Journal of Agricultural Sciences DOI: 10.2298/JAS1401091A Vol. 59, No. 1, 2014 UDC: 316.334.55-053.81(669)"200"; Pages 91-100 316.346.3-053.81(669)"200" Original scientific paper
RURAL YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN ISIN LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF KWARA STATE, NIGERIA
Gbolagade B. Adesiji1*, Kemi F. Omotesho1, Sola E. Komolafe1, Kehinde J. Oni2 and Francis O. Adereti3
1Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, University of Ilorin, PMB 1515, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria 2NPF, Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria 3Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Sociology, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
Abstract: The study investigated the level of youth participation in infrastructural development in Isin local government area of Kwara State, Nigeria. One hundred and five youths were randomly selected from seven rural communities, fifteen youths from each village. Data were collected with the aid of a questionnaire, which was analysed using frequency count and percentages. Chi- square analysis was used to test the hypothesis of significance between the socio- economic characteristics and the level of participation in infrastructural development. Findings revealed that 56.2% of respondents were within the age category of 21–30 years, 62.9% were male, and 60% were single, while 56.2% of the respondents had secondary school level education. The study revealed the various roles played by youths in participating in infrastructural development as well as the associated constraints which include finance, availability of materials, technical knowledge and time. Age, marital status, educational level and years of residence were found to be significantly related to the level of participation of youths in infrastructural development. The study recommended the adequate budget allocation to rural areas as well as intensive training and educative programmes for effective participative development. Key words: rural youth, participation, infrastructural development.
Introduction
Concentrated efforts on the development of Nigerian rural communities have led to the implementation of several infrastructural development programmes in the
*Corresponding author: e-mail: [email protected] 92 Gbolagade B. Adesiji et al.
country with the aim of improving the standard of living of the rural dwellers and also suppressing rural-urban migration. Participation is a concept of getting individuals in the community to be actively involved in those things that are liked, believed and understood by most people, hence popular participation is the method of allowing every member of the community to play an active role in the affairs that affect their lives in the community. This involves a process of mobilizing people to manage resources and make decisions that affect their lives. In the context of development, community participation refers to an active process whereby beneficiaries influence the direction and execution of development projects rather than merely receive a share of project profits. Poor performance of government in meeting the socio-economic quest of citizens in the developing countries was identified as one of the reasons behind the proliferation of community based organizations in the new millennium (Abegunde, 2009). In Nigeria, like in other developing countries of the world, youth associations and clubs are equally formed by youth in rural communities. Youth associations helped in preserving and improving traditions and cultural values of the communities; promoting unity and ensuring peace among the people in the community in which they live. They represent their communities and defend their interest in political and developmental issues (Akinola, 2007). Youth as term is referred to as the period between childhood and adulthood. The United Nations defines youth as all individuals aged between 15 and 24. The 2007 World Development Report, which focuses on ‘the next generation’, expands the definition of youth to include all young people aged between 12 and 24. The life of a youth is characterized by unique and special attributes. Participation helps youths in planning and acting together for the satisfaction of their felt needs through organized efforts to acquire skills and the concepts required for their effective participation in the problem solving process (Akinbile et al., 2006). Youth participation as a development strategy in community development requires sustained engagement of youth. This is because youth constitute the major resource base for any country that wants to embark on any meaningful rural development project. Active participation helps youths in planning and acting together for the satisfaction of their felt needs through organized efforts and it ultimately leads to mutual group and self-development. Nigerian youths need proper harnessing so that they can maintain the status quo in their locality. In fact, youth participation in real and concrete activities which include environmental sanitation and renovation work has been reported (Adesope et al., 2007). As youths are brought into community organizations they have traditionally been excluded from, they can participate in local decision-making at multiple levels. This collaboration leads to skill enhancement, confidence building, and feeling of ownership that prepare them as they navigate toward adulthood (Brennan et al., 2007). Rural youth participation in infrastructural development in Nigeria 93
Rural youths are involved in community development because they want to help their communities, to be recognized, to interact with peers, and to gain personal benefits (Adesope et al., 2003). This is because at various levels government seemed to neglect the vital roles that these aspects had in rural farming communities. Adesiji et al. (2009) found that the absence of social amenities was among the reasons for youth rural-urban drift. Hence, the presence of important infrastructural facilities in rural communities helps to reduce the rate of rural-urban migration and thus, to reduce the ever depleting farming population in the country. Then it becomes necessary to exploit their active features for progressive change in the community. Since this is important, there is the need to encourage active youth participation at all developmental levels. The general objective of this study is to investigate the level of rural youth participation in infrastructural development in Isin local government area in Kwara State, Nigeria. The specific objectives are to: i. identify the personal characteristics of the youth in the study area; ii. investigate those infrastructural developments in the study area; iii. identify donors of the infrastructural facilities; iv. assess the factors that motivate them to participate in the infrastructural development; v. identify the sources of technical expertise; vi. determine the constraints the youth face in participating in infrastructural development. The hypothesis was that there is no significant relationship between rural youth personal characteristics and the level of participation in infrastructural development.
Material and Methods
The study was carried out in Isin local government area of Kwara State, Nigeria. The population for the study comprised all youths (people aged 40 and younger) in the study area. Two-stage sampling technique was used for the study. Out of the thirteen (13) major towns, seven were randomly selected, including Ijara Isin, Owu Isin, Isanlu Isin, Oke Onigbin, Oke Aba, Opanda and Olla communities. Seven rural towns were randomly selected from the list obtained from Kwara State Agricultural Development Project. From the list, fifteen (15) youths were randomly selected from each town selected, with a total number of 105 respondents. Data were obtained with the aid of a well-structured questionnaire. Descriptive statistics including the use of frequency and percentage were used. Three point Likert type scale was used to determine the participation level of the respondents in infrastructural development, stated as: always participated (AP) = 3, sometimes participated (SP) = 2, never participated (NP) = 1. 94 Gbolagade B. Adesiji et al.
The inferential statistical tool employed was chi-square in testing the level of significance between the socio-economic characteristics of respondents and their level of participation in infrastructural development.
Results and Discussion
Socio-economic characteristics of respondents are presented in Table 1. Data reveal that more than half (56.2%) of respondents are aged between 15 and 25 years and this implies their true identity of being youths and their level of contributions in community development since youths have been noted for their active involvement in community development, greater social propensity, faster reaction time, innovation proneness (Jibowo and Sotomi, 1996; Adesope et al., 2007).
Table 1. Socio-economic characteristics of respondents.
Socio-economic characteristics Frequency Percentage Age (years) 15-25 59 56.2 26-35 30 28.6 < 40 16 15.2 Total 105 100 Gender Male 66 62.9 Female 39 37.1 Total 105 100 Marital status Single 63 60 Married 30 28.6 Divorced / Separated / Widowed 12 11.4 Total 105 100 Level of education No formal education 13 12.4 Primary education 9 8.6 Vocational education 2 11.2 Secondary education 59 56.2 Tertiary education 12 11.4 Total 105 100 Religion Islam 53 50.5 Christianity 46 43.8 Traditional 6 5.7 Total 105 100 Years of residence Since birth 40 38.1 < 5 years 30 28.6 6-10 19 18.1 11-15 1 1.0 > 15 15 14.3 Total 105 100 Rural youth participation in infrastructural development in Nigeria 95
Table 1 also shows that respondents were predominantly male (63%) and also a majority were single (60%). This further affirmed the fact that youth in the study area would fully participate in developmental programmes without hindrance that may occur as a result of marriage. Most of the respondents (56.2%) attended secondary school, 12.4% had no formal education, 8.6% had primary school education, 11.2% had vocational education, while 11.4% pursued tertiary education. This indicates a fairly high literacy level of the respondents with its possible influence on attitude and participation in infrastructural development. Adesope et al. (2010) found that education showed a significant association with respondents’ attitude towards rural development and emphasized that as one receives education, s/he has a wider horizon of knowledge and appreciates the dynamism of changes in the environment better. The majority (71.5%) of respondents have lived in the area for a long time. Hence, this possibly has influenced the way the residents perceive themselves as part of the community and the way they consider development project as their own.
Table 2. Donors of infrastructural development (N = 105).
Donors Frequency Percentage Government 69 65.7 Community leaders 51 48.7 Individuals 16 15.2
Donors of infrastructural development are presented in Table 2. The majority (65.7%) of the respondents indicated that the government contributed to infrastructures. About 48.6% and 15.2% of respondents indicated community leaders and individuals respectively as the donors of infrastructural development.
Table 3. Factors motivating youth performance in the infrastructural development.
Factors Not a factor Not a serious factor Serious factor Parental influence 26 (24.8%) 30 (28.6%) 39 (37.1%) Influence of community leaders 20 (19.0%) 43 (41.0%) 28 (26.7%) Skill acquisition 7 (6.5%) 31 (29.5%) 58 (55.2%) Need to gain expertise 10 (9.5%) 34 (32.4%) 45 (42.9%) Need to boost income generation 10 (9.5%) 25 (23.8%) 58 (55.2%) Peer group influence 14 (13.3%) 51 (48.6%) 25 (23.8%) Quest for community development 14 (13.3%) 7 (6.7%) 77 (73.3%)
Factors motivating youth performance in the infrastructural development are shown in Table 3. The quest for community development ranked highest (73.3%) among the motivating factors in infrastructural development participation. More than half (55.2%) of respondents considered skill acquisition as a serious factor. 96 Gbolagade B. Adesiji et al.
This finding is in agreement with that of Omokore et al. (2008), who found that literacy training and vocational training were rural youth training needs for effective rural transformation. Other factors indicated as serious factors include: need to boost income generation (55.5%) and need to gain expertise (42.9%). This finding is related with Adesope et al. (2003), who observed that youths are involved in community development because they want to help their communities, to be recognized, to interact with peers, and to gain personal benefits.
Table 4. Level of participation in various stages of infrastructural development.
Types and stages of Always Sometimes Never No infrastructural development participate participate participate response Building of school Materials 67 (63.8%) 29 (27.6%) 2 (1.9%) 7 (6.6%) Labour 50 (47.6%) 33 (31.4%) 8 (7.6%) 14 (13.3%) Ideas 44 (41.9%) 33 (31.4%) 16 (15.2%) 12 (11.4%) Motivation 40 (38.1%) 29 (27.6%) 25 (23.8%) 11 (10.5%) Construction of health centres Materials 61 (58.1%) 30 (28.6%) 4 (3.8%) 10 (9.5%) Labour 45 (42.9%) 40 (38.1%) 11 (10.5%) 9 (8.6%) Ideas 42 (40.0%) 44 (41.9%) 12 (11.4%) 7 (6.7%) Motivation 33 (31.4%) 29 (27.6%) 30 (28.6%) 11 (10.5%) Building of town halls Materials 70 (66.7%) 14 (13.3%) 7 (6.7%) 14 (13.3%) Labour 58 (55.2%) 25 (23.8%) 14 (13.3%) 8 (7.6%) Ideas 46 (43.8%) 43 (32.4%) 15 (14.3%) 10 (9.5%) Motivation 44 (41.9%) 26 (24.8%) 23 (21.9%) 12 (11.4%) Road construction Materials 74 (70.5%) 17 (16.2%) 5 (4.8%) 9 (8.6%) Labour 67 (63.8%) 23 (21.9%) 6 (5.7%) 9 (8.6%) Ideas 56 (53.3%) 34 (32.4%) 6 (5.7%) 9 (8.6%) Motivation 46 (43.8%) 39 (37.2%) 12 (11.4%) 7 (6.7%) Building of post office Materials 77 (73.3%) 14 (13.3%) 14 (13.3%) 7 (6.7%) Labour 68 (64.8%) 19 (18.1%) 4 (3.8%) 14 (13.3%) Ideas 53 (50.5%) 28 (26.7%) 9 (8.6%) 15 (14.3%) Motivation 59 (56.2%) 17 (16.2%) 14 (13.3%) 15 (14.3%) Market construction Materials 72 (68.6%) 23 (21.9%) 2 (1.9%) 8 (7.6%) Labour 46 (43.8%) 36 (34.3%) 13 (12.4%) 10 (9.5%) Ideas 40 (38.1%) 39 (37.1%) 15 (14.3%) 11 (10.5%) Motivation 36 (34.3%) 38 (36.2%) 24 (22.9%) 7 (6.7%) Rural youth participation in infrastructural development in Nigeria 97
A high level of youth participation in various stages of infrastructural development was revealed (Table 4). Most youth participate highly in gathering and supplying of materials in all the stages of infrastructural development: 64% (building of schools), 58% (health centre construction), 67% (building of town hall), 71% (local road construction), 73% (building of post office) and 69% (market construction). Similarly, a relatively high level of participation was observed in the area of labour supply across all the stages as given in Table 4: 48% (building of schools), 43% (health centre construction), 55% (building of town hall), 64% (local road construction) 65% (building of post office), and 44% (market construction). This provides evidence on the unique attributes of youthful stage in the aspects of energy, work spirit and innovative proneness. This finding is similar to Matanmi et al. (2006/2007), who found that community development associations gave road construction the greatest attention in Offa local government area of Kwara State. The results in Table 4 revealed the manifestation of meaningful contribution of rural youth to the infrastructural development process. Sources of technical expertise in infrastructural development are presented in Table 5. The community leaders provided the majority of the technical expertise as it accounted for the highest percentage in construction of health centres (44%), building of town hall (65%), road construction (44%), building of post office (58%), and market construction (61%), as this shows the level of local leader activeness, roles and participation in rural development. Table 4 also presents change agents as the main source of technical expertise in construction of schools as it accounted for 46.7%.
Table 5. Sources of technical expertise in infrastructural development.
Infrastructural development Change agent Community leader Publications Building of school 49 (46.7%) 38 (36.2%) 12 (11.4%) Construction of health centres 39 (37.1%) 46 (43.8%) 12 (11.4%) Building of town hall 12 (11.4%) 68 (64.8%) 19 (18.1%) Road construction 31 (29.5%) 46 (43.8%) 21 (20.0%) Building of post office 14 (13.3%) 61 (58.1%) 11 (10.5%) Market construction 12 (11.4%) 64 (61.0%) 19 (18.1%)
The constraints faced in participating in infrastructural development are shown in Table 6. The constraints mainly (53.3%) faced by the respondents are financial constraints, while about 48% of the respondents were limited by availability of materials. The majority (66%) of respondents indicated that time as a factor does not influence their participation in infrastructural development. This statement is in line with Akinsorotan and Oludije (2006), who stated that events have shown that there are many factors militating against activities of youth associations which discourage youth involvement in community development projects. 98 Gbolagade B. Adesiji et al.
Table 6. Constraints faced in participating in infrastructural development.
Constraints Yes No Finance 56 (53.3%) 47 (44.8%) Material availability 50 (47.6%) 51 (48.6%) Technical knowledge 39 (37.1%) 59 (56.2%) Time 32 (30.5%) 66 (62.9%)
The hypothesis in this study was that there is no significant relationship between their personal characteristics and the level of participation in infrastructural development, and it was tested using chi-square analysis.
Table 7. Chi-square analysis of personal characteristics of the youths and the level of participation in infrastructural development.
Personal characteristics Chi-square value df P-value Remarks Age 16.045* 4 0.003 Significant Gender 1.235n.s. 2 0.539 Not significant Marital status 30.325* 4 0.000 Significant Educational level 15.345* 8 0.012 Significant Religion 13.143* 4 0.011 Significant Years of residence 20.824* 8 0.008 Significant
As revealed in Table 7, among the personal characteristics, the variables tested against the level of participation in infrastructural development, age ( 2 = 16.05%, P = 0.003), marital status ( 2 = 30.325, P=0.000), religion ( 2 = 13.143, P = 0.0011), educational level ( 2 = 15.345, P=0.012), and years of residence𝜒𝜒 ( 2 = 20.824, P = 0.008) were found𝜒𝜒 to be significantly related to the𝜒𝜒 level of youth participation in infrastructural𝜒𝜒 development. Table 7 indicates that gender had𝜒𝜒 no significant relationship with the level of youth participation in infrastructural development. This implies that gender as a variable did not prevent the respondents from participating in infrastructural development. There is, therefore, a significant relationship between the personal characteristics of the respondents and their level of participation.
Conclusion
The study examined the level of youth participation in infrastructural development in Isin local government area of Kwara State. The study concluded that the youths in the study had a high level of participation in infrastructural development. To encourage rural youth participation in infrastructural development, the recommendations from the study are as follows: Rural youth participation in infrastructural development in Nigeria 99
1. Public enlightenment programmes should be organized from time to time to educate youth on the significance of youth participation in infrastructural development programmes in the society. 2. Intensive training in adaptive skills as well motivation programmes should be provided to improve the attitude of youths toward community development. 3. Project initiation should involve youths at all stages of developmental programmes.
References
Abegunde, A.A. (2009): The role of community base organization in economic development of Nigeria: the case of Oshogbo, Osun State, Nigeria. International NGO Journal 4(5):236-252. Adesiji, G.B., Omoniwa, V., Adebayo, S.A., Matanmi, B.M., Akangbe, J.A (2009): Factors associated with the youths’ rural-urban drift in Kwara State, Nigeria. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research Business 1(8):69-77. Adesope, O.M., Asiabaka, C.C., Angba, A.O. (2003): Appraisal of youths’ participation in selected communities of Ogbaland, Rivers State. Journal of Sustainable Tropical Agricultural Research 7:12-16. Adesope, O.M., Agumagu, A.C., Nwankwo, C. (2007): Importance of youths in community development: perspectives for agricultural extension. In: Agumagu, A.C. et al. (Eds.), Contemporary issues in agricultural extension and development studies. Molsyfem United Services, Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Adesope, O.M., Agumagu, A.C., Matthews-Njoku, E.C., Ukpongson, M.A. (2010): Rural youths development needs in the Niger Delta area of Nigeria. Journal of Human Ecology 32(1):29-36. Akinbile, L.A., Ashimolowo, O.R., Oladoja, M.A. (2006): Rural youth participation in infrastructural development of Ibarapa East Local Government area of Oyo State. Nigerian Journal of Rural Sociology 6(1-2):40-48. Akinola, S.R. (2007): Coping with infrastructural deprivation through collective action among rural people in Nigeria. Nordic Journal of African Studies 16(1):30-46. Akinsotoran, A.O., Oludije, M.G. (2006): Community development association contribution in self- help projects in Lagos state of Nigeria. Journal of Central European Agriculture 7(4):609-618. Brennan, M.A., Rosemary, V.B., Eboni, B. (2007): Youth involvement in community development: Implications and possibilities for extension. Journal of Extension 45(4): http://www.joe.org/joe/ 2007august/a3.php. Jibowo, A.A., Sotomi, A.O. (1996): The youth in sustainable rural development: A study of youth programmes in Odeda local government area of Ogun State, Nigeria. In: Adedoyin, S.F., Aihonsu, J.O. (Eds.), Sustainable development in rural Nigeria. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference of the Nigerian Rural Sociological Association, pp. 35-40. Matanmi, B.M., Adesiji, G.B., Awojobi, Y.O. (2006): Potentials of community development associations participation in community development in Offa Local government area of Kwara State, Nigeria. Centrepoint (Science Edition) 14(1-2):94-100. Omokore, D.F., Adesiji, G.B., Matanmi, B.M. (2008): An appraisal of rural youths training needs for rural transformation in selected local government area of Kaduna state, Nigeria. Green Farming 2(2):102-105.
Received: December 10, 2013 Accepted: January 13, 2014 100 Gbolagade B. Adesiji et al.
UČEŠĆE SEOSKE OMLADINE U RAZVOJU INFRASTRUKTURE U OBLASTI LOKALNE UPRAVE ISIN DRŽAVE KVARA U NIGERIJI
Gbolagade B. Adesiji1*, Kemi F. Omotesho1, Sola E. Komolafe1, Kehinde J. Oni2 i Francis O. Adereti3
1Odsek za poljoprivredno savetodavstvo i ruralni razvoj, Univerzitet u Ilorinu, PMB 1515, Ilorin, Kvara, Nigerija 2NPF, Akure, Ondo, Nigerija 3Odsek za poljoprivredno savetodavstvo i ruralnu sociologiju, Obafemi Avolovo Univerzitet, Ile-Ife, Nigerija
R e z i m e
Ovaj rad se bavi istraživanjem nivoa učešća omladine u razvoju infrastrukture u oblasti lokalne uprave Isin, države Kvara u Nigeriji. Stotinu i pet mladih osoba je izabrano metodom slučajnog uzorka iz sedam seoskih zajednica, po petnaest mladih osoba iz svakog sela. Podaci su prikupljeni uz pomoć upitnika, koji je analiziran korišćenjem učestalosti i procenata. Hi-kvadrat analiza je korišćena za testiranje hipoteze o značajnosti koja postoji između društveno-ekonomskih karakteristika i nivoa učešća u razvoju infrastrukture. Rezultati su pokazali da su 56,2% ispitanika unutar starosne kategorije 21‒30 godina, 62,9% su muškarci, a 60% su činili neudate i neoženjene osobe, dok je 56,2% ispitanika imalo srednjoškolsko obrazovanje. Istraživanje je ukazalo na različite uloge koje omladina ima prilikom učešća u razvoju infrastrukture kao i na prateća ograničenja koja uključuju finansije, dostupnost materijala, stručno znanje i vreme. Utvrđeno je da su starost, bračni status, nivo obrazovanja i godine boravka značajno povezani sa nivoom učešća omladine u razvoju infrastrukture. Preporučuje se adekvatna raspodela budžeta seoskim područjima kao i intenzivna obuka i obrazovni programi za efikasano učešće u razvoju. Ključne reči: seoska omladina, učešće, razvoj infrastrukture.
Primljeno: 10. decembra 2013. Odobreno: 13. januara 2014.
*Autor za kontakt: e-mail: [email protected]