<\/a>ATTENTION<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n INFORMATION:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n WHATSAPP US ON 08137701720<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n EFFECT OF COMMUNITY POWER STRUCTURE ON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN SELECTED RURAL COMMUNITIES OF KATSINA, ENUGU AND EKITISTATES, NIGERIA<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n ABSTRACT<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Nigeria, the greater percentage of the population lived in the rural communities and these communities have continuously served as the basis for producing food and engage in primary economic activities. In spite of its importance, rural communities lack basic amenities such as potable water, electricity, health facilities and motorable feeder roads with low purchasing power and standard of living. Most development activities such as investment and government provision of amenities are concentrated in the urban areas neglecting the rural areas. These have led to a gradual worsening in the quality of life in the rural areas, thus stimulating rural-urban migration on a massive scale. It has equally attracted development activities and policies in Nigeria since colonial and postcolonial era with the major concern of identifying suitable strategies for tackling rural underdevelopment and dearth of infrastructure. Drawing from the above therefore, the rural areas need development to raise the standard of living of the rural people. The shift is partly in response to the well-documented inadequacies of top\u2013down approach to development. These gave rise to the community-driven development that is tailored by the community power structure applying community-based planning strategies and the use of participatory action to implement, monitor and evaluate community programmes. The study, \u2017Effect of Community Power Structure on Community Development in selected rural communities of Katsina, Enugu and Ekiti State Nigeria\u2018 is a research work that examines the role played by Community Power Structure on Community Development. They study employed the pluralist theory and Mixed Methods Research approach of sampling, data collection and analysis to answer the research questions. Some of the research objectives include identifying the nature of Community Power Structure in the selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas and determining the effect of the Community Power Structure on Community Development in the study area. The population and sample size of the study was draw from the rural communities of this study based on the method of sampling as indicated by MMR. The primary and secondary data were generated through observation, focus group discussion, interview and questionnaires that were distributed, retrieved and analysed. The study employed the use of Research Assumptions and Hypotheses in order to find answers to the research questions. The data were then analysed with the aid of tables, figures, plates and the test instrument of Pearson Correlation Coefficient. The findings of the study include the noticeable features of community development and also the \u2015discovery\u2016 of power as a variable that is also a major determinant of development in the communities of the study. The study further finds that, instead of having only one family dominating or having majority influence on decisions relating to community development, there is \u2015pool\u2016 of power actors each trying to influence and dominate decision making at the community level. The study reveals that though there were little variations in the nature of Community Power Structure among the different rural communities of the study, yet all are working towards improving the living standard of their people. In conclusion, the study confirms that community power structure remains the main catalyst for the communities to employ in the quest for sustainable community development that is satisfactory for the immediate growth of the community and the ultimate development of the nation. The study therefore recommends among others, the need to engage the community power structure in capacity building that will further enhance their collective performance, thereby engineering development in their communities. There is also the need to continuously identify the ways and opportunities that can enhance community development to be critically shaped by the community power structure, its networks and histories, while at the same time collaborating simultaneously with broader power relations set by the federal, state, local government, local and international development partners together with donors\u2018 agencies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n TABLE OF CONTENTS<\/p>\n\n\n\n PAGE<\/p>\n\n\n\n Title page \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 i<\/p>\n\n\n\n Declaration \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 ii<\/p>\n\n\n\n Certification \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 iii<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dedication \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 iv<\/p>\n\n\n\n Acknowledgements \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 v<\/p>\n\n\n\n Abstract \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 vii<\/p>\n\n\n\n Table of Contents \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 ix<\/p>\n\n\n\n List of Tables \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 x<\/p>\n\n\n\n List of Figures \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 xi<\/p>\n\n\n\n List of Plates \u2013 `- \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 xi<\/p>\n\n\n\n List of Appendices \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 x<\/p>\n\n\n\n Glossary \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 xi<\/p>\n\n\n\n TABLE OF CONTENTS \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 x<\/p>\n\n\n\n CHAPTER ONE<\/p>\n\n\n\n INTRODUCTION\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026 1<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.1 Background to the Study \u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026 1<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.2 Statement of Research Problem \u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026 6<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.3 Research Questions\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026. 10<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.4 Research Objectives\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026 10<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.5 Research Assumptions\/Propositions\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026. 11<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.6 Hypotheses\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026. 12<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.7 Significance of Study\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026. 12<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.8 Scope of the Study\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026.. 14<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.9. Variables of the Study\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026. 