Full Project – COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANISATIONS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF RURAL COMMUNITIES IN ONDO STATE

Full Project – COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANISATIONS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF RURAL COMMUNITIES IN ONDO STATE

Click here to Get this Complete Project Chapter 1-5

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1         Background to the Study

Rural infrastructures are indeed the pivot of rural development because they increase rural productivity and income, improve rural living conditions and facilitate spatial integration of rural settlements into national development landscape (Bankole, 2006). Rural development is achieved through tangible projects and resource distribution.

Improving rural development projects is one of the greatest challenges facing many rural dwellers at present. Although Ilaje local government council have already executed and still have some on-going projects as strategies for rural development, the pattern and level of community participation in such projects are yet to be appreciable. Nhlakanipho (2010) also opined that the rural poor have not really participated in sharing the benefits from the enormous development efforts of the last three decades in proportion to their needs.

Rural development from a general point of view is the process of improving the quality of life and economic wellbeing of people living in relatively isolated and sparsely populated areas (Moseley, 2003) which are also known as rural areas. However, despite strategies put in place in form of projects provided for rural people, many do not benefit because of their non-involvement in the project planning process and implementation hence, the emphasis on community participation in rural development project.

Rural development is more realistic when people participate in the process of infrastructure provision because at the heart of rural development projects are infrastructures and for the overall goals and objectives to be met, the principle for effective community participation must be adapted (Idachaba and Bankole, 2006).

Community participation as a development approach for rural socioeconomic development is an alternative to the top – down approach which has failed to yield the desired result because rural dwellers who are target beneficiaries were not carried along initially (Bankole, 2007). The term has been conceptualized in different ways in the literature as either public, people or citizen participation, however they all have the same focus, which is rural development (Oakley, 1991 and Afolayan, 2008). Participation is all about inclusiveness, social justice and common good which shows that rural development is community based when people in communities determine their needs and aspiration. This is because it is realized that by so doing large numbers of marginalized rural people can be „„reached‟‟ effectively by the government and other types of developmental projects supported by international agencies like Food and Agricultural Organization and World Health Organization (WHO and FAO, 1991).

The improvement in living standard of people through popular participation is thus central to the concept of rural development (Adedayo, Taiwo and Medupin, 1991). Therefore, community participation serves as pivot for whatever successful process rural development is trying to achieve in rural communities.

Unless the rural communities are given opportunities to participate in rural development interventions designed to improve their condition of living, the level of spatial inequalities among regions will tend to increase. It therefore becomes of research interest to analyse the processes involved in provision of rural projects in Ilaje local government area, perhaps absence of community participation may be a factor in the under achievement of the desired objectives and this calls for the present study.

1.2         Statement of the Research Problem

Rural development projects placed so much emphasis on participation of the communities or beneficiaries because of multiple merits of participatory approach hence some studies have been conducted on the subject. Olisa and Obiukwu (1992) saw community participation as an important element to speedy socio – economic transformation of rural areas therefore it cannot be over looked.

Afolayan (2008) examined community participation in infrastructure provision using medium sized communities in Kwara State. The study revealed that a high level of community participation in projects such as schools, electricity, roads, water, market/stalls, health facilities and town halls influenced the functional structure in medium sized communities. The United Nations Development Programme, (UNDP) Ondo report (2006) also referred to community participation as the process that unites the efforts of the people themselves with those of the government authorities.

Dzinavatonga (2008) investigated community participation and project sustainability in rural Zimbabwe using Sangwe communal land in Chiredzi as a case study. The author employed purposive sampling technique for interviews with key informants in the community and random sampling in selection of communities in the wards for the field survey. The author‟s findings revealed that there is a need for the government and non – governmental organization (NGOs) to facilitate the creation of a community based network programme that ensures the participation of the rural communities in project planning and implementation. However, facilitation does not mean the facilitators dictate to the communities what to do but provide the necessary conducive environment for the community to institute this community-based network programme. This is because it is through such network the rural communities participate actively in the realization of sustainable projects in Sangwe.

Ofuoku (2011) assessed the effect of community participation on sustainability of rural water projects in Ondo Central Agricultural Zone of Ondo State. Purposive sampling was used in selecting rural communities based on the presence of rural water projects while systematic sampling was used in selecting every fourth house to pick respondents. Ofuoku (2011) found out that where the water projects were funded by respective communities and other agencies, effective community participation was higher compared to those solely funded by governments.

Ondoleye and Oladeinde (2013) examined the role of community self – help projects in rural development of Kwara State using Irepodun LGA. Data gathered were analysed using Chi – square and correlation analyses. The study indicated that for an equitable distribution of self-help projects provided by the federal government as an essential tool for balanced socio – economic development of rural areas especially in Nigeria, rural dwellers‟ participation should be the focus.

What inspired this study is that the presence of rural development project is not strongly felt in most rural communities, Ilaje local government area inclusive. This has resulted in the inaccessibility of most rural dwellers to some facilities and services. Also, most basic facilities are urban concentrated and rural dwellers denied (Oyebanji, 2000). For instance, out of thirty – five health facilities managed by the state Hospital Board in Ondo state, only one is in Ilaje urban centre and none in any of the rural community. More worrisome is that poverty has made lot of rural dwellers not to have means to access long distance services in the outskirt of the rural communities because most projects are sited in majorly urban centres (For example communities in Abraka and Asaba; Nigeria).

Various Nigerian government embarked on numerous developmental projects through agencies like Petroleum Trust fund (PTF), Oil mineral producing areas development commission (OMPADEC) etc. (McNeil 1993). The author pointed out that an average of one third to over half of public investment was allocated to infrastructure sectors in developing countries.

Rural development projects have been embarked upon by many communities based on self – help informed by the realization that no government can meet all the needs of all the rural communities (Adedayo, 2000). Nonetheless, the government should make provision of these projects because the fact remains that there can be no meaningful rural development without the effective harnessing of the potentialities of the rural communities. Besides, numerous government policy directives at ensuring availability and accessibility of these services to all administrative units in the country have seemingly not yielded expected results in the study area.

Although community participation is at the centre of rural development and should be one of the foremost pre-requisites in development process both from procedural and philosophical perspectives, none of these studies (Olisa and Obiukwu, 1992; McNeil, 1993; Olawepo, 1997; Adesope et al, 2000; Adedayo, 2000; Oyebanji, 2000; Ofuoku, 2011; Ondoleye and Oladehinde, 2013) have focused on rural communities in Ilaje local government area. In view of the statement of research problem, the following questions are posed: –

1. What types of socio – economic development projects are embarked upon by the communities in the study area?
2. What is the contribution of the community to rural projects in the study area?
3. What is the level of community participation in rural projects?
4. How are the rural community projects maintained in the study area?
5. What are the constraints to community participation in rural socio-economic development projects?

1.3         Aim and Objectives of the Study

The aim of this study is to Community-Based Organisations and the Development of Rural Communities in Ondo State. However, the specific objectives of the study are to:

1. characterize the types of community development projects in the study area.
2. identify the forms of participation of the rural community in the development projects?
3. examine how the community projects are being sustained/maintained in the study area
4. assess level of community participation in socio – economic development projects.
5. examine the constraints to community participation in rural development projects in the study area.

1.4         Null Hypothesis

There is no significant relationship between community participation and projects planning process and implementation in the study area.

1.5         Scope of the Study

The spatial scope of this study centred on the Community-Based Organisations and the Development of Rural Communities in Ondo State. The rural communities include Abokiti, Ago Alufa, Ago nati, Ajegunle, Alagbon, Amehin, Apata ilaje, Asumaga, Awoye and Ayetoro. The selection of communities is based on the alphabetical arrangement of Abokiti, Imoru, Oke-Eri and Bijimi districts; hence, every third (3^rd) settlement in each district was systematically selected for the study. The study focuses on community participation in socio-economic development projects since the creation of Ilaje local government area. The extent of the work includes several community projects in the study area, challenges encountered by community members, levels and forms of participation and effect of community participation on utilization of the projects.

Rural development projects included in this study are educational infrastructures, health services, markets and electricity projects. The fieldwork and secondary data used in the study span between the creation of Ilaje local government area to date.

1.6         Significance of the Study

Community participation is essential for rural development project of Nigeria and the developing countries in general because the idea is to improve the rural human condition. Community participation has also been perceived in various sectors of the economy to mean improvement in the quality of life of the rural communities which can be further classified as socioeconomic development which include education, health, water, electricity etc. (Obateru, 2003).

This study is necessary because findings will assist Ilaje local government council, traditional authorities and other development agencies such as community workers to consider different approaches of involving rural dwellers in their rural development projects. Various stakeholders would identify the role which they might play at the beginning of the development process to prevent obstacles that lead to poor community participation. Community members would also contribute by suggesting strategies which the community leaders can use to regain and maintain the sustainability of the community.

However, since there is a renewed emphasis on rural areas lately, the reason for this study on community participation is unconnected with the important role rural communities play in rural projects because former framework adopted by some previous administrations have failed to achieve many of its aims due to the bureaucratic top-down approach (McCommon, 1993).The basic assumption is that development should trickle down from the growth centre (core)to periphery but failure in achieving this goal precipitated a new framework that appreciates rural people as major stakeholder in their own development (Stohr and Taylor, 1981).This is often referred to as „participatory‟, „local democracy‟ or „bottom-up‟ approach (Rafiu, 2007). The approach allows rural dwellers express their views and help define development course for the rural area in line with their expectations and plans. The bone of contention here is that development should commence from below (bottom) that is grass–root or rural areas as against the previous from above (Adefila, 2012).

The study Assessment of Community Participation in Rural Development Projects in Ilaje local government area is also worthwhile because it will help identify missing link in rural development since it is realised that one influence of the rural development through participation is that it encourages outsiders to learn gradually from the rural people who are always happy to be involved in planning their development (Olawepo, 1997). He further noted that rural projects associated with rural area where participatory development is adopted should be encouraged because rather than development impetus originating from „top to down, the reversal of process is the case where development facet is suggested and undertaken by the communities in relation to their felt needs.

It is further hoped that the findings of this study serve as a frame of reference for the development programmes which are taking place in rural areas, be helpful to government, policy makers, development agencies in identifying the necessity of community participation in their project cycle, help in the modification and re – strategizing on how participation approach could be used in problem solving efforts towards improvement of the quality of rural life. The study will form a database for future studies and serve as important reference materials for planners, multilateral organizations, non – governmental organizations (NGOs), foundations and others interested in rural development particularly in Ilaje, Ondo state and the Ondo as a whole.

Get the Complete Project

This is a premium project material and the complete research project plus questionnaires and references can be gotten at an affordable rate of N3,000 for Nigerian clients and $8 for International clients.

Click here to Get this Complete Project Chapter 1-5

 

 

 

You can also check other Research Project here:

1. Accounting Research Project
2. Adult Education
3. Agricultural Science
4. Banking & Finance
5. Biblical Theology & CRS
6. Biblical Theology and CRS
7. Biology Education
8. Business Administration
9. Computer Engineering Project
10. Computer Science 2
11. Criminology Research Project
12. Early Childhood Education
13. Economic Education
14. Education Research Project
15. Educational Administration and Planning Research Project
16. English
17. English Education
18. Entrepreneurship
19. Environmental Sciences Research Project
20. Guidance and Counselling Research Project
21. History Education
22. Human Kinetics and Health Education
23. Management
24. Maritime and Transportation
25. Marketing
26. Marketing Research Project 2
27. Mass Communication
28. Mathematics Education
29. Medical Biochemistry Project
30. Organizational Behaviour
31. Other Projects
32. Political Science
33. Psychology
34. Public Administration
35. Public Health Research Project
36. More Research Project
37. Transportation Management
38. Nursing

Education