CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

Poverty exist in every nation of the world today, the persistent increase in poverty becomes a serious concern and poses great threat to the survival and development of any nation. Poverty affects the people physically, mentally, socially andalso their economic wellbeing. 

Nigeria ranked among the 20th poorest countries that started its independence nationhood with poverty level of barely 15% of its population in 1960 and is today struggling to bring it down from about 71% of its current teeming population of about 162million people (World Bank, 2012). The World Bank in its 2005 report pointed out that poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa is typically higher than elsewhere in the world. They are noted for prevalence of absolute poverty in all its characteristic features. Poverty here is absolute, pervasive and chronic. Nigeria is enormously endowed with human, agricultural, petroleum, gas, and largely untapped solid mineral resources but rather than recording remarkable progress in socio-economic development, the country remains one of the 25th poorest countries in the world (Ekpe, 2011).

According to World Bank ranking, Nigeria is one of the top five countries that has the largest number of poor people. India has 33% of the world‘s poor, China ranks second with 13%, and then Nigeria where 7% of the world‘s poor live. Bangladesh has 6%, while the Democratic Republic of Congo has 5%. The ‗big five‘ are home to 760 million of the World‘s poor (Oluwole, 2014), the 2010 poverty index indicated that about 112 million representing 67% of the country‘s 167 million people are living below poverty line in 2013, and presently about 70% of the total population of Nigeria are poor whileabout 4.6m people of the entire population are unemployed (NBS, 2015). Most of these poor people reside in the rural areas.

Poverty anywhere constitutes threat to prosperity, findings in 2004 indicated that poverty was more acute in rural than urban areas in Nigeria and that some geo-political zones were particularly harder hit than others (Muhammed, 2006). The poverty levels by zones as at 2008 shows that South -South has 34.1%, South East 25.7%, South West

43.0%, North Central 67.0%, North East 72.2% and North West has 71.2% (Soludo,2008). The proportions of those classified as the extremely poor, moderately poor and not poor Nigerians stood at about 38.7%, and 31% respectively in 2010(Oluwole, 2014). This situation became worse following the increase in the cost of goods and services by over 100% as a result of fuel subsidy removal in January, 2012, coupled with the decline in the purchasing power of most Nigerians, especially at the grassroots level. The relative, absolute, and a dollar-per-day poverty measures rose in 2011 to 71.5%, 69.9%, and 62.8% respectively (Ibrahim, 2012). These are grim statistics to explain the seriousness of the poverty situation in Nigeria.

Although past regimes and administration in Nigeria had attempted to tackle poverty through the creation of institutions and agencies such as Nigerian Agricultural Cooperative Bank (NACB), Peoples Bank, Family Economic Advancement programme

(FEAP), River Basin Authorities, Operations Feed the Nation, Universal Basic Education (UBE), Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI) National Directorate of Employment (NDE) and similar agencies.All of these programmes had minimal impact on the people and did notfully succeed in reducing poverty.

With the birth of democracy and inauguration of Nigeria‘s fourth republic in 1999,

Poverty Alleviation Programme (PAP) came on board as an interim anti-poverty measure (Nwaobi, 2003). As observed by Chukwuemeka (2010), the programme was targeted at correcting the deficiencies of the past efforts of alleviating poverty through the objective of providing direct jobs to 200,000 unemployed people (Obadan, 2009).

Despite the introduction of Poverty Alleviation Programme, poverty incidence in Nigeria remained perpetually high. Government in its effortidentified poor coordination of activities, dwindling resources flow, failure to build in sustainable mechanism, lack of complementary efforts from beneficiaries, poor coordination leading to low accountability, lack of well-articulated policy for poverty alleviation, lack of sustainability of programme and projects, absence of achievable target setting, absence of monitoring, evaluation and impact assessment, absence of effective coordination and collaboration between the agencies of government and among the three tiers of government and duplication of functions resulting in unnecessary rivalry among institutions as the constraints of past poverty alleviation programmes (Onwe and Chibuzor, 2015).

