AN APPRAISAL OF THE POVERTY ALLEVIATION PROGRAMME AS A TOOL FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AMASIRI DEVELOPMENT (CENTER AS A CASE STUDY).



DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE
ABSTRACT
The essence of this project is to make a thorough research Input into the study of poverty Alleviation Programmes as a Fundamental tool for the general economic development in Nigeria. How the people have fared with the system is the major concern of this work depicted in Amasiri context. In carrying out this research project, both primary and secondary data were employed. Direct interview and questionnaires with selected persons from communities were embarked upon (based on random sampling). This served as the primary data Source. Then, texts, thesis, journals, Newspapers and magazines. Were consulted to form the secondary data sources. In testing the hypothesis, a chi-square analysis or technique was employed to depict the relationship between poverty Alleviation programmes and development. In the course of this work, the researcher found out that poverty Alleviation programmes have significant impact on poverty level in Amasiri Development Center of Ebony State. Based on the above, the researcher made some   Recommendations that can help to eliminate those factors that hamper the full actualization of the objectives of the poverty Alleviation programme in Amasiri Development Center in particular and Ebonyi State of Nigeria in general.



TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page                                                                                                                               i
Approval Page                                                                                                                      ii
Dedication                                                                                                                             iii
Acknowledgment                                                                                                                 iv
Table of Contents                                                                                                                 v
Abstract                                                                                                                                 vi
CHAPTER ONE: Introduction
1.1       Background of the Study                                                                                        1
1.2       Statement of the Problem                                                                            5
1.3       Objective of the Study                                                                                            6
1.4       Research Hypothesis                                                                                               7
1.5       Significance of the Study                                                                            7
1.6       Scope and Limitation of the Study                                                                        8
CHAPTER TWO: Literature Review
2.1       Theoretical Framework on Poverty                                                                       10
2.2       The Concept of Poverty                                                                                          10
2.3       Causes of Poverty                                                                                                    14
2.4       Characteristics of Poverty in Nigeria Education Level of the
Heads of the Household                                                                             15
2.5       Measurement of Poverty                                                                                         17
2.6       Poverty Situation in Nigeria                                                                                   18
2.7       Reviews on Current Approaches to Poverty Alleviation                                   20
2.8       Strategies for Poverty Alleviation in Nigeria                                                      22
2.9       The Concept of Development                                                                                24
CHAPTER THREE: Research Methodology                                        
3.1       Source of Data                                                                                                          26
3.2       Method of Data Collection                                                                                     26
33.       Population of the Study                                                                                          27
3.4       Sampling Techniques and Sample Size                                                                27
3.5       Method of Data Analysis                                                                                        28
3.6       Statistical Method Used                                                                                          29
CHAPTER FOUR: Presentation and Analysis of Data                                    
4.1       Analysis of Data                                                                                                       33
4.2       Test of Hypothesis                                                                                       39

CHAPTER FIVE: Summary of Findings Conclusion and Recommendation 
5.1       Summary of Findings                                                                                              43
5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                                44
5.3       Recommendation                                                                                                     45
Bibliography                                                                                                 48
Appendix I                                                                                                                50
Appendix II                                                                                                               51

