THE INFLUENCE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN COMBATING POVERTY
A CASE STUDY OF EGOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1       Background of the study    -    -    -    -    -    -
1.2     Statement Of Problem    -    -    -    -    -    -    -
1.3       Objectives Of Study    -    -    -    -    -    
1.4     Hypotheses    -    -    -    -    -    -    
1.5         Significance Of Study    -    -    -    -    
1.6`        Scope Of Study-    -    -    -    -    -    -    
1.7          Definition Of Terms    -    -    -    -    -    -    
CHAPTRER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0          Review Of Related Literature    -    -    -    
2.1          Review Of Relevant Concepts    -    -    -    -    
2.1.1        Poverty    -    -    -    -    -    -    -
2.1.2       Types of Poverty in Nigeria    -    -    -    -    -    -
2.1.3         Concept of Community Development    -    -    -    
2.1.4.        Causes Of Poverty    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    
2.1.6          Factors Influencing Community Development    -    -    -
2.1.7          Effects of Poverty on Community Development    -    -    -
2.1.8          The Influence of Community Development in Combating Poverty
in Egor Local Government Area    -    -    -    -
2.2         Review of Relevant Theories    -    -    -    -
2.2.1          Individual theory perspective    -    -    -    -    
2.2.2          Cultural perspectives theory    -    -    -    -
2.2.3           Structural perspective theory    -    -    -
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.0           Introduction    -    -    -    -    -    -    
3.1           Research Design    -    -    -    -    -    -
3.2           Population Of The Study    -    -    -    -    
3.3           Sample Size And Sampling Technique    -    -
3.4             Research Instrument    -    -    -    -    
3.5             Validility And Reliability    -    -    -    -    
3.6             Method Of Data Collection    -    -    -    -    
3.7            Data Analysis Techniques    -    -    -    -    -
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION ON FINDINGS
  Introduction    -    -    -    -    -    -
4.1    Analysis Of Respondent Character    -    -    -    -    
4.2    Analysis And Discussion Of Hypothesis    -    -    -    
4.3     Research Hypothesis 1    -    -    -    -    -
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1     Summary    -    -    -    -    -    -    
5.2     Conclusion    -    -    -    -    -    -
5.3     Recommendation    -    -    -    -    -    
REFERENCES    -    -    -    -    -    
APPENDIX I    -    -    -    -    -    -
        LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1.1         Gender Of Respondents    -    -    -    -    
Table 4.1.2    Age Of Respondents    -    -    -    -    -
Table 4.1.3     Level Of Education Of The Respondent    -    
Table 4.1.4     Marital Status Of Respondents    -    -    -
Table 4.1.5     Religion Of Respondents    -    -    -    -
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
Ever since Nigeria gained independence in 1960 from the British colonial government.  Rural or community development has been declared a priority by the successive governments, be it civilian or military. In this regard, several organizations, institutions and agencies have been set up to undertake and monitor the complicated process of nation-building, development and integration (Rahman, 2008). It is observed that over fifty- five years after Nigeria’s independence, most rural areas in Nigeria demonstrate characteristics that indicate lack of prosperity. This situation has not changed much even today. Unless rural people are given the opportunity and means to fully participate in development projects, they will continue to be excluded from its benefits (Nnadozie, & Ibe, 2012)
    It is recorded that inspite of various efforts at developing rural areas, poverty, ignorance and disease are still very prevalent in Nigeria rural areas. Chigbo (2001) opined that most of the rural development projects failed because of faulty goal specification, fraud, and inadequate funding. In the same vein, most of these projects were either borrowed or merely forced on the people, without due consideration of the  political and cultural norms, which of course resulted in failure (Adagba, 2002).  To overcome this ugly situation, a new approach has evolved. This is called “popular participation” whereby local people take initiatives or influence their own development. It implies the active involvement of the rural people, particularly the dis-advantaged groups that form the mass of the rural population. The philosophy guiding this approach is that the resources of the community are mobilized by the community for the good of the community. It should be anchored on the cooperative efforts of the people with or without any external stimuli (Ikeji 2012).
Community development itself is a process aimed at improving the social, economic and environmental situation of the community (Flora & Flora, 2003).  the community becomes more vital, not just economically but as a strong functioning community in itself by constantly improving the ability of communities to collectively make better decisions about the use of resources such as infrastructure, labour and knowledge (Christenson, 2009). For community development to occur, people in a community must believe working together can make a difference and organise to address their shared needs collectively (Flora Alison, 2003).
Regardless of the definition, community development is not just “growth” Growth means more jobs and more investment but implies “more of the same”. It does not necessarily increase choices, networks or ability to manage change one of the symptoms and manifestations of underdevelopment is poverty according to Central Bank of Nigeria (2004) and Word Bank (1991) Nigeria’s poverty rate over the years has continued to grow unabated. The United Nations Reports (2001), Nigeria’s Human Poverty Index (HPI) was 41.6% which places the country among the 25 poorest nations in the world.
Schiller (2008), indicate that poverty has indeed become a pandemic national disease with symptomatic effects of high unemployment rates, poor health care, poor accessibility to water, food, housing, low human development, low per capita income, and poor infrastructural development. This has no doubt made poverty alleviation programme a recurring decimal in Nigeria’s public policy either in the military or the civilian rule as no administration has come to power without initiating a poverty alleviation package (Soludo, 2004).
The failure of previous anti-poverty programmes is partly because of lack of involvement or participation of the people and politicization of the programmes. As carefully demonstrated by some scholars like (Nwatu, 2006; Onah, 2005 & Ukwedeh, 2003).
The National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS, 2004), however declared objectives and policy statements of various governments in Nigeria have been mere rhetoric and smoke-screens intended not only to diffuse criticisms but to hide what the whole thing has been i.e. a systematic exploitation and dehumanization of the rural dwellers. In spite of this criticism, there is no doubt that the Nigerian government and its leaders has not only recognized the fact of the important roles which the rural sector plays in the generation of national wealth but also that over 70% of Nigerians live in rural areas. It is to be noted that Nigeria is not alone in the recognition of these facts. Leaders of the developing countries in Africa have also come to accept the development of rural areas as a sine qua non for national development (Afolabi, 2008),
From the above background we can deduce that, these are the major causes of poverty in community development, which are unemployment, corruption, bad governance, low productivity among others.
1.2 Statement Of Problem
It has been observed that inspite of abundant natural, physical and human resources that Nigeria is endowed with; there is still high incidence rate of poverty in Nigeria especially in the rural areas. In Edo State, majority of the people live in the rural areas and they depend mainly on agriculture. They operate fragmented and marginal holdings while some others concentrate on craft making (Abdullahi, 2006:2) strong argued that despite the obvious role of farming and crafting in the economy of the state, rural people tend to remain poor. On that note, Aboyade (1999) states that, generally they share several characteristics such as low levels of educational attainment, a relatively large number of children, relatively low access to material resources, physical and social infrastructures, higher susceptibility to community-wide exogenous shocks such as weather induced crop losses and natural disasters (Onimode, 2003). However, it must be noted that rural communities also vary greatly with regard to the condition of their rural economies and rural development needs.
Olaniyan (2003) observes that: Communities in Egor Local Government Area of Edo State, Nigeria have been involved in community development projects over the years, but their participation output seemed not to have yielded any dividends of prosperity. It was further observed that systematic research aimed at understanding factors influencing poverty status in Egor through participation in community development projects seemed to be lacking (Omofonmwan & Odia, 2000). These communities need improvement in the quality of their living standards. This, therefore, was of great concern, hence the decision to investigate the influence of level of development in combating poverty elevating in Egor Local Government Area.
1.3   Objectives Of Study
  The specific aims and objectives are as follows:
1.     To determine factors that influence participation of people in community development projects
2.     To suggest measures that would enhance the effectiveness of the programme in Egor local government area.
3.     To find out the strategies in solving problems of poverty alleviation in Egor Local Government Area.
4.     To assess the role of community development in eradicating poverty in Egor local government.
5.     To identify poverty alleviation programme earmarked by the government in Egor local government area.
1.4     Hypotheses
1.     Factors influencing participation in community development will not significantly combat poverty.
2.     Measures that enhance effectiveness of community programmes will not significantly combat poverty.
3.     Available poverty eradication methods will not significantly combat poverty.
4.     Community development will not significantly eradicate poverty.
5.     The community development strategies already in place in Egor Local Government will not significantly combat poverty.
1.5 Significance Of Study
This study would be of significance in a number of ways, however, some of this are highlighted below:
It will enlighten the public in the state and degree of poverty in Egor local government area of Edo state and also it is expected to provide information on the desirability or potential of community development in facilitating poverty alleviation among people. Such information is capable of correcting the misconception commonly believed that community development is not capable of alleviating poverty. The findings made will also raise the awareness of most people in the area about community programmes being able to alleviate poverty among them. It will suggest ways by which poverty can be averted, prevented and manage by means of acquisition of community through the Edo state government,
Moreover it will provide source of information on how best poverty can be eradicated, managed and improved or enhanced by community planners. In addition the findings made will enable the Edo state government authority to become aware of the need to provide or make available both material and human resources and equipment necessary for motivating people to participate in community development programmes put in place for helping people acquire skills that would facilitate self-reliance and poverty alleviation.
Most importantly, the finding of the study will also guide government at all level to discover and appreciate some of the problems of poverty which can also make the policy makers adopt policies to ensure success of programmes put in place.
The study will draw the attention of government and make it more committed to the course of providing good road networks within and outside the local government area and also effort should also be concentrated in the grading of earth roads linking various communities in the local government area.  Incentives necessary for promoting self-reliance and poverty alleviation among populace will be stressed.
1.6` Scope Of Study
The study is limited to Egor Local Government Area, Edo State.
1.7 Definition Of Terms
Community Development: It is an effort designed to advance the living standard of all the people who live in a particular area. It is often referred to as development of rural areas in Nigeria.
Poverty: This is the state of being poor. It can also be defined as a state of being unable to satisfy most basic and elementary requirements of human needs in terms of shelter, food and clothing.
Community: A group of people with a shared identity. Hence, community development relies on interaction between people and joint action, rather than individual activity
Development: is a process that increases choices. It means new options, diversification, thinking about apparent issues differently and anticipating change
Alleviation: This involves or implies eradication of poverty and the consequences its existence among the people.
Role: a character or part played by performer or actor
Government: the body with power to make and/ or enforce laws to control a country, land area, people or organization