Abstract
This study is basically on the failures of other strategies at the National, State and Local Government level to ensure sustainable development using community development as a strategy. Most of the projects and programmes set by government for development are not sustainable because the beneficiaries are not actively involved (participation). The objectives of the study include: to determine the relevance of Community development projects and their effects on Sustainable development; and the effect of community participation on Sustainable development in Chikun Local Government. The propositions for the research work are: community development projects and programmes are not of great relevance to sustainable development in Chikun Local Government; and community participation on projects and programmes to a greater extent do not lead to sustainable development in Chikun Local Government. The study uses the survey research method which include the use of instruments of interviews, questionnaire administration and using checklist of issues for observation as primary sources, while the secondary sources comprises files, reports, minute books, budgets etc. on activities, decisions, financial reports, pictures of community development projects and programmes of the Local Government and Community Development Associations. Data collected were presented and analyzedusing tables and simple percentages. The study found that most government plans and implementation of Community development projects and programmes did not properly involve the beneficiaries, from its initial stage to completion. We also found that there is problem of misplacement of priority by the government, as to the pressing need of the people at a time is not what the government is providing them with. The Local Government projects and programmes are not sustained or maintained because the supposed beneficiaries do not see it as their own since they lack any sense of ownership during initiation and even implementation of the projects and programmes. To this end, this study recommend that people`s participation philosophy of mobilizing resources and organizing the community people both the rural populace to the urban centers to have cogent interests in providing for their wellbeing, need to be properly emphasized and utilized. This will stimulate the feeling of ownership of such development projects/programmes by benefiting communities and by implication promote sustainable development. Government at various strata including the federal, state and most especially local governments, have to come to terms with the fact that there is an inherent importance in “the participatory development theory” which advocates community populace active participation in decision-making and implementation of policies that affect and mould their lives. This will ensure that projects/programmes of government are exactly the felt needs of benefiting communities.
CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background to the study
Community development is not a creation of modern times; it is as old as mankind when the family was the central focus of any activity. Community development is an age long movement that has been in practice in various communities even before the advent of colonialism. Before colonization, leadership was rooted in the culture and tradition of various the people and decision making was part and parcel of rural development. Rural development has always been equated to community development from immemorial to date; the two words are used interchangeably, Chukwuezi (2000) and Cavaye (2000), had lent their supports when they wrote that all rural development are equally community development. This assisted largely in mobilization of people for developmental activities.
The argument has been that since the vast majority of Nigerians of over 80% reside in rural areas, Human Development Report, in Cavaye (2000), there would not be social welfare without rural areas transformation and development so that the rural people share in the social amenities and other facets of economic, social and political life of the country. Historically, the notion of community development owes a great deal to the efforts of colonial administrators. Hence after the Second World War, the British Colonial Office became concern with ‘community development. Mayo in Cavaye (2000) suggests that administrators invented the term out of their attempts to develop ‘basic education' and social welfare in the UK colonies. For example, a 1944 report, Mass education in the colonies, placed an emphasis on literacy training and advocated the promotion of agriculture, health and other social services through local self-help (Midgley in Ugwu 2009).The importance of community development in contemporary Nigeria cannot be over emphasized as its significance stems from its recognized role in the process of achieving the improvement of the economic, political, social and cultural conditions of communities. As a strategy, “Community development ensures rapid national development. Ugwu (2009) asserts that community development is one of the major planks upon which National Developmental policies and their implementation are hinged.
This is why the group dynamic perspective of community development becomes imperative, especially as issues concerning community development with special emphasis on self-help approach tend to rely on the “felt-needs theory” and the traditional participatory democratic theory. These theories are indicative of the place of people‟s participation in development. Some community development programs that were put in place by Federal, State and Local Government include the poverty alleviation program, National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, having their versions in State and Local Government respectively.
Community development has become a national importance in Nigeria. Flora and Flora in Emeh, Eluwa and Ukah(2012)argue that community development combines the idea of „Community‟ with „Development‟ hence the concept of community development relies on interaction between people and joint action, rather than individual activity- what some sociologists call “Collective Agency”.
Christenson (1999) sees Development to involve change, improvement and vitality; a direct attempt to improve participation flexibility, equity, attitude, the function of institutions and the quality of life. It leads to a net addition to community assets.
Nigerian government policies of development such as Department of Food, Road and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI), National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP), National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) are to be concerned especially
with rural development in two major aspects. The first is the recognition of the people as the center of development. The second is the need to build strongly on existing social, cultural, political and economic foundations from the Federal, State and Local. Governmental policies on rural development can only succeed if the people especially in Chikun Local Government adopt these policies and participate actively and massively in their implementations. Such substantial participation and sustained interest can only be achieved through community development efforts of the people and in direct consonance with the people‟s social, cultural, and religious values (Jones cited in Obetta and Charity, 2012).
It is generally accepted that self-sustained community development is vital to the economic and social progress of any developing nation like Nigeria. Larger percentage of the nation‟s population lives in the rural communities which serve as the basis for the production of food and engage in primary activities that are supposed to form the foundation of any economic development for the country. Despite its importance, the rural areas lack basic amenities such as potable water, electricity, health facilities and motor able feeder roads. The rural people have low purchasing power and standard of living. While agriculture is the dominant economic activity, the tax base is limited. So rural areas are rarely able to mobilize sufficient resources to finance development projects. The prevailing situations in rural areas have been poverty, deprivation, lack of basic amenities, services and lack of opportunities for advancement.
To overcome these obstacles to rural development, a systematic policy of mobilization of the rural people in the development perspectives is necessary. This focuses on the active involvement of people in the issues which affect their lives; and encourage participation, empowerment, self-help and the sharing of skills, knowledge and experience (Jones cited in Cavaye, 2000).
Mobilization is required to facilitate implementation of carefully planned programmes and to establish partnership between the government and the people in carrying out development programmes and projects. This can be achieved if community development has been taken seriously as it deserves. Community development is people‟s oriented development and a catalyst for sustainable development.
Community development is a strategy or approach for improvement that is directed towards a specific field of social development requiring action on the part of the people to improve their condition of living, whether social, economic or cultural. Its effect in the field of social development is socially conditioned, since it brings about awareness and the improvement of relationships between individuals, groups, communities and organizations to ensure a sustained development. In this light, from a humanitarian perspective, it may be seen as a search for community, mutual aid, social support and human liberation in an alienating, oppressive, competitive and individualistic society. In its more pragmatic institutional sense, it may be viewed as a means for mobilizing communities to join state or institutional initiatives that are aimed at alleviating poverty, solving social problems, strengthening families, fostering democracy and achieving modernization and socio-economic development (Campfens cited in Ohiani, 2006).Therefore, attempt is made to justify community development as a strategy for sustainable development, with particular reference to Chikun Local Government Area of Kaduna State.
1.2. Statement of the Research Problem
It is important to recognize that most of the challenges of development in Nigeria are a clear manifestation of the weakness in the strategies adopted by the government, from Federal, State, and Local Government. Most of the development strategies adopted by government are mostly
those that are top-down in their approaches. For example, the development programmes to empower the people or enhance community development from time, such as DFRRI, NAPEP NEEDS with state and local versions are all not people friendly, since the people were not involved or carried along. This makes community development to suffer and thereby frustrating sustainable development. This is because the input from the people was not included, despite the fact that the development was targeted at them (Obetta and Charity, 2012).
