AGENCIES OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA

 AGENCIES OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Rural areas are a key sector in every nation’s economy and their rapid development and modernization have gained the attention of policy makers and governments all over the world. This is because a sizeable majority of the population lives therein therefore; the future of the country depends largely on it.  The American Bureau of Census classifies a group of people living in a community having a population of not more than 2,500 people as rural, whereas in Nigeria, the Federal Office of Statistics defines a community with less than 20,000 people as rural. According to Afolayan (1995), rural areas can be easily identified by various criteria, apart from population. Such criteria include the level of infrastructural development i.e. road networks, educational institutions, water supply, electricity, health facilities, communication, etc. Other criteria used include Occupation, Housing, Extent of community planning etc. Typically, rural dwellers are less vocal, characterized by a culture of poverty, as most people live barely above subsistence level (Laah et al, 2013). Rural areas in developing countries are usually deprived of the basic needs of life such as housing, medical care, postal communication, education, transport etc.  Specifically, rural areas refer to geographical areas that lie outside the densely built-up environment of towns, cities and the sub-urban villages and whose inhabitants are engaged primarily in agriculture as well as the most basic of rudimentary form of secondary and tertiary activities (Ezeah, 2005). Rural area, which is the opposite of an urban area, refers to the country side whose population engages mainly in primary production activities like agriculture, fishing, and rearing of livestock (Ele, 2006). About 90 percent of the rural labour workforce engages directly or indirectly in agriculture (Nyagba, 2009).

The rural sector of Nigeria is, very vital to the socio-economic development of the nation. According to Nyagba (2009), the most important sector of the Nigerian population is the rural areas. This is because the rural sector is the major source of capital formation for the country and a principal market for domestic and raw materials for industrial processes (Ugwuanyi and Emma, 2013). Rural area dwellers have been found to engage in primary economic activities that form the foundation for the country’s economic development (Abah, 2010).

Given the contributions of the rural sector to the national economy, enhancing the development of the sector should be central to government and public administration. This is necessary as such would further enhance the ability of the sector for increased contribution to the overall national growth and development. In most countries, development is most desirous in the rural areas where bulk of the population resides. The development of rural areas signals to a greater extent the level of national development and the situation of the nations in the development ladder. Rural development has therefore been described in different ways by different authors, depending on the discipline or line of thought. This is because the approach to rural development is multidisciplinary. According to Aslam (1981) rural development is a process aimed at developing the rural poor, their economy and institutions from a state of stagnation or low productivity equilibrium into dynamic process leading to higher levels of living and better quality of life. Similarly, Schumacher (1983) defined rural development as developing the skill of the masses to make them self-reliant through instructions which supply appropriate and relevant knowledge on the methods of self-help. Rural development is a strategy which is designed to improve the economic and social life of a specific group of people, the rural poor. It involves extending the developmental strides and benefits people who seek a livelihood in the rural areas such as small-scale farmers, tenants etc in order to improve their means of livelihood and mitigate the massive rural urban migration (Aliy, 1999). Rural-urban migration occurs at varying levels in every country. However, the challenges and prospects of rural development in Nigeria have been of great concern to the different tiers of government due to the rate of rural-urban migration.  Different motives account for rural urban migration amongst rural dwellers such as socio-cultural issues where people are forced to migrate to avoid numerous social problems at their place of origin (Agyemang, 2013), poor infrastructural development and lack of basic amenities, search for better economic opportunities such as jobs etc. Accessibility and ease of transportation and communication has also been noted to facilitate rural urban migration, this view is based on the extension of road networks from major towns to peripheral-urban and rural areas that resulted in the decrease in transportation cost and improved communication systems.

          Given the contributions of the rural sector to the national economy, enhancing the development of the sector should be priority to government and relevant stakeholders. Abonyi and Nnamani (2011) also noted that rural poverty persists in Nigeria despite the prosperity created by the country’s oil wealth as evidenced by the difficulty experienced in getting basic daily needs such as food, water and shelter. Lack of these basic life needs in the rural areas has made a number of rural dwellers migrate to urban centres with high hopes of improving their standard of living. This therefore calls for urgent measures to be taken towards fast tracking rural development to reduce urban population explosion. 

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Rural area: a geographical area located outside cities and towns with a relatively low population density and small settlements.

Migration: movement of people across a specified boundary for the purpose of establishing a new or semi-permanent residence.

Rural development: the process of improving the quality of life and economic well being of people living in relatively isolated areas
Rural urban migration: is a process of population shift from rural areas to urban areas with attendant increase in proportion of people living in urban areas.

CHAPTER TWO

RURAL-URBAN DEVELOPMENTS IN NIGERIA

 Rural development policies, is one of the most important variable in the practice and process of Nigeria’s government; rationalized as the means of bringing development at a quicker pace, in terms of socio-economic well-beings of the rural dwellers. However, very little development has been recorded in this direction, despite the fact that most of the rural areas are well-endowed with human, mineral and agricultural resources (Olatumbosu; 1975.) Rural development aimed at actualizing the dream of improving the people’s socio-economic welfare has remained at policy level, as it has become sad to observe that up to date most of the rural areas have been unable to pass the basic indices of modern development in terms of rural development, industrial facilities, health facilities, standard and qualitative system of education and other social services (Ibid).

CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATIONS  

Development in its current conception include; Democracy, human rights, free market economy, gender equality, population and environmental control, crises, etc (World Bank; 1985).Development is about the issue of self-reliance.  It is a self-generating and self-sustaining phenomenon.  It is about human beings and for them to achieve development, they must have the skills or capacities to generate their own knowledge for development.  Development must be self-propelling (Ibid).  Therefore, development conceived in human term is the maximum satisfaction of basic human needs of adequate and descent food, water, electricity, shelter, education, modern social and infrastructural facilities (Development Administration; 1998). According to United Nation’s, rural development is seen as a strategy designed to transform rural life by extending the masses of the rural population the benefits of economic and social progress… It stresses a fundamental principle, that the rural poor must share fully through equitable access to the resources, inputs and services and participation in the design and implementation of development programmes (Ukwu; 1986). Meaningful development of rural people must be on a self-sustaining basis, through transformation, the socio-spatial structures of their productive activities and it implies a broad-based re-organization and mobilization of the rural masses so as to enhance their capacity to cope effectively with the daily tasks of their lives and with the changes consequent upon this (Mabogunje; 1972). To Lele (1975), rural development is seen as improving living standards of the mass of the low-income population residing in rural areas and making the process of their development sustaining. Buttressing the above, Aguda (1986) stressed that, rural development can be seen as the improvement of living conditions in rural areas, through increased productivity of agricultural and related enterprises which constitute the main economic activities of the population.  And if the increased productivity so achieved is to benefit the average rural man then, there has to be fair and equitable distribution which gives due consideration to per capita consumption, investment and communal social services.Rural development is also  seen as the development that is concerned with the improvement as well as the transformation of the social, mental, economic and environmental conditions of rural areas thereby leading to an enhanced standard of living of the rural inhabitants.  It therefore, requires a multi-faceted attack on all areas such as the provision of portable water supply, good roads, health centres, decent housing, etc (Claude; 1982). Rural development is a strategy put in place to improve the economic and social life of a specific group of people-the rural poor.  It involves extending the benefits of development to the poorest among those who seek livelihood in the rural areas and who have not been able to contribute significantly to national economic growth nor the share equitably in economic progress.  The groups include small-scale farmers, tenants and the landless. Local Government perspective of rural development connotes; “Local knowledge for local affairs, ready contacts between representatives, administrators and people, and a training ground for representatives and electors alike in the realities of democratic government.  These are still true and appropriate for developing countries. There is no doubt that citizen-participation in the business of local government is the “grass-root” of democracy and is one of the ways in which the adjustment in society demanded by the rapid changes for economic growth (Modick; 1957). According to Nnoli (1972) Nigeria is involved in the second phase of its struggle for national liberation. The first phase ended with the achievement of political independence 1960.  Now, instead of the path of national freedom, Nigerians must tread the path to national development.  In a historically short period of time, they must emancipate the vast majority of their population from the pervasive and high incidence of poverty, ignorance, disease, squalor, poor diet, and poor shelter.  Life for the majority is intolerable and these characters are peculiar to the rural areas. Attempts at curbing the above mentioned problems that confronts the rural areas in Nigeria prompted the creation of various rural development strategies or policies by various governments or administrations.  Among these policies and or programmes are: The Directorate for Food Roads and Rural infrastructure (DFRRI), Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), Green Revolution (GR), Better Life for Rural Women (BLRW), Family Economic Advancement Programmed (FEAP), National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP), National Directorate of Employment (NDE) etc, etc.  All these programmes and or policies had there objective geared towards alleviating the sufferings of the rural dwellers.

CHAPTER THREE

AGENCIES OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA

1.     Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural     Infrastructure (DFRRI):

 In President Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida`s speech of 1986:
“The establishment of the Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural     Infrastructure (DFRRI) was a conscious attempt to move away from past narrow sectional pre-occupation to overall formulation of the national rural development strategy with emphasis on alleviation of rural poverty and enhancement of the quality of rural life”. This move was necessitated on the recognition that, rural development holds the key to sustained agricultural transformation and national food security.

Among the factors identified as holding back development and the quality of life in the rural areas were water supply and the lack of roads.  Consequently, the Directorate (DFRRI) was established with the aim of rehabilitating various categories of roads in the country and especially for the development of rural feeder roads in order to strengthen the massive efforts of food and agricultural self-sufficiency in the shortest possible period.  It was intended that the Directorate would have within its first year rehabilitated 60,000 km of rural feeder roads (The Guardian;1993.)

2.     GREEN Revolution (GR):

Similarly, to the rural peasants, Green Revolution (GR) meant an undertaking by the government to provide all the necessary agricultural inputs and devices  which should lessen the drudgery of farming operations and boost production  generally such that apart from abundance of food, the rural incomes which were almost exclusively dependent on agriculture could increase such that the peasant’s standard of living could improved and compared with the higher standard enjoyed by urban dwellers (Beer; 1976).

3.     Operation Feed the Nation (OFN): Operation Feed the Nation (OFN) was created by General Olusegun Obasanjo as the military Head of state of Nigeria with the aim of making food available to all” through agriculture.  Better Life for Rural Women was aimed at improving the living standard of the rural women under the chairperson of Maryam Babangida.  

4.     The Family Economic Advancement programme (FEAP):

The Family Economic Advancement programme (FEAP) was an off shoot of Better life for rural women chaired by Maryam Sani Abacha. 

5.      The National poverty Eradication programme (NAPEP):

The National poverty Eradication programmed (NAPEP) was aimed at eradicating poverty in Nigeria, but with emphasis on the poor whose majority are in the rural areas. In spite the fact that the rural areas have been the focus of these policies and the laudable objectives to alleviate their sufferings, most Nigerians that dwell in the rural areas, are still experiencing on a daily basis, “the stank realities of underdevelopment.  There is rural backwardness in all its manifestation: declining food production; poor transportation and health care delivery; rural urban migration, squalor and  ignorance and non-existing and decaying infrastructural facilities” Because of the poverty dominant characteristics, Nigeria’s rural population has been variously referred to as the “neglected rural majority” or “the stagnant factor” in the Nigerian economy.  Ijere refers to ruralites as “victims of collective underdevelopment”(Famoriyo;1985). The brandishing of the Word ‘Rural Development’ has been taken so leisurely, simply, so lightly defined that a critical appraisal of the rural development policies from the scientific and historical perspectives become a sine quo non (Ibid). It is in this regard that I proposed in the next part to evaluate the implementation of the rural development policies in Nigeria though with emphasis on the lead programme (DFRRI) as an example and for clarity of purpose also for the fact that DFRRI enjoyed quite a long period of years (6) years compare to other rural development policies.   

CHAPTER FOUR

FACTORS INHIBITING ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES

Some of these factors includes: narrow conception of rural development, poor socio-economic structures, social differentiation, neglect and exploitation thesis, wrong policies and high cost of implementation. Narrow concept of rural development: In Nigeria, rural development policies are separated from our overall national development policy.  Our rural development policies are perceived in terms of provision of certain amenities, social infrastructure to the terms of areas, therefore, makes the scope of what rural development means to be narrow (Development Administration: 2000). Poor socio-economic structures: Nigeria government did not take into cognizance socio-economic structures of Nigeria.  And because of this lopsided policy, the huge sums of money pumped into these policies could not transform the socio-economic standard of the rural populace. “Great damage has been inflicted by well meaning financial agencies which are persuading developing countries to implement ;multi-sectoral development programmes under the guise of integrated rural development programmes, even though, these countries often do not have a well defined rural development strategy”. Attempts to set up special or semi-autonomous project authorities to speed up project implementation have often that not damaged efforts at building local government units. At the persuasion of international financial agencies, several developing countries have implemented so-called sectoral development, project or regional development projects----- (these) have resulted in diversion of resources from other parts of the country to the projected areas resulting in regional imbalances (Famoriyo; 1985).Controversial though they are, the above words, we think, contain much truism and call to question not only efforts of the “agencies” but also of the national governments. The undecided question therefore is: Is the concept of integrated rural development a shibboleth or is it an  article of faith? If the former, then it is questionable why poor countries like Nigeria should continue invest millions in it.  If it is an unquestionable article of faith, however, what are the implications for rural-urban integration, income disparities, equity consideration, welfare and so on? Who really benefits from it?  Is it the farmers (rural dwellers) or the urban contractors? (Ibid). The above questions should enter the calculus of variables determining the prospects for rural development in poor countries in general and Nigeria in particular. According to Idachaba (1984) if rural development does not usually achieve its objectives, its increasing popularity needs to be explained in some other way.  Clearly, a number of people benefit from it, even when the rural dwellers do not.  The self-interest of the agents of rural development may not be sufficient to explain the activity, nor does the particular form it takes.  .

May 29, 2000 dispensation meant a beginning of a new order for the entire Nigerians.  But in terms of immediacy, the euphoria and mutual back-slapping aside, a grain reality focus the rural areas.  The rural areas are glorified rural towns, with little evidence of modernity in place.  The social facilities are either moribund or not yet installed.  The rural areas which are suppose to be the centre of  attention, are at their best, a caricature of what such areas are in the developed countries, then heaven knows how the constituents rural areas that made over 95% population of Nigeria are fairing (Yunusa, 2001).

In the light of the above analysis, it has become essential to discuss the way forward or prospect of rural development polices in Nigeria. 

CHAPTER FIVE

RECOMMENDATION TO ENSURE THE SUCCESS OF FUTURE RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION IN NIGERIA

 The following suggestions if strictly adhered to will ensure better tomorrow of rural development policies in Nigeria,

