CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
Poverty is a global phenomenon which affects continents, nations, and peoples differently. It afflicts people in various depths and levels, at different times and phases of existence and development. As a matter of fact, there is no nation or people that can be said to be absolutely free from poverty. What is markedly different is the intensity, depth or prevalence of this malaise. Nations in Sub-Sahara Africa, South Asia and Latin America reflect the highest level of poverty, and consequently the lowest level of socio-economic development. These regions equally have an attendant higher level of social insecurity, violence, unrest, crime, poor capacity utilization and generally unacceptable low standard of living.
As it has been mentioned above, poverty manifests itself in different and various dimensions, and hence is susceptible to varying definitions and understanding. The Central Bank of Nigeria (1999) views poverty as “a state where an individual is not able to cater adequately for his or her basic needs of food, clothing and shelter, is unable to meet social and economic obligations, lacks gainful employment, skills, assets and self esteem and has limited access to social and economic infrastructure such as education, health, portable water and sanitation; and consequently, has limited chance of advancing his or her welfare to the limit of his /her potentialities”. Whereas this definition of poverty is deductive, the World Bank (2000) on the other hand utilized inductive approach to uncover various dimensions of poverty such as well-being, psychological, basic infrastructure, illness and assets. One of such definitions is “the lack of what is necessary for material well-being, especially food, but also housing, land, and other assets. In other words, poverty is the lack of multiple resources that leads to hunger and physical deprivation”. Another of such definitions is “the lack of voice, power, and independence that subjects them to exploitation. Their poverty leaves them vulnerable to rudeness, humiliation, and inhumane treatment by both private and public agents of state and the hierarchy of society from whom they seek help”.
Nigeria, ranked among the 25 poorest countries in the world, started its independent nationhood with a poverty level of hereby 15% of its population in 1960, and is today struggling to bring it down from about 70% of its current teeming population of about 140 million people (2006 estimates). Of the number of the poverty stricken people, about 73% is concentrated in the rural areas where illiteracy prevalence is high, portable water and health facilities are rarely available, road and electricity infrastructures are either unavailable ill-managed, or under utilized. The World Bank and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)’s 2000 Human Development Index (HDI) of 0.461 aptly indicates the deplorable state of the nation’s level of poverty and low human development. This is in spite of the fact the country is richly endowed with all kinds of water, agricultural and mineral resources. In fact Nigeria’s proportion of the poor has doubled over the last two decades, during which time the country received well over $300 billion in oil and gas revenue. Paradoxically, Nigeria’s level of revenue and endowment are in opposite direction with her poverty level. For instance, according to World Bank, and UNDP (2001) Statistics, Nigeria which impressively ranked 6th and 7th in petroleum export and petroleum production respectively, is ranked 194th in Gross National Product (GDP) per capita and is unenviably classified as the 25th poorest nation in the world.
However, the above scenario has not come into being as a result of nonchalant attitude and non recognition of the problem at hand. It has also not come by as a result of lack of response to the yearning of the teeming poor people to be liberated from their rather deplorable and frustrating state of near-despair.
No Nigerian Government, be it military or civilian, has come without introducing and leaving behind one form of poverty alleviation or reduction programme meant to reduce the level of poverty, give hope and succor to the poor and, or move towards some sort of wealth creation. Strategies, policies and plans have been articulated; programmes and projects have been formulated and executed over the years. For instance, at independence in 1960, poverty eradication efforts in Nigeria centered on education, while Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), the Green Revolution, Peoples Bank of Nigeria (PBN), Community Banks (Now micro-finance banks), Directorate of Foods Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFFRI), Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP), Better Life for Rural Women, Family Support Programme (FSP) and National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP) Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) have all existed at one point or the other during the period under review. These programmes have been implemented mostly through a top-bottom approach, originating from the central government and implemented through state offices down to the local level. The implication has been that at every point in the implementation of these policies, state governments across the nation are executing a uniform programme, though at different paces with recognition of state peculiarities.
Cross River State as one of the 36 states in the Nigerian federation, and one of the six states in the South-South geo-political zone has not been insulated from the various efforts at poverty reduction before, during and after the period under review. Though successive governments in the state have tried to address the issue of poverty as captured above, the effect of the policies and programmes on reducing poverty among the populace has been that of mixed feelings. The questions bothering a great number of the citizens are:
If so much efforts have been made towards reducing poverty, why is poverty on the increase?
What is the effect of the increasing poverty rate on the economy of the state, and the nation.
Are there, (or are there not) better ways or strategies of implementing poverty reduction programmes to make them more effective?
1.2 Statement of the Problem
It has been known that almost every government in Nigeria has embarked on one form of poverty reduction programme or the other.
However, what has remained unanswered is the extent to which these policies and programmes have actually impacted on the target population — the poor.
Recent studies on the subject of poverty and its reduction agencies, as well as programmes indicate that considerable gap exists between the target objective — reducing or eradicating poverty, and the achievement of this target objective. It seems that the efforts of various governments are ineffective and therefore not much has been done to actualize the expected benefits. For poverty reduction agencies, their results do not seem to justify the huge financial allocations they have received over the period. Poor people’s perceptions of poverty reduction institutions are largely that of ineffectiveness and irrelevance in their lives as government’s poverty reduction activities contribute little in their struggles to survive and rarely help them to escape poverty. More disturbing is the fact that despite the colossal amount of resources committed to those programmes, the poverty situation aggravates, and more and more people fall into the poverty region instead of escaping from it.
1.3 Objectives of the Study
The overall purpose or objective of the study is to assess the impact of the various poverty reduction policies and strategies that have been formulated and implemented between 1987 and 2007 (twenty year period of review) in Cross River State.
