ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTIVENESS OF RURAL FINANCE INSTITUTION BUILDING PROGRAMME IN AKWA IBOM STATE, NIGERIA

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00009253

No of Pages: 127

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $

ABSTRACT

The study assessed the effectiveness of Rural Finance Institution Building Programme (RUFIN) in Akwa Ibom State. The specific objectives were to: describe the socio-economic characteristics of participants in RUFIN programme, determine the level of participation of RUFIN participants; ascertain the level of empowerment of participants, identify agricultural and non-agricultural enterprises promoted by RUFIN, determine the level of performance of participants and examine constraints faced by the participants. Multi-stage sampling procedure involving purposive and random sampling techniques were employed to select 303 respondents from the three RUFIN pilot Local Government Areas of the State. Primary data were collected with the aid of structured questionnaire and analyzed using descriptive statistics such as frequency counts, percentages and mean scores, while Pearson product moment correlation analysis was used to test the null hypotheses at 5% significance level. The results revealed that the mean age of RUFIN participants was 42.9 years. More female VSG participants (56%) benefited from the programme than males (44%). The grand mean score of the responses of village saving groups (VSGs) on their level of participation was 2.77 while the grand mean score of the responses of Cooperative participants on their level of participation was 3.02. This implied that there was high level of participation of VSG and Cooperative participants in RUFIN in the study area. The grand mean score of the responses of VSGs on their level of empowerment was 2.62 while the grand mean score of the responses of Cooperative participants on their level of empowerment was 2.64. This implied that there was high level of empowerment of VSGs and Cooperatives in RUFIN activities. The result also showed that the respondents were given financial trainings in crop production (40.5%) and agro-processing (32.5%). The grand mean score of the responses of VSGs on their level of performance was 2.73 while the grand mean score of the responses of Cooperative participants on their level of performance was 2.92. This implied that there was high level of performance of VSGs and Cooperatives in RUFIN in the study area. Insufficient loans for business ( = 2.92) and high interest rate ( = 2.70) were recorded as major constraints faced by RUFIN beneficiaries. The result of the hypotheses testing revealed that for hypothesis one, there was a positive (r = 0.517) and significant (t = 5.374**) relationship between the level of participation of cooperative societies in RUFIN programme and their level of empowerment at 5% significance level. For hypothesis two, the result also showed a positive (r = 0.351) and significant (t = 6.098**) relationship between the level of participation of village saving groups in RUFIN programme and their level of empowerment at 5% significance level. The study concluded that there was high level of participation and empowerment of RUFIN participants in the study area. The study recommended among others the implementation of similar rural intervention programmes to grant more loans to participants; regular training of rural people to develop healthy saving culture and the establishment of functional socially inclusive financial institutions with single-digit interest rate.




TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page                                                                                                                                i

Declaration                                                                                                                             ii

Certification                                                                                                               iii

Dedication                                                                                                                              iv

Acknowledgements                                                                                                                v

Table of Contents                                                                                                                   vi

List of Tables                                                                                                                          x

List of Figures                                                                                                                         xi

Abstract                                                                                                                                  xii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1       Background of the Study                                                                                            1

1.2       Problem Statement                                                                                                     5

1.3       Research Questions                                                                                                    7

1.4       Objectives of the Study                                                                                              8

1.5       Hypotheses of the study                                                                                              8

1.6       Justification for the Study                                                                                           9

1.7       Scope of the Study                                                                                                      9

1.8       Definition of Terms                                                                                                    10

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1       Conceptual Review                                                                                                     12

2.1.1      Overview of Agricultural Development Programmes                                               12

2.1.2      Performance of Rural Development Programmes in Nigeria                                     17

2.1.3      Rural Finance Institution Building Programme (RUFIN)- Background

Information                                                                                                                 20

2.1.4      Rural Finance Institution Building Programme- Goals and objectives                    21

2.1.5      Overview of poverty and well-being                                                                          23

2.1.6      Poverty alleviation                                                                                                     25

2.1.7    Historical development of banking in Nigeria                                                           26

2.1.8    Micro-financing                                                                                                          29

2.1.9    Concept of Micro-finance                                                                                          31

2.1.10  Micro financing and poverty alleviation                                                                    32

2.1.11 Roles of Micro-Finance Banks in promoting entrepreneurship                                33

2.1.12 Challenges facing Micro-finance Institutions                                                            35

2.1.13   Concept of programme assessment                                                                            36

2.1.14  Purpose of programme assessment                                                                             37

2.1.15   Types of programme assessment                                                                                38

2.2          Empirical Studies                                                                                             38