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1              Background of the Study
Any life or aspect of life that is unexamined is not worth living. Critical monitoring and review of human system is therefore a proper thing to do at all times and in all situations otherwise the system denied of adequate feedback might suffer discontinuity. This is especially so with a dynamic phenomenon like poverty in an ever changing world.
One of the major objectives of every government is to achieve a sustainable economic growth and development. Basically, this objective is accomplished through and among others, putting in place effective and efficient development policy programmes and measure, sound socio-political and economic development programmes. Development Economists have propounded that for a nation to attain radical economic growth and development, it must posses certain ingredients such as the development of human, material and natural resources.
In view of this, the problem of poverty has become a global issue because of its economic impact on the growth and development of the national economy. For instance, a nation that is economically poor in human, material and natural resources will encounter serious difficulties in her effort to achieve rapid economic development. Therefore, for any nation to attain economic growth and development it must develop its resources.
Poverty is a living condition in which an entity is faced with economic, social, political cultural and environmental deprivations (Ajakaiye and Olamol; 1999).It is a state of involuntary deprivation to which a person, household, community or nation can be subjected. Furthermore, poverty can be defined in its absolute sense as a situation where a population or section of population is able to meet only bare subsistence essentials of food, clothing, and shelter in order to maintain minimum standard of living
(Balogun, 1999).The definition requires that a yard-stick to be set which can be used to assess who is poor and who is not. This leads to the emergence of the concept of poverty based on the level of income per capita or consumption pattern of the urban centers within the country.
Consequently, the simplest definition of poverty usually implies not having enough to eat, poor drinking water, poor sanitation, poor nutrition, unfit shelter, high infant mortality rate, low life expectancy rate, poor environmental conditions, low level of energy, low educational opportunities, poor health condition due to inadequate health care, lack of productive assets, general lack of economic infrastructure and lack of active participation in the decision making process either  it affects the individual or residential layout or national arena be it management or political(Olaclune,1999).Thus, the misfortune of continued chronic poverty is exacerbated by the traditions in methodological commitments to poverty alleviation rights, international financing and donor agencies have since discovered that  government have a role to play in poverty reduction. Thus, in recent times, all effort in the urban centers aimed at promoting urban development, social development, and infrastructural development. Today, it is known as poverty alleviation.
Ordinarily, one would expect a certain level of growth in the socio-economic status of a developing nation like Nigeria at this stage. A fact which is inscribed in the constitution that government shall control the national economy in such a manner as to secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every Nigerian citizen on the basis of social justice (constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria 1979, Act 10(a)).But despite this fact, the citizenry are living below standard and met with difficult situation daily. The conspicuous fact is that the minimum wage paid to senior civil servant can in no way square up with their daily expenses at this high rate of inflation. Most of them cannot feed their families let alone pay school fees, buy clothes or even provide shelter for them.
Consequently a good number of them now put in their motorcycles or cars on the roads for transport services as part time jobs in order to make ends meet. What then becomes of junior civil servants? This is a billion dollar question. Today, one can establish without fear of contradiction that the present difficult situation in the country has made many young Nigerian girls and boys to accept and embrace prostitution and crime as a welcome means of livelihood both at home and abroad.
The plight of the Nigerian students is another sensitive area of interest in this research project. For decades now, no one talks of scholarship again, while tuition fees are periodically on the increase, like the recent one in Ebony state University. Even the payment of bursary awards to students has become a non issue. Thus, you hear them talk and practice stomach adjustment programmes like 0-1-0, 1-0-0, 1-0-1, 0-0-1 and so on. These are but a few faces that project hardship in this country (Nigeria).
The plant for the prosperity must address a startling paradox: more than two third of the Nigerian people are poor, despite living in a country with a vast potential wealth. Although revenue from the crude oil has been increasing over the past decade, our people have been increasingly over the past decade, our people have been falling deeper into poverty.
Finally, the emphases is on what strategy that will be adopted to arrest  the problem  of poverty alleviation programme it is the researcher’s view that to alleviate poverty to the dearest minimal level, the basic questions to ask  are; who are the poor?, why are they poor? How do they feel about their poor condition? What effort(s) have they made to alleviate their poor situation?
In view of the above, the researcher intends to showcase in this thesis the impacts and impacts of the efforts of the government, non –governmental organization and international agencies towards achieving a sustainable development through poverty alleviation programme.
1.2       Statement of the Problem
The trends of the poverty in most of the developing countries (Nigeria) have been increasing rapidly, these trends constitute. A virus, in spite of the effort made by the federal, state, local government, international and private agencies to address poverty situation through the provision of basic human needs and their sustenance.
The unreliable and inadequate public services and facilities in most part of the economy have further aggravated the living condition of the poor whose numerical strength is ever increasing.
The current economic meltdown has force many small and medium scale industrial establishments and even government establishment to lay off some of their staff, this increasing the level of unemployment and poverty in the country.
The immediate effect of poverty in Nigeria has led to the unsustainable development in the country.
This is low productivity, Lacks of capital low income, absence of modern techniques of production etc.
Consequently, the strategies so far adopted by the government in an attempt to effectively and efficiently curb the spread of the growing effect of this virus (poverty) in Nigeria over the years have not been yielding positive results.
The following question will guide the researcher in the research study;
What is the effect of poverty in Amasiri Development Center of Ebonyi State? Can the source and causes of poverty be identified in Amasiri Development Center of Ebonyi State.
Is there any relationship between poverty alleviation and economic development?
Have there been any benefits derived from poverty alleviation programmes.

1.3       Objectives of the Study:
Based on the problem  created by poverty in Nigeria in general and Amasiri Development center in particular, this work attempt to pursue the following objectives;
1.                  To X-ray. The effects of poverty in Amasiri Development center of Ebony state.
2.                  To identify the source  and courses of poverty incidence in Amasiri and how the poverty alleviation programme has helped to alleviating poverty in Amasiri development center
3.                  To analyze the relationship between poverty alleviation and development.
4.                  To find out if the people of Amasiri development center have benefited from the poverty alleviation programme, how has it affected or improved their living standard.
5.                  Finally this work intends to make some policy recommendation concerning the best strategy to be adopted by the government to alleviate poverty in Ebony state and Amasiri in particular.

1.4       Research Hypotheses
       Sequel to the statement of problems and theoretical,
The following assumptions could be made:
    H0:  poverty alleviation programmes does not have significant impact on poverty level in Amasiri Development Center.
  H1:  poverty alleviation programmes has significant impact on the poverty   level in Amasiri development Center.

1.5.    Significant of the Study
             The necessity to carry out any study hinges on the importance and value of the work to humanity.
Since the programme is a conscious effort by the government to solve poverty problem in the country there is need to conduct a statistical study on the programme in order to appraise its performance. This study will be useful to the government, academic institutions, individuals and researchers.
To the government, there will be acquaintance with respect to poverty alleviation programmes, which shall be enhanced to promote economic growth and development.
The academic institution will have more resources on poverty alleviation strategies, which shall equally add to the body of knowledge.
Individuals who consult this research work shall adopt various means of reducing poverty without solely depending on the government.
Finally, it will also serve as a reference work to other researchers who may wish to carry out research work relating to poverty alleviation programmes as a tool for sustainable economic development.

1.6    Scope and Limitation of the Study
The area of this study is Nigeria with a trim down review of Amasiri Development Center of Ebonyi State setting. In fact, the study is actually that of poverty Alleviation programme in Amasiri Development Center of Ebonyi State per belittle excursion shall be taken outside the focus area to actualize the aphorism that ‘poverty Alleviation Programme is a tool for sustainable development’.
This work is limited by time and financial constraint. The researcher could not visit some organizations and sample areas where useful information could be obtained due to time and money available to him.
 Therefore, the reliability of this research work is subject to the reliability of the statistical data published by the Federal Bureau of Statistics (FBS) and data collected from questionnaires distributed to the locality under study.
                             

CHATER TWO
                             LITERATURE   REVIEW
2.1       Theoretical   Framework on Poverty:
            The issue of poverty is a global one, which constitutes: social, political and cultural deprivation faced by a person, household, community and nation at any particular time. It is a socio-economic ‘’cancer’’ that is as old as history. The world is made of two groups, the ‘’Haves’’ and the ‘’Have not’ those who live in plenty and those who stagnate in want and familiar only with fear of hunger, sickness, and death.
            As Author Mc Cormeck (1963) has noted this was championed by Dr. BR. See, that one does not have to seek the aid of statistics to discover the widespread poverty that exist in many parts of the world today. It is visible to the naked eye; one merely has to walk in these parts of the world with one’s eyes opened.