Specifically, the objectives of this study are:
To identify these policies and strategies for poverty reduction
To assess their effectiveness and impact on the poor or target group
To assess their capability for reducing poverty
To identify reasons for their success or failure
To suggest and recommend appropriate poverty reduction strategies / policies for Cross River State.
1.4 Research Questions
For the purpose of this research, the following research questions will be addressed.
What impact have the poverty reduction policies had on health practices among the citizens in the state between 1987 and 2007?
How have the poverty reduction policies for the period under review affected the housing pattern in Cross River State?
To what extent have the poverty reduction policies of the Cross River State government between 1987 and 2007 impacted on the nutritional practices of the citizenry?
How has the poverty reduction policies of the Cross River State government impacted on the availability and access to education among the citizenry?
What is the impact of poverty reduction policies on the availability of public utilities in Cross River State within the period under review?
To what extent have the poverty reduction policies of the Cross River State government affected the level of self reliance among the poor within the period under consideration
1.5 Research Hypotheses
The following research hypotheses will be formulated to guide the study:
Health practices have not been significantly influenced by the poverty reduction policies of the Cross River State government.
The poverty reduction policies have had no significant impact on the availability of housing in the state.
There has been no significant relationship between poverty reduction policies and improved nutrition among the target citizens in the state.
There has been no significant impact of the poverty reduction policies on the availability and access to education by the poor.
There has been no significant impact of the poverty reduction policies on the availability of public utilities in the state.
Poverty reduction policies have not significantly influenced the level of self reliance through skills acquisition among the poor in the state.
1.6 Significance of the Study
Achieving significant results reducing poverty often hinges on what is done, how it is done, when it is done and whom it is targeted at. It is obvious from several studies that poverty reduction policies in Nigeria have failed to achieve their stated objectives. Several reasons may be adduced for this failure. It therefore requires concerted efforts by all stakeholders to contribute to the success of this all-important but elusive goal. Such efforts can only be meaningful if it stem from an empirical study in order to realize not only her own local targets and objectives, but also to help her in achieving the global lofty objective of eradicating poverty by the year 2015. Pointedly therefore, this study is going to be significant for a number of reasons.
The study is expected to be a concerted effort to identify, articulate and highlight the existence, causes, and effects of poverty in Nigeria.
It is an effort at streamlining poverty reduction strategies towards making them more potent, and hence more beneficial to the target population.
The study is also expected to benefit a number of groups, especially stakeholders of poverty reduction efforts such as public and private sector players, planners, managers, coordinators and monitors of poverty reduction agencies and the poor who are the ultimate beneficiaries of the efforts and indeed the general public.
The research is expected to become part of a data bank for operators as well as policy makers in poverty reduction activities.
It will also arouse the interest of students and researchers to conduct more researches in the field of poverty reduction.
1.7 Scope of the Study
This study will be limited to an assessment of the impact of poverty reduction policies in Cross River State between 1987 and 2007. In this work, the researcher is concerned with what impact these policies have made in the areas of :
Health care practices
Housing, shelter and accommodation
Nutritional practices, habits and patterns among poor people
Availability and access to education and training
The presence or otherwise of public utilities like electricity, pipe born water, sanitary services, access roads, social services, security, etc.
Engendering self reliance among the poor people in Cross River State.
1.8 Research Assumptions
In conducting this study, the researcher is going to make a member of assumptions, which it is hoped will help to put the work in proper perspective. Among these assumptions is the following:
That within the period under consideration, poverty reduction policies have remained ongoing irrespective of the frequent change in leadership which characterized that period.
That the beneficiaries (or the target population) of such programmes have had the opportunity to interface with the different types of policies over this period and as such are able to give a dispassionate assessment of the impact such programmes have had on them.
That the subjects for this study shall have been born at least 18 years ago.
1.9 Limitation of the Study
Due to the confidentiality of answer to be received from respondent i.e. top management to questions asked, the researcher was unable to gather all answer to questions asked but this ahs not served as detriment to the quality of conclusions and recommendations proposed at the end of the study.
Also, the research work was limited because of obvious reasons such as lack of financial resources to X-ray all possible areas little time required for the completion of the research and inadequate information data base as affects all other projects of its kind in our present economic situation.
1.10 Definition of Terms
In the context of this research work, certain terms will be used in a manner that can be understood only in relation to the discussion here. This is not to suggest that new meanings are being created for such terms, but the terms are used here operationally. Some such terms are briefly explained here.
Absolute Poverty: This refers to insufficient or total lack of necessities and facilities like food, housing, medical care, education, social and environmental services, consumer goods, recreational opportunities, neighbourhood amenities and transport facilities, etc.
HDI: This refers to Human development Index which is a measure of longevity, knowledge and income. Longevity is measured solely by life expectancy at birth, while knowledge is measured by adult literacy rate.
Indicators of Poverty: Generally refer to measures of economic performance as well as the standard of living of the population. This normally combines the measures of income or purchasing power or consumption with those social indicators, which highlight availability and access to the basic necessities of life.
Poverty: As will defined elsewhere, is a state where an individual is not able to cater adequately for his or her basic needs of food, clothing and shelter; is unable to meet social and economic obligations, lacks gainful employment, skills for self reliance, assets and self esteem; and has limited access to social and economic infrastructure such as education, health, portable water, and sanitation; and consequently, has limited chance of advancing his or her welfare to the limit of his or her capabilities.
Poverty reduction: Means all formal activities geared towards lowering the rate and prevalence of poverty in the country.
PRSP: Poverty reduction strategies paper is a position paper introduced by the World Bank that is a development plan borne out of collaborative efforts of a broad range of stakeholders in poverty reduction. It is normally designed and implemented through the participation of all involved in one way or the other in poverty, poverty reduction and its other related issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment