An Assessment of Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP) in Benue State, Nigeria

Transcription

1 ISSN: International Journal of Advances in Management and Economics Available online at RESEARCH ARTICLE An Assessment of Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP) in Benue State, Nigeria Adam A. Anyebe Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Administration, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria- Nigeria. Abstract In spite of the efforts by successive governments to eradicate extreme poverty in Nigeria, poverty incidence has remained high. This study, therefore, attempted to evaluate the implementation of NAPEP with a view to ascertaining its effectiveness to eradicate absolute poverty in Benue State. Questionnaire, personal interviews and documents were employed in data collection and the data were analyzed using tables, simple percentages and t-test. The study revealed that NAPEP activities were poorly coordinated among local, state and national offices. It was therefore recommended among others, that there should be an effective coordination in the implementation process among NAPEP offices at the various levels. Keywords: Coordination, Effectiveness, Eradication, Extreme Poverty, Implementation. Introduction Nigeria is acclaimed to be the World s 7 th largest exporter of crude oil, 6 th largest producer in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), Africa s largest oil exporter, and the 5 th biggest source of United States oil imports. Such a country is easily, a good potential for effective reduction and possibly eradication of poverty [1,2]. This notwithstanding, according to World Bank rankings, Nigeria is one of the top five countries that have the largest number of poor people. India ranks number one with 33% of the world s poor while China ranks second with 13%.They are followed by 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 [3]. It was reported that as many as 112 million or 70.0% of Nigeria s population lived below poverty line in 2013 [4]. Successive administrations in Nigeria have therefore, initiated programmes to reduce poverty in the country. One of such was the Agricultural Development Projects (ADP) of 1975 and Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), these were introduced by the Obasanjo Administration. The objective of the programmes was to ensure that Nigerians had adequate food to combat hunger, which is regarded as one of the elements of poverty reduction in the country. In 1980, the Alhaji Shehu Shagari Administration continued in this line by introducing the Green Revolution programme [5]. The Babangida Administration widened the scope by introducing a programme that was meant to combat both absolute and relative poverty. The Administration established the Directorate of Food, Road and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI). This was primarily aimed at reducing absolute poverty, while the creation of Peoples Bank was aimed at addressing relative poverty [6]. The Community Bank and Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) were established by the Abacha Administration. The two programmes were targeted at reducing poverty from the polity, whether absolute or relative. However, the Central Bank of Nigeria s 1999 study on the rate of poverty in Nigeria concluded that poverty has been on the increase in the country. During the democratic dispensation, in 2000, the Obasanjo Administration created a Poverty Alleviation Programme (PAP). PAP was introduced to urgently create a menial-based 200,000 jobs. Adam A. Anyebe Jan.-Feb Vol.5 Issue

2 The immediate objective was to mop up from the labour market, in the shortest time, some 200,000 unemployed persons in the face of increasingly restive youth. The projects undertaken by the participants of the programme were to stimulate economic activities and improve the environment. It was also aimed at bringing down the rate of social vices and stem rural-urban drift. The participants were paid N3,500 (local currency) eachmonthly for a period of twelve months as they were engaged in direct labour activities such as patching of potholes, vegetation control along highways, afforestation, environmental sanitation, maintenance of public buildings, among others [5]. After some months of implementation of PAP, the unabated criticisms of the programme by the public made government institute a panel to review it. The panel finally recommended its discontinuation because of the following identified problems: over-centralization, unsustainable design, uncoordinated management, overpolitisation, irregular payment, and lack of monitoring logistics and high-level and lowlevel corruption [7]. The federal government then established NAPEP in 2001, which was a replacement for PAP. This shows that government was not just trying to alleviate poverty but was aiming to eradicate it in the country. The main areas of NAPEP were categorized into four schemes: Youth Empowerment Scheme (YES), Rural Infrastructure Development Scheme (RIDS), Social