University of Nigeria       Virtual Library 

Serial No

Author 1 MBA, Chike. H

Author 2

Author 3

Title

Community Self-Help Development as a

Strategy for Rural Development: An Appraisal of the Experience in Anambra

State, Nigeria

Keywords

Description

Community Self-Help Development as a Strategy for Rural Development: An

Appraisal of the Experience in Anambra State, Nigeria

Category Environmental Sciences

Publisher

Publication Date

Signature

COMMUNITY SELF-HELP DEVELOPMENT AS A STRATEGY FOli liURAL DIWELOPMENT: AN

APPRAISAL OF TI-IE EXI'ElilENCE IN ANAMBRA STATE, NIGrOIiIA.

H. Chilte Mba, Ph.D., MNITP, RTP Snr. Lecturer, Dcpt. of Urban cSi Regional Planning

University of Nigeria, Enugu Canipus.

COMMUNITY SELF-IIELP DEVELOPMENT AS A SrPRATECY FOR RURAL DEVELOPRIENT: AN AI'I'NAISAL OF THE ISXl'ElllENCE IN

ANAMMU STATE.*

Dr. H. a l i k e Mbn, MNITP, RTP Depar[rnsnl of Urban 6: Regional I'lan~~ing,

Univcrsily of Nigeria, I:hgu Campus.

Most of the strategies which have been commonly employed in dcaling with the problems of rural development in Nigeria have usually been mainly directed towards particular sector objectives. These have among ~tlzers included the following: agricultural development pro$rammes (stich as Agricultural Inputs and Extension Schemes, River Basin Development Schemes, and Integrated Agricultural/Rural Development Projects), industrial development programmes, market developiilent programmes, and a host of others. These strategies have not only bcen largely narrow in context and scope, but have also been planned and executed in isolation fmin one another.

I-lowever, Nigeria's rural development objectives were very broadly and caregorically stated in the Third National Development Plnn as follows:

To increase niral productivity and income, diversify rural economy nnd generally enhance [he quality of lifc in 1-ural arcits, (Fcderal Republic of' Nigeria, 1975). A close look at the above objectives will point up the fact that any strategies that would bc useful for achieving Nigeria's rural developn~ei~t objectives must be comprehensive in n:~ture, and not specilic-sector orientccl. 1,iteroturc rcvicw strongly supports the conrcnlion

con~prclxnsivu planning is a 'sinc-qua-non' fbr st~cccssl'~d development plans, whether they are for urban areas, rural m a s or for an entire nation.

This paper is aimed at achieving two major objectives: firstly, proposing a basic framework for con~prehensive rural development policies by means of properly coordinated and instiiuticrnalized colmnunity self-help developn~ent strategies: and secondly appraisirlg the current cornmunily self-help dcveEap~nent experience in Anarnb~a Slate.

It is perhaps pertinent at this juncture to explain what is meant by the term, community development strategy. In this palxr, community sdS-help development strategy is viewed as a package of localized development oriented activities and tasks which are either initiated, planned and implemented by local communities themselves or initials from outside the communities but which involve the active participation of those conlmunities. The community development strategy generally has been identified as the most effective means of revival of underdeveloped or depressed areas. It has for long been efkctiveIy used in the United Slates of America for econornic revival of depressed urban areas.

'I'hc strategy, in its vuricty of fortns, hid Ixcrl ;I commnn I'ca1i11.c. ul' 111c culture i l l

some of the eastern states of Nigeria before 111c advent of the European civilization (Mba, 1978). It was basically part and parcel of the communal system which utilized coinnlunity effort for execution of community projects. The system did indeed survive the dis- orienting effects of the western culture and has continued tb be the main vehicle for planning and implenlentation of developn~ent projects in some of the eastern parts of the

country to date. For exinnple, before and after independence, several comrnnnities in the eastern parts of the country undertook various development projects using town unions, youth Icagi~cs, agc grados, ant1 social clubs as vcl~iclc liw cxccution of thcir projccls (h~aarnbru State Government, 1986). S w i d amcnitics planned and execurcd by thesc cu~nn~unities have usually included: primary schools, secondary schools, hospitals, maternity humcs, pipe-bornu watcr, roads, bridges and several other social ameniries.

In spite of these rernarksrble achievements, the conlmunity development strategy was only accorded official government recognition at the Federal Government level in the Third National Development Plan. l+om that period, however, many of the governments of the federation have realised that "comn~unity development provides a practical means of grass-roots participation in the development process" (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1975).

The magnitude of community development programmes varies in different parts of the country, although the activities have usually taken the usual forin of self-help schemes undertaken by communities. By 1969, for example. the former Western State Government had been involved in a rural development promotion scheme which providect vocational training for primary school lenvers in some partk of the state (Ibid). That scheme was aimed at reducing unemployment smong school kavers as well as reducing rural-urban migration among youths.

Moreover, by the early 1970s thc Kmo State Govern~ricnt had estublished a Community Development Training School for the training of community development workers. In addition, it dcvcloped sonw "model villages" to scrvc as standnrcls for other communities.

However, there have been serious shortcomings with the community development efforts in Nigeria. Firstly, the programmes have historically been limited mainly to provision of social amenities in the rural areas. They have not been used for promotion of rural capital and economic development of the rural areas. 13ut the community developnent strategy could have much better paved the way for Future industrial development if rural communities had included agric~~ltural production in the list of programmes and activities towards which they naobilised their efforts. That would haw rcsulted not only in self suil'lciency in food production but also in excess production of the cash crops that are very essential for industrial takeoff and economic development.

Secondly, the communities often do not make use of experts in the planning and execution of their various projects. Many of the committees appointed to deal with projects that call for professional expertise are not often disposed to seek the advice of cxperts. Cases abound of building comnlittees that neither include architects, building engineers and related proressionafv nor are djsposcd lo employ the services of such people.

Thirdly, fund generation for many of the rural development projects is done in an ad-hoc manner. Money is ususllly raised for specific projects only when the occasion demands. This is done through levies, contributions or donations which are not always guaranteed. Communities have also used a variety of punitive measures to collect moriey

from defaulters. ihese measures have included: seizure of househuld property, physical ~nolestation, and exclusion from social benefits. Howevcr, none of these usually has the active backing of the government. The following overview of the Anambra Statc experience will shed more lighl ull LIIC issues.

1 3 e Role of Community Dcvelopnln S~ratcr,v in rhc Ituri~l Dcvc lo~mcn~ I ' ~ r m 1 1 1 u ut' Anambra State

Since the inception of the present Military Ad~ninistration in Anarnbra State, rura! development has come to the forefront as one of the cardinal nbjcctivcs oi'government. In an attempt to grapple with the problems of rural poverty nnd underdeveloprncnt, the state government took a number of positive and far-rcaching measures. Most importantly, it formulated a policy for enhancement of rural development. This policy has been embodied in "Blueprint for Rural Dcvclopment in Anambra State", which will serve as a guide for government officials, agencies and organizations involved in the implementation of the State's rural development policies. Government created the State Rural Developn~ent Implementation Authority. Rural Works Units were set up in the different local government areas. For rural development co-ordination, a Directorate for Rural Development was created in the Government Ilousc. The following Task Forces and Agencies were created under thc Ministry of Works, Lands and Transport:

Task Force 011 Road Construction nnd Maintenance ' I ' L I s ~ I :O~CC 011 I C L I L . ~ Wakr Supply Rural Electrification Board.

hloreover, five other Agencies and Task Forces were set up under the Ministry of Agriculture. These include:

'Task Force on Food Processing, Preservation and Storage Task Force on Erosion Control Agricultr~ral Ilevelopment Project Ada Rice Production Company Anambra State Forestry Co~mnission Anambra State Rice Project (World Bank Sponsored).

More Task Forces have recently been set up. These include the Task Force on TechnoIagy for Industrial Promotions and Task Force on Local Goods Promotions.

T ~ L ' highlight of tlic bluc-print is t l~c crnphnsis on pronioti'on 01' cimmunity self- hclp devclopment elliwt. 'l'lic ohjcctivc 01' the guvcr~lnicnt was 1 l ~ t tlic ubovc listctl task forces and agencies would be playing only con~plementary and advisory, roles to community efforts. The focus has becn to iddrcss rural dcvelopmcnt problms by means of "Government/comn~unity partnership" (Anamhra State Government, 1986). Communities were encouraged to set up towdvillage devclopment committees. Where circumstances warranted, two or more communities with comnlon interests and needs were encouraged to set up development area committees, Rural development ~ommittees were also set up in each of the twenty-three local government areas in the state (see fig 1).

TLc Achicvemcnts So Far I

The new comn~unity participatory planning approach fnrmulsted by Anambra State has yiclded some positive results. I t has generated considcrable en~husias~n among 1hc rural cc&munitics. Many corn~nunities IIWC launchcd various ibrnw 01' rlcvclopmcrit programmes. Some have provided money and labour for various development projects.

Rural Roads --- In collaboration with the Rural Works Unit of the Minist~y of Local Govermlent,

Rural Dcvelopnront and Chieftancy Matters, and the local governments, the rural communities rehabilitated about 2,208 krn of rural roads in 1986. Individual community cfforts resulted in the surfacing of 26.5 km of rural roads in Nnewi and Ukpor in Nnewi Local Government Area, Umuoji in Iclcmili Local Government Area, and Ihiala in Ihiala Local Government Area. Only a few examples will be cited in this paper.

Rural Water Supply Considerable progress was also made in thc area of rural water supply. Apart from

the Federal and State Government bore-hole programmes, some communities not cuvered by these programmes have not only contributed money but have also pruvidcd labour for the 'Task Force on Rural Watcr Supply for sinking of horc-hotcs. ];or cxample, tlic IJmirubi Community in Ucli 1,ocal Government Area has invcstccl up to N58,OOO un watcr project. (Anambra Slillc Govcrnmcn!, 1986). Morcovcr, scvcrul o t l w rcrral con~li~trnilics have pioneered and undertaken water supply projects with out^ necessarily obtaining assistance from the state government. For example a pliilantrophist in Ogidi, in Idemili Local Government Area, did sponsor water bore-hole projects to the tune of over N80,OOO. Several other instances of h i s type of philantrophic activity could be identified in the state during the period.

However, the major problem with some community groups is that they lacked expert advice and adequate financing. Some of the water facilities provided are grossly inadequate for the local population supposed to be served. Sonle of these facilities go out of operation only a few ~hontlls after the commissioning ceremony.

Rural Electrification Rural electrification schemes have usually been handkd by the state government.

However, local comn~unities have always playcd important roles in a nunlbcr of ways. They have been responsible for identifying local needs. They have also mobilized human resources and funds for the implementation of rural electrification programmes. For cxamplc sincc the last Civilian Adniinistration whcn 62 c o n i m ~ ~ t ~ i t i ~ s cun~pletcd llrcir electrification projects, many more communities have also benefited from the Military Administration's renegotiated rural electrification scheme (Ibid). Some of these communities include: Amaechi Awkunanaw in Enugu Local Governme~~t Area, Oraukwu in Ideniili Local Government Area and several others.

&icu!tural Seclor As mentioned earlier, local community developrnent programmes have never

redly addressed the issue of agricultural production and rural productivity. Their focus

11as usually been social amcnity-oriented. The co~ltinued untler-development of the rural areas can be attributed to (his situation. Since massive agricultural activity is required for the purpose of producing enough raw inaterials for industrial production, t l~is sector of the rural economy needs to bc taken more seriously.

" So far, most OF h e major innovations in agricultural xrivity in the rural areas of the State have either been initiated by the State Government or by the World Rank. They !rave includcd Ananibra State (World Bank sponsored) Rice l'roject, Ada-rice Production Project, Anambra River Basin Authority I'rojccts and a few other projects.

Although the local communities have become involved in these government sponsored projects, the level of locd participation at present is still very low. There are a number of reasa foreigners, have Secondly, the 1 execution stage! stage. Thirdly, s

111s for this. Firstly, the sponsors of these programmes, some of whom are not adequately educated the local comnwnities on what they are doing.

local communities are often not involved froin the planning to the s of the projects. They are often only brought in at the in~plementation ome of the techniques rived are alien to- the local communities.

~mcnt areas and some multi-develolment areas. A 11 that while rural development committees are

* I I I r .l . - 1 1

Recommendations and Conclusions 1

The Government of' Anambra State has achieved positive rcsults in its drive towards rapid and massive development ol' the rural areas of the state. A number of Ikr- r~uchin~jirneaswres have been planncd and are currently bcing inrplcmentcd. '['he govcrnmcnt must bc pruiscd Ibr Lhcsc c1li)rts.

However, there are a number of areas' where.considerable improvement can still be made. Rural development committees have been proposed for each of the rural communities as well as for local govern close look at this structure will revea necessary at the local government areas, mey really are nor necessary at me town, vulage community tevel. At the cornnlunity levels the town unions have always been callcd development unions, and the members of their executive councils have always operated as executed committees .for rural development.

There is much concern with the structure of the rural development organisation at the community level because it is this level that really represents the grass-roots. The grass-roots level is not at the local kovernment level. On the basis of the above observation, the following recommendations are proposed:

First and foremost, the existing town unions should be re-organised so as to cnsure that resourcei'u! and knowledgeable ildividu unions. Some towns arc already doing so. Exa~ Oghunikc, Ogidi and n host 01' othcr communities. Oincr culnnlurllllcs s n o z ~ ~ c ~ nc auvlscu by the State Government 20 do the same thing. Secondly, town clevelop~nont uuions should set up committees within thcir rank and filc to llatldle specilk scctors of their rural development projects. These could include the following; I . Daily Market Development Committees 2. Agricultural Products Develop~nent Committees (which should include

subcommittees on palm produce, root crops, poultry, fishing etc) 3. Industrial Developn~cnt Committees

als are elected into the offices of the tuples can be observed in Nnewi, \ . I . ..' I I I 1 I . I

- ICural I-lousing Lkvclopnwnt Committws Local Crafts a l~d Technology I)cvelupment Committees Education Development Committees.