2.2 The Concept of Poverty:
            A search of relevant literature quickly shows that there is no general consensus on the definition of poverty. Because it affects many aspects of the human condition including physical, moral and psychological, a concise and universally accepted definition of poverty is elusive. Different criteria have therefore, been used to conceptualize poverty. The most common practice is to conceptualize poverty into absolute and relative poverty. Absolute poverty has been defined as the approximate maximum proportion
of income that a family spends on certain subsistence goods(watts,1967). Aliyu in Ayemoni (2003) explains absolute poverty to be the condition  where an individual or group of people are unable to satisfy their basic requirements for human survival in terms of education, health, housing, feeding, employment, transportation etc. It refers to a condition under which there is a serious deficiency or lack of access to what are considered the basic necessities of normal life. Absolute poverty considers poverty as lack of resources to consume certain basic necessities such as food, shelter, and clothing among others.
Relative poverty on the other hand has to do with the living standard that prevails in a particular society. It is defined as the inability to attain a given minimum contemporary standard of living (D’Silva; 1992 and Odosola, 1997). While the concept of absolute poverty tends to identify those who are the poorest with the overall pattern of income distribution within a given country (Odusola, 1997).
Some analysis follows the conventional view of poverty as a result insufficient income for securing basic goods and services. Other view poverty, in part as a function of education, health, life expectance, child morality, etc. It is in buttressing the difficulties encountered in arriving at a common and generally acceptable definition of poverty that Aboynle (1997) posits that there seems to be a general agreement, that poverty is a difficult concept to handle, and that it is more easily recognized than defined. Even, attempts made to categorize some specific areas at which poverty could be viewed are fraught with lack of agreement. For instance, the organization for Economic co-operation and Development guideline on poverty Education (2002:29) stressed that “an adequate concept of poverty should include all the important areas in which people of either gender are deprived and perceived as incapacitated in different societies and local context. It should encompass the causal links between the core dimension of poverty and the central importance of gender and environmental sustainable development.
The organization fails to define poverty but rather enumerated “The core dimension”. A definition of poverty should include, economic, human, political, socio-cultural and protective capabilities on the other hand, Nairayan et al (2000:29-30) in buttressing that poverty is multidimensional, he says “definition of poverty and its causes vary  by gender, age, cultural, and other social and economic contexts. They defined poverty from such categories as, lack of voice, power and independence, well or ill living, regional gender etc.
Every poverty element like lack of power and voices are explained differently in various countries. A Ghanaian in 1995 as stated in narayan et al (2000:39) explained poverty in the dimension of lack of power and voices thus; “You know good, but cannot do good”. That is to say that such a person knows what is good, but has not got the means to do it. In the same vein, an elderly poor man in Uganda explained in his own words “The forces of poverty and impoverishment are so powerful today that it is only the government or big churches that can manage it so, we feel somewhat helpless. It is this feeling of helplessness that is painful, more painful than poverty itself”.
     Another poor man in Kenya in 1997 as reported by Narayan et al (2000: 30) said “Don’t ask me what poverty is because you have met it outside my house. Look at the house and count the number of holes. Look at my utensils and the clothes I am wearing. Look at everything and write what you see. What you see is poverty”. In relation to people, the basic concept of poverty refers to a serious inadequacy of economic conditions, a situation of individual, group or regional lack or deprivation of what are considered the necessities for acceptable living standard, a situation of not having access  to a conducive environment and the facilities and opportunities for decent living (Ukwu I Ukwu,2004). Caulking (1984), considers poverty as a condition in which people
Have little money to afford the basic necessities of life. Caulking, of course adopted income level as the basis for determining a state of poverty. Nyah (1996) sees a situation of absolute poverty when a population or a section of the population is unable to meet only its bare subsistence essentials of food, clothing and shelter in order to maintain maximum levels of living.
The Central Bank Of Nigeria (1999: 1) view 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, lack gainful employment, skill assets and self-esteem, and has limited access to social and economic infrastructures such as education, health, portable water, and sanitation and consequently has limited chances or advantages to his or her capabilities.
  The World Bank (2000) defined poverty as “the lack of what is necessary for material well-being especially food, land and other assets”. In other words, poverty is the lack of multiple resources that leads to hunger and physical deprivation. From the foregoing, it can be drawn from the conceptualization of poverty above that any attempt to design pragmatic approach to poverty alleviation has to adopt mixture of strategies since poverty is multi-faceted in scope and in dimension.       
2.3 Causes   of   Poverty:
Poverty has many causes, all of which reinforce one another. One source of poverty is the lack of basic services, such as clean water, education, and health care. Another is lack of assets, such as land, tools, credit, and supportive networks of friends and family. A third is lack of income, including food, shelter, clothing, and empowerment (political power, confidence, dignity). Some of these factors directly affect poverty. Others contribute indirectly, by producing inequality by stifling the political power of certain sectors of the population, for example or denying them their dignity or human rights. All of these factors are affected by the environment in which people live. Discrimination on the grounds of gender, race, disability, age, or ill health increase vulnerability to poverty. So do natural or human-caused shocks-market collapses, conflicts, droughts, or floods.
        The many strands of poverty intermine and can pull people into a down ward spiral. Because tackling one factor may not be enough to lift a family out of poverty, an effective poverty reduction strategy must attack poverty on all fronts at the same time.
2.4       Characteristics of Poverty in Nigeria Education        Level of the Heads of         the Household
Evidence from federal office of statistics (1999) showed that education reduces the chances of being poor. For instance, household heads per person without education exhibited the highest poverty head count ranging from 30.2 percent in 1980 to 72.6 percent in 1996, this is also collaborated by the central bank of Nigeria/world bank study (1999) that education is crucial as it provides skill and abilities, which allow households to secure productive and well paying jobs.
On the other hand, lack of education deprives the households the capacity to be gainfully employed and raise productivity and income. Thus, the low productivity and low income of the household heads are strongly correlated with their low level of training, skills acquisition and educational attainment generally.
Households   Size:
It can be depicted that poverty level consistently increase with the size of the household.(Awoseijila,1999)poverty headcount which ranged between 9 percent for a household of four members and below 80.9 percent in 1996 respectively. The central bank of Nigeria/ world bank study (1999) corroborated the nation that incident of poverty compounded in urban centers. The increase in the number of household size portends a worsened poverty situation since it implied adversely on the declining income, feeding ability and living conditions of the households.
 Household    Income
Ten different occupational categories, professional, Technical, Administration, clerical and related sales workers, service, manufacturing and processing, students and apprentices and others were identified with household heads (Federal Office of Statistics, 1999). These occupational types produces explanation for the level of poverty, since certain occupational practices are characterized by low productivity, low income and very limited access to economic resource and social physical infrastructure in the urban centers.

2.5       Measurement of Poverty
The most widely used measure of poverty is known as the head count. According to baridhan (1973) and ahluwaha (1976) head count ratio is the ratio is the ratio of individuals or households whose income falls bellow the poverty line. Another traditional measure is the poverty – gap.
This is the average deviation of the income of the poor from the poverty line. These two measures have the problems of being very insensitive to the actual income level of the poor.
Thus, a transfer from the poorest of the least poor, which raises the income of the later above poverty line, would reduce head counts while in the case of poverty –gap it will be less obvious that poverty has fallen. This problem of insensitivity seems to have been addressed by sense (1976) index sense, index relies on three parameters the head- count ratio income gap ratio as a proportion of poverty line, and the coefficient of the distribution of the income among the poor.
However, despite the elegance of the sense index which has been formalized by many scholars. It has a major setback like all others of being based on micro (household) data usually obtained through large scale household survey. In recent times opinions are now grouping towards a consensus. It is now grouping towards a consensus. It is now agreed upon that poverty embraces both material and non material aspects. The material aspect can be captured in terms of monetary (as depicted by absolute poverty).
However, poverty is not only measured by income and consumption. It also includes non- material aspects relating to quality of life, such as nutritional and health status and educational attainment (Morris 1978; world Bank 1993). Since these indicators are not easy to measure, it is a common practice to supplement income –based measures of poverty, with non income indicators such as child or infant mortality, life expectancy school enrollment, Educational  status among others.
2.6       Poverty Situation in Nigeria
Although poverty is a global phenomenon,  it has been observed that Nigeria is one of the poorest countries in the world despite its abundant natural resources. Nigeria is the 20th poorest in the world; the poverty level in Nigeria has reached an alarming stage where 70% of her population lives below the poverty line. The federal office of statistics (FOS) report for the period 1980-1996, indicates that about 67 million Nigerians are living below the poverty level. The report also indicate that during 1980-1985 the percentage of rural duelers and urban inhabitants in the core poverty bracket respectively in that same period, the percentage of moderately poor in the rural areas rose from 21.8 to 36.6 percent and 14.2 to 30.3 percent respectively. The report also indicates that the number of non – poor in both rural and urban areas dropped from 71.7 and 82.8 percent to 48.6 and 56.2 percent respectively.  The number of rural poor (million approximate) in 2008 was 28,443,456.8. Life expectancy at birth in 2007 was 188.8. Mortality rate infant (per 1,000 live birth s) in 2007 was 97.2.
The introduction of the structural adjustment programme in 1986 witnessed a significant reduction in poverty among the moderately poor, while the menace of poverty among the core poor deteriorated. For instance, there was increase from 14.8 percent in 1985 to 15.8 percent in 1992, while the moderately poor decreased during the period. The percentage of the core poor in the urban centers increased from7.5 in 1985 o 10.7 in 1985 to 26.8 percent in 1992. During the 1992 – 1996 periods, the percentage of the core poor increased from 15.8 to 31.6 percent. These imply that while rural poverty increased by 22 percent between 1992 and 1996 consequently, there was and overall decline in the standard of living.
         The obvious deduction from the above scenario is that Nigerians in general are becoming is increasingly impoverished. This is anchored on their lack of basic choice and opportunities to live a long and healthy life and to enjoy a decent standard of living.
         According to the human development report of 2009, the human poverty index  ( HPI-I), focuses on the proportion of people below certain threshold levels in each of the dimension of the human development index-living a long and healthy life, having access to education, and a decent standard of living.
       By looking beyond income deprivation, the HPI-I represent a multi-dimensional alternative to the   $1.25 a day poverty measure.
         The HPI-I value for Nigeria is 36.2%.
         According to this report the probability of not surviving to age 40 is 37.4%, adult literacy rate 1% age and above is 28.0% while the percentages of children under weight/form the age under 5 is 29%.
         However, the paradox of this issue which is baffling to development observers in Nigeria is how this situation was allowed to germinate in the midst of abundant natural resources.
2.7     Reviews On Current Approaches To Poverty Alleviation:
          Foluso Oku (1999) highlighted on the current approaches to the urban poverty, these approaches are directly to ensure measures that will effectively and sustainably alleviate the poverty level in Nigeria.
         The non-governmental organization (NGO 1999) focused on educational development, health, community organization, loan disbursement schemes and helped in the implementation of development programmes of the urban poor. NGOs suggested that with the application of the initiated programmes (UNDP, 1990) summit on urban poverty is to provide technical workshops, research and consultative programmes with others agencies to reduce the urban poverty in Nigeria. The united nation development programme (UNDP1999) summit on urban poverty is to support the government policies through creation of job opportunities and sustainable livelihood management of social development and sustainable agriculture, environment and urban poverty in the cities.
         The UNICEF (1999) summit on urban poverty looked at a physical and social problems of the urban poor in their environment. Thus reduction in infant under 5yrs and maternal mortality rate, reduction in malnutrition, universal access to safe drinking water  and sanitary means of human waste disposal, access to education etc.
         The world health organization ( WHO;1999) summit on urban poverty in the cities of Nigeria emphasizes on health priorities, preventing and controlling such diseases as HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis as well as epidemic outbreak like cholera, meningitis and waste while also working in the area of disease related to children and childhood  illness to eradicate poverty in Nigeria.
               The International Labor Organization(ILO; 1999) summit on urban poverty in an important promotion of an urban employment in different urban center was aimed at providing employment, elimination of obnoxious child labor, improvement, of labor administration, occupational safety and health issues, respect for human rights, social security, labor management information system and good governance.
         The department for International Development (DFID, 1999) summit on urban poverty strengthens the NGO’s capacity towards sustainable livelihood, democracy, human right and governance, basic education, so that the poor will be involved in all decision and design programme for development.
2.8       Strategies for Poverty Alleviation in Nigeria
           Government strategies will be centered on actions that can rapidly lead to a reduction of poverty and establish the frame work to prevent a replace. Such measure will include the following.
1.            In order to achieve the objectives of poverty alleviation programmes, the social environment will be made conducive by ensuring access of the poor to health care services, basic and adult education, good drinking water, and environmental care.
2.            Development programmes will be deliberately sensitive to the needs of woman and the disadvantaged.
3.            Monitoring and evaluating of poverty alleviation programmes will assume a major part of implementing development programmes in Nigeria.
4.            Integration of poverty alleviation objectives and programmes into the perspective plan, rolling plans national and state budgets.
5.            Efficient socio-economic management, preservative and conservation of Nigeria natural resources will be pursued in order to protect the interest of future generation of Nigerians.
6.            Government micro-economic policies will be people oriented and designed to ensure that people are not marginalized or subjected to unnecessary suffering in the pursuit of their legitimate interest and well being.
7.            Development programmes will be designed to produce a broad based development of the people and the resources they require to live a useful and productive life, with a view to achieving a balanced, equitable and sustainable economic growth and development.
8.            All effort and assistance to the poor will be complemented by a strong commitment to building the capacity of the individual and communities for self-reliance.
9.            The community and household will be used as the reference point for poverty alleviation programmes to ensure the participation of the beneficiaries in the initiation, design and management of the projects and high impact for the programmes.
10.       Credit will be made available to the grassroots and the poor for productive engagement. In addition, policies will ensure that productive assets are provided at affordable, cost effective and cost-sharing prices.

