HOUSEHOLD SURVEY (ONUIYI, ODENIGBO AND
NGURU)
Table 1: Ages of Household
|
AGE GROUP OF HOUSEHOLD
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
16 – 25
|
4
|
8.0
|
|
26 – 35
|
33
|
66.0
|
|
36 – 45
|
3
|
6.0
|
|
46 – 55
|
7
|
14.0
|
|
56 and above
|
3
|
6.0
|
Age Group of Household:
Out of the 50 household surveyed,
8% were between the ages of 16-25, 6% were between 36-45 and 14% were between
the ages of 46 to 55 and 6% were 55 and above.
Table 2: Gender of the Household Head
|
GENDER OF HEAD
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
Male
|
36
|
72.0
|
|
Female
|
14
|
28.0
|
Gender of Household Head:
The
households headed by males accounted for 72% while that of female accounted for
28%.
Table 3: Households Martial status
|
STATUS
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
Married
|
40
|
80.0
|
|
Single
|
10
|
20.0
|
Household Marital Status:
Majority of the household head
surveyed were married, 80% to be precise and then the remaining 20% were single.
TABLE 4: DOMINANT NUTRITIONAL TYPES, DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME AND FEEDING
AND FREQUENCY
|
S/N
|
NUTRITIONAL TYPES
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
1.
|
Garri
|
13
|
26.0
|
|
2.
|
Yam
|
8
|
16.0
|
|
3.
|
Cassava
|
19
|
38.0
|
|
4.
|
Rice
|
4
|
8.0
|
|
5.
|
Maize
|
2
|
4.0
|
|
6.
|
Okpa
|
4
|
8.0
|
TABLE 5: DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME
|
PERCENTAGE OF INCOME SPENT ON FEEDING
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
20-40%
|
6
|
12.0
|
|
40-70%
|
40
|
80.0
|
|
70 – 100%
|
4
|
8.0
|
TABLE 6: SOURCES OF FOOD SUPPLY
|
FOOD SUPPLY SOURCES
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
Market
|
17
|
34.0
|
|
Farm
|
32
|
64.0
|
|
Elsewhere
|
1
|
2.0
|
TABLE 7: FREQUENCY OF CONSUMPTION
|
NUMBER OF TIMES AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD EATS
DAILY
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
Once
|
-
|
-
|
|
Twice
|
17
|
34..0
|
|
Thrice
|
33
|
66.0
|
DOMINANTS NUTRITIONAL TYPES, DISTRIBUTION OF ECONOMIC RESOURCES ON
FEEDING AND FREQUENCY OF FEEDING:
Analysis
of household feeding conditions include description of the dominant nutritional
types, their consumption patterns food supply sources, he proportion of households
income devoted to feeding and the number of times the average household eats.
Most
of the people consume mostly carbohydrates and few others consume proteins. 25%
f the population eat garri 15% eat yam 38% eat cassava, 8% eat rice, 4% eat
beans, while the remaining 8% eat maize or meals made out of it. The income
spent by most respondents on feeding vary from people to people, that means
that 12% spend between (20-40%) on their income on feeding and 8% spend between
(70-100%) on feeding.
The
food supply sources of most of the surveyed population were mainly sourced from
farms, 34% from the markets, 64% from farm while 2% from elsewhere. More than
half percent of the surveyed population 66% to be exact consumed or eat thrice
daily, while 43% eat twice daily.
TABLE 8: EMPLOYMNET STATUS OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD
|
EMPLOYMNET STATUS
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
Wage-earner
|
10
|
20.0
|
|
Self-employed
|
30
|
60.0
|
|
Others
|
10
|
20.0
|
Employment status of household head
20%
of the surveyed rural populations are wage-earners, 60% are self-employed, 20%
are involved in other things.
TABLE 9: TYPES AND OWNERSHIP OF DWELLING UNITS
|
(A) TYPES
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
1. Mud house
|
23
|
46%
|
|
2. Block/Brick rooming types
|
25
|
50%
|
|
3. Bungalow
|
2
|
4%
|
TABLE 10: OWNERSHIP OF DWELLING UNITS
|
(B) OWNERSHIP
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
1. Purcahsed
|
2
|
4.0
|
|
2. Rented
|
10
|
20.0
|
|
3. Owned or built by respondent
|
20
|
40.0
|
|
4. Inherited
|
18
|
36.0
|
Types and Ownership of Dwelling units:
Housing
conditions which are reflected in the types, ownership has strong bearing of
the economic status and social well-being of the household. According to the
surveyed results, 46% live in mud-bacha house, 50% live in block/brick rooming
type and the remaining 4% live in bungalows.
The
ownership structure of dwelling houses in the rural area surveyed shows that
most of the respondents live in their own houses, 4% of the population
purchased their houses, 20% live rented houses, 40% own or built their houses
while 34% inherited theirs.
TABLE 11: PROVISIONING OF INFRASTRUCTURE
|
TYPES OF INFRASTRUCTURE
|
GOVERNMENT NO
|
COMMUNITY NO.
|
PRIVATE
|
|
1. Economic
a.
Electricity
b. Motorable
|
100%
60%
|
30%
|
10%
|
|
2. Social
a. Schools
b. Health institution
c.
Water supply (pipe
borne)
|
70%
80%
100%
|
30%
20%
-
|
|
Provisioning of Infrastructure
The
basic socio-economic infrastructure facilities include electricity, motorable
roads, schools, health institution, water supply etc, where available and
adequately accessed, those facilities contribute immensely to the people, while
the lack of them aggravate poverty situation. 100% of the electricity accessed
by respondent was installed by the government, 60% of the motorable roads was
by the government, 30% by the communities and 10% by private individuals and
bodies. 70 of access to schools was by government and 30% by the community, 80%
of health facilities/institutions were built by the government, 20% by the
community, while water supply was 100% by the government.
TABLE 12: CCESSIBILITY AND
NON-ACCESSIBILITY TO SOCIAL ECONOMIC INFRASTRCUTURES
|
|
HEALTH
|
EDUCATION
|
ENERGY
|
WATER SUPPLY
|
ELECTRICITY
|
|||||
|
Rural
|
No
|
%
|
No
|
%
|
No
|
%
|
No
|
%
|
No
|
%
|
|
Non accessible
|
30
|
60
|
25
|
50
|
20
|
40
|
37
|
74
|
20
|
40
|
|
Accessible
|
20
|
40
|
25
|
50
|
30
|
60
|
13
|
26
|
30
|
60
|
Accessibility and Non-Accessibility to Social Economic Facilities by
Rural Households:
It
was all the respondents that has access to more of the socio-economic
facilities for instance 6% has no access to health facilities while 40% has
access, 50% has no access to educational and 50% has access 50% has no access
to energy while 60% has access. 74% has no access to water supply while 26% has
access and also 40% has access to electricity, 60% did not have access.
TABLE 13: MODES OF TRANSPORTATION
|
MODES
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
1. Public Transport (Bus)
|
10
|
20
|
|
2. Trekking
|
10
|
40
|
|
3. Bicycle
|
12
|
24.0
|
|
4. Motor cycle
|
8
|
16.0
|
|
5. Canoes
|
-
|
-
|
Modes of transportation:
Out of 50 households,
20% made use of public transport (Bus) to get to work and other places, 40%
trek to any place of their choice, 24% use bicycle to transport themselves
while 16% have motor cycle at their disposal.
TABLE 14: INCIDENCE OF POVERTY EDUCATION ATTAINMENT HOUSEHOLD HEAD
|
EDUCATION
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
No education
|
25
|
50
|
|
Primary
|
15
|
30
|
|
Post secondary
|
3
|
6
|
|
Secondary
|
7
|
14
|
Incidence of poverty educational attainment household head
50%
of the surveyed population are illiterates and have no access education while
30% were opportune to go primary school, 4% attended secondary school and 6%
post secondary.
TABLE 15: TYPES OF HEALTH FACILITIES ACCESSED
|
TYPES
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
1. Traditional
|
35
|
70
|
|
2. Cottage hospital
|
-
|
-
|
|
3. Clinic
|
15
|
30
|
Types of health facilities accessed
The
health facilities available range from the orthodox to the traditional types.
Most of these health facilities were regarded as not available because of their
accessibility due to long distances between their locations and residence of
the household, 70% of the population made use of the traditional health
facilities while 30% made use of clinics. None had access to cottage or general
hospitals because of the non-availability of any.
TABLE 16: INCOME DISTRIBUTION
|
(A) INCOME BRACKET(
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
Less than 1,000
|
1
|
2.0
|
|
1,001 – 5,000
|
39
|
78.0
|
|
10,000 – 20,000
|
10
|
20.0
|
|
More than 20,000
|
-
|
-
|
|
(B) CHANGE IN INCOME
|
|
|
|
1. Increaing
|
9
|
18.0
|
|
2. Decreasing
|
20
|
40.0
|
|
3. No change in income
|
21
|
42.0
|
Income distribution
2% of the population
surveyed is less than 1,000, 78% lies between 1001-5000, 20% lies between
5,001-10,000. The change in income tends to change in most cases where there is
instability, 18% of the population income increases, 40% of the population income
decreases while 42% of the remaining population does not change.
TABLE 17: HOUSEHOLD ACCESS TO CREDIT FACILITEIS
|
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
1. Household who have no access
to credits
|
45
|
90.0
|
|
2. Household with access to
credit
|
5
|
10
|
Household access to credit faculties
90% of the
surveyed population did not have access to credit facilities while 10% has
access to credit.
TABLE 18: FARMING AND STRCUTURE OF LAND OWNERSHIP
|
TYPE
|
NUMBER
|
PERENTAGE
|
|
1. Family owned and inherited
|
38
|
76.0
|
|
2. Rented
|
2
|
4.0
|
|
3. Leasehold
|
6
|
12.0
|
|
4. Purchased
|
4
|
8.0
|
TABLE 19: UTILIZATION OF ENERGY
|
(A) LIGHTING
|
NUMBER
|
PERCENTAGE
|
|
1. Electricity
|
30
|
60
|
|
2. Kerosene
|
20
|
40
|
|
3. Candle
|
-
|
-
|
|
B. COOKING
|
|
|
|
i. Firewood
|
32
|
34
|
|
ii. Stove
|
17
|
2.0
|
|
iii. Gas
|
1
|
|
The utilization of Energy:
The
main energy types available to the house are electricity and kerosene lamps. Electricity
dominates a little the energy types sourced by households for lighting with the
assistance of kerosene lamps in some cases. Government provides most of the electricity.
60% of the population made use of electricity, 40% made use of kerosene lamps.
Most
of the populations surveyed make use of firewood, which has contributed,
enormously to the deforestation and degradation of the rural environment.
64%
make use of fire wood, 34% use stoves and 2% make use of gas for cooking.