Welfare Services Scheme (SOWESS), and National Resources Development and Conservation Scheme (NRCDS) [8].Thus, the main objective of NAPEP was to work with relevant agencies of government to coordinate and monitor all direct poverty eradication efforts in Nigeria; and the guiding of the periodic poverty eradication policy reviews through the use of comprehensive data and regular poverty incidence assessment to improve effective use of resources. This was a clear demonstration and commitment of government to address the challenges faced by the poor in the country. However, in spite of this commitment by government, poverty rate remains high and the living standard continues to decline. For example, 40.8% of people living in Benue State in 1992 were poor, but then the incidence rose to 53.3% in 2004, in spite of the introduction of NAPEP in 2001 [4]. Is this situation a sign that NAPEP is not an effective programme to eradicate absolute poverty in Benue State? The objective of this study, therefore, is to attempt to evaluate the implementation of NAPEP with a view to ascertaining its effectiveness to eradicate absolute poverty in the state. It is hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between the coordination of NAPEP activities and its success in eradicating extreme poverty in Apa, Logo and Katsina-Ala local government areas of Benue state. Literature Review Nigeria is the most populous nation in Africa with a population of over 140million people in According to the final result of the 2006 population census, the country has an annual population growth rate of 3.2%, which is one of the highest in the world [6]. There are many interconnecting and inextricable links between population and poverty. Poverty is widespread, severe and varies among the 36 states and communities in Nigeria. The poverty rate in the country increased from 27% in 1980 to 66% in 1996 and by 1999 it was estimated that more than 70% of Nigerians lived in poverty [9]. It has been realized that poverty anywhere is a threat to peace, security and prosperity everywhere [7]. This reality has in the recent past motivated governments across the globe to redouble effort aimed at improving conditions of living of the people. In the same vein, conscious effort to eradicate all forms of extreme poverty and hunger are made. These efforts by governments of developing nations translate into introduction of economic empowerment and development strategies. The origin of poverty in Nigeria can be traced to the shortcomings in the various development plans in the country. The first attempt at planning for socio-economic Adam A. Anyebe Jan.-Feb Vol.5 Issue

3 development took place in This was part of the exercise that produced the plans which covered all aspects of government activities. This development plan which fell within the colonial administration was formulated and implemented solely by the colonial masters without any input, whatsoever from the Nigerian people [10]. Thereafter, a total of four post-independence development plans have been formulated and implemented- the , , , plans. In these development plans, communities were not fully involved in the planning and implementation of their social services and this partly, contributed to the problems of the plans. Successive administrations in Nigeria have initiated policies in an attempt to reduce poverty in the country. Two of such were the Agricultural Development Projects (ADP) of 1975 and Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), these were introduced by the Obasanjo Administration. The objective of the programmes was to ensure that Nigerians had adequate food to combat hunger. In 1980, the Shagari Administration continued in the same vein by introducing the Green Revolution programme [6]. The Babangida Administration as earlier stated enlarged the scope by introducing a programme that was meant to deal with both absolute and relative poverty. The Administration established the Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI). This was aimed at reducing absolute poverty, while the creation of Peoples Bank was targeted at addressing relative poverty. The Abacha Administration established the Community Bank and Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF). The two programmes were targeted at reducing poverty from the polity, whether absolute or relative. The Obasanjo Administration established the Nigeria Agricultural and Corporative Rural Development Bank (NACRDB) to address relative and absolute poverty [6]. The Federal Government further designed and implemented a number of development initiatives and programmes geared towards achieving the country s vision and development goals. These initiatives and programmes include the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategies (NEEDS I and II), Seven-Point Agenda, and Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). All these programmes were targeted at poverty reduction, wealth creation and employment generation [7]. During this democratic dispensation, the Administration created