; i.) assess the level of effectiveness of implementation, monitoring and evaluation of NAPEP activities and operations in the selected Local Government areas;

ii.) assess the level of funding of NAPEP in the selected Local Government areas.

1.4 Research Questions

In addressing the core problem of this research, questions are derived and answers shall be sought for the following:

i.) To what extent have the implementation, monitoring and coordination of NAPEP activities been effective?

ii.) To what extent has the funding of NAPEP activities resulted in poverty eradication?

iii.) To what extent socioeconomic indicator of poverty in kaduna north local government area?

1.5 Research Hypothesis

For the purpose of this research, the following hypotheses would be tested in order to achieve the objectives for the study:

1. H0i: There is no significant relationship between Coordination of NAPEP activities and poverty eradication kaduna north local government area.

 2. H0ii: There is no significant relationship socioeconomic indicator and poverty in kaduna north local government area.

1.6 Significance of the Study

Various researches on the issue of poverty and the role of NAPEP towards poverty eradication, socioeconomic in Nigeria have been conducted by researchers and scholars. Researchers like Asaju (2011) studied NAPEP with focus on the operational structure of the programme and implementation strategies of its various schemes as well as the appropriateness of the programme to poverty alleviation.

Nnamdi (2010) also conducted a study on the impact of NAPEP on rural populace. The area of focus by the researchers were the issues of the contribution to agriculture, employment provisions, micro finance and social amenities provisions by NAPEP to the benefitting communities. Other scholars like Mahmudu (2008) studied the role of NAPEP on the development of the society with special focus on its contribution to Women and the factors that affect the success of the programme. Isah (2008) also conducted research on the issue of social policy as it affects poverty reduction with attention on the issues of the effectiveness of social policies of the Gombe State Government on poverty reduction and the various poverty eradication measures of the government between 1996 and 2006. This research is however unique for its focus on assessment of NAPEP in the implementation of its programme. The research would also be significant to policy makers and administrators at federal, state and local governments who are inextricably concerned with making policies on poverty eradication. Also, national or international donor agencies or institutions interested in the issue of poverty eradication, would find this work relevant and significant because it will add to the existing literature in the field. 10

The administrators and staff of the NAPEP and its beneficiaries would also benefit from this research as it will expose the crucial function that implementation play in any programme or activity. It is also hoped that findings of this research would be significant to researchers, academicians, students and interested readers in making further research in the field of poverty eradication and development in general. It would also serve as a source of reference in understanding the concept, nature, and importance of implementation and coordination to any human endeavour.

1.7 Scope of the Study

This study is centered on the assessment of the socioeconomic indicator of poverty in kaduna north local government area using NAPEP programme as a study; part of the areas with a high percentage of people living in poverty in the State. It is clear that NAPEP has uniform programmes and schemes as well as structure in all the 36 states of Nigeria.

The study also selected some key programmes out of the numerous NAPEP programmes. These programmes included the Youths Empowerment Scheme (YES) which was selected based on its emphasis on skills acquisition and development, wealth generation among the youths who are of course the largest part of the active population in these Local Governments of Kaduna State. The second programmewas the Farmers Empowerment Programme (FEP) which was selected for its focus on farmers who formed more than half of the population of the selected Local Governments. The study covered the period of 2008 to 2013. The period was selected because this was the period that poverty incidence has become terrible. It thus becomes imperative to determine the effect of poverty eradication within the period.

1.8 Limitation of the Study

In carrying out this research many factors served as constraints:

1. The limitation of the research title as just assessment of the socioeconomic indicators of poverty.

2. Financial Limitation.

3. Inadequate Time: time factor constitutes the major limitation of this research study. It relates to the fact that the time for research work was short because it was combined with lectures, studies and examination.

4. Negative attitude of respondent: the problem facing the researcher with regards to the respondents relates to the non-cooperation and uncompromising attitude some respondents in giving.

1.9 Definition of Terms

A study of this nature used certain concepts whose meanings need to be operationally defined in order to have a clear understanding of their applications within the context of the work. Thus, the concepts applied in this research and their meanings are discussed below:

Coordination: The term coordination as used in this study should be taken broadly and it is not meant to exclude joint work. It is meant to cover the spectrum of joint activity in terms of collaboration between the National, State and Local Government Monitoring Committee.

Management Capacity:

It refers to the assignment of responsibility within an organisation in which the employees primarily:

a) Manage the organisation or a department, subdivision, function, or component of the organisation

b) Supervise and controls the work of other supervisory, professional, or managerial employees or manages an essential function within the organisation, or a department or a subdivision of the organisation. Managerial capacity in this study, refers to the assignment of responsibilities as well as the ability, skill and competency of staff within NAPEP for the actualisation of the poverty eradication programme.

Socio-Cultural factors: Socio-cultural factors as used in this study relate to influences derived from the customs, traditions and beliefs of an individual’s culture and can be a key determinant in whether or not a person or group of people agree with modern innovations or reforms.

Funding: Funding is the act of providing financial resources, usually in the form of money, or other values such as effort to time, to finance a head, program, and project, usually by an organisation or government.

Poverty Poverty is said to be more easily recognised than defined. Johnson (1966), defined poverty as: “a situation when the resources of individuals or families are inadequate to provide a socially acceptable standard of living.” But, Iyayi (2005), viewed poverty as a state of deprivation in the means needed to sustain life at some level of human dignity.

Poverty Eradication Poverty eradication refers to erasing the incidence of poverty in a certain population usually after certain intervention. Poverty in a particular society is said to have been eradicated if there is matured improvement on the factors mentioned under the definition of poverty already discussed.

Quality of Staff Quality of staff refers to the effectiveness and efficiency of the staff of an organization in discharging their responsibilities.

Get Complete Materials

Abiolian VTU SHOP
Our Market – Abiolian Online Store
Abiolian Jobs Portal
Send Bulk SMS @ Abiolian Get Bulk SMS
Get Final Year Project @ Project Gist International

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy