DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES
DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE AND POVERTY ALLEVIATION PROGRAMME: A CASE STUDY OF OLUSEGUN OBASANJO ADMINISTRATION 2003-2007
A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR DEGREE (B. Sc) IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
This research work has been approved for the department of Public Administration.
I dedicated to my parents for their support and encouragement.
In my journey to make this research work a reality, I am indebted to so many people.
I thank my Supervisor who in spite of her numerous engagements spent her time to read through this work and to guide me until the work become a reality. I equally thank her for the motherly role she played particularly assisting and advising me to ensure that this work was completed.
THIS IS A SAMPLE | WE ARE PROFESSIONALS IN WRITING
The topic of this study is democratic governance and poverty alleviation programme. A case study of Olusegun Obasanjo administration 2003-2007. However, they are problems emanating from this programme which is poor living conditions of the people. The methodology used in the work was structured questionnaire and oral interview to gather the required information. The information derived was sources of data collection, population of study and determination of sample size which was used to analyze the democratic governance and poverty alleviation programme in Nigeria. The researcher finds, that for democracy to be in Nigeria, the government should foster macroeconomic sector and ensure poverty alleviation. At the end of the work, the researcher made some recommendations which includes basic infrastructural both at urban and rural areas, full employment opportunity, development of human capital among others.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Nigeria is at a crossroad. They have the opportunity now more than any other time in it’s history. Nigeria has the chance to build a society than can guarantee justice, human dignity and civil liberties to all Nigerians.
Nigeria is committed to nation building and democratic consolidation. The burning issue is: will Nigeria’s people and leadership grasp this opportunity to move the country forward, on the path of justice, peace and economic development or will Nigeria repeat its pattern of a short break of civilian government between long stretches of military rule?.
On 29 May 2003, Nigerians continues to face economic, political and social uncertainties. Flash points of ethnic, communal, religious and resources conflicts persists. The economic environment is still unstable. The Niger Delta crisis has yet to be resolved and environmental degradation in oil producing regions remains a problems. Exacerbating this is the public perception that government has been insensitive and show in addressing fundamental issues affecting Nigerians resource distribution, infrastructure development and security. An air of anxiety and uncertainty continues to pervade Nigeria society.
It is generally agreed that since then progress has been in the areas of personal freedom. The transition has made possible a new, more open society in which people no longer live in fear of the military. Nigerians remains loyal to the idea of corporate entity called Nigeria, despite the challenges, Nigeria democracy in their country.
There has been a stupendous rise of poverty in the country. The copious gulf between the obscene rich and pathetically poor citizens widens too, almost to a unimaginable and alarming rate and cannot be overemphasized. There was a joy and prodigious smiles on the faces of the poor and hungry masses as Olusegun Obasanjo enunciated his political promises to be dully realized in 2005, and above. Among them is Poverty Alleviation Programme, Security of lives and property, provision of amenities, creation of job opportunities to the ever teeming Nigeria youth.
The situation of poverty stricken described above had continued to grow from bad to worse. But the president came up on 29th day of May 2003, we learnt over the air and his address presentation that he was going to lead Nigeria into a promise land.
The president on 15th February 2004, declared, “Nigeria our resources; human and material, we shall strive to eradicate poverty from our country.
That was why Obansanjo came up with the poverty alleviation scheme: passed it into law with the prime as he said of creating jobs, as it were for the teaming Nigeria populace. This, for him is a way of effecting out poverty. He further added “I am mindful of the level of unemployment amongst the youth, our professional at all levels. I will endeavour to create employment opportunities.
Nigeria is among the fell sub-Saharan African countries in which the government has mapped out poverty alleviation programmes and strategies as an important economic policy objectives. The emergence of a democratically elected government in Nigeria promise to put yearnings of the nation’s poor masse for poverty alleviation. We must, however, accept the fact that although the government seems to have the political will and has shown a commitment towards poverty alleviation, the progress has slow.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
For almost a decade, poverty and poverty related issues have been the fore front of socio-economic discourse world-wide. In Africa in general and in Nigeria in particular, poverty has become deep-rooted and its eradication, but at least its alleviation, has become one of the ideal goals of development policies.
The persuasive level of poverty in Nigeria has been issue of concern to leaders and policy makers in Nigerian, Africans and other people and institutions the world over.
The large number of people in poverty in Nigeria and elsewhere implies that resources are inefficiently used and therefore increases the risk of social upheards and political instability. Poverty widens income and social inequality and as the gap between the rich and the poor becomes increasingly obvious to the poor, they become restless and instability becomes the rule rather than the exception.
These become source of worry to me and led to the following research questions.
i. What is the nature of democratic governance in Nigeria since 2003-2007?
ii. What is the relationship between democratic governance poverty alleviation?
iii. Has the poverty alleviation policy of 2003-2007 democratic governance in Nigeria alleviated poverty among the citizens?
1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The objectives of this study are:
i. To assess the democratic governance in Nigeria since 2003-2007.
ii. To examine how democratic governance can affect poverty.
iii. To access the introduction of poverty alleviation in Nigeria.
iv. To identify major constraints inherent in 3rd world countries in practicing democracy.
v. To look into and examine how poverty alleviation improved (affected) the lives of Nigerians.
vi. To suggest some policy recommendations based on the findings of the study.
1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This is the benefits that would be derived from it when the project is successfully completed and those that will benefits from it.
This work shall be of immense benefit to entire political class and administration in Nigeria. Again, the entire Nigeria will also benefit from the research. The research will establish the benefit of the Nigeria poverty alleviation policy under democratic governance.
Furthermore, the democratic institutions and policy makers such as the political parties, technocrats, Nigerian leaders etc will also benefit from this work.
The research is timely because it will proffer a solution to high rate of poverty in the country and the democratic issues.
The work will be practically relevant to the decision makers who are always first with varieties of decision to make.
Lastly, it is in accordance with national priority that it will reduce the high level of poverty and bring about increase per capital income and stability in economic growth.
1.5 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The scope of this is the total area of research work covers. This research work looks into the relationship between democratic governance and poverty alleviation in Nigeria since 2003-2007, with respect to how poverty has been improved upon by the democratic governance (tools) applied in the country. Above all, to assess the democratic governance of the 36 states the country including federal capital territory. As a matter of fact, the problem of democratic governance is not only obtainable in Nigeria; they are present in all other 3rd world countries as well as developed ones in the world. Nigeria makes good representation.
However, some of the limitations encountered in gathering the data and other materials inadequate finance, lack of time, unco-operative attitude of some Nigeria in responding to oral questions and mistakes in written textbooks limits the carrying out this work.
The types of data used in carrying out this research work are’ primary and secondary data collections.
The primary data is oral interviews while the secondary data is all the information gathered from textbooks by different authors and in the internet.
1.6 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
The hypothesis of this study includes that:
i. People tend to express their views more in democratic setting than in non-democratic setting.
ii. The rich participate more actively in democratic setting than the poor ones.
iii. The poor are more likely to be used in democratic setting to perpetuate crisis than the rich.
iv. Poverty tends to engulf the rural people more in military regime than in democratic era.
1.7 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The theory used to explain this work is Decision-making theory as propounded by Karl Dutch in 1967.
In this context, the poverty alleviation programme of Olusegun Obasanjo is a product of decision-making. The policy is meant to serve the aspirations, values and ends of the decision makers of this country.
However, the relevance of this theory to this work is that it’s enables the researcher to study the behavioural tendencies of the main actors in polity in the allocation of issues and values towards the poverty alleviation in the country through the process of democratic governance.
Other importance of this theory to this work is that it enabled the researcher to examine whether poverty alleviation programme policy of Olusegun Obasanjo administration is a good decision or not since there are many order projects and programmes to be executed.
1.8 OPERATIONALIZATION OF KEY CONCEPTS
The following terms are hereby defined in the context of their usage.
i. Democratic governance: Refers as a political system with a high level of civil and political liberties. It involves mass participation in government and decision making through representation.
ii. Poverty Alleviation: This is a process of reducing poverty level or level of poverty in the society or country.
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The Objective of this Study was to examine the democratic governance and poverty alleviation programme in Nigeria, 2003-2007, using President Olusegun Obasanjo’s democratic governance. It equally tried to x-ray the bane of Nigeria poverty alleviation programme.
In a bid to summary the researcher findings, it is important to note that in the country Nigeria, the high level of poverty can be addressed when the element of good democratic governance is in place. This will gives the citizens the ability to participate in governance of country thereby alleviating poverty.
Moreso, it is evident that in Nigeria today, the poor masses do not participated activity in the politics of the country because of their inability to lay hands on finances. This make the rich ones to participate more in the government which the public observed was aiming at looting public treasury.
Also, in the cause of the summary, it was noted that the democratic government, the political conflict in the country are been caused by poor masses which was attitude to their poor level.
The phenomenon of poverty is complex and exerts pervasive influence on all aspects of an economy’s life, particularly for the sub-Saharan African countries, which include Nigeria, poverty has become endemic. Poverty is a condition of living characterized by disease, illiteracy, malnutrition and squalor to the extent that it inhibits the realization of potentials by individuals and even entire societies.
Poverty is therefore a socio-economic and political liability to any action. The universal democratic principles of popular sovereignty, political equality, popular consultation, majority rule and minority rights, the rule of law and fundamental human rights cannot thrive in a poverty stricken society. Furthermore, the environment conditions and the institutions necessary for democracy cannot function in a society pervaded by poverty for democracy to their and be sustain in Nigeria, the government must take action to foster efficient macroeconomic and sector policies for sustained growth and poverty reduction.