2.9      The Concept of Development
 Development is a complex phenomenon that involves many aspects of life ranging from health, education, agriculture, politics, economics and social.
 Development is also defined as making people to realize their potentials and putting them to action in order to help improving both the entire nation and oneself. It is hard work; lazy individuals develop lazy nation hence undeveloped societies.
Development is define as the fulfillment of the necessary conditions for the realization of the potential of human personality which transforms into reduction of poverty, inequality, unemployment and satisfaction of basic need; such as food, education, and certain social indicators such as housing, electricity and general high quality of life.
AZIZ (1978) summarized development as: being focus on meeting the human needs of the entire society through a strategy that would provide rapid increase in the production of certain goods and services and the distribution of land and other productive assets as well as a change of political power structure. It also involves cultural growth through education and community life creativity, freedom of association and expression.
Professor Dudley Seers argues that development is about an outcome that is development occurs with the reduction and elimination of poverty, inequality, and unemployment within a growing economy.
Economic development is the development of economic wealth of countries or regions for the well being of their inhabitants. From a policy perspective, economic development can be define as efforts that seek to improve the economic well-being and quality of life for a community by creativity and retaining jobs and supporting or growing income and the tax base. The term economic development on the other hand, implies much more, it typically refers to improvement in a variety of indicators such as literacy rates, life expectancy, and poverty rates. GDP is a specific measure of economic welfare that does not take into account important aspects such as leisure time, environmental quality, freedom or social justice. Economic growth of any specific measure is not a sufficient definition of economic development.
 On the other hand, sustainable development is that which economically viable, socially acceptable and environmentally sound. Development is not sustainable if it does not integrate all three elements. It implies long term synergy through changes in business practices and life styles, as well as the adoption of environmental and social standard to stay within the limits of available resources.

CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1       Sources of Data:
  The execution of any project is primarily dependant on the nature and quality of data that are available. To this effect, much attention is paid to the method of data collection and the sources of data being collected.  A poor method of data collection, no doubts, leads to fluctuations or errors in the data analysis and consequently lead to inaccurate conclusions. The source of data has similar effect but goes to determine the quality of the data, their reliability and degree of confidence in using such data for statistical inference. There numerous ways of data collection form statistical analysis but for this project, data collected are both primary and secondary data.

3.2       Method of data Collection
         For the purpose of this project, the researcher made extensive use of primary data collected through the help of questionnaires; structured and oral interviews were documentary sources. A questionnaire was administered based on the selected local communities in Amasiri Development center.
3.3       Population of the Study
The populations of the study were resident in Amasiri development center. It has five (5) communities namely: Ezeke, Ndukwe, Ohaechara and Poperi.
  The population size of the mentioned communities is one hundred and thirty- four thousand, four hundred and thirty-eight (134,438). Source: Federal Republic Of Nigeria Official Gazette 2009.
3.4       Sampling Techniques and Sample Size
      Kane (1987:90) define population as “a group in which all the individuals or items are singled out for study”.
In other words, who or what constitutes the population to be studied. The idea of sampling or determining sample size is to obtain a part of the population from which some information of the entire population can be inferred. The sample frame will comprise the following; Ezeke, Ndukwe and Poperi. The population sizes of the randomly selected communities are; 42, 143, 29,281, and 19,854 respectively. Thus, the total population size for the randomly selected to avoid biasness. There is need to determine the sample size by the use of Tami Taro method
Thus n= ____N ____        
              1+N (e) 2
Where n=desired population size
N=Total population size
E=maximum acceptable margin of error
1=is a constant.
Thus,
n=         N_____         
        1+N (e) 2
n= _______ 91,278
      1 + 91278 (0.0025)
n= 91,278
     91,279 (0.0025)
n= 91,278         
       228.1975         = 399
         Therefore, the sample size is 399. This random selection of 3 communities gave us a sample size of 399 persons. This was considered enough to permit the statistics compilations that was involve in the analysis.

3.5       Method of data Analysis
       In the course of this project, the numerical data collected are presented in a contingency table with a corresponding analysis. Again, the numerical data were later presented in a calculated table and proper interpretation was given.
However, on the analysis of the numerical data, and its interpretation, inference were drawn which confirms with the earlier made hypothesis in the chapter one of this project work.

3.6       Statistical Method Used
         The statistical method used by the researcher in this work is a non-parametric method of significance testing otherwise called chi-square (X2) test statistics. This method of test is employed for testing two or more population proportions.
         The essence of using the chi-square test in this project is to investigate how observed frequencies agree with the expected frequencies. Meanwhile, observed frequency is the frequency or proportion given to you or observed. The expected or theoretical frequency on the other hand is the frequency that should be calculated.
         Therefore, before we are able to compute the chi-square test statistic. The values of the observed frequency and expected frequency must be determined.
         To calculate the expected frequency therefore we use the formula.
Eij= ni x nj
              n       (i.e ith row total times jth colum total divided by the overall total).
Where: Eij=the expected frequency
ni=the  ith  the row total
nj=ith column total
n=the total frequency of all observed.
If the two values are known (that is observed frequency and the expected frequency) then, the chi-square test statistic is defined thus.
X2 =∑rc0ij2
     I=1,j=1  Eij
Where;X2=chi-square test.
∑=zigma (summation)
r=number of rows
c=number of columns
oij=the observed frequency in the ith cell of the table (that is the number of items belonging to the ith  row and ith  Columns).
Eij=the expected frequency (that is ith  row total times ith column total divided by the overall total)
Thus the acceptance or rejection of our hypothesis depends on the level of significance of the parameter.
This will enable us find out the chi-square tabulated which will be used in comparing the chi-square calculated to know whether we are rejecting or accepting the null hypothesis or the alternative hypothesis.
So, five percent (5%) level of significance will be used throughout the hypothesis testing.

CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA
         There purpose of this chapter is to present and analyze the data collected, to answer the specific questions raised by the statistical model. The sample size from the population study is 399. However, out of the questionnaires distributed to respondent, 384 questionnaires were return. In analysis the data, we made use of tables and percentages.
                     Questionnaires distributed to various people in the community of Amasiri development center.
Respondent
Distributed
Returned
%Returned
Not Returned
% Not Returned
Traders
133
127
33.1
6
40
Student
135
131
34.1
4
26.7
Civil Servant
131
126
32.8
5
33.3
Total
399
384
100
15
100
                               Emeka Field Survey, 2012
        From the above table, it is observed that out of 399 questionnaires distributed, 384 of them were returned. Considering the number given to various people in the three communities of Amasiri Development Center, out of 133 questionnaires distributed to traders, 127 questionnaires representing 33.1% were returned. In the case of student, out of 131 questionnaires, 131 representing 34.1% were returned. Out of 131, 126 representing 32.8% returned by the civil servants.

4.1       Analysis   of Data:
1. Would you rate poverty level high in Amasiri development Center?
Respondents
Traders
Students
  Civil       Servants
Total
Percentage (%)
Yes
61
63
57
181
47.14
No
38
54
46
138
35.94
No Idea
28
14
23
65
16.92
Total
127
131
126
384
100
                                           Emeka Field survey, 2012
The above table shows that 181 respondents representing 47.14% rated poverty level high in Amasiri development center while 138 respondents did not rate poverty level high in Amasiri Development Center. However, 65 respondents representing 16.92% had no idea.

Respondents
Traders
Students
Civil servants
Total
Percentage (%)
Yes
61
63
57
181
47.14
No
38
54
46
136
35.94
No idea
28
14
23
65
16.92
Total
127
131
126
384
100
(2) Is per capital income of people low in Amasiri Development Center?
Emeka Field Survey 2012
The above table shows that 181 respondents representing 47.14% rate poverty level high in Amasiri Development Center while 138 respondents did not rate poverty level high in Amasiri Development Center. However, 65 respondents representing 16.92% had no idea.
(2) Is per capita income of people low in Amasiri Development Center?
Respondents
Traders
Student
  Civil Servant
Total
   Percentage (%)
Yes
72
81
26
179
46.61
No
50
30
57
137
35.68
No idea
5
20
43
68
17.71
Total
127
131
126
384
100
                                                   Emeka Field Survey, 2012
                           The above table shows that 179 respondents representing 46.61% agreed that per capita income is low in Amasiri Development center. However, 137 respondents representing 35.68% indicated otherwise while 68 respondents representing 17.71% had no idea.
(3)  Do you agree that income inequality is the only tool for measuring poverty?
Respondents
Trader
Students
Civil Servants
Total
Percentage (%)
Yes
17
26
19
62
16.15
No
82
87
54
223
58.07
No idea
28
18
53
99
25.78
Total
127
131
126
384
100
                                                   Emeka Field Survey, 2012
              The above table shows that 62 respondents representing 16.15% agreed that income inequality is the only tool for measuring poverty while 223 respondents representing 58.07% did not agree. 199 respondents representing 25.78% had no idea.
(4)   Are you in support that poverty has significant effect on the individual’s standard of living in Amasiri Development center?
Respondents
Trader
Students
  Civil Servants
Total
Percentage (%)

Yes
81
93
65
239
62.24
No
30
31
51
112
29.17
No idea
16
7
10
33
8.59
Total
127
131
126
384
100
                                             Emeka Field Survey, 2012
It is observed from the above table that 239 respondents representing 62.24% supported that poverty has significant effect on the individuals standard of living in Amasiri development center, 112 respondents did not support it while 33 respondent representing 8.59% had no idea.
(5)     Is lack of capital a factor causing poverty?
Respondents
Traders
Students
 Civil Servants
Total
Percentages (%)
Yes
98
77
66
241
62.76
No
20
53
56
129
33.59
No idea
9
1
4
14
3.65
Total
127
131
126
384
100
                                 Emeka field survey, 2012
It is observed from the above table that 241 respondents representing 62.76% agreed that lack of capital is a factor causing poverty in Amasiri development center while 129 respondents did not agree with it and 14 respondents representing 3.65% had no idea.