4. Infrastructure Development Commiltees (which will include sub-committees on water supply. clccfricily, ro;rds, sew;rEc. i d so on)

5. b.

a I F.. ,~~-., ur rx.r urrl.rrl~uIIlly I b v b l . -18 at;^ EILLUC ~ K U L I I ) IUI C X ~ ~ I I I ~ ~ C i l i a wants ro DUIIU an unviable secondary school could he advised by the town develo~ment unions to invcit in

'rgain some town aeveloprnent unwns nave already taken t h ~ s h e of action. However, his approach is still too rcccnt to bc appraised.

Thirdly, a11 other local community organisations such as agc grades, social clubs n d village groups should be ~ I I ~ L I , ' to channel their developn~ent pro-jects through the o w n L~vvrlopment Unions. 'Hierc shuuld be prujw co-ordination of dcveloprncnl ~ p - p e q q t I ~ P r r x m n x ~ 1 m 1 ; 0 t r Iati.rl A ,, ,,., ... A, ..,,...- P,.- ...--- - I ~ 1 - . . 1 - 1 .

~ - - . - - - - . - - - - - - agricultural production or in an agro-based industry instcad. This alternative investment will create jobs in the locality and then pave the way for the type of population growth that would ensure a viable conlnlunity secondary school Inter. There have been several

, . - - - - - - - - Directoralu for Iturul Dcvclopnictit so as to~cnsurc cxpcr~ itrrcl ~iircct supcrvisicln ( IS tllc rural development projects in the 44 1 con~munities throughout the state. I n other words, the Directorate should "reach out" to the communities directly, arid not just operate through unwieldy committees at various gover~~nlental Icvels. On its part, the State r . . . . 1 ( 1 *. . 1 F . , - . uovernmcw snoula alrecr nlucn or me nlrmey currently spend on rnalrrtenance 01 ~ t s szvcral committees at the luvcl to the training and deployment of nction-oriented rural development supervisors and inspectors.

In this rcspect, several of the unc~nployed graduates in the state could be trained and sent to the con~munities as 'rural development corpers'. There arc currently graduates in econijmics, agriculture, urban and regional planning, sociology, engineering, and a host of other professions who could be mobilised as rural development inspectors at minimum cost will-

in both training and deployment. Fifthly, rural undercfevelop~~ent will continuc to be i us for a while. rl'rcmendous amount of expenses will be required on a continuous

. , I *"I r. , . . .

:xpenditure should be allowed. Thc Governn~ent currently . . . .. <.,...>,.,...l.... ' ..-. I ..... **.. ..I' -.-.... : . I

basis to develop our rural areas. lllcrerore only pruclcnt ana opt~mum resuI1-or1e11ted e

has difliculty meeting its part of financial obligations 1" LVI I I I I IL I I I IL IC . J L L l l l I ~ u l IIIIJYILling n i ~ ~ ~ c h i n g grants. l'crI~11 tbr the government to concentrate on provision oi' expertise

3s il would t)c morc prutlun and supervision. Several o

1 I . . t

the rural communities can in !act raise the funds for their deve~opmen~ process, nu1 rney ere mistakenly given tl-16 impression that the government can be of financial help, However, uonimunitics that cannot help themselves should be assisted linancially by the ; u v b 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 1 .

Finally, conlniunity development unions should be open minded enough to nclude locally based public servants living in their conmunities in their sectorial and mfrastructure development committees and subcommittees. These ofticials include h ~ a r l m a c t ~ r c nnrl i r a r h ~ r s ~ m n l n v d in t h ~ lnrnl cr-hnnlc in thtx A r p s l C T ~ P V mav Pvm

I

I .wU.....U YCVIY M.... .-U"..".IJ "... y'-Jw" ". .a'- ..,"... Y" I .--. ., ... ...- I--.- -. ..- J "'" J -.--- include local church officials. Although these people may not be indigenes of the

communities, they have, by their employmeni, had somc roles to play in the developnlent of the areas. Moreover, these non-indigenous working class group can be of great assistance to the local pcople in the abscnce of the more enlightened indigenes of the areas, who are away from their communities most of the time. 'This is one sure way of ensuring continuity in the local development process.

There is no doubt that with adequate resourcefulness and planning, our rural uevelopment objectives will be achieved. Althoh~gh tho target is by no means near, imaginative and consistent strategies will surely do the job.