EVALUATION OF YOUTHS PARTICIPATION IN SELF-HELP

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN ASABA

 ABSTRACT

This study was carried out on the evaluation of youths participation in self help

community development in Asaba Local Government Area. The survey design was

adopted and the simple random sampling techniques were employed in this study. The

population size comprise of youths in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state. In

determining the sample size, the researcher purposefully selected 147 respondents and

141 were validated. Self-constructed and validated questionnaire was used for data

collection. The collected and validated questionnaires were analyzed using frequency

tables, and mean scores. The result of the findings reveals that the extent of youth

participation in self help community development in Asaba Local Government Area

is low. The study also revealed that youth’s does not participate in the project

planning process, in determining the type of facilities needed for the project, in

making suggestions for improvement, and supervision of projects so as to achieve

desired project objectives of self help community development. Furthermore, the

study revealed that the constraints to youth’s involvement in self help community

development in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state include; not given free

hand to be actively involved in community development projects, etc. Therefore, it is

recommended that community development stakeholders should see the youths as an

important segment of the populace and future custodian of the community, who

should be given opportunity like others, in all aspects of community development

efforts such as, in the planning process, implementation, supervision and evaluation of

community projects. To mention but a few.

 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Of The Study

From the earliest time of human history people have enjoyed and shared together the

good tidings of nature because of the presence of communities and the social

activities performed by the people for the advancement of their community, which is

better called Community Development (CD). The notion of community development

was first stated publicly in 1948 at the Cambridge Conference on African

Administration at which community development was considered as a movement

aiming to promote better living for the entire community. For Hill (2011), it signifies

a coordinated strategy whereby the community members conduct activities and

initiatives in order to ameliorate the living situation of the people live in that

community. This according to Johnson (2008) signifies the improvement in the

physca1 and material wellness including livelihood of people in the community.

Community development consequently, assist individuals to discover and develop

their skill and potential in order to meet their issues and needs which they share

(Effiong, 2012). (Effiong, 2012).

Community development marks the stage in the life of a community where by

members come together to take collective actions in order to generate solutions to

their identified problems.Some scholars like Afuye (2015) posit that community

development is a structured intervention that gives communities greater control over

the conditions that affect their lives. This however, does not solve all the problems

faced by a local community, but it does build up confidence to tackle such problems

as effectively as any local action can perform. In essence, community development

works at the level of local groups and organizations rather than with individuals or
families. Implying that community development has to look both ways; not only at

how the community is working at the grassroots, but also how responsive key

institutions are to the needs of local communities.

In this regard, people collectively make use of available local resources (human and

material) at their disposal to improve their standard of living. They may form

community based development unions which would enable them participate in

community development projects. The spirit of self-help guided the zeal of the people

and in no time, roads, for instance, were constructed through virgin forest to link up

villages and other neighbouring communities. People also undertook self-help

community development projects like building of markets, community halls, road

expansion and maintenance, tree planting to check erosion and communal palm fruits

harvesting, amongst others (Nzeneri, 2008). Self-help community development

projects are those tangible ventures that the inhabitants of the community embark on

in order to improve the living condition of the people residing in that particular

community. For example money realized from communal palm fruit harvesting is

usually used to sponsor the education/scholarship of indigent students in the

community as well as foot the bills of other development activities

One of the basic assumptions of community development herein is that community

development activities are all inclusive as it provides opportunity for people to learn

and grow thus, ensuring that no segment of the populace is exempted, youths

inclusive. According to (Rowland, 2011). Definitely, being young is a transitional

phase of life which carries with it increased vulnerabilities and delinquencies. If the

youths are not adequately harnessed it becomes a problem. Youths therefore, could be

effectively mobilized and involved as assets, beneficiaries, partners and youth leaders

in community development activities which abound in various communities; instead

of displaying their unruly behaviors as militants, terrorists and other restiveness in the

community and society today. lnvolvement is the act of participating in the

achievement or accomplishment of a particular task. Youths involvement in the

context of this study means giving the youths opportunity to effectively participate as

facilitators in community development agenda in all the stages because of the effect it

will have on their lives now and in future. Through their involvement they will be

acquainted with the myriad of problems in their communities and suggest

remediation.