New Revenue Allocation Formula: The present revenue allocation formula must be revised in such a manner that both the states and the local government areas will have the lions` share of all revenue accruing to the federal government.  The present formula gives too much waste of money at the centre whereas, states and local governments are always in dire need of funds for development.  What goes to the local governments is not enough to bring about substantial improvement in the quality of life of the rural people (Sunday Tribune; 1999).Provision of basic infrastructure such as portable water, electricity supply and motorable road, which are possible all year round will surely reduce if not eliminate the exodus of young men and women from rural areas to urban areas.  Employment will be created; people who are fighting tooth and nail to control the central government will go to their states of origin to vie for the position of governors and chairmen of their local council.  If this happens, there will be rapid development in the rural areas.  More importantly, the centre will be less attractive.  In addition, utilization of resources should be directed at poverty eradication, not poverty alleviation.  In this regard, the constitution should emphatically prioritize the responsibilities of rural areas (Ibid).
          Similarly, of crucial importance to the present civilian administration to escape the present economic predicament, is the pursuit of a determined intensification of the on-going efforts at revitalization of traditional agricultural output and food crops.  The need to boost agriculture in the rural areas is very great today, for a more food is needed to both feed and growing population and to improve dietary standards and the venture will also help to boost rural incomes.  In addition, rural economy should be diversified to include non-farm ventures such as construction and fabrication of bricks, cement, and blocks, furniture, etc (Ibid).Reducing corruption would boost the future of rural development policies in Nigeria.  Corruption is a consequence of ideology which informs our social organization.  The same explanation accounts for the failure of various existing categories of control measure.  Formal conventional measures and mechanisms, sermonizing and moralizing efforts (Odekunle; 1994).  There is the need for even development. An overall achievement of the state should be the primary focus and objectives of the present government.  Yar`adua should assuage the fear of marginalization among various ethnic groups.  The rural areas are worst hit in terms of amenities.In addition to the above, the population should be empowered against corruption at the grassroots level and at the work place.  For instance, the broad outline of the federal government subvention to each local government should be printed on posted and be posted all over the public places of the local government areas.

CONCLUSION

This paper focused on setting agenda for rural development in Nigeria.  To achieve this, I had clarified the concept of rural development, scanned the objectives of rural development policies in Nigeria, assess the level of implementation of rural development policies in Nigeria, factors inhibiting levels of achievements of policy objectives and agenda for the future.
In conclusion, if the tasks as contained in this agenda and many more for the new civilian administration of Nigeria are implemented, then, the phenomenon of socio-economic arrested rural development which has rather become pervasive will be reduced to the bearest minimum

REFERENCES
Abah, N. (2010) Development Administration: A Multi–Disciplinary Approach. Enugu: John Jacob Classic Publishers.

Abonyi, N and Nnamani O. (2011) “Development and Food Crisis in Emerging Economy: A critical Appraisal of Nigeria”. Nigerian Journal of Administrative Science Vol. 9 No. 1 Pgs. 245 – 278.

Afolayan, S. O. (1995). Community Mobilization for Rural Development in Bangladesh: Lessons for Nigeria. Ilorin: Agricultural and Rural Management Training Institute, ARMTI.

Agyemang I and Abu S. R (2013) Rural-Urban Migration and Rural Community Development: A case of Kpongu Community of Upper West Region of Ghana. African Journal of History and Culture. Vol. 5(4), pp. 72-77

Aliy, A. (1999). Short and Medium Poverty Reduction Strategies in Nigeria. Abuja: Family Economic Advancement Programme.

Aslm, M. (1981). Rural Development in India. Journal of Bangladesh Academy for Rural Development, Comilla, X (1/2)

Ele, C. (2006) Evangelization through Rural Development. Nsukka: Great AP Publishers Ltd. Enugu State (2009) Medium Term Implementation Plan–Enugu State Vision 2020–(2010–2013). Enugu State Government Publication.
Ezeah, P. (2005) Rural Sociology and Rural Development with Focus on Nigeria. Enugu: John Jacob Classic Publishers.

Laah, D.E., Abba, M., Ishaya, D.S. and Gana J.N (2013) The Mirage Of Rural Development In Nigeria. Journal of Social Sciences and Public Policy, Volume 5, Number 2, 2013

Nyagba, S. (2009) “Review of Nigeria’s Rural Development Policy for sustainable Development” paper presented at Business Round Table at Abuja, 9 –11 July.

Ugwuanyi B. I and Chukwuemeka E. O (2013) Enhancing Rural Development in Nigeria: Periscoping the Impediments and Exploring Imperative Measures. Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review Vol. 2, No. 7