• 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00007616

No of Pages: 115

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :




This study focused on the assessment of the impact of management of poverty reduction  programmes on the quality of lives and households of communities in Osisoma Ngwa and Aba North local government areas of Abia State. The objectives of the study are, to ascertain the impact of poverty reduction programmes on the households living standards of communities, to examine the relationship that exists between management of poverty reduction programmes and people’s well-being in those communities, to ascertain the challenges faced by the management of anti-poverty programmes in implementation of the policy and to determine the strategies for effective management of poverty reduction programmes in the communities. The survey research design was adopted; the population was 210,000 members of the two selected local governments, from which 422 sample size were drawn. The instrument used for data collection was questionnaire designed on five point likert scale of agreed, strongly agreed, disagreed, strongly disagreed and undecided. The instrument was confirmed to have high validity and reliability. Four research questions were analyzed using frequencies and percentages while four hypotheses were tested using person’s correlation coefficient and multiple regression statistical tools with SPSS statistical package at 0.05 level of significance. The major findings were that management of poverty reduction programmes is active to ensure high quality of  lives of the households in those communities investigated, that there is a  significant relationship between  management of poverty reduction programmes and people’s wellbeing in those communities, there are challenges faced by management of poverty reduction programmes in implementation of such policy and that there are suitable strategies for effective management of poverty reduction programmes in those communities. The study recommends that management of anti-poverty programmes should be proactive in their job to add more quality to the lives of households in those communities investigated, that governments, philanthropists and NGOs should be extremely interested in the indigent and vulnerable (real poor) people when initiating and implementing such programmes such that it will ensure zero tolerance of irregularities, misappropriation of funds, and those who cut-corners during and after the program should be thoroughly investigated, prosecuted and sacked from the system to avoid subsequent occurrence. That key stakeholders should be involved in planning and decision making so that objectives of the programme can be realized. 


Title Page                                                                                                                                            i

Declaration                                                                                                                                         ii

Certification                                                                                                                                       iii

Dedication                                                                                                                                          iv

Acknowledgements                                                                                                                            v

Table of Contents                                                                                                                               vi

List of Tables                                                                                                                                      ix

Abstract                                                                                                                                              x


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION                                                                            1

1.1       Background to the Study                                                                                1

1.2       Statement of the Problem                                                                               6

1.3       Objectives of the Study                                                                                  7

1.4       Research Questions                                                                                        8

1.5       Research Hypotheses                                                                                      8

1.6       Significance of the Study                                                                               8

1.7       Scope of the Study                                                                                          9

1.8       Profiles of the Local Governments                                                                 10

1.8.1    Osisioma Ngwa                                                                                              10

1.8.2    Aba North                                                                                                       10

1.9       Operational Definition of Terms                                                                    10       


2.1       Conceptual Framework                                                                                  12

2.1.1    Meaning of poverty                                                                                        12

2.1.2    Poverty summary in Nigeria                                                                          15                                                                                           

2.1.3    Causes of poverty in developing countries                                                    16

2.1.4    Effects of poverty in developing countries                                                    24

2.1.5    Government poverty alleviation programmes in Nigeria                               26

2.1.6    An evaluation of poverty alleviation programmes/policies and poverty

reduction strategies in Nigeria                                                                        35


2.1.7    Hindrances of poverty reduction programmes in Nigeria                              38

2.1.8    Poverty profile and the failure of government’s interventions                        39

2.2       Theoretical Review                                                                                         44

2.2.1    Nurkse’s vicious circle of poverty theory (1953)                                           44

2.2.2    John Locke’s individualistic theory.                                                              45

2.2.3    Oscar Lewis’s culture of poverty theory (1950)                                            46

2.2.4    Paul Hershey’ situational theory                                                                    47

2.2.5    Marxian theory of poverty                                                                              48

2.2.6    Social exclusion theory                                                                                  50

2.3       Empirical Review                                                                                           51

2.4       Summary of the Literature Reviewed and Gap                                              58


CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY                                                                          60

3.1       Research Design                                                                                             60

3.2       Sources of Data                                                                                              60

3.3       Population of the Study                                                                                  60

3.4       Sample Size Determination                                                                            64

3.5       Sample and Sampling Procedure                                                                    65

3.6       Instrument of Data Collection                                                                        65

3.7       Validity of the Instrument                                                                              65

3.8       Reliability of the Instrument                                                                          66

3.9       Method of Data Analyses                                                                               66

3.9.1    Model specification                                                                                        67


CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION                                                     

4.1       Distributed and Return Rate of Questionnaire                                               68

4.2       Analyses of Research Questions                                                                    71

4.3       Test of Hypotheses                                                                                         78

4.4       Discussion                                                                                                       85



5.1       Summary                                                                                                        92

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                      92

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                          93

5.4       Areas of Further Study                                                                                   94

            References                                                                                                      95

            Appendices                                                                                                     103








3.1    Communities in Osisioma Ngwa                                                                       61

3.2     Communities in Aba North                                                                              63

4.1      Return Rate of Questionnaire                                                                          68

4.2       Local Government Areas                                                                                68

4.3       Age of Respondents                                                                                        69

4.4       Sex of Respondents                                                                                        69

4.5       Educational Qualification                                                                              70

4.6       Occupation of Respondents                                                                            70

4.7       Analysis of Research Item 1 of Question 1                                                    71

4.8       Analysis of Research Item 2 of Question 1                                                    71

4.9       Analysis of Research Item 3 of Question 1                                                    72

4.10     Analysis of Research Item 1 of Question 2                                                    72

4.11     Analysis of Research Item 2 of Question 2                                                    73

4.12     Analysis of Research Item 3 of Question 2                                                    73

4.13     Analysis of Research Item 1 of Question 3                                                    74

4.14     Analysis of Research Item 2 of Question 3                                                    75

4.15     Analysis of Research Item 3 of Question 3                                                    75

4.16     Analysis of Research Item 1 of Question 4                                                    76

4.17     Analysis of Research Item 2 of Question 4                                                    76

4.18     Analysis of Research Item 3 of Question 4                                                    77

4.19     Correlation Analysis of Hypothesis 1                                                             78

4.20     Correlation Analysis of Hypothesis 2                                                             80

4.21     Correlation Analysis of Hypothesis 3                                                             81

4.22     Correlation Analysis of Hypothesis 4                                                             83







 Poverty which is as old as the world, affects continents, countries and persons differently. It afflicts people in various depths and levels, at different times and phases of existence. There is no state that is totally free from poverty (Oyemomi, 2003). Therefore, the reduction of poverty is the most difficult challenge facing many countries in developing world where on the average majority of the population is considered abjectly poor. Agreeing to Etim and Ukoha (2010), poverty rests a practical global problem of enormous fraction. The disturbing occurrence at present-day, induces anxiety, fear, comment, argument, and has engaged a main area of speech between policy makers and scientists. Compared with other regions in the world, sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has the highest number of people classified as poor, followed by south AsiaEtim and Ukoha (2010). 


Oyemomi (2003), opines that Nigeria is ranked among the 25 poorest countries in the world, started its independent nationhood with poverty level of barely 15% of its population in1960 and is today struggling to bring it down from about 70% of its current teeming population of about 170 million. Of the amount of the poverty traumatized individuals, about 73 per cent is focused in the rural areas where illiteracy dominance is high, potable water and health amenities are rarely obtainable, road and energy infrastructures are either unobtainable or badly managed. The World Bank and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)’s 2002 Human Development Index (HDI) of 0.461 aptly indicates the deplorable state of our nation in the level of poverty and low human development. This is in-spite of the fact that the country is richly endowed with all kinds of agricultural and mineral resources. Nigeria’s proportion of the poor has doubled over the last two decades, during which time the country received over $300 billion in oil and gas revenue. Paradoxically, Nigeria’s level of revenue and endowment are in inverse proportion with her poverty level. Ogwumike (1998), in his study shows that the amount of people under poverty has continual to upsurge. For instance, the amount of those in poverty up surged from 27% in 1980 to 46% in 1985; it dropped somewhat to 42% in 1992, and enlarged very sharply to 67% in 1996. By 1999 when Olusegun Obasanjo’s governments came to power, statistics showed that more than 70% of Nigerians lived in poverty. That was why that regime affirmed in November 1999 that the N470 billion budgets for year 2000 was “to dismiss and control poverty.” Prior the National Assembly even passed the 2000 budget, the government got an endorsement to pledge N10 billion to poverty mitigation programme.


In the 2001 budget, the administration has improved the provision to poverty mitigation programme by 150%. This idea of poverty alleviation was received with high hopes especially given the speed with which that administration tackled the fuel problem as soon as it came into power. Good management of poverty alleviation system was seen as a vehicle through which the government can revamp the battered economy and rebuild self-esteem in majority of Nigerians who had been dehumanized through lack of attention to poverty by the past military regimes. The Nigerian government in realizing the pivotal role good management of poverty alleviation policies are playing in transforming the economy and in reducing the level of poverty, put in place enabling policies in collaboration with a number of committed international agencies and NGOs to promote an effectively improve human capital development for Nigeria through internship, vocational, skill acquisitions and other profiteering and business ventures aiming at reducing  if not eliminating poverty level. In accession to that, the Nigerian government also pursues viable cooperation with other interested stakeholders like States and Local governments for the positive growth of the human capital development and drastic reduction of poverty. For example, the present government has began with her Social Investment Programmes (SIP) which aimed at reducing poverty and improving livelihoods of vulnerable groups through; N-power program which is aimed at empowering 500,000 unemployed youths through teaching and other skills acquisition  across the country for two years, Conditional Cash Transfer aimed at ensuring transfer payment  of N5,000.00 on  monthly basis to elderly people for years, National Home Grown Feeding Programme aimed at feeding primary school children across the country for two years and Government Enterprise and Empowerment Program aimed at giving credit facilities to entrepreneurs and businessmen to enhance pump investment. 


To accelerate growth and reduce poverty, the World Bank Group and other international aid agencies provide targeted assistance to small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) in developing economies. For example, the World Bank Group approved more than $10 billion in SME support programmes over the period 1998 – 2002 and $1.3 billion in 2003.Also in a bid to encourage the growth and development of manpower and to overcome poverty, Nigerian government initiated different policies and structural programmes that are SMEs oriented, with the mandate to assist and reduce the rate of poverty. These programmes include: Better Life Programme (BLP), National Directorate of Employment (NDE); People’ Bank of Nigeria (PBN); Community Bank (CB); Poverty Eradication Programme (PEP); National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP); Youth Empowerment Scheme (YES) and National Economic Empowerment Development Strategy (NEEDS), among others.


Obadan, (2001), states that doubts have been raised regarding the effectiveness of these programmes in achieving their overarching goal of poverty alleviation and promoting household welfare, as the country experiences soaring and wide-spread poverty incidence. A close inspection of these programmes reveals priority misplacement. Several programmes has been launched to facilitate efforts made by the Federal government in reducing poverty level and as well to cushion the effects on the people. Certainly before now, several poverty alleviation programmes had been outlined and implemented, even some are under implementation process. Although analyzing each of the Poverty Reduction Strategies in Nigeria looks ideal, such exercise has been done by several studies and they seem to agree substantially on the reasons for the failure of the numerous poverty intervention measures. Jega (2003) was unequivocal in his agreement with problems identified by Ajakaiye (2003) as the bane of poverty alleviation eradication programmes in Nigeria. Ajakaiye in his work identified the following problems associated with the successive management of poverty reduction programmes.

- Policy inconsistency and poor governance;

- Ineffective targeting of the poor (leading to leakage of benefits to unintended beneficiaries);

- Unwieldy scope of the programmes resulting in resources being thinly spread among projects;

- Overlapping of functions which ultimately led to institutional rivalry and conflicts;

- Lack of complementarities from beneficiaries;

- Uncoordinated sectoral policy initiatives;

- Lack of involvement of social partners and other stakeholders in planning, implementation and evaluation; and

- “Poor human capital development and inadequate funding.”

The Presidential Panel on Streamlining and Rationalisation of Poverty Alleviation Institutions and Agencies in its main report of 1999 P. 10 listed some reasons it considered most relevant that account for the failure of the wide array of Nigeria’s poverty intervention measures. The reasons accord substantially to those above with the following as additions:

i.          Gross mismanagement and lack of financial discipline;

ii.         Poor and inconsistent funding;

iii.     Policy inconsistencies occasioned by frequent changes in Government and absence of in-built sustainability mechanism; and

iv.        Absence of a co-coordinating body necessary for effective implementation, co-ordination, planning, monitoring and evaluation of achievements and constraints.

Anyanwu (2012) asserts that most policy direction towards the fight against poverty in Nigeria has never been structurally designed to focus on those options that significantly alleviate poverty in its context. The inability of efficient management of most poverty reduction programmes in the past and of the present to achieve significant outcomes has been the outright neglect or unclear understanding on the part of policy formulators of what the problem truly is: who are the poor?, why are they poor?, what kind of poverty do they face?, and where do they live?. Incorporating these salient but important issues in evolving a poverty antidote instill a comprehensive insight on why most Nigerians lack the capabilities to function effectively. For instance, in a bid to improve living conditions in  of people in Umuocham, an urban community in Osisioma Ngwa LGA in Abia State, Nigeria, monetary aid was disbursed to the villages in that community. Records showed that the targeted beneficiaries were unable to access the fund, let alone improving their lots from that aid, as their standard of living remained pitiable. This was occasioned by lack of accountability and transparency in the implementation of poverty reduction scheme in the target community. Though, government has not relented in devising policy measures to checkmate and as well control the poverty level hence the desire to initiate poverty reduction programmes in the state.



Nigeria has been described as a self-contradictory State by the World Bank in 1996; this has continued to be confirmed by events and official statistics in the country. The inconsistency is that the poverty level in Nigeria opposes the nation’s immense fortune. Among other things, the nation is extremely gifted with human, agricultural, petroleum, gas, and large unexploited solid mineral resources. Particularly it is worrisome that the country earned over US$300 billion from one resource, petroleum, during the last three decades (World Bank, 1996). Instead of recording remarkable progress in national, socio-economic development, Nigeria retrogressed to become one of the 25 poorest countries at the threshold of twenty-first century whereas she was ranked among the richest 50 in the early 1970’s.

Official statistics show that in 1980 the national (average) poverty incidence grew to 28.1% of the population. As a result of the great majority of people living in abject poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, diseases, dilapidated roads, poor quality water supply and consistent hazards and devastation of the environment and livelihoods, especially in the communities of Osisioma Ngwa and Aba North and their households. In order to alleviate this social cankerworm that has eaten deep into the fabric of the economy, Nigerian government/NGOs has set up strategies in the name of poverty reduction programmes to help ameliorate this condition. But sadly, the management of these programmes has not been efficient and effective in the distribution and implementation of this policy to the people who are virtually pre-occupied with how to survive the predicaments stated above and which has ravaged their socio-economic situation. Unless immediate and proactive attention is not taken it will continue to cause considerable hardship to the people and as a result pose a serious threat to the growth and development of lives of the households in those communities. More so, its persistent increasing trend and presence definitely will conquer the objectives and efforts of government in initiating poverty reduction programmes in Nigeria.

It is the opinion of the researcher that the ugly trend in management of poverty reduction policies and unemployment in the face of rising cost of living has conditioned many people to very low and undignified standard of living in Nigeria which inevitably classifies this country as an under-developed country. Poverty reduction programmes, which are actions that seem to increase the standard of living of the people beyond their present abject poverty condition, and which facilitate the well-being of the households and the communities, have not been taken seriously. Hence the present study.



The major objective of this study is to assess the impact of management of poverty reduction programmes on the quality of lives of households in the selected communities.

The specific objectives are to:

i           Ascertain the impact of management of poverty reduction programmes on the     households’ living standards of those communities.

ii          Examine the relationship between management of poverty reduction programmes and     people’s condition in those communities.

iii         Ascertain the challenges faced by the management of poverty reduction programmes in implementation of poverty reduction policies in the communities.

iv         Determine the strategies for effective management of poverty reduction programmes in the communities.


i           How active is management of poverty reduction programmes in ensuring positive living standards of households in those communities?

ii          What significant relationship exists between management of poverty reduction        programmes and people’s conditions in those communities?

iii         What are the challenges faced by the management of poverty reduction programmes in implementation of the policy in the communities?

iv         What are the strategies for effective management of poverty reduction programmes in the communities?



  i H01: Management of poverty reduction programmes is not active in ensuring positive  living standards of households in those communities.

ii  H02: There is no significant relationship between management of Poverty reduction programmes and people’s condition in those communities.

iii H03: There are no challenges faced by the management of poverty reduction programmes in implementation of the policy in the communities.

iv H04: There are no strategies for effective management of poverty reduction programmes in   the communities.



This research work seeks to assess the impact of management of poverty reduction programmes on the quality of lives of households: A study of communities in Osisioma Ngwa and Aba North LGAs. This research work will help the communities and her residence know the negative effects poverty has imposed on households and individuals. This research work will help the communities investigated to constructively appraise the management of governmental and NGOs policies and programmes towards attaining poverty free Localities. The study will bring to their notice the areas the management of these policies have affected their lives negatively or positively and the state of their standard of living. This study will as well help the management of these social policies to know whether they are on the right track or not. Through the recommendations, they will be informed of the ways they can improve and add more quality to people’s lives, it help  them in overcoming negative effects  of inefficiency and as well redirect them on how to improve in reducing if not  total eradication of poverty. Finally, this research work proposes to provide information that will be useful to the policy makers (government) and the general public who needs to understand the mayhem caused by ineffective performance of management of poverty reduction organizers to the communities under investigation and benefits programmes initiated and to be initiated will be to the quality of lives of household and individuals who embraces it, as well, it will be an eye opener to the government to understand carefully her areas of inefficiency in implementing the outlined programmes. More importantly, the result will be a corrective policy measure and strategies to control or encourage programmes channeled towards alleviating poverty. This research work will add to the scholarly materials available for potential researchers and students to rely on when embarking in similar topics.



The scope of this study focused on the assessment of the impact management of poverty reduction programmes on the quality of lives of households in the selected Local Governments in Abia State. It covers the meaning, forms, causes, effects, and consequences of poverty. The scope equally covers the fundamentals of poverty alleviation programmes by the government, evaluation of poverty alleviation programmes/policies, why poverty reduction programmes not yielding the desired result, poverty profile and government’s failure to intervene. It equally suggests how to effectively implement programmes outlined to reduce poverty within the localities under study and generalizing; what should be done to (perpetrators) those who sabotage the efforts of government and NGOs in disbursing/implementing the carefully planned policies and programmes aimed at reducing poverty drastically if not total eradication in Osisioma Ngwa and Aba North LGAs in Abia State of Nigeria.



1.8.1    Osisioma Ngwa is a Local Government Area of Abia State, Nigeria. Its headquarter is      in the town of Osisioma. It has an area of 198 km² and a population of 147,154 as at 2016. The postal code is 451.


1.8.2    Aba North is a Local Government Area of Abia State, Nigeria. Its headquarter is in the town of Eziama Urata, it has an area of 23 km² and a population of 62,846 as at 2016. The postal code is 450.



Poverty: Poverty, in this sense, is defined as deprivation in the material requirements for minimally acceptable fulfillment of human needs, including food. This deprivational concept goes far beyond a lack of private income: it includes the need for basic health and education and essential services that must be provided by the society to prevent people from falling into poverty.

Reduction: according to Dictionary .com, reduction is the act of reducing or the state of being reduced. Or the amount by which something is reduced or diminished.  Also according to Webster’s dictionary, reduction means, the act of making something smaller or less:  the state of being made smaller or less

Management: This is the activities of setting the strategy of an organization and coordinating the efforts of its employees or volunteers to actualize its objectives through the input of the available resource which could be time finance, human, technological and natural.

Communities: According to Wikipedia, community is commonly considereda social unit a group of people who have something in common, such as norms, values, or identity. Often - but not always - communities share a sense of place that is situated in a given geographical area e.g. a country, village, town, or neighborhood. Durable relations that extend beyond immediate genealogical ties also define a sense of community.


Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects


+(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. 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 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, the management of 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


No Review Found.

To Review

To Comment