1.2 Statement Of The Problem

Daring, full of vitality and vigor, curious, enterprising, enthusiastic, self-sacrificing,

full of ambitions, wonderful initiatives, and hopes are the attributes of youths in

general. All of these qualities may be leveraged to help community development

programs succeed. According to Banda (2005), there is a strong belief that community

leaders' effective participation in self-help community development projects is

desirable in our quest for the qualitative development of our rural communities,

particularly in these days of continued government cuts to development funding at all

levels. Most communities in underdeveloped nations such as Nigeria are known for

starting self-help development initiatives, but the sad reality is that most of these

projects are never completed. Consequently, it appears that their efforts are not

commensurate with all they have invested as reflected in the rate of some abandoned

self-help projects. It seems not possible to even ascertain the areas and level of

involvement of all stakeholders in the communities especially the youths who are

supposed to fast track development activities in their communities.Although,

literature showed that community development officers and experts especially in

developing countries, like Nigeria, have frowned at the low involvement of youths in
community development. So many reasons have been adduced for such anomaly,

which include; that youths seem not to be considered as matured people and as such

have been excluded right from decision making process, planning, implementation,

supervision and evaluation of community development projects by community

development stakeholders (Shaw, P.N. (2007).

The stakeholders in question include all parents, community leaders in the

community. In some rare occasion, when the youths willingly participated in

community development activities, they seem not to be given a free hand to

participate in vital issues like, decision making process, project implementation,

supervision and evaluation. Could it be that community leaders and other stakeholders

are not convinced that if the youths are effectively involved in their own community

development projects, it would to a great extent reduce abandonment of self-help

projects, make significant impact on the lives of the people now and in future, as well

as help to curb various social ills which has eaten very deep like cankerworms into the

fabrics of societies world over. Hence, the essence of this study which focused on

examining youths’ involvement in self-help community development projects in

Asaba Local Government area of Delta State.

1.3 Objectives Of The Study

The broad objective of this study is to examine youths participation in self-help

community development projects in Asaba. Specifically the study seeks to:

1. Ascertain the extent of youth involvement in the planning of self-help community

development projects in Asaba Local Government Area.

2. Find out the ways youths involved in the implementation of self-help community

development projects in Asaba Local Government Area.

3. Ascertain how youths involved in the monitoring and evaluation of the self-help

community development projects in Asaba Local Government Area.

4. Find out the constraints to youths involvement in the execution of self-help

community development projects in Asaba Local Government Area.

1.4 Research Questions

1. What is the extent of youth involvement in the planning of self-help community

development projects in Asaba Local Government Area?

2. Find out the ways youths involved in the implementation of self-help community

development projects in Asaba Local Government Area?

3. How does youths involved in self-help community development projects in Asaba

Local Government Area?

4. What are the constraints to youths involvement in the execution of self-help

community development projects in Asaba Local Government Area?

1.5 Significance Of The Study

The findings of this study will be useful to community leaders, traditional rulers, and

community members including youths, government, donor agencies, future

researchers, Local Government Chairmen, in the area of study and beyond.The

findings of the study will provide useful information to the Community leaders on the

best way to mobilize their youths to actively involve in self-help community

development projects.Community members including youths will find the results

from this work very useful because, through this means, they will realize that it is also

their responsibility to participate in the development of their communities. The study

will provide useful information to the government on the present condition of most

rural communities and the need for them to partner with these communities to

improve the living standard of the people in the community in order to reduce the
sufferings that they are passing through, thereby helping in curbing the menace of

extreme hunger, underdevelopment and other societal vices. Finally, the study would

contribute empirically to the body of existing literature and it would serve as a

reference source to students or other researchers who might want to carry out their

research on the similar topic.

1.6 Scope Of The Study

The scope of this study borders on the evaluation of youths involvement in self-help

community development projects in Asaba Local Government Area of Delta State. It

will also cover the extent of youths involvement in the planning of self-help

community development projects in the area; the ways youths were involved in the

implementation of self-help community development projects in the area the

constraints to youth involvement in self-help community development projects in

Asaba Local Government Area of Delta State.