In particular, poverty reduction must be based on effective analysis of the problems must truly target the poor. Furthermore, government decision making, especially decisions on public expenditure must be decentralized. Commodity participation must be promoted in the design, implementation and monitoring of programmes that are essential for successfully alleviating poverty. Moreover, there must be a shift of actual expenditures on social services from urban to rural areas.
However, we maintain that for democracy to be sustained in Nigeria, poverty alleviating policy instruments needed to be designed to achieve population restraint, equity orientated income in structure and adequate educational, health and infrastructure facilities. Based on the past antecedents, of the democratic governance in Nigeria, there are no hopes that democratic governance can achieve this onerous task.
For democracy to survive in Nigeria, the poor needs to be reawakened to its responsibility of strengthening and internalizing democratic values as well providing a meaningful check on the excesses of the state.
On the basis of the foregoing discussions, I proffer the following recommendations towards the alleviation of poverty in Nigeria.
Firstly, there is an urgent need for the provision of basic infrastructures both at the urban and rural sector. This is necessary, as no meaningful results will be achieved in this direction in the absence of electricity, water, good roads, health care, etc.
Secondly, the government as well as the private sector must take the issue of human capital formation seriously. Education at the primary, secondary and tertiary levels must be made more functional through the provision of conducive learning environment. The introduction of universal basic education must be implemented. Moreover, teachers at all levels must be well remunerated, while training of educational administrators needed to be enhanced.
It is now a well known fact that a greater percentage of the poor in Nigeria live in the rural areas. For the current poverty alleviation programme of government to make the necessary impact, there is a need for the transformation of the rural sector. This can be done by enhancing the economic activities of rural dwellers through provision of basic infrastructures as well as financial impetus.
Finally, it recommended that full employment be taken as a national economic policy objective, in which case efforts must be made to get our economic resources fully employed to enhance aggregate output of the Nigeria economy.
Akpakpan, E.B and Umoh, P.N. (1999) developing the Nigeria Economy for an enduring democracy, CSA production Ltd, Lagos
Aluko, s (1975), “poverty: its remedies”, poverty in Nigeria, the Nigeria Economic society, Ibadan.
Amego, J. (2002), National poverty eradication programme; towards a successful programme implementation; Role of the secretariats.
Baro. R. (1996), Democracy and growth. Journal of economic growth 1-27, U.S.A
Chole, E and Ibrahim, J (1995), Democratization process in Africa; problems and prospects (Dakari CODESRIA).
Ekpo, H. H (2000), poverty alleviation and substance of democracy in Nigeria, Calabar university of Calabar.
Ekong, E. (1991), Rural development and the persistence of poverty in Nigeria. Uyo: university of Uyo press
Edozien, E.C. (1975,) “Poverty: some issues in concept and poverty I poverty in Nigeria. The Nigeria economic society, Ibadan.
Mbonjo, O. (2000), “World Bank, IMF and Nigeria poverty reduction strategy”. The Guardian Online July, 10 2000.
Madueme, I.S. (1999), An evaluation of the Nigeria; a case of Enugu State”. International journal of studies in the humanities (IJOSH) Vol 1 and 2,
Federal office of statistics (2004), poverty and welfare in Nigeria: Wellington, American Writing Corporation.
Department of Public Administration,
Faculty of Management Sciences,
I am a final year student of the above named University. The purpose of this letter is for you to help me answer the attached questionnaire for my research work as a final year student.
Please, answer the following questions as sincerely and objectively as you can, by filling the blank space provided or by ticking (√) were applicable.
Your information will be treated with almost confidentiality.
Please tick where appropriate
iii. Marital status
(a) GCE/’o’ level
(b) Senior officer
(c) Junior officer
i. Do you agree that the rich participate more actively in democratic setting than the poor?
Agree , strongly agree , disagree strongly disagree
ii. Is it true that poor masses are used in democratic setting to cause crisis than the rich?
Agree , strongly agree , disagree , strongly disagree .
iii. Can poverty be addressed through democratic governance?
Agree , strongly agree , disagree , strongly disagree .
iv. Democratic setting has done more harm than good to the development of Nigeria society.
Agree , strongly agree , disagree , strongly disagree
v. Do you see improvement as regards the poor masses since, the introduction of poverty alleviation programme?
Agree , strongly agree , disagree , strongly disagree
vi. Do you agree that the introduction of poverty alleviation programme encourage corruption?
Agree strongly agree disagree , strongly disagree
THIS IS A SAMPLE | WE ARE PROFESSIONALS IN WRITING