NAPEP to eradicate extreme poverty. Incidence of Poverty in Nigeria Although the poverty level has been declining in the sub-saharan Africa on the average; progress made in Nigeria has been negative as the poverty rate has increased over the years. The incidence of poverty in the country using US $1 per day increased from 28.1% in 1980 to 46.3% in 1985 and decline to 42.7% in The number however increased to 66% in 1996 and to about 70% in Although the report of the National Planning Commission (NPC) indicates that the poverty has reduced to about 54.4% in 2004 [11], it further rose to 69% in 2010 [4]. In fact, the United Nations (UN) Human Development Reports (HDR) of 2006 rated Nigeria s poverty rate between 1990 to 2005 to be 70.8% of the populace. This trend is far above the sub-saharan Africa average of 41.1% in In addition, the 2009 Human Development Index (HDI) of the UN revealed that using $1.25 as poverty line, the Nigerian poverty rate between 2000 and 2007 was set at 64.4% of the entire populace. If estimated at $2, the percentage would be 83.9%. This of course, shows the severity of the incidence of poverty in the country. Incidentally, Nigeria is one of the countries of the world endowed with rich land and natural resources; the country occupied the world 13 th position as the largest producer of petroleum and 6 th largest in OPEC as at As at the beginning of 2006, the country was rated as the 8 th highest producer of petroleum in the world, producing 2.1million barrels of petroleum per day at an average price of US$50-60 per barrel [12]. The country has an estimated proven reserve of 32 billion barrels-sufficient Adam A. Anyebe Jan.-Feb Vol.5 Issue

4 for 37 years at the then prevailing rate of production. The gas reserve if fully exploited would place her in the world s top ten gas producers as the estimated gas reserves were 174 million cubic feet and would last for 110 years at the then prevailing rate of production [13]. In terms of annual percentage of growth in Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the country only recorded an average of 2.4% from This could be regarded as very poor compared to other countries like Ghana (4.3%) and Egypt (4.6%) [11]. In fact, the 2009 Human Development Report (HDR) of the UN expressed Nigeria s average annual growth rate from to be 0.91%. This is unlike other developing countries like Benin Republic with an average of 1.46% and Burkina-Faso with an average of 1.82%within the same period. Between 1960 and 2004, a sizeable percentage of Nigeria s resources were increasingly invested in poverty reduction programmes yet poverty incidence has been on the rise. Obadan [14] notes that there has been an increase in poverty incidence within and among locations in Nigeria. Benue state had poverty incidence of 49.7% in 1992 and 53.3% in 2004 as earlier indicated in this work. Thus, in spite of the increased revenue and the corresponding increased financial commitment to poverty eradication programmes the people of Benue State were getting poorer. Empirical Studies One of the studies conducted on poverty eradication programme was by Joseph [15] which was entitled An Assessment of Impact of Poverty Reduction Programmes in Nigeria as a Development Strategy, The researcher pointed out that poverty eradication programmes of successive governments in Nigeria from 1970 neither made significant impact on the living condition of the poor nor led to the eradication of poverty in the country. The researcher suggested that the poor were more likely to associate with poverty reduction programmes if they were allowed to participate in the initial policy design of such programmes. He went further to say that poverty reduction programmes should be properly packaged in such a way that government would go into partnership with the people in order to make implementation smooth and successful. While the study could be commended for pointing out that effective poverty eradication programme may lead to an improvement in the lives of the poor, the research did not make an in-depth assessment of the effectiveness of the various agencies involved in the poverty eradication programme. Another work by Asaju [16] on the assessment of poverty eradication programme in Nigeria with particular reference to NAPEP activities in Kastina and Kogi states revealed that even though the programme claimed to have adopted participatory (bottom-top) approach, it was not so in reality as the major stakeholders were not allowed to participate in the policy making and implementation of the programme. The study also revealed that there was lack of fairness in the distribution of application forms, and the selection of beneficiaries. The study went further to say that the service delivery by NAPEP was insignificant due to poor implementation. While the research may be said to have succeeded in assessing the strategies and mode of implementing NAPEP in the two states, it failed to address the issue of coordination of the programme with the poverty eradication agencies in the country. The research was also unable to specifically address the issue of the claim of ownership of the programme by the beneficiaries which might have led to the commitment to the programme. Furthermore, a research by Abdullahi [7] which focused on the implications of social policies for poverty eradication and development in Gombe state showed that the implementation of poverty reduction programmes in the state was poor. Although the study addressed the issue of relevance of social policies in poverty eradication programme, it failed to address the issue of administrative and managerial variables in the programme. Adam A. Anyebe Jan.-Feb Vol.5 Issue