1.7 Limitation Of The Study

Like in every human endeavour, the researchers encountered slight constraints while

carrying out the study. The significant constraint was the scanty literature on the

subject owing to the nature of the discourse thus the researcher incurred more

financial expenses and much time was required in sourcing for the relevant materials,

literature, or information and in the process of data collection, which is why the

researcher resorted to a limited choice of sample size. Additionally, the researcher

will simultaneously engage in this study with other academic work. More so, the

choice of the sample size was limited as few respondent were selected to answer the

research instrument hence cannot be generalize to other secondary schools outside the

State. However, despite the constraint encountered during the research, all factors

were downplayed in other to give the best and make the research successful.
1.8 Definitions Of Terms

Community: Persons in the same environment putting their resources together to

develop their area.

Development means a new state has been reached as consequences of developing.

Community development: As something dealing with the sequence through which

communities (or their segments) go as they advance from pre-industrial to industrial

ones.

Development programme: Project capable of improving the living standard of

communities.

Youth Participation:

Youth participation is the active engagement of young people throughout their own

communities. It is often used as a shorthand for youth participation in any many

forms, including decision-making, sports, schools and any activity where young

people are not historically engaged

 CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

INTRODUCTION

Our focus in this chapter is to critically examine relevant literature that would assist in

explaining the research problem and furthermore recognize the efforts of scholars

who had previously contributed immensely to similar research. The chapter intends to

deepen the understanding of the study and close the perceived gaps.

Precisely, the chapter will be considered in three sub-headings:

 Conceptual Framework

 Theoretical Framework

2.1 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Community

A community may be defined as a group of people living in a geographical area, who

have identical culture, beliefs, values, traditions and are united with common interest.

It is this common interest that brings them together to share a territory. According to

Anyanwu (2009), a community is a social group, occupying a more or less defined

geographical area, and based on the feeling that people have for one another. Such

feeling can accommodate: the facility to identify a common sentiment, the ability to

share a recognized way of life and the possibility of living wholly within such groups.

Bray (1996) presents three different categories of communities based on his research

on community funding of education. The first category is the geographical community

defined by the place of residence, like a rural community or an area. The second

category is that of tribal, racial and religious communities where membership is based

on ethnic, cultural or religious identity and membership generally overlapped on the

basis of geographical location. The third category refers to communities based on

common family or educational backgrounds, including parent associations and similar

organizations based on the common interest of the families for the benefits of

students. Again, community can be perceived as a people or group of people who

sharecommon interest or functions such as farming group or agricultural group,

education, cultureor religion. This group may not include everyone within the

geographical area or boundary,but only those individuals who have a particular

interest or function in common. A commonobjective bring such people together to

develop some awareness and feeling for the need towork together at solving their

common problems. This is the type of community thatChristenson, (2005) referred to

as functional community.In a similar manner, community is also referred to as a legal,

political oradministrative unit. As a legal unit, it is likened to a municipality, a school

district or a nationunit with a clearly defined social structure. In this sense a

community will feature theformulation of laws to guide the conduct of members, and

this is what is required to ensure itsexistence. The regulation or laws are enforced by

an administrative structure. The mere traditional community is one where relationship

is personal, intimate andoften enduring. Such relationships are often ends in

themselves. They are not formed to servenarrow interest and purposes. The

community which they occur is not only homogenous butalso fixed. The people work

as a team with relatively few divisions or clashes of interest.Every member in such

community knows and accepts his place, and the moral code of thecommunity is well

defined and generally upheld.

Development

The concept of development is a difficult one. There are as many views on the notion

as there are scholars. It is a “term” that is overloaded. It is commonly seen as

nearlyanalternative word for improvement. Development is being used in various

ways, including social, economic and political. UNDP (2004) noted that development

is a form of social change involving new concepts in a social system to improve

people's livelihoods.According to Oduaran (1994), development implies some form of

change usually from a prior bad or poor condition to a better one. Development

implies change in different capacity,Nyerere (1978), maintained that development is

summed up as man‟s capacity to expand his own consciousness, and therefore, his

power over himself, his environment and his society. To him, man is the central peg

around which development revolves. Hence he concluded that development is for man

by man and of man. This means that man is not only the recipient or beneficiary of

development effort but must also initiate the effort to develop himself. In other word;

the opportunities created by development are generated or induced through human

efforts. Man must show the desire to develop before development can come. Beside,

true development is that which leads to expansion and growth of man‟s inner

qualities. Put in another way, development must raise mans‟ ability to dominate

himself, become less dependent and more proficient in what he is doing as well as

become critical in outlook. Community development amount to the optimal

consideration, realization of the wellbeing, of persons or individuals in their

community for development, the emphasis of development is on people, as it is the

people who are stimulated, motivated, helped or encouraged to adopt new method and

learn new skills for the attainment of their wellbeing, When we consider these

definitions, it becomes easy to see that no one can live alone in this world.