Respondents

Traders
Students
 Civil Servants
Total
Percentage (%)
Yes
51
88
24
163
42.45
No
70
38
99
207
53.90
No idea
6
5
3
14
3.65
Total
127
131
126
384
100
 (6).    Does Government react towards poverty reduction through the provision of capital in Amasiri Development Centre?
                                    Emeka Field Survey, 2012
Respondents
Traders
Students
  Civil Servants
Total
Percentage (%)
Yes
63
71
68
202
52.60
No
56
49
56
161
41.93
No idea
8
11
2
21
5.47
Total
127
131
126
384
100
        The above table indicates that 163 respondents representing 42.45% agreed that government reacts towards poverty reduction through the provision of capital in Amasiri Development. However, 207 respondents representing 53.90% disagreed while 14 respondents representing 3.65% had no idea.
 (7)     Are there programmes initialed for poverty alleviation in Amasiri Development Center? 
Emeka Field Survey, 2012
     The above table shows that 202 respondents agreed that there are programmes initiated for poverty alleviation in Amasiri Development Center, 161 respondents representing 41.93% did not agreed with that while, 21 respondents representing 5.47% had no idea.
(8)    Do poverty alleviation programmes have significant impact on poverty level in Amasiri Development Center?
Respondents
Traders
Students
Civil Servants
Total
Percentage (%)
Yes
48
86
96
230
59.89
No
75
39
27
141
36.72
No idea
4
6
3
13
3.39
Total
127
131
126
384
100
Emeka Field Survey, 2012
     From the table above, it is observed that 230 respondents representing 59.89% agreed that poverty alleviation programmes have significant impact on poverty level in Amasiri Development Center. However, 141 respondents representing 36.72% disagreed with it while, 13 respondents representing 3.39% had no idea.

4.2          Test of Hypothesis:
               Having researched properly, it is pertinent to test the validity or truism of those hypotheses:
     Ho: Poverty alleviation programmes do not have significant impact on poverty level in Amasiri Development Center.
The statistical test is X2=∑(0¡-£¡)
                                                £¡
The level of significance used is given by (c-1)(r-1) ie dif=(c-1)(c-1) where:
               C=number of columns
                R=number of rows.
    There for, d.f=(3-1)(3-1)=2×2=4
Thus at 5% level of significance, the critical val ue is given as X2=9.49
       The next step is the computation of the test statistics aising question 13 from the questionnaire and question number 8 from the analysis.
Research Question 13
        Do poverty alleviation programmes have significant impact on poverty level in Amasiri Development Center?
Respondents
Traders
Students
Civil Servants
Total
Yes
48
86
96
230
No
75
39
27
141
No idea
4
9
3
13
Total
127
131
126
384
Emeka field survey, 2012
Expected Frequency= Row total × Column total
                                           Grand total of responses.

A = 230 × 127 = 76.07
            384
B = 230 × 131 = 78.46
             384
C = 230 × 126 = 75.47
            384
D = 141 × 127 = 46.63
             384
E = 141 × 131 = 48.10
             384
F = 141 × 126 = 46.27
            384
G = 13 × 127 = 4.29
            384
H = 13 × 131 = 4.43
            384
I = 13 × 126 = 4.27
          384
                                  





Contingency Table
 
 £¡
(0¡-£¡)
 (0¡-£¡)2
(0¡-£¡)2/£¡
48
76.09
-28.09
789.0481
10.37
75
78.46
-3.46
11.9716
1.53
4
75.47
-71.47
5107.9609
67.68
86
46.63
39.37
1549.9969
33.24
39
48.10
-9.1
82.81
1.72
6
46.27
-40.27
1621.6729
35.05
96
4.29
91.71
8410.7241
1960.54
27
4.43
22.57
509.4049
114.99
3
4.27
-1.27
1.6129
3.78




2228.9
                            
                            X2 = £ (0¡ - £¡) 2/£¡ = 2228.9
There for, comparing the test statistic with the critical value: 2228.9 > 9.49
DECISION: - From the computation above, we can see that the X2 calculated is greater than the X2 tabulated (i.e. the critical value). We there for reject the null hypothesis and conclude that poverty alleviation programmes have significant impact on poverty level in Amasiri Development Center.
                                     
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARYOF FINDINGS CONCLUSION AND        RECOMMENDATION
5.1  Summary of Findings
We have successfully conducted the statistical evaluation of poverty alleviation programmes (A case study of Amasiri Development Center). We employed a chi-square statistical technique in the analysis of our data. The data collected was analyzed with reference to the research questions formulated for response for the study. Thus, based on the analyzed questionnaires, the following findings where made; that poverty alleviation programmes have significant impact on  poverty level in Amasiri Development Center; per capita income is low in Amasiri Development Center ; that lack of capital is one of the factors which cause poverty in Amasiri Development Center; that income inequality is not the only tool for measuring poverty; that poverty has significant effect on the  individuals standard of living in Amasiri Development Center; that government reacts towards poverty reduction through provision of capital in Amasiri Development Center.
Some of the poverty alleviation programmes initiated in Amasiri Development Center are: Agricultural credit guarantee scheme (ACGS), Microfinance, Skill acquisition scheme were also established and other National poverty Alleviation programmes (NAPEP).
The researcher also found that microfinance has proven to be an effective and powerful tool for poverty reduction. Like many other developmental tools, however it has insufficiently penetrated the poorer strata of the society. The poorest form the vast majority of those with no access to primary health care and basic education. Similarly, they are the majority of those without access to microfinance.

5.2  Conclusion
This research project as provided an appraisal of poverty alleviation programmes as tool for sustainable development in Nigeria using a case study of Amasiri Development Center. It provides some basis for further discussion on the issues of poverty alleviation programmes. There is need to shift emphasis to target approach to poverty alleviation in Nigeria. This will require several inputs including alternative measures of poverty that are base on minimum standard either in terms of food, income or other basic needs to which minimum standard could be applied.
When poverty groups are identified on the basis of such minimum standard, it makes it easier to address their poverty problems since policies and programmes could as well be targeted at them base on aspect of needs that constitute the acceptable minimum standards.
Given the interest that poverty research has generated in the country especially the last few years, there is need to ensure that this momentum is not sustained, but should be used as a vehicle to meaningfully reduce poverty in Nigeria within the first decades of this 21st century.

5.3       Recommendation
It is indisputably true that one of the objectives of a research work is to access the success and failure of a particular venture. While such work is done, some problems are discovered which militate against the full realization of the objectives for which the venture was established. On the other hand, some feasible solutions are also discovered which when applied, can improve the rate of achieving the set objectives. In this regard we talk about the prospects of such venture or programmes as the case may be.
In this research work, therefore, we make some recommendations that help to eliminate those factors that hamper the full realization of the objectives of the poverty alleviation programmes of Amasiri Development Center in particular and that of the Federal Government in general. We also make some recommendation that can accelerate the success of the programme.
  The following recommendations are made based on the results of this research work via the questionnaires distributed and collected:
(i)        The present effort of the government and international agencies like UNDP,UNICEF,NDE etc, aimed at employment creation, skill acquisition, provision of credit facilities, enhancing income earning opportunities of the vulnerable groups among others are very relevant to poverty reduction. But they need to be properly focused on the poor. This as we have said earlier requires proper identification of the poor and their unsatisfied needs.
(ii)       Basic education can lay the foundation for human capital formation through the process of skill acquisition. Hence individuals should see education as the touch light for development. Also, government should endeavor to invest more resources in the educational sector, as this will help in the sustainable development of Nigeria in general and Amasiri Development Center in particular.
(iii)     Poverty alleviation progamme requires a holistic approach with a synergy between the governments at all levels and the civil society to achieve a radical development in Nigeria.
(iv)      Poverty reduction strategy should not focus narrowly on social welfare measures. Rather, assets redistribution and creation of incentive structures that can promote the rate and pattern of economic development should be seen as an essential component.
Considering poverty alleviation programs, adequate and affordable housing can promote calm and healthy life and thus, enhance productivity. Therefore, government should adopt measures on low-cost housing projects that will benefit the poor.
(v)       Poverty  alleviation programs on Agriculture should be aimed at providing the bulk of food requirement; providing agricultural inputs such as improved seedling and fertilizers to farmers, supplying raw materials to the manufacturing sector, and providing adequate employment and income to farmers.
(vi)      Basic health services should not be ignored in the poverty alleviation programs as that can enhance the health status of the populace and hence their participation in the production process. Therefore, government should ensure that there is a positive structural change in the health sector as this will contribute to the service delivery sector.
(vii)    The government must work not only to improve incomes but to tackle the many other social and political factors that contribute to poverty and social exclusion.
(vii)    Simply providing more and more reliable power could triple the amount Nigerian industries produce.
(viii)   Nigeria’s   future prosperity depends on producing children who are well prepared to take their place in tomorrow’s society. There should be a legal enactment that will give NAPEP the mandate to monitor the activities of other agencies on poverty reduction.



BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abudu O, Iwezie.s (1999) ‘’Nigeria poverty situation’’ Every publishers
            kano State. Adelabi N, Filani O. (1975) poverty as social issues.
            Theoretical notes in poverty in Nigeria.The Nigeria Economic Society.
            Ibadan.

Agbonifo I (1987) ’’Urban poverty’’ Issues for research and policy.
             Journal of international development pg 627-634.
            International monetary fund (2005) National Economic Empowerment and            development strategy.

IMF Country report no. 05/433.

Washington D.C.

Awoseyila C. (1999) poverty reduction in Nigeria: policy options bulletin,
            vol. no.2 April/June.

Balogun E.O.(1999) Analyzing poverty concepts and methods. C.B.N.

Annual policy (April)111-149.C.B.N.
Annual report pg 3-10

C.B.N. Economic bulletin: Machuagwu, A (2002) Africa economic
             analysis, the economic of rural poverty in Nigeria growing up in Oguta.

Enyi D. (2002) Addressing poverty in Nigeria, the educational management           option vol.1 no.1.

Eric C. Rboh, (1998). Social and Economic, Research Principles and Methods.      Federal Republic of Nigeria Official Gazette, (2009) vol.96.
Foliso O. (1999) International Agencies Response to poverty Situation in Nigeria.            Methodology.

Narayan, D & petesh p. (2002) voice of the poor: from Maryland World Bank,      New York. Document of the National Planning Commission (2004)

Sherrifdeen. A. Tella Boye Ilorin (1999) A Scheme for monitoring poverty             alleviation in Nigeria: Selected papers on Annual conference of Economic     Society.
Soyombo. O (1995) Poverty and its implications in Nigeria. Unpublished
            World Bank, (1996) Nigeria Poverty in the mist of plenty: The challenge of            growth and inclusion. A World Bank poverty assessment, population and            human resources division report no. 14733 UN Washington DC.
Nigeria National planning commission (2004) meeting everyone’s Needs. NEEDS Abuja.
Share on Google Plus

Declaimer - MARTINS LIBRARY

NB: Join our Social Media Network on Google Plus | Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin