IMPACT OF INDUSTRIALIZATION ON RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA (A CASE STUDY OF KIRIMBO AREA OF KUMBOTSO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF KANO STATE)
Background to study
More than 70% of Nigerians live in rural areas, hence there is a need for the government to take the issue of rural development seriously, particularly issues related to the formulation and implementation of rural development policy (Nzimiro, 1985:1-3, 1990 population census). Besides, there is a global concern on issues of poverty and rural development by state governments and theUnited Nations.
Any attempt to improve the rural condition is a welcome development. Nzimiro (1985:5-81) argues that:
“part of the reasons for interest in rural development study is because of the increase in social differentiation between the rural and urban areas. The dwindling quality of rural life had encouraged many rural producers to escape from the suffering of rural poverty to urban misery.”
The level of development in Nigeria is too low considering the number of resources at Nigeria’s disposal. In the immediate post-independence years, for instance, Nigerians had expected tremendous positive changes in their conditions of living. This, however, was not the case.
This condition of backwardness may be attributed to the level of development bequeathed to the nationalists at independence by the colonial masters who saw the rural areas as main sources of raw materials for export. (Rodney; 1972, Ake, 1981; Alkasum, 1986).
The modernization approach imported from the Western developed economies failed to transform the third world societies. Modernization was simply the adaptation of western institutions, structures, and values such as the Weberian type of bureaucracy, periodic elections, and excessive capital formation for investment and industrialization, etc… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
Statement of the Research Problem
Analysis of the Nigerian rural condition suggests that rural areas in Nigeria are in a state of neglect, with serious consequences for development in general and national development in particular (Olatonbosun, 1975). The colonial rule which gave credence to the extraction of raw materials for export at the expense of food crops and other aspects of rural development laid the foundation for rural neglect.
Even though the raw materials were extracted from the rural areas, the rural areas were neglected in terms of infrastructure development… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
- Examine if the people of the Kirimbo area of Kumbotso are beneficiaries of the industrialization program… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
Significance of the Study
The study is expected to contribute to the ongoing discussion on how to improve the rural areas as it is being addressed by African Heads of State through the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) policy/framework, and the Millennium Development Goals of the United Nations Organization.
The study is also expected to contribute to the literature on rural development, and development administration in particular since a critical analysis of the institutions, programs, and policies understudy in Kano State’s rural development efforts shall enable us to proffer some solutions to the development problematic.
Thus a contribution to development administration, in general, and public administration in particular… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
The concept of development is relevant to human society and rural development in general. Rodney (1972) views development as a human activity, where skills are acquired, capacity is built, creativity and self-discipline are acquired in order to face the challenges of life and overcome human needs and wants. He argues that development is a universal process.
However, Africa’s development was retarded because of the impact of the slave trade and colonialism. The consequence of this was the underdevelopment of Africa. Rodney, (1972:24) argues thus:
“for the first three decades of colonialism, hardly anything was done that could remotely be termed a service to the African people. It was in fact only after the last war that social services were provided as a matter of policy. How little they amounted to does not really need illustrating. After all, the statistics which show that Africa today is underdeveloped are the ones representing the state of affairs at the end of colonialism.”
Development by western scholars has been seen as synonymous with modernization or transformation from a pre-modern to the modern stage (Rostow 1960, Gana, 1987; Hopkins; 1979).
Hopkins (1978:27) contends that the dependency thesis argues that “it is the external links which have created economic backwardness by forging chains of dependence and inequality between the privileged core and the exploited periphery”. It is in this line that Walter Rodney anchors his thesis “How Europe underdeveloped Africa”.
Rodney’s work is a detailed historical account of the integration of Africa in the world economy through the slave trade, imperialism, colonialism, which contributed to the plunder of Africa’s human and raw materials to Europe.
This action led to the stagnation of African’s development and its dependency status on Europe; hence the thesis that “Africa is underdeveloped” because Europe plundered its resources… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
Rural development must be targeted at the people as the beneficiaries of development. Chinsman (1988:3-4) asked the question, why put people first? In his view, “development is a process of economic and social advancement which enables people to realize their potential, build self-confidence, and live lives of dignity and fulfillment.
It is a process which, if sincerely implemented, frees people from evils of want, ignorance, squalor, and exploitation”. Meaningful developments in general and rural development, in particular, require the full utilization of the nation’s own resources, both human and material.