Rural Development

Various attentions has been given to the issues of rural development since the early

70s by various levels of government organization and different scholars that it is a

concept that is not easily amenable to definition but it is view in relation to personal
research problem. The overseas development Institute defined rural development as

the improvement of living conditions in rural areas, through the increased productivity

of agricultural and related enterprises. The world Bank on the other hand defines it as

a strategy designed to improve the economic and social conditions of specific group

of the people; the rural poor (World Bank). King (1974) also conceived rural

development in terms of the changes in the structure of opportunities that residents of

rural areas can avail themselves and thereby improve their standard of living. Mensah

(1970) and Sarta (1978) explain rural development as consisting of concerted efforts

directed at improving the quantitative and qualitative conditions of living of a given

population Akinbode (1986) added that rural development is that stage at which

people in my village and other villages in Nigeria turn on their taps and get clean

water inside or near their homes, have improved medical facilities, schools, markets,

transportation etc and participate in decision making that affects their lives, with inner

satisfaction and pride to remain in the these rural villages. In essence, the rural people

and their communities should be the focus of development programmes. Improvement

in levels of living, including income, employment, education, health and nutrition,

housing and a variety of social services will eventually reduce the rural-urban

migration. It decreases inequality in the distribution of rural incomes and in urban

rural imbalances in incomes and economic opportunities. Thus rural development is

on holistic process in which transformations in economic, social and political spheres

are interwoven.

Community Development

Community development is a cherished ideal in the contemporary world, hence the

strong stress on the need to explain the holistic nature of community development by

experts. Community development is a process which involves many activities, both

physical and psychological, which combine towards the improvement of the standard

of living, values, perception structure and functions of a community (Amirize, 1998).

Scholars have defined community development in three ways (as a movement, a

process of social action and as an educational method or programme) which have

received wide range of acceptance. As a movement, Cambridge summer conference

in Oyebamiji and Adekola (2008) defined community development as a movement

designed to promote better living with the active participation and if possible, on the

initiative of the community, but if this initiative is not forthcoming spontaneously, by

the use of techniques for arousing and stimulating it in order to ensure it active and

enthusiastic response to the movement. According to Amirize (1998) development as

a mass movement aims at releasing the people from a state of hopelessness and

helplessness so that they throw aside fear-complex and then learn to take the initiative

in the transformation of their circumstances and environment. Rather than accept a

continuing deterioration of their living conditions, health and real income, they should

be able to see their conditions as deliberately created, being trapped as helpless

people, by the decisions and actions of fellow human beings who have economic and

political power. This implies that development is that which builds an individual into

a critical conscious person. This is in agreement with Freire in Kobani and Alozie

(2016) who referred to development as conscientization. He defined conscientization

as the process by which man, not as a recipient but as a knowing subject reaches a

deeper awareness both of the sociocultural reality on which his life is built and of his

ability to transform that reality. Conscientization was derived from the Brazilian word

"conscientizasao" meaning learning to perceive social, political and economic

contradictions and to take action against the oppressive elements of reality. As a

process of social action, community development is defined as a social action in

which the people of a community organize themselves for planning and action, define

their common and individual needs and problems, make group and individual plans to

meet these needs and solve their problems; execute these plans with maximum

reliance upon community resources and materials from governmental and

nongovernmental agencies outside the community (USICA in Onyeozu, 2007).