16<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.9.1 Definition of Terms\/ Operational\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026. 16<\/p>\n\n\n\n CHAPTER TWO<\/p>\n\n\n\n LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK \u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026.. 22<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.1 Introduction\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026.. 22<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2. Concept of power \u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026 22<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2.1 Channels of Exhibiting Power\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026 24<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2.2 Concept of Community Power Structure 24<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2.3 Formal and Informal Community Power Structure 25<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2.4 Youth Power Structure 29<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2.5. Women Power Structure 30<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2.6. Nature of Community Power Structure 33<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2.7 Characteristic of Power Structure 34<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2.8 Sources or Bases of Community Power 35<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.2.9. Membership of Community Power Structure 38<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.3 Concept of Community 39<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.3.1 Concept of Rural Community 41<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.4 Concept of Community Development 42<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.4.1 Local Government and Community Development 45<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.5 Empirical Studies 46<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.6. Theoretical Framework 54<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.6.1 Applicability of the Theory 56<\/p>\n\n\n\n CHAPTER THREE<\/p>\n\n\n\n RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 61<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.1 Introduction 61<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.2 Mixed Method 61<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.3 Research Design 64<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.4 Administration of Research Instruments 66<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.5 Population and Sample Size of the Study\u2026\u2026..\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026.. 66<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.5.1 Sample Size Determination\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026.. 67<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.5.2 Sample Technique 68<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.6. Sources of Data Collection 70<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.7 Recruitment and Training of Research Assistants 72<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.8. Validity of Research Instruments 72<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.9 Method of Data Presentation and Analysis 74<\/p>\n\n\n\n CHAPTER FOUR<\/p>\n\n\n\n OVERVIEW OF CPS & CD IN SABUWA, NSUKKA AND IKERE 76<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4.1 Introduction\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026. 76<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4.2. Community Development in Nigeria 76<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4.3 Community Power Structure in Sabuwa 79<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4.4 Community Power Structure in Nsukka 83<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4.5 Community Power Structure in Ikere 88<\/p>\n\n\n\n CHAPTER FIVE<\/p>\n\n\n\n DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS 91<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.1Introduction 91<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.2 Analysis of Qualitative Data .92<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.2.1 Observation .92<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.2.2 Summary of Findings from Observation 95<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.3. Focus Group Discussion and Interview 95<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.3.1 Sabuwa Local Government Area 96<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.3.2 Nsukka Local Government Area 101<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.3.3 IkereLocal Government Area 106<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.4. Summary of Findings from FGD and Interview Session 111<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.5. Test of the Research Assumptions\/Propositions 115<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.6. Analysis of Quantitative Research 116<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.6.1. General Description of Data 116<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.6.2. Distribution of Research Instrument 117<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.6.3. Demographic Information 118<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.6.4. Model Specification 121<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.6.5. Data Analysis 121<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.6.6 Statistical analysis 122<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.6.7 Test of Hypotheses 125<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.7. Summary of the Research Assumptions\/ Proposition 137<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.8. Summary of Hypotheses test 137<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.9. Discussion of Findings \u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026. 138<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.10 Summary of Major Findings\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026..152<\/p>\n\n\n\n CHAPTER SIX<\/p>\n\n\n\n SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 155<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6.1 Introduction 155<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6.2 Summary 155<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6.3 Conclusion 156<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6.4 Recommendations 159<\/p>\n\n\n\n Reference 163<\/p>\n\n\n\n CHAPTER ONE<\/p>\n\n\n\n INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.1 Background to the Study<\/p>\n\n\n\n The issues of rural community development, poverty and dearth of infrastructure among other issues have attracted development activity and policies in Nigeria since colonial and postcolonial era. The major concern to governments, multilateral institutions, policy makers and the rural communities is to identify suitable strategy for tackling the problem of rural underdevelopment and dearth of infrastructure. This is more so as most development activities such as investment and government provision of amenities, are concentrated in the urban areas neglecting the rural areas. These