The work by Chinsman (1983) is based on his experience in Nigeria as the UNDP Representative, where he agrees that development is about people and not objects or things. The people must come first in the process of planning for their development. He identifies the benefits of development to include economic and social advancement, building peoples’ potentials, self-confidence, dignity, freedom from evils of want and deprivation, ignorance, etc.
In all of these, the people must be involved from the beginning to the end of the program and policies of the government. This researcher agrees with Chinsman and sees his work as being in agreement with the bottom-up approach to rural development, which is adopted as our theoretical framework for this research… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
Review of Scholars’ Contributions to Rural Development
The study came across a lot of literature on rural development as discussed in the theoretical framework and the definition of terms. However, for the purpose of emphasis, few of them were discussed to find out our points of departure or convergence from existing works in the field.
Some of the selected works discussed below could be categorized into the two major approaches or divide i.e. those that adopt the top-bottom approach on the one hand, and the bottom-up approach on the other… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
- The Modernization Scholars
Ujo in his work “Development Administration in Nigeria”, attempts to explain modernization by defining it as, “a strategy designed 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 a livelihood in the rural areas”. . . (Ujo, 1994:111).
Ujo tries to describe rural development strategy in Nigeria using the modernization approach, which relies on the creation of institutions by the state for rural development.
He also discusses the challenges of rural development to include, socio-cultural beliefs, old traditions and ways of doing things, economic backwardness, religious beliefs, and taboos, all of which impact negatively the transformation of agriculture, industries, and the adoption of new technology in agriculture… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
- The Agrarian Transformation Scholars
Williams (1985:3-121), examines the theory and strategy for rural development, with a focus on agricultural transformation via the application of science and technology and extension services, plus the training of personnel in order to improve our traditional method of farming. The magic of improved agriculture products will come if these improved methods and technology are properly communicated to the rural dwellers.
William’s focus is also on adopting an integrated approach to rural development. He contends that “integrated rural development then appears to be one of the basic ways of Nigeria harnessing her natural resources for the benefit of her people”. Williams (1985:20) further states: (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
Rural development can be understood within specific theoretical models of analysis. The study of rural development, like development itself, has been perceived from different viewpoints such as the modernization or transformation approach, redistributive justice approach/mobilization approach, and the integrated approach, (Ujo,1994:51-56, Williams 1985, Todaro 2003, Kolawole, 1993).
We shall examine some of these theoretical models to enable us to pick one as a framework of analysis. There are basically two approaches to rural development; the top-down and the bottom-up approaches.
The top-down is that which the policymakers/bureaucrats/governmental agencies decide what is best for the rural people, and go ahead without their involvement in the processes of planning, decision making and even implementation, while the bottom-up approach allows for the mass mobilization and participation of the beneficiaries of the programs and projects of rural development… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
- Research Design
The research adopted the survey design. The survey research enables a researcher to study a group of people or items or a population, by collecting and analyzing data from only a few people or items considered to be representative of the entire group (population). Thus, rather than obtain data from the whole population being studied only a sample is selected from the whole through a sampling process.
- The Area of Study
The area of study is Kirimbo area of Kumbotso Kano State,
- Population of the Study
The population of the study involves all the residents of Kirimbo area of Kumbotso Kano State
- Sample Size And Sampling Technique
The research adopted a purposive sampling method, and a sample size of 300 respondents was used in this research. This was so because the researcher did not have the time and resources to study all the million inhabitants of the Kirimbo area of Kumbotso Kano State.
The purposive sampling enables the researcher to pick on target groups such as farmers, farmers’ cooperative societies, and the community development association leaders who are residents in the local governments selected… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This section deals with the presentation of data (collated information from our primary sources) and their analyses. The questionnaire was divided into five sections. Section one biodata; section two dwells on PAIP; section three on direct labor agency; section four on Kano State Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Agency while section five is on general information.
The field questionnaire collates responses from communities through individuals residents in those communities about their awareness, roles, and contributions of these selected rural development agencies in Kano State. The field report and analysis are presented below in tables. Simple percentages and chi-square statistics were employed for data analysis.
Table 9: Rating Of Industrialization In Kano State
|Assessment of beneficiaries to industrialization Programme||PAIP
Source: Field Survey, 2010
Data on the above table show that for PAIP, 7% of respondents put the rating very high; 25% as high, 36% very low, and 32% low. On a general note, PAIP’s performance in the state is very low with 36% as against 7% very high. The direct labor agency has a rating of 7% very high, 19% high, 29% very low, and 45% low.
The finding shows that the response for low performance (45%) is higher than that of high performance (19%). It is therefore evidently clear that the performance of direct labor agency is rated low in the state… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The study was carried out to find out the impact of selected rural development agencies in Kano State on rural development.
The specific areas investigated are the budgetary allocations to the three selected agencies in the state, the role of the beneficiaries in the process of decision making and implementation of the programs of the selected agencies, and the impact of the selected agencies on rural conditions or rural development in the state… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
Based on the findings of this research, the following recommendations are made:
- There is the need for a paradigm shift from the traditional (modernization) or top-down model of rural development to the bottom-up, participatory approach to rural development in Kano State.
- The agencies engaged in rural development be properly funded and given free hand to operate in order to avoid the spate of abandoned projects as presented in appendix 4, 5, and 6. These agencies should be under the first-line charge directly from the Governor’s office, considering the importance of rural development to the overall national development… (Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)
Abba, E.U & Anazodo, R. (2006). Development administration in Africa Onitsha: Abbot Books.
Abasiekong, E.M. (1982). Integrated rural development in the Third World, its Concepts, Problems, and Prospects; New York: Exponation press.
Agbodike, C.C (1991). “Mass-Mobilization and rural development in Nigeria: an appraisal”. In: Olisa Obiukwu (eds) Rural development in Nigeria: a Conceptual and analytical Perspective, Nsukka: Spectrum Ltd.
Ade, S.O. & Nwosu A.C (eds), (1992). Rural development Strategies in Nigeria; Ibadan: Adetunje Press.
Ake, C. (1979). Social Science as Imperialism; Ibadan: University Press.
Ake, C. (1981). The political economy of Africa; Ibadan: Longman.
Alkasum, A. (1985). The Nigerian economic crisis; causes and solutions; ZARIA: ASUU Publication
Akinbode, I. (1986). The role of Local Governments in agricultural training and extension Services in Nigeria; Ibadan: University Press.
Akor, M.E. (2005). Ideological strands in Africa, Jos Mono Press.
Anikpo, M. (1995). “Policy Options for innovative rural development in Nigeria”, in Nwanunobi (eds), Innovative approaches to rural development in Nigeria; Department of Sociology and Anthropology; University of Nigeria Nssuka. (Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)
Alli, W. O (1989). “Rural community in the political and development process- The case of Nigeria“ Development Studies Review, 3 (1 &2), 31-39.(Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)
Anzaku D. & Dashe D.(2003). community mobilization in human resources development in the third world implications for nomads in Nigeria” Current Issues in Development No.5, (1 & 2),75- 78. (Industrialization)
Abasiekong, E.M. (1980). “Integrated approach to community development as a strategy for rural development” Journal of Community Development: (3), 1-2. Anthonio, Q.B.O (1967). “The stagnant sector in the Nigerian economy” Bulleting of Rural Economics and Sociology, 2 (3), 221-228. (Industrialization)(Industrialization)
Aremo, J.A. (1983). “Popular participation in rural development” ERES, 16 (3), 15-18. (Industrialization)
Akinbode, I. (1976). “A perspective on rural development in Nigeria”, Journal of Administration University of Ife, II,127 – 135. (Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS/SEMINAR PAPERS/WORKSHOP PAPERS
Akorodula Ake E.O.“Nigeria’s fundamental national objectives and the question of appropriate National development strategy” paper presented at DFRRI National workshop on integrated rural development for Local government Chairmen and secretaries) Durba Hotel Badagry Express Way, Lagos, 30th – Jan.- 2nd February 1989.
Alubo, S.O. , “Rural development in contemporary Nigeria, A dialectical critique” paper presented at the 4th National conference of the Nigerian rural Sociological Association, ABU, Zaria, May 17-20th. 1987.
Anikpo, M., “Rural Development in the third republic: Precondition for National integration in Nigeria”, Paper Presented at the 1989 NASA Conference Ogun State University Age-Iwoye, November 26th -30th, 1989.
Ake, C., “Sustaining development on the indigenous”, paper prepared for the World Bank special economic office, African Region December. 1987. (Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)(Industrialization)
Amadi, B.C., “Integrated rural development” Proceedings of the National Conference on integrated rural Development and Women in development, University of Benin., 1980. (Industrialization)(Industrialization)
(Scroll down for the link to get the Complete Chapter One to Five Project Material)