The people lacked sense of belonging to any of government projects or programmes, they never felt as if they were part of the development effort of their communities, which affected the maintenance of those projects, leading to the problem of not sustaining those facilities or programmes put in place to serve the people. In some communities in Chikun Local Government, like any other communities within the country, there are projects initiated and implemented by the government that are no longer serving the purpose which they were meant for because the community‟s inputs were neglected. For example the solar boreholes of Ungwan Bije-Kakau ward, the solar borehole in Sarki Street Ungwan Romi Yelwa/Romi Ward worked for only a year and are no longer functioning. Also in Kakau community, about seven boreholes were sunk by the L.G. only the one in front of the house of a member of house of representative representing the constituency is functioning. Most of government projects and programmes provided by government within the local government area are not properly maintained, thereby leading to problem of sustainability.
It is mostly a top-down approach to community development, which makes projects and programs unsustainable due to misplaced priorities, as to what the people need, is not what is given to them, but what the donors feel they need. It is against this background that the study explores how, and what model to be used for community development to serve as a veritable strategy for sustainable development in Chikun Local Government Area of Kaduna State
1.3. Research questions
i.How relevant were the community development projects and programmes on sustainable development in Chikun Local Government Area?
- To what extent can community participation leads to sustainable development in Chikun Local Government Area?
1.4. Objective of the study
The major objective of this study is to examine how community development can serve as a viable strategy for sustainable development in Chikun Local Government Area, Kaduna State from 2005to 2010.
The specific objectives of this study are to:
- Determine the relevance of community development projects and programmes and their effects on sustainable development in Chikun Local Government Area;
- Examine the effects of community participation on sustainable development in Chikun Local Government Area Kaduna State.
1.5. Propositions
The Propositions for the research work are:
- Community Development Projects and Programmes are not of great relevance to Sustainable Development in Chikun Local Government Area.
- Community Participation on Projects and Programmes to a greater extent do not lead to Sustainable Development in Chikun Local Government Area.
1.6. Scope and Delimitation of the Study
1.6.1. Scope of the Study
This study covers a period of five years, 2005-2010. The researcher chooses this period in other to make a reasonable and proper appraisal on community development projects and programmes within Chikun Local Government Area and how they continue to serve the purpose which they are executed.
The specific areas dealt with are:
The contributions of government to community development in Chikun Local Government Area, self-help efforts within the local government area; the maintenance culture of the government; and of the people in the communities of developmental projects and programmes
The sustainability of such projects and programme (are they serving the purpose for which they were established?).
Chikun Local government area has 11 wards. The study covers about 4 different communities selected across these wards as the research empirical coverage (2 Urban and 2 Rural. Communities such as Sabon-Tasha, under Sabo Ward, Kakau community under Kakau Ward and Ungwan Romi/Agyeita community under Yelwa/Romi Ward and Kakau Ward respectively). This is done in order to make careful and proper findings within the Local Government Area; chikun is seen as one of those Local Governments in the state that has the population of both urban and rural communities in order to study the community development activities of the various communities. Sabo and Romi communities cover the urban communities, while Agyeita and Kakau covers the rural communities. Also chikun local government is chosen as the research empirical scope because meaningful community development activities is said to have taken place in the local government, so the study access most of these projects and programmes.
1.6.2. Limitation of the Study
The study in limited to only Chikun Local Government Area, the major limitation of this study is the problem of very poor record keeping in Chikun local government; Most of their records were burnt by fire inferno that gutted some of the offices in the local council secretariat. It was a great task to get documented data, on community development projects and programmes within the local government.
Secondly, the study has the problem of the attitude of some local government officials‟ respondents, especially (the political class) who were either absent from office and or very often feel reluctant to sit and attend to our questions. It took a long period of time, over seven months of the researcher‟s repeated visit to their offices and sometimes their homes, before some of the officials could attend to our questions.
The third and last problem is the problem of time. The limited time we have for the study could not give us the opportunity to cover more communities than we would have done. In our effort to ameliorate the adverse effect of the research limitations, we went extra miles to the State Ministry for Community and Rural development to get meaningful data on this regard. We also visited the local government secretariat and even officials houses to get primary data for the research work and personal observation of checklist of issues.
1.7. Significance of the Study
Although the research is carried out to fulfill an academic requirement, it will also go beyond that scope encouraging more meaningful and conscious development efforts on the part of Community people. Previous studies on development have often laid emphasis on Community development as one among numerous strategies employed by government for development, not paying attention as to whether the development is sustainable or not, and what are those salient issues in Community development that will ensure Sustainable development.
Therefore, the study laid emphasis on the issue of Community development in a participatory manner, Jumare and Mohammed (2012), in a study on the effort of Community development in sustainable development concluded that, most common of the problems of Sustainable development is the problem of poor participation of beneficiaries of the development. With the mode of collaborative and collective action by the people and the government. The collaborative mode of Community development postulated that local people work together with outsiders to determine priorities, responsibility remains with outsiders for directing the process. While the collective action mode postulate that local people set the agenda and mobilize to carryout, utilizing outsiders not as initiators or facilitators, but as required by local people. This mostly is done in projects or programmes that require quick action to be taken Nicole (2002). This study is in line with the above scholars, with a paramount significance of filling the gap that most researches in the field of Community Development are yet to fill, in bringing out Community development strategy that will be more Sustainable for development (projects and programmes to continue serving the need which they are created)
1.8Operational Definition of Key Concept
To avoid ambiguities and enhance clear understanding of concepts, some of them are defined operationally as follows:
Sustainable Development: General Sustainability is a process, and is a futuristic one. To understand sustainable development, it has to be looked at in 3 different perspectives:
Social indicators
- Adequate education, eliminating illiteracy, enrolment in schools, student/teacher ratio, skills training, special skills and labour. Opening up of educational facilities for other people outside the formal school system.
- Shelter, employment, transportation, good roads energy and water that will continue to serve the people
- Significant reduction in infant and maternal mortality, availability of health services, increase in life expectancy, combating killer diseases
- Guaranteeing right to life, right to freedom of expression and participation in decision making.
Economicindicator
- Food security (availability of food throughout the year
- Per capita income increase and GDP
- Raising standard of living for all
- Decrease in wealth differential (i.e. between rich and the poor in favour of the poor).
Environmental indicators
- Water sources, bio-diversity, promotion of community hygiene
- Recycling techniques decreases in affluent consumption pattern and use of renewal energy.
Community Development:
- People are capable of organizing themselves to bring social and physical benefits to their community.
- Self or collective community effort for achieving progress and development.
- Mobilizing local initiative in the interest of the community
- Proper channeling of external assistance to provide more incentives and motivation for development projects and programmes in the community.
- Selfless service, volunteerism and participation of community people in developmental activities and self-help programmes.
Relevance of Projects and Programmes
- Good motor able and all season road.
- Portable drinking water and food supply.
- Good Health facilities.
- Sanitation and hygienic environment.
- Proper Education and Educational facilities.
Participation:
- Involvement of would be beneficiaries in their own advancement.
- Actors/ change agents in the community.
- Bottom-up approach to development.
- Social inclusion of community people in developmental activities.
1.9 Outline of Chapters
In chapter one, the study provided background to the study, statement of the research problem, research questions, objectives, propositions, scope and delimitation of the study, limitations of the study, significance, operational definition of key concepts and outline of chapters.
Chapter two comprises of literature review, a review of empirical studies in community development and sustainable as well as a theoretical framework to underpin the study.
Chapter three presents research methodology which comprises of research design, population and sample size, sampling technique, sources of data, administration of research instruments, and method of data presentation and analysis.
In chapter four, the study discussed an overview of community development programmes in Chikun local government including evolution of community development activities in Nigeria, community development in Eastern region of Nigeria, community development in other parts of the world from China, India and Tanzania as well as the role of local government and the community in community development within Chikun local government area of Kaduna state.
Chapter five deals with data presentation and analysis including responses community, results and discussion of community responses, community development associations‟ responses, discussion of local government officials‟ interview responses, confirmation of propositions as well as summary of major findings. Finally, chapter six present summary, conclusion and recommendations.