5 Finally, Samuel [17] in his own study found that the role of NAPEP in capacity enhancement micro-credit scheme and examination of its effect on capacity enhancement and the living condition of the poor in Enugu State was not significant. While the study might have succeeded in assessing the strategies and modalities of implementing NAPEP in the state, it failed to also tackle the issue of weakness in the implementation of the programme. The reviewed literature definitely addressed some aspects of NAPEP, they have however, failed to address some issues such as coordination which is the pre-occupation of this study. Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework for this study is drawn from the work of Rensis Linkerts linking Pin-Model which to a large extent depicts representation and participation in an organisation. The model is based on the principle of supportive relationship whereby it is assumed that every thought and action by any member of the organisation is done with a view that it is meant for the benefit of the whole organisation or system. In Linkert s words: An organisation will function best if its personnel function not as individuals but as members of a highly effective workgroups with high performance goals. Consequently, management should endeavour to develop these effective groups, linking them into an overall organisation by means of people who hold overlapping group membership. The superior in one group is a subordinate in the next group, and so on through the organization [18]. Linkert insists that if a relationship of members of an organisation/society is patterned to be in line with the individual cultural heritage and desires, then members would view the experience (relationships) as supportive and one that builds and maintains sense of personal worth and importance [18]. Thus, a model geared towards the need of the members of group or society would be suitable to incorporate policies/ programmes that would be part of the organisation/society. Linkert s model rested on three principles. The principle of supportive relationship; The use of participatory procedure in decision making where appropriate; and Concern for high performance of goals rather than emphasizing job description and formal relationship. The principle of supportive relationship underscores the importance of cooperation among members of the organisation/society in their relationships and articulation of interests. It shows the need to promote community of interest amongst members of the society /organisation which fosters coordination. According to Rensis Linkert s Linking-Pin-Model, participatory decision making procedure in planning and implementing activities or programmes in a society promotes coordination. He is of the view that the government s structure would consist of linking-pin model of people in groups and not of individual. Vertical and horizontal relationship is assumed to be the order of relationship,which will invariably promote blending or meshing of activities of the organisation into a harmonious whole. The structural aspect of organisation would evolve from continuous participation in committees, conferences and consultations. Other structural methods that show evidence of planning, organisation and controlling would feature in the attempt to archieve high performance goals of the organisation without necessarily falling into the pitfalls of the bureaucratic arrangements. In Linkert s model, shared leadership becomes the common feature of the organisation, because, through the overlapping relatioships, between the level and units of the organisation, short distinctions between the level and units would have disappeared. According to this model the national coordination body of NAPEP link-ups vertically with all levels of government; thereby the state government on the other hand links up with the people at the local government level. This is to promote overlapping relationships among the Adam A. Anyebe Jan.-Feb Vol.5 Issue

6 national implementing body, state governments, local governments, and the people at the local level. For example, the linking-pin model best describes the poverty eradication programme implementation from the national poverty eradication programme body (NAPEP); down to the state implementing body or state poverty eradication programme (SPEP). Further down to the people at the local government level (LGPEP). Linkert suggested that, vertical and horizontal relationship would be archieved through conferences, committees, meetings, rules and regulations and standardization of activities to ensure the success of the programme on poverty eradication or any programme for that matter. Linking-Pin Theory is relevant to this research as the theoretical framework for the fact that effective administration of NAPEP requires inter-twine correlationship among the implementation officers, the staff, various institutions of NAPEP and other relevant public and private organizations that complement the programme. The theory is also relevant as it addresses the issue of inputs in both human and material resources which are all significant towards poverty eradication.this is the fulcrumupon which this study is built. Research Methods Sample Selection and Data Collection Six senior members of staff of NAPEP at local, state and national headquarters were interviewed. The interviews were intended to extract from the managers of the programme their reflections on the system with which they were actively engaged. Each interview lasted between 30-40minutes and it took the form of discussion organized around the issue of coordination of NAPEP activities. All the interviews were preceded by formal request and the issues were raised in the and text- messages. Replies were received indicating willingness to grant the interview and the scheduled time for the interview. Notes were taken down and the relevant jottings were read to the hearing of the interviewees for their consent. A semi-structured interview method was used to avoid rigidity of highly structured schedules which sacrificed depth for standardization; at the same time, avoiding the weakness of standardization by the unstructured interview. Hence, staffs of local government poverty eradication implementing unit, state office and national office were interviewed on such issues of the programme and implementing process. The questionnaire method was also used in the study because of its reliability in providing required information and also permits wider coverage at minimum cost. The population of this study was drawn from the 24 local government areas of Benue State and the state is divided into three senatorial districts. Thus, Apa local government area represents Benue southern senatorial district, Logo local government area represents Benue central senatorial district, and Katsina-Ala local government area represents Benue north senatorial district. However, from the available records, the total number of beneficiaries of poverty eradication programmes in Benue state senatorial districts was 1680 beneficiaries. A sample size of 100 was drawn from each local government with Apa having 33 beneficiaries, Logo, 33 and Katsina-Ala having 34 because of its relatively large size. The sample size of 100 was drawn using aformula prescribed by Asika: n=n/1_(b)2 [5].Secondary data were obtained from publications of National Bureau of Statistics, National Assembly Statistical Information, National Population Commission, and NAPEP. From table 1, it can be clearly noted that 25.0% of the respondents from the staff category rated the level of coordination among these offices to be as ineffective and 30.0% of them viewed that the coordination was very ineffective. But 15.0% were undecided. None of respondents was of the view that the coordination was ineffective. Thus, we can deduce that, the coordination of activities among the three offices of NAPEP is very ineffective. Adam A. Anyebe Jan.-Feb Vol.5 Issue

7 Table 1: Responses on Effectiveness of Coordination among the Federal, State and Local Government NAPEP offices Option Frequency Percentage (%) Very Effective Effective Undecided Ineffective Very ineffective Total Table 2: Responses on Enhancement of Social and Economic Wellbeing of the Beneficiaries by NAPEP Option Beneficiaries Percentages% Strongly agreed Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly disagreed Total From table 2, 65% of the respondents disagreed with the assertion that social and economic wellbeing of the beneficiaries were enhanced by NAPEP. Thus, we can say that NAPEP has not enhanced the social and economic wellbeing of its targeted population in the selected local government areas. Test of Hypothesis It is hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between the coordination of NAPEP activities and it success in eradicating extreme poverty in Apa, Logo and Katsina-Ala local government areas of Benue state. Using one tail test, only the H0 is tested. In this case, once the H0 is accepted, the H1 is rejected and vice versa. The independent variable (x) in this hypothesis is the coordination of NAPEP activities while the dependent variable (Y) is the success in eradicating extreme poverty. The level of significance for the study is 95% (0.05) and the degree of freedom (v) is sixteen (16).The values of the independent and dependent variables in table 1 respectively were cross-tabulated in order to test the hypothesis using the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS).The