Following a review of these problems, the federal government identified the need to:

i. Streamline and rationalize the functions of core poverty alleviation institutions and agencies; ii. Reduce their overlapping functions; iii. Ensure effective performance; iv. Improve coordination of poverty eradication activities and

       v.                    Improve collaboration with State Governments, Local Governments, and

International Donor agencies. (Onwe and Chibuzor, 2015).

The aforementioned therefore, provided the grounds for the establishment of the National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP) by the federal government in

January 2001by the civilian regime of President OlusegunObasanjo, NAPEP is the Programme which focuses on the provision of ―strategies for the eradication of absolute poverty in Nigeria‖ (FRN, 2001). NAPEP is complemented by the National Poverty Eradication Council (NAPEC) which is to coordinate the poverty-reduction related activities of all the relevant Ministries, Parastatals and Agencies. It has the mandate to ensure that the wide range of activities are centrally planned, coordinated and complement one another so that the objectives of policy continuity and sustainability are achieved. The programme adopted a four scheme strategy for implementation.These are, Youth Empowerment Scheme(YES) which is aimed at economic empowerment of youths including male and female. It programmes include Capacity Acquisition Programme, Mandatory Attachment Programme as well as Credit Delivery Programme. Social Welfare Schemes (SOWESS) which is also aimed at ensuring the provision of basic social services which include strengthening the economic power of farmers under the Farmers Empowerment Programme among others, Rural Infrastructure Development

Strategy (RIDS), and National Resource Development and Conservation Scheme

(NRDCS). 

1.2 Statement of Research Problem

In the face of endemic poverty, hunger, unemployment and progressive disempowerment of a large chunk of the population, the prospect of escaping life threatening situations and achieving sustainable growth and development is therefore linked to the establishment of NAPEP in Nigeria (Edoh 2003).The harmonized Nigerian living standard survey (2010) released by the National Bureau of Statistics puts the

Nigeria‘s poverty incidence at 69% or 112.47 million people are classified as people living in poverty. In 2013, the National Poverty level was put at 70%.

To tackle the rise in poverty trend, NAPEP was introduced in 2001. In the case of Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state, several strategies of NAPEP were put in place in the quest to reduce poverty. To enable participants acquire new skills in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state under the Capacity Acquisition Programme, 3000 beneficiaries were trained in welding, carpentry, hairdressing, food processing and preservation, snack making, cosmetology etc between 2010 and 2014 (NAPEP-Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos, 2014).

Similarly, between 2008 to 2014, over 1000 unemployed graduates were provided with job training and were exposed to relevant skills in their field of specialisation under the Mandatory Attachment Programme of NAPEP and later attached to employers of labour were each participant was paid the sum of #10,000 monthly to further empower women and youths. The Farmers Empowerment Programme was initiated to create job opportunities among farmers in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state by increasing access to loans, farmlands and improved seedlings, fertilizers, pesticides and farming implements so as to improve output or productivity. Since 2003, over 940 farmers have benefited from the FEP of NAPEP. 

NAPEP has received the sum of #129,803,316, between 2009 and 2012 for multipartnership programmes in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state,why is there still very high incidence of poverty in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state inspite the enormous investment by NAPEP in the state to reduce poverty? The study therefore proffers answers to the following research questions.

1.3 Research Questions

i.             To what extent has Capacity Acquisition Programme of NAPEP reduced Poverty in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state?

ii.           To what extent has Mandatory Attachment Programme of NAPEP reduced Poverty in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state?  iii. To what extent has Farmer‘s Empowerment Programme of NAPEP reduced Povertyin Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state?

1.4 Objectives of the Study

The central objective of this study assessedthe strategies of NAPEP on Poverty

Reductionin Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state.

Specifically, the objectives of the study are:

i. To ascertain the extent to which Capacity Acquisition Programme of NAPEP has reduced Poverty in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state.

 ii. To examine the extent to which Mandatory Attachment Programmeof NAPEP has reducedPoverty in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state.

 iii. To determine the extent to which Farmers Empowerment Programme of NAPEP has reduced Poverty in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state.

1.5 Statement of Hypotheses

The hypotheses for this study are:

Ho1: There is no significant relationship between CAP and Poverty Reduction in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state

H02: There is no significant relationship between MAP and Poverty Reduction in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state

H03: There is no significant relationship between FEP and Poverty Reduction in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state

1.6 Significance of the Study

There have been studies on poverty and the activities of NAPEP in Nigeria covering various dimensions. This study apart from examining the causes of the failure of previous anti-poverty initiatives, this study will also identify major pitfalls that could hinder government efforts through NAPEP in reducing poverty.  This will help in improving on the success achieved and effecting correction in those areas that are deficient.  Thus, this research has been rationalised by the motivation to fill in the gap in knowledge. Scholars like Nnamdi (2010) conducted a study on the impact of NAPEP on rural populace with emphasis on agriculture, employment, micro finance and the provision of social amenities to rural populace. Asaju (2011) also conducted a study on NAPEP in Kogi and Katsina States focusing on operational structure of the programme and implementation strategies of its various schemes(Youth Empowerment Scheme, Rural Infrastructure Development Scheme (RIDS), Social Welfare Service Scheme, National Resources Development Scheme).

Abdullahi (2008) carried out a study on implications of social policies for poverty eradication and development in Gombe state. Much preference was on social policies in poverty eradication programme. Samuel (2011) also conducted a study on the role of NAPEP in capacity enhancement of micro-credit scheme and examination of its effect on capacity enhancement and the living condition of the poor in Enugu State.

Furthermore, the outcome of this study shall assist such future poverty eradication programmes initiators, especially improvement of the programme‘s performance and

increasing its benefits to the target group. This study therefore hopes to expose to policy makers if the strategies employed byNAPEPon Poverty Reduction in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state is with or without limitations. This study will also serve as a spring board or a point of reference for other researchers, students and practitioners who are interested in solving the problem of poverty in Nigeria, management and staff of NAPEP as well as beneficiaries of its various schemes would benefit greatly from this study because, the study would expose areas of strengths and weaknesses of the programme for future action.

1.7 Scope and Limitations of the Study

The focus of this study is on the assessment of the strategies of NAPEP on poverty reduction in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state. The study covered the period between 2008 to 2014. The choice of this period has helped to explain the extent to which Capacity Acquisition

Programme (CAP), Mandatory Attachment Programme (MAP) and Farmers

Empowerment Programme (FEP) of NAPEP has reduced the incidence of poverty in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state. It also explains the extent to which Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state Government has played its role of supporting the success of NAPEP in the State. Meanwhile, the period 2008 to 2014 experienced steady increase in poverty in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state as NBS, (2012)puts it that between 2009 – 2010, absolute poverty stood at 79%, 62.9% of household do not have access to primary education in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state, 76% of the entire populace lack any source of power in 2010, 78.1% of the entire populace are living in poverty in 2013, and 95.5% of people in the state only have access to fire wood as the type of fuel used for cooking within the same period (NBS: 2012), and these have greatly affected the lives of the people of the State. 

The study is limited to three (3) areas of Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state namely;Area 1 from  Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos Southern senatorial district, Area 2 from Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos Central senatorial district and Area 3 from Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos North senatorial district. National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP) established by Federal Government of Nigeria in 2001 provided the framework for assessment of poverty reduction in Adamo, Ikorodu,Lagos state. The justification for the choice of NAPEP is simply because, it is hinged on the fact that it is one of the most comprehensive policy on poverty reduction programmes in Nigeria, it has a national outlook which cut-across 774 local governments in Nigeria, it is laudable and considering the fact that some of its programms are in line with the activities of the state, three out of the numerous programmes of NAPEP that is, CAP, MAP and FEP are the areas this study addressed.

The study is not without some limitations,perhaps the most debilitating limitation of this study is the inadequacy of data. Vital documents like financial reports and records of NAPEP in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos statewere mostly beyond the reach of the researcher, the researcher made use of available records. The study covers the periods 2008-2014, however in an attempt to reach out to the beneficiaries of NAPEP in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state, the study is limited to 2014 beneficiaries, there was also the limitation of the inability to reach-out to the trainers of NAPEP in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state as every effort proved abortive. There was also lack of cooperation by respondents, as well as difficulties in reaching out to the State coordinator of NAPEP in Adamo, Ikorodu, Lagos state. In addressing these limitations, it was through the help of one of the directors in one of the local governments that facilitated access to the contact of the state coordinator of NAPEP in the State. Also, through the help of the CDOs, alongside five research assistants the beneficiaries of NAPEP were reached at various locations in the study areas.

1.8 Operational Definition of Key Terms

Assessment:Gearhard and Gearhard (1990) see assessment as a process for evaluating the strength and weakness of a programme with the aim of providing a base for efficiency. Assessment is the process of measuring the level of performance of an individual or group in a particular area or field of endeavour. It is a tool for measuring the level of success of programmes in a system. For the purpose of this study, assessment simply means the act of judgement or forming opinion about something very carefully, it has to do with evaluation.

Strategy:A plan that is directed towards achieving thedesired purpose. It could also mean the process of planning something or putting a plan into operation or action. In this study, NAPEP strategy geared towards poverty alleviation which include CAP, MAP and FEP.

Mandatory Attachment Programme:This is a long term work experience acquisition and training programme organised only for Universities and Polytechnicgraduates, as well as holders of the Nigerian Certificate of Education (NCE). Trainees are attached to employers for two years in order to acquire relevant job skills.Participants are expected to be paid a token of N10, 000 naira monthly for the duration of their attachment.

Capacity Acquisition Programme:This is a programme targeted at holders of First School Leaving Certificates and Secondary School leavers. Participants of this programme are trained for three months. Trainees are expected to receive a monthly stipend of 3,500 naira, after which they are settled in employment and offered trade equipment at a subsidized price for them to set up their own business.

Farmers Empowerment Programme: This is a programme design for rural dwellers that depends primarily on farming as their source of living. For the purpose of this study, farmer‘s empowerment programme has to do with alleviating the yearnings and sufferings of rural dwellers through provision of improved seedlings, pesticides, fertilizers, tractors for mechanised farming, and agricultural loans with the sole aim of improving their output, income level and their standard of living in general.

Poverty: Johnson (1996) defines poverty as a situation where the resources of an individual or families are inadequate to provide a socially acceptable standard of living. Poor people are those who are unable to live a decent life. For the purpose of this study, poverty is when an individual lack access to apprenticeship training in welding, plumbing, painting, mechanic, carpentering, volcanizing, fashion designing, interior decoration, tailoring, and as well lack access to agricultural loans, improved seedlings, subsided fertilizers, knapsack sprayer, wheel barrow etc. If an individual lack access to all the aforementioned, that individual is said to be poor.

Poverty Reduction: Poverty reduction means ‗decrease' in the level of ‗lack‘ of or

‗want‘ of basic necessities of life of an individual or community. It has to do with improving the living standard of mass of the low income populace residing especially in rural areas and making the process of their development self-sustaining. For the purpose of this study, it is the creation of general condition of living where individuals can cater for his/her basic needs of food, clothing and shelter through training in various skills such as welding, plumbing, painting, mechanic, carpentering, volcanizing, fashion designing, interior decoration, tailoring, investment inducement seminars, and as well have access to agricultural loans, improved seedlings, subsided fertilizers, knapsack sprayer, wheel barrow, etc. These can lead to increase of the individual income and by so doing, reducing the level of need or want of basic necessities of life, create employment and by extension increase in income.

Effectiveness: Effectiveness as used in this study simply means producing the wanted, desired or intended result. It has to do with producing a successful result within a stipulated time or at the end of a programme or a given period.

You either get what you want or your money back. T&C Apply

Talk to us right now: (+234)906-451-7926 (Call/WhatsApp)

---