2.3          Review of Related Theories                                                                             47

2.3.1    The diffusion theory                                                                                                   47

2.3.2    Theory of change                                                                                                        48

2.3.3    The growth pole theory                                                                                              49

2.3.4    Empowerment theory                                                                                                 50

2.4       Theoretical Framework                                                                                              51

2.5       Conceptual Framework                                                                                              53

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1       Study Area                                                                                                                  56

3.2       Population of the Study                                                                                              57

3.3       Sample and Sampling Procedure                                                                                57

3.4       Method of Data Collection                                                                                         60

3.5       Validity of Instrument                                                                                                60

3.6       Test of Reliability of Instrument                                                                                60

3.7       Data Analysis                                                                                                              61

3.8       Hypotheses Testing                                                                                                    61

3.8.1    Model specification                                                                                                                61

3.9       Measurement of Variables                                                                                         63

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1       Socio-economic Characteristics of Respondents                                                       66

4.1.1    Age                                                                                                                             66

4.1.2    Sex                                                                                                                              67

4.1.3    Marital status                                                                                                              68

4.1.4    Level of education                                                                                                      69

4.1.5    Household size                                                                                                           70

4.1.6    Primary occupation                                                                                                    71

4.1.7    Monthly estimated income                                                                                                    71

4.2       Level of Participation of VSGs and Cooperative Societies in RUFIN

Programme                                                                                                                 74

4.3.1    Level of Empowerment of VSGs and Cooperative Societies in RUFIN

Programme                                                                                                                 76

4.3.2    Level of Empowerment of Microfinance banks in RUFIN

Programme                                                                                                                 79

4.4       Agricultural and Non-Agricultural Enterprises Promoted under RUFIN                        80

4.5.1    Level of Performance of VSGs and Cooperative Societies in RUFIN

Programme                                                                                                                 82

4.5.2    Level of Performance of Microfinance banks in RUFIN Programme                 85

 

4.6.1    Constraints Faced By VSGs and Cooperative Societies in RUFIN

 Programme                                                                                                                86

4.6.2    Constraints Faced By Microfinance Banks in RUFIN Programme                                     88

4.7       Results of Hypotheses Test                                                                                        89

4.7.1    Result of hypothesis 1                                                                                                89

4.7.2    Result of hypothesis 2                                                                                                91

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1       Summary                                                                                                                    93

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                                  95

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                                      96

References                                                                                                                  97

  Appendix i                                                                                                                   102

 Appendix ii                                                                                                                   107

 Appendix iii                                                                                                                  110

                                                   






                                               
       LIST OF TABLES

                                                                                                Page

4.1       Socio-economic characteristics of respondents                                                          73

4.2       Distribution of respondents according to their level of participation in RUFIN

Programme                                                                                                                 75

4.3.1    Distribution of respondents according to their level of empowerment by

RUFIN Programme                                                                                                    78

 

4.3.2    Empowerment of Micro finance Banks by RUFIN                                                    79

4.4       Distribution of respondents according to agricultural and non-agricultural

Enterprises promoted under RUFIN                                                                           81

4.5.1    Distribution of respondents according to their level of performance in RUFIN

Programme                                                                                                                 84

4.5.2    Level of Performance of RUFIN-Mentored MFBs in RUFIN Programme                 85

4.6.1    Distribution of respondents according to constraints faced in RUFIN

Programme                                                                                                                 87

 

4.6.2    Constraints Faced by Micro-Finance Banks in RUFIN Programme                                    88

4.7.1    Correlation result of relationship between the level of participation of cooperative

            societies in RUFIN programme and their level of empowerment                                    90

4.7.2    Correlation result of relationship between the level of participation of village

            saving groups in RUFIN programme and their level of empowerment             92

 

 

 

 

 

 

           

 

LIST OF FIGURES

                                                                                                 Page

 

1      Conceptual framework on Effectiveness of Rural Finance Institution Building

Programme in Akwa Ibom State                                                                                55

2      Sampling Procedure showing the number of VSG, Cooperative and MFB

participants                                                                                                                 59

 

 


 

 

 

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1       BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Since the turn of 1960s, the Nigerian government in its avowed determination to better the lots of the citizenry, has evolved a number of strategies to improve the social and economic well-being of the people, especially those living in rural communities. Expectedly, the poor economic status and social welfare of Nigerians has inexorably been attributed to the lack of income and food (Onwuka and Udeh, 2015). As part of efforts to reverse the ugly development, several agricultural intervention programmes aimed at turning around the economic fortunes of the rural people have been implemented by different governments and development agencies in Nigeria. The focal point has been on poverty reduction through improvement of income, food security and general living conditions of the poor rural households. However, in the past 25 years, the world has managed to half the number of people living in extreme poverty (Oshinowo and Olayide, 2018).

Notable agricultural programmes in Nigeria, as listed by the World Bank (2015), include: Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), Green Revolution and Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs). The Nigerian Agricultural and Co-operative Bank (NACB), now known as Bank of Agriculture (BOA), was established in 1973 as a key institution to address problems militating against agricultural development and financing. The three major functions of this institution were to grant loans for agricultural production to any State or institution for on-lending to farmers, group of farmers or corporate body; grant direct loans to individual farmers, co-operative societies or other bodies provided that it was satisfied that the Scheme for which the loans were requested was were viable, and there was adequate security to cover such loans; and do all such things as might have been incidental or conducive to the attainment of these functions (Zuru, 2016) .

Another milestone in government’s determined effort geared towards agricultural financing was the establishment of the Agricultural Credit Guarantee Scheme (ACGS) in 1977 by the Central Bank of Nigeria. The primary aim of this Scheme was to provide guarantee to Commercial Banks for the loans taken by farmers for agricultural purposes. One of the components of the Scheme was the creation of Agricultural Credit Guarantee Fund (ACGF) by the Federal Government and the Central Bank of Nigeria. Under the Scheme, Commercial Banks were required to channel a minimum proportion of their loan portfolio to the agricultural sector and to deposit the shortfall with the Central Bank, which made such funds available to Nigeria Agricultural and Co-operative Bank for its operations (Stewart, 2012).                

In the 2018 National Budget, the Federal Government of Nigeria earmarked 203 billion Naira for agriculture and rural development. This was targeted at programmes and projects aimed at scaling up efforts to improve the economy (Buhari, 2018). The National Special Programme for Food Security (NSPFS) was the first step towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals of reducing by half the number of hungry people by 2015. The Federal Government of Nigeria, in conjunction with the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, launched the National Special Programme for Food Security (NSPFS) in 2002. The goal of this programme was to improve national and household food security and reduce rural poverty in a sustainable way with the ultimate objective of contributing to better livelihoods for poor farmers on sustainable basis. However, Nigeria appears to be currently experiencing the scourge of rising poverty and the growing threat of food insecurity among its citizens. This situation has been seen to be especially worse in the rural areas where people’s livelihoods depend largely on small-scale agricultural output (Idiaye and Omonona, 2014).

In 2010, the Federal Government of Nigeria, in conjunction with the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (FMARD) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), launched the Rural Finance Institution Building Programme (RUFIN) in Nigeria. The Rural Finance Institution Building Programme (RUFIN) was designed to develop rural economy through enhancing the capacity of micro-finance institutions and non-formal credit institutions such as Co-operative Society and Village Savings Groups (VSGs) to provide cheap credit facilities to poor rural people, and to manage such credits in a sustainable manner.

The broad objective of the RUFIN was to develop and strengthen the rural micro finance sub-sector of the economy, comprising the Micro-Finance Banks (MFBs) and non-formal credit institutions such as Co-operative Societies and Village Savings Groups (VSGs) so as to increase access of the rural population to sustainable finance services; thereby expanding and improving agricultural productivity. The expected outcome was poverty alleviation, especially among poor rural women, youths and the physically-challenged, and bridging the yawning gap of financial inclusion of the active poor. The specific objectives of RUFIN were to bridge the existing gap in micro-finance delivery; strengthen Rural Micro-Finance Institutions (RMFIs) to bring financial services to the poor; develop target group member-based, poor RMFIs so as to promote effective participation of the poor in rural financing; facilitate the participation of rural people and their institutions in the micro-finance policy implementation; and orient policies to service agricultural and non-agricultural sectors, and strengthen Rural Finance Institutions (IFAD, 2013).

RUFIN was implemented in 12 States of the Federation – Adamawa, Akwa Ibom, Anambra, Bauchi, Benue, Edo, Imo, Katsina, Lagos, Nasarawa, Oyo and Zamfara, representing two States from each of the six geo-political zones in Nigeria. The total volume of external investments in the programme was US $32.5 million, which ran for seven years. Out of this amount, Akwa Ibom State withdrew US $2.7 million (N405m), in addition to her own counterpart fund contribution of twenty million naira (N20m). The programme commenced in 2010 with a pilot Local Government Area in each participating State. In Akwa Ibom State, EssienUdim, Onna and Itu were pilot Local Government Areas used as administrative centres for the three senatorial districts of the State (IFAD, 2013).

