PARTICIPATION OF GRADUATE BENEFICIARIES IN N-POWER AGRIPREURSHIP SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00009240

No of Pages: 108

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $

ABSTRACT

 

This study analyzed participation of graduate beneficiaries in N - power agripreneurship social development programme in Abia State, Nigeria. Specifically it described the socio-economic characteristics of respondents, assessed respondents’ motives for enrolling in the programme, assessed perceptions of respondents about the programme activities, ascertained the levels of participation of respondents in agripreneurship programme activities, ascertained extent of outcomes derived by respondents participating in agripreneurship programme activities and examined constraints to participation of respondents in the programme activities in the study area.Multi-stage random sampling procedure was used in the selection of eighty (80)graduate beneficiaries that participated in N-power agripreneurship social development programme. Data were collected with a structured questionnaire and analyzed using descriptive statistics such as; frequency counts, percentages and mean scores and inferential statistics (multiple regression analysis).Results of socio-economic characteristics of respondents showed that most (67.50%) of the respondents were males, with mean ages of 31 years, while most (66.25%) were single, with mean household size of 4 persons as against 23.75% that obtained MSc/BSc in different disciplines while, 33.50% graduated  in agricultural sciences. The result also showed that the participants had high ( =2.7) motives for enrollment in the programme, had favourable perception ( =3.1) and high participation ( =2.3) and outcomes ( =3.3) from the agripreneurship programme activities. Multiple regression resultsshowed that coefficients for gender (-2.60**), age (-3.01***), number of trainings (2.57**), incentive received (2.91***) and stipend paid (3.94***)influenced graduate beneficiaries in N-power agripreneurship programme activities whereas, coefficients for psychological development (3.81***), mastery of skills (-3.99***),positive identity (2.63**), civic participation (-2.68**) and understanding needs/wants (2.73**) influenced participation outcomes derived by respondents from agripreneurship activities of social development programme. Participation of graduate beneficiaries were seriously constrained by low self-interest, shortage of training materials, bureaucratic and administrative bottlenecks and delayed stipend payments.The study therefore recommended that government should encourage and strengthen the capability of graduates, proper funding, prompt payment of monthly stipends and focus on ways to attract and encourage young graduates who are agile and strong to participate in the agripreneurship N-power programmes.







TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Title Page                                                                                                                             i

Declaration                                                                                                                         ii

Certification                                                                                                                       iii

Dedication                                                                                                                          iv

Acknowledgement                                                                                                               v

Table of Contents                                                                                                               vi

List of Tables                                                                                                                      ix               

List of Figures                                                                                                                      x         

Abstract                                                                                                                               xi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION                                                                                                  1

1.1       Background of the Study                                                                                            1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  1.2       Statement of Problem                                                                                                 6

1.3       Research Questions                                                                                                    7

1.4       Objectives of the Study                                                                                              8

1.5       Hypothesis of the Study                                                                                              9

1.6       Justification of the Study                                                                                   9

1.7       Definition of Terms                                                                                                    10

1.8       Limitations of the Study                                                                                             12

 

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW                                                                           14

2.1       Entrepreneurship Skills for Agricultural Development in Nigeria                                    14

2.2       Emerging Trends of Entrepreneurship in Agriculture: An Implication

for Empowerment                                                                                                       18

2.3       Youth and Unemployment in Nigeria                                                                        20           

2.4       Overview of Government Youth Employment Programmes                                     22

2.5       Reasons for Unemployment Policies Failure                                                             24       

2.6       “N-Power” Youth Social Investment Programme                                                     25

2.7       The Concept of N-Power Programme                                                                                    26

2.7.1    Types of participation                                                                                                28

2.7.2    Types of participation in research                                                                              29

2.8       Challenges to Rural Youth Participation in Agricultural

             Development Programmes                                                                                                                            31

 

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY                                                               35

3.1       The Study Area                                                                                                           35

3.2       Population of the Study                                                                                              38

3.3       Sample and Sampling Procedure                                                                                38

3.4       Data Collection                                                                                                           38

3.5       Validity of Instrument                                                                                                38

3.6       Reliability of Instrument                                                                                            39

3.7       Data Analysis                                                                                                              39

3.8       Measurement of Variables                                                                                          39

3.9       Model Specifications                                                                                                  41           

 

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION                                                                  45

4.1       Socio-Economic Characteristics of Respondents                                                       45

4.1.1    Gender                                                                                                                        47

4.1.2    Age                                                                                                                             47

4.1.3    Marital status                                                                                                              47

4.1.4    Household size                                                                                                           48

4.1.5    Education                                                                                                                    50

4.1.6    Course of study                                                                                                           50

4.1.7    Distance to training venue                                                                                          50

4.1.8    Distance to work                                                                                                         41

4.2       Motives of Graduate Beneficiaries for Enrolling in Agripreneurship

Programme of N-Power Social Development Programme                               52

4.3       Perception of N-Power Graduate Beneficiaries About the

Agripreneurship Programme Activities                                                                     54

4.4       Participation of N-Power Graduate Beneficiaries in the Agripreneurship Programme Activities                                                                                                                     56                      

4.5      Participation Outcomes Derived From N-Power Graduate Beneficiaries in

Agripreneurship Programme Activities                                                                    58                                                                                                                                

4.6       Constraints to Participation of N-Power Graduate Beneficiaries in

Agripreneurship Programme Activities                                                                     60       

            Test of Hypotheses                                                                                                     61

 

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS                 69

5.1 Summary                                                                                                                          69

5.2 Conclusion                                                                                                                        73

5.3 Recommendations                                                                                                            73

References                                                                                                                              75

Appendices


 





LIST OF TABLES

 

4.1: Distribution of respondents according to socio-economic characteristics of graduate beneficiaries of the programme                                                                                     46

4.1b: Distribution of respondents according to socio-economic

       characteristics of graduate beneficiaries of the programme                                    49      

4.2: Mean frequency distribution of respondents according to the motives of enrolling in          agripreneurship programme                                                                                              52

4.3:  Mean frequency distribution of respondents according to their perception

about agripreneurship activities of the programme                                                54                    

4.4: Mean frequency distribution of respondents according to their participation in    agripreneurship programme activities                                                                   56

4.5: Mean frequency distribution of respondents according to participation outcomes

derived from the agripreneurship programme activitie                                           58

4.6: Mean distribution of respondents according to constraints to participation in

agripreneurship programme activities                                                                             60                                                                                                

4.7: Multiple regression estimates of the socio-economic determinants of n-power graduate                  beneficiaries’ participation in n-power agripreneurship programme activities in Abia State,     Nigeria    62      

4.8: Multiple regression estimates of determinants of participation outcomes of

graduate beneficiaries in N-power agripreneurship programme in Abia State, Nigeria          66      

 

 





LIST OF FIGURES

1: Map Showing the Local Government Areas in Abia State, Nigeria                    37

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER 1

                                                       INTRODUCTION

1.1       BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Nigeria is obviously gifted with agro-entrepreneurship prospects; nevertheless, the grasping of the complete possibilities of these prospects has been constantly dampened by the continuous non- involvement of youths in policies at different stages of programme development (Pev and Yaro, 2017: Esiobu, Onubuogu and Ibe; 2015; Nwaobiala, and Ogbonna, 2017). Agripreneurship characterizes the riches creation exercises among economies of the world; and it is likewise the best answer for tackling unemployment (Umeh, et al., 2020; Nwofoke et al., 2020). A major concern of the Federal Government in Nigeria is how to tackle the problem of unemployment, as the country has been contending with heightened rate of unemployment within the last 30 years. Available records show that the challenge of unemployment was most overwhelming or at its peak in the preceding five years. This was further worsened in the wake of the country falling into recession in 2016 and the attendant termination of duty of workers by organizations in the diverse sectors of the economy (National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), 2017).

Graduate unemployment has become one of the developmental challenges in almost every developing country of the world in the 21st century. According to International Labour Organisation (ILO) 2018), youths are made up of as much as 57 percent of the over-all working age (15 years and above) population of the world in 2017. The report further shows that about 60 million young people (80%) are unemployed which makes youths to be nearly three times as adults that were unemployed in world. Similarly, youth unemployment grows annually at more than 15 percent rate in all the developing countries all over the world. Nigeria’s past record has shown that approximately 80 million of the 140 million populace are youths amongst the age range of 10 and 24 years (Nigeria Population Reference Bureau, 2017). Nonetheless, the National rate of joblessness in Nigeria was projected to be 23.9 percent of which 70 % represented the youth proportions (Small, 2017). However, the issues leading to unemployment of youth in Nigeria are rural-urban migration, rural underemployment and urban unemployment, rapid population growth, absence of vibrant manufacturing sector and lack of employable skills among others (Salihu, Muhammed, Adbullahi and Muhammed, 2018). 

Youth empowerment has been an issue of concern over the years for successive and present-day governments and has become one of the terms equated with development. The term empowerment links action to needs. It is also a concept that does not merely concern personal identity but brings out a broader human and societal development (Harry, 2016). The absence of youth empowerment in Nigeria usually result to activities of miscreants such as militancy, like in the Niger Delta, communal crises, the deadly Boko Haram in northern Nigeria, incessant farmers-herders violence, political thuggery, banditry and trafficking, hence, upsetting the seemingly peaceful and stable socio-political situation (Aiyedogbon and Ohwofasa, 2018; Salami, 2013).

Literally, the term participation simply means involvement. The participation of different actors especially the beneficiaries in stages of programme development is considered very crucial because it gives room for project ownership and the propensity to guide and protect the project from vandalism (Umeh, 2018). This is similar to the ability of the beneficiaries to make use of the available resources and benefits from it. In line with the fore-going, Abali, Adesope and Ifenkwe (2019) stated that it can be argued that a process cannot be labelled “participative” if the recipients do not have rights and access to be involved in planning and decision making process. Consequently, Paul (2011) defined participation as the dynamic procedure whereby recipients impact the bearing and execution of improvement venture as opposed to just get a portion of the project benefits.

Nigeria has huge arable land yet the nation has kept on going through colossal totals of cash bringing in food to meet the food needs of the populace. This required the administration and non-legislative associations to energize youths, particularly the unemployed alumni in entrepreneurship advancement plans, to address the twin difficulties of monstrous unemployment and national food uncertainty (Amaefule, 2016).  Empowerment of youths in rural areas through agricultural development programmes is of the opinion that though efforts has being made by government to reduce poverty and vulnerability through the introduction of different youth programmes (Agwun, Nwankwo and Anyanwu, (2013).  Gonyok (2016) has maintained that, “As soon as the youths are empowered with agricultural innovative skills and are capable of setting up functional businesses also engage in job creation, the degree of poverty in the nation would be minimized likewise the rate of criminality”.

The emphasis of youth engagement is on guaranteeing that youngsters take an interest in top notch programmess (Nwaobiala, 2015). Youth engagement is tied in with helping youngsters discover exercises they are energetic about. Another thought of youth engagement accentuates the estimation of youth voice and input, or having a state in issues that influence them. Some consider youth and grown-ups all in all sharing dynamic force and power to be a sign of youth engagement, as scientists and professionals to a great extent concur that every one of these types of youth engagement, progressed nicely, are useful for youngsters, programs and networks (Sullivan, 2011).

 

Different districts in Nigeria have planned and executed a few self-empowerment programs to improve the financial empowerment of the unemployed through training on different agricultural entrepreneurial skills (Odey and Sambe, 2019: Nwaobiala and Nzeakor, 2016; Gonyok, 2016). Entrepreneurship is associated with innovative and dynamic developments within the Small, Micro and Medium Enterprise sector (United States Department of Agriculture, 2011). Onubuogu and Esiobu (2014) opined that practical improvement of agribusiness requires the advancement of entrepreneurial and hierarchical competency in ranchers. The improvement of entrepreneurial abilities in agriculture is a significant condition to create sustainable rural development (Yaro, Gadu and Pev, 2016). Umar, Nyameh and Jauro (2014) affirmed that entrepreneurship is an mechanism for refining the quality of life for families and communities, and for sustaining a fit economy and condition, encouraging entrepreneurship aptitude must be viewed as a direly required turn of events component. Uzezi, (2014) and Popoola, (2014) also noted that entrepreneurship is the application of energy for initiating and building an enterprise. The data from Nigerian University Commission shows that enormous unemployment exists among most alumni of tertiary foundations in the nation; a circumstance that was supposed to be recognizable to the disequilibrium between labor advertise prerequisites and basic employment aptitudes of these alumni. The circumstance is wretched in light of the fact that as the labor power develops, with an expanding extent of youth, employment development is insufficient to retain labor advertise contestants (Aiyedogbon and Ohwofasa, 2018).

Agricultural extension is a key to any meaningful food security programme, which encompasses improved agricultural productivity and environmental sustainability. The role of frontline extension agents in grass root extension for higher productivity is overemphasized (Nwaobiala, 2015; Adeoye, 2015). Over the years, the staffing situation in the States’ Agricultural Extension Agencies, the Agricultural Development Programmes (ADPs) has become most worrisome with declining population. This was as a result of staff ageing, retirements, resignations and deaths without replacements in most of the states. This has caused a systematic weakening of the extension system and a resultant stagnation in agricultural productivity improvements (N-Power Information Guide, 2017). Nwofoke, Nwibo, Umeh, Igboji, Ezeh and Nbam, (2020) asserted that unfavourable government  policies, multiple taxation, poor access to finance, absence of instruction and preparing, ecological issues and defilement have stayed significant imperatives to new businesses by youngsters in Nigeria that were involved in agripreneurship activities.

To address this, huge unemployment exists among most alumni of tertiary establishments in the nation; a circumstance that was supposed to be discernible to the disequilibrium between labour advertised necessities and basic employment aptitudes of these alumni. The circumstance is despicable on the grounds that as the labour power develops, with an expanding extent of youth, employment development is insufficient to ingest labour in showcasing contestants to develop strategic intervention. The intervention involves the recruitment and capacity building of 100,000 unemployed graduates to provide agricultural extension support services effectively nationwide. This intervention has a double-pronged advantage of creating employment for the teeming population of unemployed graduates and also improving agricultural extension delivery services (N-Power (Agro) 2017). The N-power which is a National Social Investment Programme was pointed explicitly at work creation and youth empowerment through human capital development. The center target of the programme appear to depend on aptitudes procurement and improvement of the Nigerian youth, both taught and non-instructed, who had insignificant any desire for making sure about occupations, even at the base level expected to endure or raise a family (Okoro and Bassey, 2018; N-Power Information Guide 2017; Department for International Development (DFID), 2017).

  

1.2       STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

In most parts, unemployment in Nigeria seems, by all accounts, to be on reliable ascent and supposedly prevails among the working populace which included a huge extent of the youth who additionally comprise the greater part of populace of the nation (Bison, 2019). With the huge number of graduates being produced yearly, the already saturated labour market can no longer sustain the output calling for government intervention. However unemployment has kept on being a significant test of the Nigerian state. To be sure, Nigeria has been thinking about high pace of unemployment over the most recent 30 years. The unemployment circumstance in Nigeria has exacerbated throughout the years (Beetseh and Ahima, 2012). Available statistics show that unemployment rate as a level of complete labor power in Nigeria developed from 13.10 percent in 2000 to 21.10 percent and 23.90 percent in 2010 and 2011 individually (Gonyok, 2016;Oduwole, 2015). Unemployment makes a wide scope of social ills and youngsters are especially vulnerable to its harming impacts to be specific, absence of aptitudes, low confidence, underestimation and wasting of enormous time resources. These problems associated with unemployment can be solved by empowering the youth through agricultural development projects which will enable them have opportunities for self-employment in agriculture and other sector in the rural economy (World Bank 2016;Ajani et al, 2015). Yet, agriculture has the capability of retaining the enormous unemployed and underemployed youth populace to cause them to contribute definitively to financial development and national turn of events. Then again, there can only be a meaningful development in agriculture if the youths are given the opportunity to participate actively in the developmental programmes (ILO, 2014).

The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) information shows that all unemployment and underemployment expanded from 37.2 percent in the second quarter of 2017 to 40 percent in the second from last quarter of 2017. The NBS report likewise shows that 67.3 percent of youngsters, especially those between the ages of 15-24 years were either underemployed or unemployed, while those between the ages of 25 – 34 years slight expanded from 22.2 percent to 22.3 percent in the second from last quarter of 2017. Knowing that aptitudes and knowledge are the main thrusts of economic development and social turn of events; the Administration of President Buhari in 2016, through N-Power, engaged and conveyed 200,000 youthful Nigerians in agriculture advancement venture spread across the Local Government Areas in Nigeria. Another 300,000 young graduates were added in 2017, bringing to total of 500,000 being empowered (National Bureau of Statistic 2017; Akujuru and Enyioko, (2019).

Though these figures are mind burgling, in spite of the various strategies of successive governments, one wonders if the desired goal of empowering the youth can be achieved through the N-Power or that the unemployment will continue to increase unabated. However, the levels of participation of the unemployed graduates in the programme are not yet ascertained because of other training mandates of the programme. It therefore becomes expedient that the study provides answers the following research questions.

 

1.3         RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The following research questions guided the study:

i.               What are the socio-economic characteristics of respondents?

ii.              What are the motive(s) of respondents for enrolling in agripreurship activities of the programme?

iii.            What are the perceptions of respondents about the agripreurship activities of the programme?

iv.            What are the levels of participation of respondents in the agripreurship activities of the programme?

v.              What is the extent of outcomes derived by respondents participating in agripreurship activities of the programme?

vi.            What are the constraints to participation of respondents in agripreurship activities of the programme in the study area?

 

 1.4       OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The broad objective of this study is to analyzed participation of graduate beneficiaries in N- power agripreurship social development programme in Abia State, Nigeria

 

The Specific Objectives of the study were to;

i.               describe the socio-economic characteristics of respondents

ii.              assess respondents’ motives for enrolling in agripreneurship activities of the programme

iii.            assess perceptions of respondents about the agripreneurship activities of the programme

iv.            ascertain the levels of participation of respondents in the agripreneurship activities of the programme

v.              ascertain extent of outcomes derived by respondents’ participating in agripreneurship activities of the programme; and

vi.            examine constraints to participation of respondents in agripreneurship activities of the programme in the study area


1.5       HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

The following hypotheses were tested:

Ho1:   Factors such as gender, age, marital status, education background, course of study, household size, distance to training venue, learning condition, stipend, incentive and number of training do not influence respondents participation in agripreneurship activities of the programme.

Ho2:   Participation of graduates was not significantly influenced by outcomes they derive from agripreneurship activities of the programme.

 

1.6   JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

The study provided facts that add more knowledge on existing information about N-Power, the main factors that motivated the beneficiaries for participating in the programme and their agro-based training programmes and how beneficiaries perceive the agripreneurship activities of the programme. The study had assessed agripreneurship activities of the graduates were mostly involved and as they made valuable inputs for its implementation. However, the study also revealed the participation outcomes derived by the respondents and main factors that influenced their participation as well as the constraint factors that hindered their participation in these agripreneurship activities in the state. Furthermore, the study has helped to determine the factors that influenced participation of graduate beneficiaries and the outcomes they derive from participating in the progrramme The findings of this study provided policy makers and agricultural administrators with relevant data they need to make sound policies when planning for the agricultural sector and youth social investment programmes powered by the Federal Government. It serves as a primary tool to understand the effectiveness of their policies of youth empowerment; thereby, serving as a guide for formulating, tracking and evaluating policies, plans, programmes and projects meant for youth empowerment in the future. The findings of this research should be of interest to Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other international agencies that are interested designing and financing poverty reduction strategies for the unemployed in the country. Finally, the contents and findings of this study should provide excellent conceptual guide and reference sources to research scholars and students interested in a   related field of study.

1.7       DEFINITION OF TERMS

Participation: The act of working with others in making value judgments and determining course of action within a social situation and structure. It can be described as the degree to which the benefactors of a programme or project are involved or engaged in the activities of a programme.

Perception: This is refers to a negative or positive, wrong or right feelings normal or abnormal view point of a concept

Engagement:  This is a direct involvement of marginalized group in a development process, which aims to build people’s capacities to have access to and control of resources, benefits and opportunities towards self-reliance and improved quality of life.

Youth participation: This refers to the process of involving young people in institution and decision that affect their lives. For the purpose of the study, youth participation refers to the involvement of youth in agricultural activities.

Motives: This is defined as the reason for doing something or engaging in any activity.

N-Power: N-Power is an integrative program set by government that gives a stage where most Nigerians can get to abilities securing and improvement. As of now be that as it may, the underlying particular programs in N-Power are intended for Nigerian residents between the ages of 18 and 35 years.

N-Power Agro: This is a progamme intended to provide advisory services and disseminate the knowledge to farmers across the country.

Youth: Youth is the hour of life among adolescence and adulthood (development). Youths are additionally viewed as those people between the ages of 18 and 35 years (Federal Ministry of Youth Development, 2009).

Youth Empowerment: Youth empowerment is an attitudinal, basic, and social procedure whereby youngsters gain the capacity, authority, and organization to settle on choices and actualize change in their own lives (Obadan, 2017).

Unemployment: Under Nigerian context, unemployment is seen as the extent of labor power that was available for work however didn't work in the week, going before the overview time frame for in any event 40 hours. Those that is willing and prepared to do working, but unable to find a better employment (National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) 2017). 

Agribusiness: This consists of all industries surrounding food production, ultimate end-user is the consumer, with marketing as the driving force behind all profitable activities.

Entrepreneurship: This refers to an individual’s ability to turn ideas into reasonable action. It covers risk taking, creativity, discovery, invention, innovation and enterprise as well as the ability to plan, manage, coordinate and control projects in order to achieve objectives of a predetermined goal.

Agripreneurship: This refers to the ability of an individual to create jobs for themselves through agricultural activities or agro-allied ventures

Agricultural Activities: These are activities or practices directly related to the production or processing of crops, fruit trees, livestock and poultry which is usually undertaken or engaged by an individual.

1.8       LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

In the course of this study, the researcher encountered problems. The contact of the N =Power beneficiaries were a bit difficult to locate because most were not found in their work place, whereby the second batches of the beneficiaries were used who seem to be readily available during the time of the research as it affected the sample size.

 

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