calculated value is 15.0 while critical value is the calculated value is higher than the critical or table value. Decision rule: accept the null hypotheses (H0), if calculated value is greater than the critical value and accept the alternate hypotheses (H1). Thus, in this case, the null hypothesis which states that: There is no significant relationship between the coordination of NAPEP activities and it success in eradicating extreme poverty in Apa, Logo and Katsina-Ala local government areas of Benue state is accepted and the alternate reject it. This means that there is a relationship between a coordination of NAPEP activities and its success. Major Findings There was an ineffective coordination of activities of NAPEP which manifested in the form of lack of coordination between the selected local government implementation units, state and national offices. This was generally corroborated by the interviewees who said that they hardly met or had any contact with one another to discuss NAPEP activities. This situation deviate from the principle prescribed in theoretical framework for any organisation to record any success. Adam A. Anyebe Jan.-Feb Vol.5 Issue

8 The programme has not enhanced the social and economic wellbeing of the beneficiaries because there was usually creditability problem in the selection of beneficiaries due to political pressures from key government functionary and politicians. This was attested to by the staff interviewed. Recommendations Based on the findings of the study it is recommended that: There should be effective coordination of activities of NAPEP among the local, state, and national offices for unified effort for the achievement of the set objective. References 1. National Planning Commission Report, Thomas S, Canaganajah S (2002) Poverty in a Wealthy Ecxonomy: The Case of Nigeria s. IMF Working Paper. Washington: htt/ideas.repel.org/pumfwpa/02114.html 3. Oluwole C (2014) Eradication of Poverty by NAPEP, triumph of poverty. Blueprint, Retrieved from 4. Federal Government of Nigeria: National Bureau of Statistics Reports, 2005, 2006, 2012, Anyebe AA (2014) Development Administration in Nigeria. Saarbrucken, Deutschland/Germany: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing. 6. Federal Government of Nigeria: National Assembly Statistical Information, Abdullahi MI (2008) Social Policy and Poverty Alleviation in Gombe State ( ) An Unpublished Ph.D dissertation submitted to Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria-Nigeria. 8. Aliyu A (2003) Federal Government Poverty Eradication Effort, , FEAP Publication. 9. Federal Government of Nigeria: Central Bank of Nigeria s Report, Anyebe AA (1995) Federalism and National Development Planning in Nigeria: A Case Study of the Plan, being an unpublished Ph.D Dissertation submitted to the Postgraduate School, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria-Nigeria. 11. Igbuzor O (2008) Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Poverty Eradication in Nigeria. In J Ibrahim and O Igbuzor (eds). Can Nigeria Meet the MDGs in 2015? Abuja: Centre for Democracy and Development. 12. BBC (2006). BBC World News, 16 th January IMF (2002) Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers; A Fact sheet. Available from No. 4 ( ). Principle of credibility should be strictly adhered to in the selection of beneficiaries of the programme so that the target population would be the actual beneficiaries. In this case, it is suggested that an independent body should be emplaced to scrutinize and select beneficiaries in accordance with the selection guidelines. Political interference by government functionaries and politicians in the administration of NAPEP should be avoided. [19-24]. 14. Obadan MI (2003) Poverty Reduction in Nigeria: The Way Forward. CBN Economic and Financial Review. 39(4). 15. Joseph IO (2005) An Assessment of Impact of Poverty Reduction Programme in Nigeria as a Development Programme, An unpublished Dissertation submitted to the School of Postgraduate Studies, St Clements University, Turks and Caicos Island. 16. Asaju K (2011) Poverty Reduction Programmes in Nigeria: An Assessment of National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP). An unpublished Ph.D Dissertation, School of Postgraduate Studies, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria- Nigeria. 17. Samuel UC (2011) Micro-Credit and Capacity Enhancement in Nigeria: An Evaluation of NAPEP in Enugu State, An Unpublished Thesis, Submitted to Postgraduate School, University of Nigeria, Nsukka-Nigeria. 18. Ibrahim Y (2014) Assessment of NAPEP in Poverty Eradication in Selected Local Governments in Kaduna State. 19. Federal Government of Nigeria: Federal Ministry of Education. 20. Federal Government of Nigeria: National Population Cencus of 2006, final population figures, Federal Government of Nigeria: National Poverty Eradication Programme, Flantz R (1997) (Translated Ed.) Hanaeudhad Publishers. 23. UN Human Development Index, UN Human Development Report, Adam A. Anyebe Jan.-Feb Vol.5 Issue