As explained earlier, RUFIN focused its attention on micro financing. Micro-financing, according to Zuru (2017), is a poverty alleviation tool used to provide micro credit and other financial services to low-income persons who are usually excluded from the mainstream financial systems. The author identified four distinctive features of micro-finance institutions, namely, loan is disbursed without collateral; loan is offered to those people who live below poverty line; terms and conditions offered to the poor are decided by NGOs; and the provision of other financial services, including savings account and insurance. The aim of micro-finance institution is not only to extend credit to beneficiaries, but also to promote entrepreneurship and boost rural financial markets that will provide sustainable access to financial services by creating a relationship between those with financial resources and those who need them. 

RUFIN was aimed at improving the economic status and standard of living of the rural people through provision of loans to boost their agricultural production. According to Onwuka and Udeh (2015), rural people with small-scale operation, low productivity, low income and inability to purchase modern requisites, need to be supplied with credit facilities to stimulate increased productivity. The ultimate goal of the programme was to contribute to poverty reduction through increase in income and general improvement in the living conditions of the rural households, including women, youth and the physically-challenged.


1.2       PROBLEM STATEMENT

The International Fund for Agricultural Development reported in 2016 that an estimated two billion working-age adults globally (38% of the world population) had no access to services provided by formal financial institutions, while 62% of them were unbanked (IFAD, 2016). Similarly, the World Bank in 2018 asserted that about 1.7 billion rural people in the world have no financial account at the bank. Even when they have accounts, many people find them of little value and they are left unused. The result is that they have no savings for a child’s education; they cannot access loans to buy seeds and fertilizers and they have no insurance to protect them from medical or natural disasters (World Bank, 2018).

Generally, traditional financial institutions in rural areas are not only few, but weak in service provision. This is what Kirechev (2011) observed as limited supply of financial services in rural areas. The National Bureau of Statistics reported that 67.1% of inhabitants of Akwa Ibom State were living in poverty, while 32.9% were non-poor (NBS, 2017). The increasing pauperization in the State renders the standard of living and quality of life unimpressive and unenviable because of serious deprivation or lack of income necessary to attain socially-acceptable standard of living. Existing rural finance institutions are few with respect to the population they serve, and even more critical to the rural economy is that they are very weak.

The consequence of few, near non-existence and weak rural finance institutions is anti-development. This is because the existing rural finance institutions cannot provide adequate financial products and services to the people (Okon, Etim and Offiong, 2012). This situation results in continued low household income, poor health care uptake, poor nutrition, low or non-existence of savings or utilization of formal finance institutions that could alleviate poverty. It is against this background of poor state of the rural economy that the Akwa Ibom State Government embraced the intervention of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) when the Rural Finance Institution Building Programme (RUFIN) was launched in 2010.

Basically, RUFIN was designed to develop the rural economy through enhancing the capacity of micro-finance institutions to provide cheap credit facilities to poor rural people and to manage such credit in a sustainable manner (IFAD, 2013). The programme pursues the flow of funds into rural areas by influencing different stakeholders, but without directly being involved in the credit delivery.   

To the knowledge of the researcher, little or no rural development study has been conducted on the performance of the RUFIN in Akwa Ibom State almost a decade after being launched. Available studies were either focused on Impact of Micro-Credit Schemes on rural areas (Okon et al., 2012) or Asset Structure and Profitability of Micro-Finance Institutions (Ekpo and Mboho, 2017). In neighboring Cross River State, research on Access and Utilization of Micro-lending among rural farmers was also conducted (Okoronkwo, Joseph, Alobari and Ephari, 2014). Other research studies identified were on Sustainability of Rural Finance (Kirechev, 2011); Effect of Microfinance Institutions in Rural Households well-being in Oyo State. Furthermore, in a study of IFAD/RUFIN supported programme, Oshinowo and Olayide (2018) examined the strengths and working of the Rural Finance Institution Building Programme (RUFIN) in Oyo State. Therefore, the research gap was to be filled by carrying out a study on the effectiveness of Rural Finance Institution Building Programme (RUFIN) in Akwa Ibom State.

Uchenna and Onyeibo (2018) observed sub-optimal operations of some laudable empowerment intervention programmes which in most cases did not meet expected programme objectives. Could this assertion be applied to RUFIN? Every programme has relative impact, but the level of the said impact is always a subject of academic discourse. It is against this backdrop that this research was conducted to assess the effectiveness of the Rural Finance Institution Building Programme (RUFIN) in Akwa Ibom State.