led to a gradual deterioration in the quality of life in the rural communities, thus stimulating rural-urban migration on a massive scale as can be seen in the selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas, the study areas of this work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The realization of the need to bring the neglected rural areas into the mainstream of national development made the government to develop a National Policy on Integrated Rural Development (NPIRD) in 2001 through the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. It was done in collaboration with relevant national and international development partners working in the rural sector. The policy objective is to develop rural areas, raising the quality of life of the people, reducing poverty through Rural and Community Development as a basis for laying a solid foundation for national development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The American and the British governments have through the United State Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Department for International Development (DFID) respectively have been collaborating with the relevant establishment especially at<\/p>\n\n\n\n grass root level of Nigeria. In order to reduce rural poverty and improved rural infrastructure using various schemes and programs in rural communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In spite of the above, there still exist enormous gap between policy formulation and implementation and the reality of the level of the development of the rural communities in Nigeria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Nigeria, a percentage of the nation\u2018s population lived-in the rural communities and these communities have continuous served as the basis for producing food and engagement in primary economic activities which form the foundation for economic development of Nigeria. In spite its importance, rural communities lack basic amenities such as potable water, electricity, health facilities and motorable feeder roads with low purchasing power and standard of living. Agriculture is the dominant economic activity as such the tax base of the rural communities is limited, so rural areas are rarely able to mobilize enough resources to finance development projects (Ezeani, 2006, Umeh & Odom, 2011, Tamuno, and Iroh, 2012). Drawing from the above therefore, the rural areas need development to raise the standard of living of the rural people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Development could be a cluster of benefits given to people in need but it also requires the populace gaining a greater mastery over their own destiny. It relies on local people using assets in new ways, working cooperatively, improving networks, mobilising existing skills, and putting innovative ideas into action with having synergy with formally constituted institutions or establishments such as Federal, State, Local governments and donor agencies as partners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is the more reason why international development partners favours local over central planning. The shift is partly in response to the well-documented inadequacies of top\u2013down approach to development.These give rise to the community-driven development that is tailored by the community power structure applying community-based planning strategies<\/p>\n\n\n\n and the use of participatory action to initiate, implement, monitor and evaluate community programmes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The power structureis constituted of institutions or establishments together with various social groupings and individuals within the rural communities. These are the core groups of people that identify community felt-needs, while at the same time working together for solutions to the identified community felt-needs. These small groups of \u2015activist gladiators\u2016 integrate community members for developmental purpose. They are the active community members that identify the community\u2018s problems, work out policies and decide for organizational solutions, or mobilize constituency support for program implementation (Checkoway, 1991).<\/p>\n\n\n\n These power structure are can be categorised into both formal power structure, made up of individuals workingwith constituted institutions or establishments like federal, state and local government staffs, elected and appointed politician, etc. The informal power structure is made up of individuals that are not working with the formal constituted institutions or establishments such as farmers, local artisans, traditional rulers; Social Groups such as age grades community development associations, Teachers, etc. This various categories of power structure in the selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas is the concern of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is then assumed that the power holders or actors expectedly should be playing a vital role in community development projects, by influencing decision-making process of the people, which affects acceptance or rejection of community development initiative. As they wield much power over the people they lead and are considered as the ones to first perceives the community felt needs before others and thereafter plan and enlists the cooperation of others in their implementation (Kuponiyi, 2008).<\/p>\n\n\n\n In short power actors decide the issues to be addressed or not to be in a community, thereby deciding the outcomes of community decisions and the allocation of internal and external resources needed for community action. They are the change agents that motivate and mobilize community members to take action on any community felt needs. As they are equipped with indigenous knowledge, skills and resources that can be utilized in making sure that Community development is done to address felt needs and sustainability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Community development is the process by which communities harness and engage in several development efforts. The tremendous importance attached to community development evidenced by the great attention it attracts in the development literature. Because it ignites development at community level using diverse means, especially with the dismal and poor performance of governments especially at the Local governments\u2018 level in meeting the socio<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2013 economic demands of the citizens (Adesoji, 2008).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Community development is a common and age long phenomenon that has practice in various urban and rural communities of Nigeria even before colonization. The leadership was rooted in the culture and tradition of the various communities engaged in decision making process and mobilising people for community development activities even in the study area of this work made up of selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Directorate of Foods, Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DIFRRI) clearly conceived community development as centred on the creation of self \u2013 sustaining local communities which, by virtue of their effective organizations and the strength of their own internal momentum, capable of solving their production and general development problems (Okoli, 2009).