CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1       BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Poverty appears to be one of the worst universal problems of man. According to Ukpong (1996) it humiliates and dehumanizes its victim.In fact, poverty is theoretically and methodologically a difficult question, even as Lawal and Hassan (2012) noted that the concept of poverty remains controversial both conceptually and in practical measurement. The controversy stretches even to the debate over whether it is to be poverty alleviation or poverty eradication.
Successive Nigerian governments have had to contend with this hydra-headedchallenge which appearsto have high casualties across age and gender brackets. The magnitude of poverty in Nigeria is worrisome. The UNDP has classified the country as 141 poorest nations on human development index. In its report, Nigeria is considered one of the 20 poorest countries in the world with 70% of the population classified as poor and 54.4% living in absolute poverty (UNDP-HDI, 2006; Ekugo 2006).
Recent studies have revealed that the various campaigns against poverty are yet to record any meaningful success. The UNDP report (2010) covering a period of 2000-2008 indicates that 64.4% of Nigerians live below poverty line, while the country occupies 142nd position out of 147 countries in human development index.
Available evidence shows that poverty has been a serious problem confronting Nigeria since independence in 1960.The poverty level in the country was about 15%, and by 1980 it had reached 28.1%. In 1985, the poverty level was 46.3%, but dropped to 42.7% in 1992. As Ugo and Ukpere (2009) have noted, with the termination of the democratic process by the military government, the poverty level rose to 43.6% in 1995. A year after, about 65% of the population was below poverty line, that is, about 67.1 million Nigerians. In 1999 and 2000, UN Development Report revealed that Nigeria had degenerated further as 87% of the population was below poverty line and the country rated 154th on the world’s Marginal Poverty Index out of 172 countries (Ekpu 2004).
According to the Statistician General of the Federation, Dr. Yemi Kale, poverty in Nigeria is rising with almost 100 million people living on less than $1 a day despite strong growth(Subair, Vanguard, February 13:2012).
The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) boss said that the percentage of Nigerians living in absolute poverty – those who can afford only the bare essentials of food, shelter and clothing – rose to 60.9 per cent in 2010, compared with 54.7 per cent in 2004.
Although Nigeria's economy is projected to continue growing, poverty is likely to get worse as the gap between the rich and the poor continues to widen.It remains a paradox ... that despite the fact that the Nigerian economy is growing, the proportion of Nigerians living in poverty is increasing every year, Statistician General of the Federation, Dr. Yemi Kale, told reporters at a press conference in Abuja, on Monday. NBS estimates that this trend may have increased further in 2011 if the potential positive impacts of several anti-poverty and employment generation intervention programmes are not taken into account (Subair, Vanguard, February 13:2012).

Subair reported him as saying that the poverty rate in Nigeria might have risen to 71.5 per cent, 61.9 per cent, and 62.8 per cent using the relative, absolute and dollar-per-day measures, respectively:
However, this will become clearer once the 2011 Annual Socio-Economic Survey is completed later in the year. Thus, using the relative, absolute and dollar-per-day poverty measures, NBS estimates that poverty may have further risen slightly to about 71.5 per cent, 61.9 per cent and 62.8 per cent respectively in 2011.
Dr. Kale said that between 2004 and 2010, Nigeria’s poverty rate had moved from 54.4 per cent to 69 per cent involving 112,518,507 Nigerians, adding that although the country’s Gross Domestic Growth (GDP) had grown since then, it had little impact on the poverty situation (Subair, Vanguard, February 13:2012).
Thus applying the United Nations’ definition of a poor person in dollar terms, the Statistician-General disclosed that 51.6 per cent of Nigerians were living below US$1 per day in 2004 but this increased to 61.2 per cent in 2010.“Although the World Bank standard now is US$1.25 per day, the old reference of US$1 per day was the standard used in Nigeria at the time that the survey was concluded,” he said.
Nigeria has a huge agricultural resource base which offers great potential for economic growth. It has vast land that is available for mechanized agriculture. Irrigation is being used only in the near arid parts of the north to increase yields.
Inspite of its huge agricultural resources, growth and oil wealth, poverty is widespread in the country and has increased since the late 1990s. Over 70 per cent of Nigerians are now classified as poor with 35 per cent of them living in absolute poverty. With limited social services and infrastructure poverty is particularly aggravated in the rural areas, where up to 80 percent of the population live below the poverty line. The country’s poor rural women and men depend on agriculture for food and income. Nigeria is a huge importer of rice and other food items in spite of its potentials for producing them to meet local demands and even for export. Generally, agriculture is done by small-scale farmers who cultivate small plots of land and depend on rainfall rather than irrigation systems. Majority of the farmers are peasant women and aged men as the able bodied youths have migrated to the urban centres for other jobs.Less than 1 hectare of land per household is cultivated.
In spite of absence of earthquakes and other natural disasters in Nigeria it has the unenviable reputation of being classified among poorest nations of the world. Elsewhere these disasters deplete resources and cause or increase poverty. Country Studies Project (2011) notes, concerning Nigeria, that “About 57 percent of the population lives on less than US$1 per day”, an index for measuring poverty across the world. It goes on to observe that due to inflation, per capita GDP today remains lower than in 1960 when Nigeria declared independence. In 2005 the GDP was composed of the following sectors: agriculture, 26.8 percent; industry, 48.8 percent; and services, 24.4 percent. According to the report Human capital is underdeveloped – Nigeria ranked 151 out of 177 countries in the United Nations Development Index in 2004 – and non-energy-related infrastructure is inadequate.
The percentage that lives below the poverty margin tilts more towards the extreme situations. A United Nations Human Development report says 64 percent of Nigeria’s population live in abject poverty (UN 2010 Report).According to the UNDP report titled The Real Wealth of Nations, Nigeria has a lot to do towards bridging the widening gaps in poverty and gender inequality. According to the U.N resident coordinator, Mr. Daouda Toure (UN 2010 Report), some other findings include that Nigeria’s life expectancy at birth in 2010 was at 48.4 years, a little rise from the 47.7 years recorded for the country last year, the Human Development Index (HDI) at 0.423, which ranked the country 142 out of 169 countries with comparable data.
Nigeria, the UN 2010 Report notes, did not make the very high Human Development rank, neither did it make the High Human Development rating. It was not also ranked among the countries that made it to the Medium Human Development strata. Nigeria found itself in the lowest ranking nations in the Low Human Development category, escaping from the bottom of the human development index by 27 positions.       The HDI of sub-Saharan Africa as a region increased from 0.293 in 1980 to 0.389 this year, placing Nigeria above the regional average.
This dismal position has attracted reasonable academic interest in the area of poverty in Nigeria. One of such reports released in 2009 by the Fund for Peace, an American independent non-profit research and educational organization that works to prevent violent conflicts and promote sustainable security in the world states that out of the 177 countries considered in the ranking Sudan, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Haiti, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Central African, Iraq, Cote d'Ivoire, Guinea, Pakistan, and Yemen, Nigeria has once again been ranked 14th most failed state in the world. A closer look will show that Nigeria is struggling for position with some countries that are at war and whose economies have been battered by such wars.
Economic indicators from CBN say inflation rate in Nigeria as at September 2011 was 10.3(CBN, 2012).According to the 2011 result which is the seventh annual Failed States Index report, Nigeria maintains its same position as that of last year, except Kenya which is now more improved than Nigeria and moved out of its 13thposition of 2010, while Yemen that was a step better than Nigeria, now in twelfth position, a step poorer.
In the field of economics the coexistence of vast wealth in natural resources and extreme personal poverty, as is found in developing countries like Nigeria, is described as “resource curse”.The term "resource curse" has come to be more widely understood to mean an abundance of natural resources which fuels official corruption resulting in a violent competition for the resource by the citizens of the nation. Nigeria’s exports of oil and natural gas – at a time of peak prices – have enabled the country to post merchandise trade and current account surpluses in recent years. Reportedly, 80 percent of Nigeria’s energy revenues flows to the government, 16 percent cover operational costs, and the remaining 4 percent go to investors. However, the World Bank has estimated that as a result of corruption, 80 percent of energy revenues benefit only 1 percent of the population.
There are some who do not even accept that there is poverty in Nigeria. For instance, Nwuke (2004:20) quotes former Governor of Bauchi, Adamu Muazu, as saying that:
There is no poverty in Nigeria. We have no business with poverty in Nigeria. I totally disagree with those people who say Nigeria is in difficulty. We must know that we are endowed with so many beautiful things people take for granted.
Such denial of the pervasiveness of poverty in Nigeria fails the acid test when juxtaposed against the findings of Nwuke (2004:20) which claim that each year with depressing consistency; Nigeria is declared among the 20 poorest countries in the world, its substantial wealth notwithstanding.
Pointers in Nigeria show that the number of those in poverty has continued to increase. For example, the number of those in poverty increased from 27% in 1980 to 46% in 1985; it declined slightly to 42% in 1992, and increased very sharply to 67% in 1996. By 1999 when the Obasanjo civilian administration came to power, estimates had it that more than 70% of Nigerians lived in poverty. That was why the government declared in November 1999 that the N470 billion budgeted for year 2000 was to relieve poverty. Before the National Assembly even passed the 2000 budget, the government got an approval to commit N10 billion to poverty alleviation programme.In the 2001 budget, the government increased the allocation to poverty alleviation programme by 150%. This idea of poverty alleviation was received with high hopes especially given the speed with which the administration tackled the fuel problem as soon as it came to power. Poverty alleviation was seen as a means through which the government could revamp the battered economy and rebuild self-esteem in majority of Nigerians who had been dehumanized and traumatized through past military regimes(Ogwumike:2003).
Poverty in Nigeria also has geographical perspective. According to the Nigeria’s Draft Report on Millennium Development Goals, the Northern part of the country accounted for the higher incidence of poverty which largely predominated in the rural areas. Specifically, the report showed that the rate of poverty was as high as 84% in states like Zamfara, Sokoto, Gombe and Bauchi during the period 1980-2004. In the Southern part, poverty had increased between 1980 and 1996, but dropped in 2004. Infact, in all states, except Bayelsa, the rate of poverty was more than half their population (Akintunde and Amaefule 2005).
Reviewing the period 2004-2010, Kale stated that while the North-West and the North-East geopolitical zones had the highest poor, the South-West recorded the lowest with 59 per cent. Whereas Sokoto tops the list of poor states with 86.4 per cent, Niger followed with 43.6 per cent.
Comparatively, while poverty showed as high as 72.2% in the North-east, it had the lowest in the South-east with 26.7%. This confirmed the findings by the World Bank Study in Nigeria which showed that there were differences between the North and South with more concentration of the poor in the Northern zone (cited in National Bureau of Statistics, 2005).
Successive government efforts at eradicating the endemic poverty in Nigeria date back to pre-Independence era. During the period, the colonial administration drew up schemes, programmes and strategies and laid out resources for the first two 10 year development plan which ended in1955. The policies were targeted at local processing of raw produce such as groundnuts, palm oil, hides and skin.
Following independence, the periods between 1962-1968, 1970-1974, 1975-1980, and 1981-1985 aimed at provision of basic infrastructure, diversification of the economy, reducing the level of unemployment rates, achieving dynamic self-sustaining growth and raising the living standard of the people. Many of these programmes includedOperation Feed the Nation (OFN) in 1976, Free and Compulsory Primary Education (FCPE) in 1977, Green Revolution in 1980. Others include the establishment of the People’s Bank of Nigeria (PBN), Community Development Bank (CDB), Nigeria Agricultural Co-operative and Rural Development Bank, Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP), among others. However, many of these programmes failed because of corruption, lack of continuity, improper implementation, poor supervision, etc.
As a result of failure of the foregoing programmes to significantly reduce the poverty index in Nigeria, and in compliance with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) targets, the Obasanjo civilian regime established the National Poverty Eradication Programme in 2001. In terms of structure NAPEP was designed to involve all stakeholders in poverty eradication in Nigeria namely the federal, states and local governments. Others include civil society organizations, research institutions, the organized private sector, women groups, and concerned individuals (Okoye and Onyeukwu, 2007).
As a federal government sponsored project, NAPEP was subsequently launched in various states of the federation, including Abia state and the federal capital territory,Abuja. Incidentally, no serious empirical study has been conducted to evaluate the activities of NAPEP and its impact towards poverty eradication in Abia state. This study has been designed to bridge this gap in literature. The broad aim of this study is to theoretically and empirically evaluate the impact of NAPEP towards poverty eradication in Abia state within the period under study.

1.2       STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
One of the greatest problems facing Nigeria as a country is how to combat the highly elusive povertyproblem. This appears more so and critical as all prescriptions so far have only either scratched the surface or paid lip service to it. According to a recent study, Nigeria returns a high level of poverty with 63% living on less than $1 per day (Adoyi, 2011). This trend has continued despite the fact that Nigeria has one of the world’s highest economic growth rates, averaging 7.4% over the last decade, a well developed economy and plenty of natural resources.
There have been government attempts at poverty alleviation and reduction of which the Poverty Alleviation Programme (PAP) and its successor, the National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP), are the most recent ones. The rationale behind the conception and eventual establishment of the NAPEP stemmed from the failure of the successive colonial and post-colonial poverty alleviation programmes to achieve the targets. The NAPEP was therefore established in 2001, by the Obasanjo civilian administration, as a corrective and alternative poverty alleviation programme, which was aimed essentially at enhancing the living conditions of the Nigeria populace, especially the poor and unemployed (Iwuoha and Obi, 2012).
The stakeholders recognized that certain fundamental reasons were responsible for the inadequacy of anti-poverty measures over the years, which included inadequate involvement of stakeholders, poor management and implementation arrangements among others. The mandate of NAPEP is to monitor and coordinate all poverty eradication efforts in order to harmonize and ensure better delivery, maximum impact, and effective utilization of available resources (Okoye and Onyukwu, 2007).
In order to ensure effective poverty eradication, the government arranged NAPEP into four schemes, namely Youth Empowerment Scheme (YES), Rural Infrastructure Development Scheme (RDS), Social Welfare Service Scheme (SOWESS), and National Resources Development and Conservation Scheme (NRDCS).
With the take-off grant of N6 billion approved for it in 2001, NAPEP established structures at all levels of government nationwide. A recent study by Arogundede et al (2011) revealed that NAPEP has trained 100,000 unemployed youths under its capacity acquisition programmes and 5,000 others received training as tailors and fashion designers. Again 50,000 unemployed graduates have also benefited from NAPEP’s mandatory attachment programme, MAP.
Despite the various efforts of government from independence to date, poverty has been on the increase. Nigeria’s proportion of the poor has doubled over the last two decades, during which time the country received $3,000billion in oil and gas revenue (Oyemorni, 2003). Tersoo (2013), in his study of NAPEP and wealth creation in Benue state, opined that it is indeed a paradox of poor people in rich country, in other words “poverty in the midst of plenty”. He went on to say that statistical data available indicate that by 1960 the poverty level in Nigeria covered about 15% of the population and by 1980 it rose to 28%. In 1985, the poverty level was 46% and it dropped to 43% by 1992. By 1996, the Federal Office of Statistics estimated poverty level in Nigeria at about 66%.
Capacity building activity is often meant to train beneficiaries in the various skills and trades.Upon completion beneficiaries will be assisted with start-up capital in form of loans or credits to start micro-businesses of their own. Tersoo’s work revealed that just 6.7% of the respondents have actually benefitted from the micro-credit strategy of NAPEP, which therefore suggests that a weakness exists in this strategy as beneficiaries are not properly empowered to start entrepreneurial activities that will create income streams and wealth. Concerning this model of poverty reduction Kpelai S.Tersoo (2013:30) argued that:
…. poverty reduction through job creation is plausible in the sense that when you develop entrepreneurship and create jobs; you increase purchasing power and demand for other goods and services in the market place. Then, you create employment of resources and flood the market with goods and services to reduce inflation, create wealth and eradicate poverty. The use of entrepreneurship strategy for employment generation, poverty reduction and economic growth is the strategy used among countries like USA, Chile, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea.
Tersoo(2013) reviewed previous studies of Friedman (1953) based on an earlier General Theory of Employment by Keynes in 1936 to support this model, Kpelai (2009), Iguisi (2008), Konings (1995) and Hughes (1993) which provide evidence in their empirical works suggesting that equipping the poor with skills to create jobs for themselves and other people is the best strategy of rising from poverty to riches. He (Tersoo,2013:30) further argued that:
Europe and USA have propelled the growth of their economies through promoting vibrant SME sub-sector. This situation creates demand on policy makers to aggressively support entrepreneurship education and development in Nigeria in order to reduce the level of poverty in the country; the case of Nigeria appears to be worrisome when compared with other African countries
Coordinator of National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP), Dr. Magnus Kpakol, was quoted as rating Anambra state high as the state with the lowest poverty rate among all the states in the country (See Daily Champion, Wednesday February 18, 2009:7). Kpakol noted that the level of private enterprise in Anambra put the state on the top echelon of the ladder of efforts by states toeradicate poverty especially because of the level of and commitment to private enterprise there.
Iwuoha and Obi (2012:42) evaluated NAPEP in Enugu state and discovered as did Francis and Nweze (2003) that:
As a result, Youth Empowerment Scheme (YES) that aimed at capacity enhancement through provision of job training opportunities to graduates and school leavers was implemented in Enugu state amidst other numerous programmes of the NAPEP. Though the scheme, had been establishment in 2001, it recorded various degrees of achievements in training the unemployed, the growing incidence of poverty in Nigeria including especially Enugu state, where the NBS report of 2007 indicates 31.12% increase has generated a quantum debate among scholars concerning the effectiveness of NAPEP as a scheme for poverty eradication through capacity enhancement.
Tersoo looked at NAPEP in Benue state whileothers(Agbiokoro,2010;Fasoranti,2007) looked at Ebonyi and Ekiti states, respectively. Agbiokoro (2010) studied Ohaukwu LGA of Ebonyi state in a bid to unravel the impact of NAPEP on economic development in Nigeria. According to the study, 91% of the Ohaukwu population did not know of the existence of NAPEP and its programmes in the country. However in his examination of the impact of NAPEP on the alleviation of poverty in Ekiti state Fasoranti(2007) discovered that 90%of the total respondents agreed to the positive influence of NAPEP schemes on the living standards of the people in the study area. He further established that about 33.3% benefited from the skills acquisition programmes of NAPEP. The report also found that there was massive diversion of benefits to unintended targets.In their work on the extent of involvement of participants in the poverty eradication programme in Cross River state, Aboh and Onabe (2007) established that majority of the participants were highly involved in the sub-programmes of keke NAPEP,garbage truck and farm tractors,rural transportation,rural water,primary healthcare,farmers’ empowerment,etc.
Incidentally, no known serious empirical study has been conducted to critically evaluate the impact of NAPEP on poverty eradication in Abia state.
The central focus of this study is to critically evaluate the role of the anti-poverty agency towards the war against poverty in Abia state within the period under study, 2001-2013. The study is anchored on the following related research questions:

1. Has the implementation of Youth Empowerment Scheme (YES) reduced the incidence of youth unemployment in Abia state?
2. Has the implementation of SOWESS improved the social and personal wellbeing of residents of Abia state?
3. Did the level of budgetary allocation to NAPEP impede the actual performance of the agency in Abia state in the area of poverty eradication?

1.3       OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The study has both broad and specific objectives. The broad objective is to critically evaluate the implementation of the NAPEP’s programmes in Abia state and its impact on poverty eradication, especially the impact of NAPEP on youth employment in Abia state between 2001 and 2013.
Specifically, the study is designed to:

1. Ascertain whether the implementation of Youth Empowerment Scheme (YES) has reduced the incidence of youth unemployment through skills acquisition,etc in Abia state.
2. Evaluate howthe implementation of SOWESS has improved the social and personal wellbeing of residents of Abia state.
3. To analyze how the budgetary allocation to NAPEP impeded the actual performance of the agency in Abia state in the area of poverty eradication.

1.4       SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The study has practical and theoretical significance. Practically the study will use the structural functionalismapproach to assess whether the massive input of resources in terms of money has translated to positive output in terms poverty eradication or even reduction in Abia state. This will thus provide a further policy guide for government as to its resource distribution policies and strategies and desire to improve the lot of its citizens.
It will ascertain the extent to which the NAPEP as a structure has performed its function, even distributive,of stabilizing the state in terms of poverty alleviation. This will enable the federal, state and local governments to evaluate the achievement of the programme so far, particularly in Abia state. More importantly, other stakeholders like the Millennium Development Goals, international organizations and non-governmental organizations will find this study revealing. Again, it is expected that this study will satisfy the partial requirement for the award of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science (Public Administration) to the researcher.
Theoretically, the study will add to the existing body of literature in this area of study. The instrument used, methodology and findings will inspire greater exploits in this field of study.