1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The research sought to answer the following questions:

      i.         What are the socio-economic characteristics of the participants in RUFIN programmes in Akwa Ibom State?

     ii.         What is the level of participation of village savings groups and co-operative societies in RUFIN programme in the study area?

   iii.         What is the level of empowerment of village savings groups, co-operative societies and Micro-Finance Banks by RUFIN?

   iv.         What are the agricultural and non-agricultural enterprises promoted under RUFIN programme in the study area?

     v.         What is the level of performance of village savings groups, co-operatives and Micro-Finance Banks empowered by RUFIN?

   vi.         What are the constraints faced by participants in RUFIN programme?


1.4       OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The broad objective of the study was to assess the effectiveness of Rural Finance Institution programme in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. Specifically, the objectives were to;

      i.         describe the socio-economic characteristics of participants in RUFIN programme in the study area;

     ii.         determine the level of participation of VSGs and cooperative societies in RUFIN programme;

   iii.         ascertain the level of empowerment of participants by RUFIN programme;

   iv.         identify agricultural and non-agricultural enterprises promoted by RUFIN programme;

     v.         determine the level of performance of participants empowered by RUFIN and

   vi.         examine constraints faced by the participants in RUFIN programme.


1.5       HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

The following null hypotheses guided the study:

Ho1: There is no significant relationship between the level of participation of cooperative societies in RUFIN programme and their level of empowerment.

Ho2: There is no significant relationship between the level of participation of village saving groups in RUFIN programme and their level of empowerment.

 

1.6       JUSTIFICATION FOR THE STUDY

The research revealed the effectiveness of RUFIN programme in Akwa Ibom State. Undoubtedly, the study revealed that the majority of the rural dwellers enjoyed linkage to formal financial institutions, in addition to capacity building through active participation in RUFIN programme. Apart from several trainings given to participants, most of the beneficiaries enjoyed increased access to micro finance bank loans through RUFIN programme.

The study would certainly be of help to Financial Institutions like the Micro Finance Banks to re-structure their interest rates and marketing strategies to become much more relevant to rural development.

As one of the rare works in recent times, researchers will develop interest to build on the existing one or undertake similar research with a view to contributing to knowledge and offering solutions to challenges confronting poverty alleviation programmes.


1.7       SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study assessed the effectiveness of Rural Finance Institution Building Programme comprising Micro-Finance Banks, village savings groups and co-operatives societies empowered by RUFIN in Akwa Ibom State in three pilot Local Government Areas of the State.

Accordingly, data were obtained on the level of empowerment of MFBs, VSGs and Co-operative societies in microfinance services delivery, level of participation, agricultural and non-agricultural enterprises promoted by RUFIN, as well as constraints faced by RUFIN in financial service delivery to MFBs, VSGs and co-operative societies.

The study focused on 9 RUFIN- mentored Micro-Finance Banks namely, Prudential, Sapphire, Gufax, Uniuyo, Eduek, Brooks, Madelyne, Active Point and Palm Coast, three (3) co-operative societies which are Akwa Ibom State Financial Prudential Co-operatives, Usung Unwan Co-operatives and Nka Unwan Ntiat Co-operative Society and 10 village savings groups in each of the three LGAs.


1.8 DEFINITION OF TERMS

The section gives explanation of important terms as used in the study.

Programme Assessment is the systematic and ongoing method of gathering, analyzing and using information from various sources about the programme to measure the programme outcome in order to ascertain it effectiveness (whether the programme has achieved its set goal).

Effectiveness is defined as the capability of producing the desired result or the ability to produce the desired output. When something is deemed effective, it means it has an intended or expected outcome, or producing a deep, vivid impression.

Micro-financing is the provision of credit facilities/loans in small amount (under N500, 000) that are repaid within a short period of time (0 – 2 years) for the economically-active poor to enable them raise their income level and improve their standard of living.

Poverty is defined as a condition of having insufficient income or resources to obtain minimum standard of living. The level of income is an important indicator of the degree of poverty.

Microcredit/loan is a small amount of money (N5000 or less) lent to the economically-active poor to help them start up or improve upon their businesses in order to enable them improve their income level and keep poverty at bay.

Poverty alleviation is the substantial reduction in the number of households or individuals whose income cannot provide the necessities of life such as food, clothing, shelter, medical care and education.

 

 

Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects

FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!

+(234) 0814 780 1594

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.

Ratings & Reviews

0.0

No Review Found.

Review


To Comment