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thus, the Directorate expects every community to form a community development association (CDA), with democratically elected leaders which will form the base of<\/p>\n\n\n\n organizational pyramid for community development. From the democratically elected community development associations will spring various local traditional organizations, association, social clubs, and occupation organization. These were under the supervision of various agencies and development partners with their desk office at the local government levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thus the developments of the rural communities usually occur under certain conditions for it to achieve specific purpose, objective and outcome. Such conditions include the power to harness human, material with and policy issues into activities or practices that will affect, influence and bring about improvement in the human and material condition of the people especially in rural communities. Those that posses such powers have a stake in the system and can either ignite or even sabotage development in their respective communities (Gaventa, 2006).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thus, a fundamental precondition for understanding the nature of relationships in the development process of any community entails understanding the community power structure. This points out why the issue of power in community studies has been a subject of great debate and came to the foreground in the early 1950\u2018s with the work of Hunter (1953). Hunter\u2018s (1953) study has since triggered several research efforts on community power structure in various communities, especially the relationship of power holders or actors and the nature of development (Mills, 1957), (Dahl, 1961), Kuponiyi, 2008), Oyeleke, 2013), Boogers, 2014).<\/p>\n\n\n\n These underscore the role of various power actors and its effects during community development activities. It is therefore important to identify such power actors, their source of power, and how such power is utilised to effect community development in the selected rural communities of this study. The study is also concerned about the similarities and difference of the community power structure and community development in the selected rural<\/p>\n\n\n\n communities of this study and these issues make up the focus of this studyin the selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.2 Statement of Research Problem<\/p>\n\n\n\n The rural communities in Nigeria despite having the overwhelming part of our national population are seriously marginalized in terms of most basic elements of development. According to Ogolo, M.B. (1995), the inhabitants live at the margin of existence and opportunities as most rural communities lack potable water, electricity, health care, educational and recreational facilities and motorable roads. They experience high population growth rates; high infant and maternal mortality, lowlife expectancy and a peasant population that lacks modern equipment that can guarantee sustainable exploitation of the natural resources on which they live (Chinsman (1998), Oyeranti and Olayiwola (2005) and Egbe, (2014).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The government have taken the responsibility of create the enabling environment for rural community development; through many policies and initiatives aimed at ameliorating rural poverty and the improvement of rural community development. This is also applicable in the selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas. But such policies and initiatives have largely failed because of the attendant corruption, greed and mismanagement associated with these institutions and agencies. Okpaga (2004) asserted that rather than making these institutions such as the local governments\u2018 vehicle for rural transformation, they become conduit pipes from where public funds are siphoned into private pockets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n More so, as international development now favours local control of development over central planning due to the inadequacies of top\u2013down approach to development as indicated above. The shift that favours down-top approach to development isfurther underscored by the World<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bank\u2018s fastest-growing strategy for delivering development assistance through community-driven development tailored by the community power structure (Beard & Dasgupta, 2006).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The above then indicates that for rural communities to attain development, community development then becomes one of the options to be embarked upon. It entails the participation of the people in efforts to improve their living conditions with as much reliance as possible on their own initiatives. It also entails the provision of technical and other services by governmental and donor agencies in ways that encourage initiative, self-help, and mutual help, and also make such services more effective. But the success or otherwise of any community development depends on how effectively human and non-human resources are mobilised by the community power structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thus it is assumed that the pace of development in any community varies based on the activities of the community power structure. As the community power structure commands significant influence directly and indirectly especially in decision making such as mobilizing human and material resources that will translate into the initiation, implementation, supervision, and maintenance of projects and programmes. This indicate the extent to which they can even prevent the commencement of community development project or programme within their locality or even oppose it after it is been initiated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A study on community power structure within the context of community development entails understanding of the interplay of power relationship and the capacity of its holder to expect compliance or obedience of other individuals to their will to gain certain set goals. In short, how power is noticed in the rural communities, how it is exercised, and with what results such have on development, are some of the issues of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is more imperative as a major problem frequently encountered in rural communities is that of leaders not conceding decision-making roles to other people especially in different<\/p>\n\n\n\n development project situations. Some feel they can perform effectively in all situations thereby arrogating the roles of initiators, legitimizers, planners and executors to themselves alone for all projects (Oyeleke, 2013). This goes to underscore the relevance of community power structure in issues of community development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As in most rural areas of Nigeria including the selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areasof this study, majority of development messages get to the village level, not through the mass media, but through interpersonal contacts of the people that have influence on decision making of a community. These are the Community Power Structure made up of Local Government Officials, Social Groups such as age grades community development associations, Teachers, Village Health Workers, Extension Workers and other Volunteers etc, that are resident in the villages or districts. The traditional leaders, through the village chiefs, town criers and age grades create awareness about programmes and legitimize their adoption. Religious leaders have played a positive role in spreading messages, while social groups have helped through face-to-face contacts, to tell, convince and motivate potential adopters of innovations (Imoh, 2013).<\/p>\n\n\n\n These indicate that for any development strategy that will led to community action to success, depends largely on the existence of committed local leaders in the rural areas concerned as well as the extent to which government encourages local planning and participation Chukwuezi, (2000). The question then is, to what extent does such community power structure exist in the communities of this study and if they to what extent do they command influence in community development issues? This is one of the problematic of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Women are generally considered as highly dedicated and hardworking and endure challenges in their various capacities as wife, mother, caregiver, friend, companion and a builder, which make them supportive and family oriented in our communities. In community development,<\/p>\n\n\n\n participation is the key determinant of real change and women just like the youths contribute through the provision of farm labour, direct production of crops and livestock, provision of agricultural information to farmers. They are involved in construction and rehabilitation of rural roads, promotion of cultural heritage and mobilization of people in national events, supply of labour for community self-help projects etc. (Lewis, 2008).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The issue is that it is assumed that youths and women\u2018s effective performance is constrained because of non-recognition of them as partners in development by community power brokers (Umeh, and Odom, 2011). That is they don\u2018t have a voice in decision-making as it regards community development in spite of their contribution. Thus, Ugboh (2007) rightly stated that the partnership of youths and women in community development have not transcended from token involvement, token participation, token decision making in community affairs to been actual partners in community decision making organ. The issue is whether the communities in this study have youth and women that participate in community development? And if they do, to what extent are they considered as power holders or actors within the communities? If they have, does the partnership of youths and women in community development in the communities of this study transcend token involvement, token participation, token decision making in community affairs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Based on the above it is quite clear that a research on Community Power Structure and Community Development must try to answer the following interrelated questions: \u2013 \u2015Who governs\u2016? \u2015Where\u2016? \u2015When\u2016? \u2015With what effects\u2016? (Clark, 1975). These questions connote the following: \u2013 What is the nature of community power structure in the communities of this study? In what kinds of communities is such structure available? Under what conditions does such power structure perform? How does the decision of the power structure affect community development? These basic questions, and their answers, will not only shape the conceptual framework of this work but also guide the subsequent steps of the research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem of this study simply put is how does the structure of power in the communities (community Power Structure)affect Community Development in these selected rural communities? This and many more issues are the concern of this study in the selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.3 Research Questions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Based on the statement of the problem, this study will grapple with the following research questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n i. What is the nature of the Community Power Structure in the selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas?<\/p>\n\n\n\n ii. What are the effects of the Community power structure on Community Development in the study area of this research?<\/p>\n\n\n\n iii. Describe the situation of Community Development taking place in the rural communities of this study?<\/p>\n\n\n\n iv. To what extent are the Informal CommunityPower Structures such as traditional tittle holders, town criers and age grades and Formal Community Power Structuressuch aslocal government officials, elected and appointed politicians having an impact on Community Development in the selected communities of this study?<\/p>\n\n\n\n v. What are the contributions of Youth power structure to community development?<\/p>\n\n\n\n vi. What are the contribution of women power structure to community development and its level of differences in the rural communities of this study?<\/p>\n\n\n\n vii. What are the challenges facing community Development in the rural communities of this study?<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.4 Research Objectives<\/p>\n\n\n\n The main objective of this thesis is to study the effect of Community Power Structure on<\/p>\n\n\n\n Community Development in the study area, while the specific objectives are to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n i. Identify the nature of Community Power Structure in the selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ii. Determine the effect of the Community Power Structure on Community Development in the study area of this research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n iii. Determine the extent to which community Development is taking place and its level of variance in the rural communities of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n iv. Ascertain the influence of the Informal and Formal Community Power Structures on Community Development in the selected rural communities of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n v. Examine the contribution of youth powerstructure on Community Development in the rural communities of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n vi. Examine the contribution of women power structure on Community Development in the rural communities of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n vii. To identify the challenges facing Community Development in the rural communities of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.5 Research Assumptions<\/p>\n\n\n\n The following research assumptions\/propositions are postulated for this study:-<\/p>\n\n\n\n i. This study assumes that Power Structuresare identifiable in the various rural communities of this study though with some level of differences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ii. This study assumes that there are some community development programmes and projects taking place in the communities of this study and which indicate little or no variances.<\/p>\n\n\n\n iii. This study assumes that there challenges facing community Development<\/p>\n\n\n\n programmes and projects in the communities of this study seem to be similar.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.6 Hypotheses<\/p>\n\n\n\n The following hypotheses are postulated for this study:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ho1: \u2013 There is no significant relationship between the community power structure and community development in the selected communities of the study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ho2: \u2013 The Informal Community Power Structure such as Farmers, traditional title holders, youths, women, social groups etc has no significant influence on Community Development in the selected communities of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ho3: \u2013 The Formal Community Power Structure such as elected and appointed politicians, officials at Federal, State and Local Government etc have no significant influence on Community Development in the selected communities of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ho4:- There is no significant contribution made by Youths as Power Holders\u2018 or Actors, to community development in the selected communities of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ho5: \u2013 There is no significant contribution made by Women Power holders\u2018 or actors, to community development in the selected communities of this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.7 Significance of Study<\/p>\n\n\n\n This study is unique as it employs the power analysis to the study of community development using rural communities as its focal point. Power analysis is considered as a new tool, aimed at understanding and explaining development performance, policy and governance issues. It is an extension of the search for causes of change that are hidden in the grey zone of<\/p>\n\n\n\n development beyond economic statistics (Hyden, 2008). It will therefore, x-ray development policy performance in terms of facilitators or otherwise in development process and ownership, which would serve as a mirror by which communities, government and donors could see their own strengths and weaknesses as well as those that hamper partnership and institutional roles in community development. These will then lead to the development of more inclusive and effective community development programs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The study of local power structures is highly relevant for a better understanding of local governance networks. Not only does it draw attention to the power dimension of a community, it also brings to focus the individuals who play a role on and behind the scenes of governance networks, which is relevant in terms of policy implementation, the feeling of ownership in terms of project and programmes in communities (Anazodo,R. O., Et al, (2014).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The study would further serve as a mirror by which donors could see their own strengths and weakness as well as those that hamper partner institutions in the quest to execute development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Furthermore, the rural community is generally considered as primary power centre with a favourable environment for the realisation of democratic values of participation and pluralism. These then makes it a useful unit of power study in terms of community development as it relate to participation (Gaventa, 2006).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Power analyses have been conducted in developed countries to confirm existing power structures such as Britain, America, and Germany. While in developing countries like Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda, the studies are conducted to uncover existing power structures due to the weakness of formal institution especially in the rural areas as there is a dearth of documentary information on the characteristics of power structures of the rural communities<\/p>\n\n\n\n of this study. Therefore, the significance of this study lies partly in its ability to fill the latter gap.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even though community development has generated a great deal of interest among scholars of various disciplines, not much effort has focused on community power structure. More conspicuously missing is a systematic assessment of the extent of involvement of community power structure in community development. This study filled the aforementioned gap by studying Community Power Structure of rural communities across Nigeria, with emphasis on their role towards Community Development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another significant impact of this study lies in the use of power structures as the frame of analysis in order to understand the distribution of power in rural communities and to demonstrate its efficacy, if any, in determining who has influence in community development. The findings will provide useful information to the community development policy makers as they attempt to understand existing structures of community development towards improving its functionality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And by adopting the comparative method, it further provides a framework for identifying similarities and differences among economic trajectories and local leadership structures that play a key role in community and economic development in each city.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.8 Scope of the Study<\/p>\n\n\n\n The study is on the effect of Community Power Structure on Community Development of selected rural communities of Sabuwa, Ikere and Nsukka local government areas. The time frame for the study is 2011-2015, which is the period of five years; that is enough for the completion of any project and programmes for any rural community. It is also a period that covers the tenure of most local government councils that has also the responsibility for community development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The study also studied the sources or bases of power of the power actors\u2018 and how shifts and changes in sources of power can affect not only the power holders or actors, but also community development. Youths and women Power Holders or Actors were of interest to the study, in terms of their influence on decision making related to community development. In short, the focus was on how the Community Power Actors determine the following:<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1) Which community issues are to be addressed, or not to be addressed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2) What are the outcomes of community decisions on community development?<\/p>\n\n\n\n The study area is based on three (3)selected rural communities each of Katsina, Ekiti and Enugu States, representing the selected three Geopolitical zones of Nigeria comprising, North West, South West and South East Geopolitical Zones. The communities were chosen based on purposive sampling as can be seen from Table 1.1 Tabulation of study area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Table 1.1 Tabulation of study area: \u2013<\/p>\n\n\n\n S\/NO State Local Govt Area Selected Communities<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. Katsina Sabuwa i. Mazari<\/p>\n\n\n\n ii. Inono Madawaki<\/p>\n\n\n\n iii. Anguwan<\/p>\n\n\n\n Garkuwa,<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2. Ekiti Ikere i. Agbado<\/p>\n\n\n\n ii. Oyo<\/p>\n\n\n\n iii. Uro<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3. Enugu Nsukka i. Obukpa<\/p>\n\n\n\n ii. Nru<\/p>\n\n\n\n iii. Ihe na Owerre<\/p>\n\n\n\n Source: Field Survey, 2016<\/p>\n\n\n\n The justification for the selection of the nine (9) rural communities from Katsina, Ekiti and Enugu State, representing the selected three Geopolitical zone of Nigeria for this study include the following:-<\/p>\n\n\n\n a) The rural communities of Katsina, Ekiti and Enugu State, have Ethnic\/cultural diversity and are heterogeneous, thus the study seek to find out whether or not such characteristic have effect on the nature and dynamics on community power structure and community development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n b) The nature of community power structure existing in the various rural communities and its effects on community development will indicate lessons to be learnt by others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n c) The rural communities are from different geographical locations of Nigeria (North West, South east and South west); may reveal some unique features that required policy intervention for improvement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.9. Variables of the Study<\/p>\n\n\n\n The variables for this study include one dependent variable and six independent variables. The dependant variable is community development while the independent variables include the Community Power Structure; Informal Power Structures; Formal Power Structures; Youth Power Structures; Women Power Structures and challenges faced by Community Power Structure during Community Development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.9.1 Definition of Terms\/ Operational<\/p>\n\n\n\n The following concepts are defined for better understanding of their meanings as well as their operationalisation in this study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Power Actors<\/p>\n\n\n\n Power actors or power holders are members of the community that are perceived to have social power and influence that they employ during community decision-making processes. They are perceived to have more social power than other actors with which to affect community decisions. The social power which community power actors have may depend upon the interaction of various sources of social power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Power structure<\/p>\n\n\n\n A power structure is that pattern or relationships among individuals which enables the individuals possessing social power to act in concert to affect the decision-making of the<\/p>\n\n\n\n social system on a given issue area. To clarify the concept, individuals working separately toward a common goal in the social system without communication among the individuals do not constitute a power structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Social scientists asserted that two types of leaders exist in all institutions namely: Official and Unofficial (Stogdill, 1948). A distinction could be made between the two types. On one hand, the unofficial tends to be intermittent, becoming active at times of crisis and quiescent in more placid circumstances. On the other hands, official leader is an established person who designs, controls and motivates the subordinates to work towards goals which are regarded by organization as desirable. Political office-holder is an official type of leader; it is an \u2017engine\u2018 of governmental organization in Nigerian administrative setting. In the context of this study the Official and Unofficial are referred to as informal and Formal Power Structures respectively. And the community power structure is the sum total the collection of the power actors within a given rural communities here referred to as the general community power actors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Influence<\/p>\n\n\n\n During community development, there are various ways in which power structures and power actors exert their role and responsibility towards achieving community development; such are derivatives of their influence. In this survey, we adopted Boogers (2014:13) indices of measuring influence viz<\/p>\n\n\n\n (a) Function: Influence derived from formal issues and responsibilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (b) Popular support: Influence based on popular support or on the ability to mobilize it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (c) Network: Influence resulting from contacts with other influential people together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (d) Expertise: Influence connected with professional knowledge and expertise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (e) Money influence grounded on investment capacities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Within the context of this study, the most dominate indices used as influence is the function, popular support and networking of the power structure towards community development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Development<\/p>\n\n\n\n Development is a generic term subject to different considerations. Within this context development is considered as an improvement in a community involving all aspects of life e.g. social, economic and political development which is tailored towards the enhancement of status and possessing the ability to choose. Development then include: (a) Increase in the availability of basic needs such as food, shelter, health, clothing etc. (b) A general rise in standard of living (c) The provision of more employment opportunities. (d) Structural changes in agriculture leading to increase farm productivity and output. (e) Transformation of rigid institutions and changes in beliefs, values and norms of the society that is inimical to development. (f) Creating more political space for good governance, accountability and service delivery (Jalingo, 2008).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Participation<\/p>\n\n\n\n Participation is a keyvariable in community development and in this context; it is broadly understood as an active involvement of people in making decisions about implementation of processes, programs and projects that affect them and their communities. It is the exercise of people\u2018s power in planning, coordination, organizing, mobilizing human and material resources for the developmental purposes. Therefore, participation includes the collaborative effort of people, by taking initiatives by themselves in terms of their own thinking and deliberations to serve or achieve developmental activities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Further, participation is also playing active, though not necessarily direct, roles in community decision, knowledge of local issues, attendance at public meetings, related attempts to<\/p>\n\n\n\n influence proposed measures through individual and group actions, belonging to committees and making financial and other necessary contributions towards community programmes (Ekong, 1983:387).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The definition is adopted for its plausible implications for this study. The participation could be active or passive. The active participation involve being members of committees of the community for development; this is usually through community development association, and the participation take the form of attending meetings, voting, making both compulsory no compulsory financial, labour, material, tools or expert contribution. The passive contribution involves making only the mandatory contribution and other such contribution that is needed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These grades of participation also indicate levels of commitment, which can be measured in terms of seriousness and involvement in activities that relates to the community generally at all levels by the members of the community power structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the context of this study, the members of the community power structure are considered to have taken part in community development when they engage themselves in the planning, coordination, organizing and mobilizing human and material resources for the developmental purposes of their community. The result of their participation will then led to a general rise in standard of living of the people, structural changes in agriculture leading to increased farm productivity and output.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rural Communities<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rural communities are better understood using some characteristic that makes them different from urban areas. These characteristics include the size and density of population, dominant occupation, non-availability of social infrastructures and low per capital income.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Within the context of this study, these communities are those that exhibit the above characteristics and have agriculture and agriculture-related occupation, such as fishing hunting and animal husbandry as the major means of economic activity and even then for<\/p>\n\n\n\n subsistence only. The rural communities are also human settlement with strong traditional mores and population number of around 20,000 inhabitants with little or influence on government policies and programmes, as such; there is glaring feature of poverty within the communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Informal Power Structures<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is the part of civil society exhibiting certain aspect of governance that is recognised in a community involving kinship structures, patron-client networks and religious institutions. This is the Informal Power Structures or leaders that helps to structure local relationships, and also links these into wider district, national and international levels. Through their various Informal institutions the Informal Power Structures influence norms of social justice among rich and poor people by helping to create a \u2017moral context\u2018 in which socially-sanctioned codes of conduct, such as patronage, assistance and charity, help govern everyday social interactions between the various social groups (Lewis and Hossain, 2008). This clearly indicates that the informal actors or leaders play important roles in the local power structure of any community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Informal power can be thought of as the socialized norms, discourses and cultural practices that are part of our everyday lives. The power relations are internalized through socialization from young age, starting with acceptance of inequality in roles, for instance, between father and mother and older and younger family members. These informal power relations are often taken for granted as normal, or natural. Because deliberate strategies of coercion or domination are not required, informal power is sometimes also referred to as invisible power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Formal Power Structures<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is a powerstructure that is based on formality with legitimate and rational authority within formal institution but whose coverage depends upon the type of formal organisation. Its powerrelationis the configuration between individuals and groups regarding the allocation of tasks, responsibilities, and authority within the communities or organizations that is based on merit, bureaucracy etc but not on personal relations or connection. The formal power structure is easily recognized and includes elected and appointed government officials and leaders of civic organizations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Formal power are visible and recognized structures of power that are part of the way in which communities work because of its institutions that mediate the relationship between those with legitimate authority and those who are subject to that authority. It operates within the boundary of the laws and rules which define what is acceptable and what is not acceptable, and how those who break laws and flout norms are treated. The formal power may also operate in less visible or legally recognized ways. Such as through clandestine strategies of coercion that enforce certain belief systems which reproduce inequalities or feelings of powerlessness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n 08068231953 or 08168759420<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n (1) Your project topics<\/p>\n\n\n\n (2) Email Address<\/p>\n\n\n\n (3) Payment Name<\/p>\n\n\n\n (4) Teller Number<\/p>\n\n\n\n We will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert<\/p>\n\n\n\n BANK ACCOUNTS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI<\/p>\n\n\n\n Account Number: 0046579864<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bank: GTBank.<\/p>\n\n\n\n OR<\/p>\n\n\n\n Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI<\/p>\n\n\n\n Account Number: 3139283609<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bank: FIRST BANK<\/p>\n\n\n\n FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n 08068231953 or 08168759420<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n AFFILIATE LINKS:<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n myeasyproject.com.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectmaterials.com<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectmaterials.net.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectsmaterials.net.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectsmaterial.net.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectmaterial.net.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n projectmaterials.com.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n