Community development as a process of social action emphasizes a recognition of

some unacceptable situations by the people of a community, a unanimous rejection of

such situation by the people and a determination to organize themselves and work

jointly with team spirit to overcome or eliminate this unwanted situation. As an

educational method, community development is that which the efforts of the people

themselves are united with those of governmental authorities to improve the

economic, social and cultural conditions of communities, to integrate these

communities into the life of the nation, to enable them to contribute fully to national

progress (UNESCO in Onyeozu, 2007). As an educational process, community

development highlights the fact that the most distinguished characteristics of

community development is the educational process by which people change

themselves and their behaviour and acquire new skills and confidence through

working in co-operation. A careful consideration of the above definitions given by

organizations and individuals, Kobani and Alozie (2015) asserted that community

development in contemporary times has gone beyond the traditional role of improving

the social, economic and physical conditions of individuals but includes improvement

in their emotional and psychological dispositions. Based on this, they (Kobani and

Alozie) aver that community development is a process by which the people with or

without external help take steps to improve on the social, economic and physical
standards as well as the emotional and psychological positions of community

members relying mostly on local initiatives, leadership and resources.

Approaches To Community Development

Approaches to community development usually involve the point of view of three

main groups in the process. According to Anyanwu (2009), these are the participants,

the government agencies and the professionals. The participants are members of the

local population, who need community development as a matter of urgency for the

improvement of their community. They are the principal actors on the stage for

community betterment. The government agencies are essential bodies outside the

local community. They include various levels of government, voluntary association

and philanthropist bodies. For convenience they are all grouped as government

agencies. They are the professionals or the change agents who are the on-the spot

direction and guidance for the achievement of the goal of community development

programmes.

Integrated Community development approaches

Government interest in Integrated Rural Development schemes is not new in the

country. For instance, some years back, the then Western Nigeria Regional

Government had issued a whole paper on Integrated Rural Development in Western

Nigeria which was adopted by other regions in the country. Examples include the

farm settlement of Eastern and Western Nigeria and the farm training institute of

Northern Nigeria (Idachaba, 1980). Integrated rural development is a new approach to

rural development planning and given the multisectoral approach to rural

development. According to the United Nations, the concept of integrated rural

development is a composite or comprehensive programme for rural development with

all relevant sectors such as agriculture, education, housing, health and employment
conceived as interlinking elements in a system having horizontal as well as vertical

linkage in operational and spatial terms (United Nation, 1976). The primary objective

of integrated rural development is the up-lifting the well-being of the rural people.

Integrated rural development occurs when the quality of life of the rural majority has

been raised. In other words, the strategy of integrated rural development involves

comprehensive, simultaneous and systematic attack on all the factors affecting the

development of a given rural area in accordance with the relative scarcity of each

critical factor (Gama, 1987). Integrated rural development can be brought about in

various ways like community development, agricultural development, rural

infrastructure development government agencies rural headship. For this study the

community development approach is adopted.

Community development approach

This form gained prominence during the colonial era when social welfare officers

tried by stimulating selfhelp to improve health, nutrition and general community

welfare. It connotes that the people themselves assert their economic, social and

cultural conditions. According to Dunham (1973) community development is

concerned with is concerned with total community life and needs. It involves all the

members of the community and requires their fullest participation in first making and

then implementing decision for their whole being development. Whereas community

development is defined and conceptualized variously, its modes of operation is made

up of three essential elements like the participation by the people, initiative self-help

by the people and strengthening the community as an entity (Adedayo et al., 1991).

The effectiveness of a community development programme will depend largely on the

extent to which government encourages local planning and participation since the
goals of improving the living standard and popular participation of the rural people

are central to the concept of community development.

Government Attitude Toward Community Development

Traditionally government has a significant role of policy formulation and inducing

social change in the community. According to Akumah (2008), government policy for

community is to encourage people at grass roots levels to develop democratic values

and process in the village. He continue by saying that, the aim is to ensure that the

provision of technical and other services should not only encourage initiation, self-

help and mutual assistance but should also make them more effective. The important

role of government in community development programme should serve two principal

purposes. First, it aims at eradicating poverty and stagnation in the villages which

have adopted this activity as a means of inducing better living among their citizen.

Secondly, it should serve to create in the masses a sense of responsibility and

involvement in the development of both their community and the wider society. The

government especially the local government which is the third tier of government is

responsible for the maintenance of law and order, the provision of some range of

social services and public amenities. Omoruyi (2001) opined that the local

government provides the channel through which the interest of the local people and its

leadership is awakened and stipulated towards directing its effort to activities or

programmes designed for the genuine development of the community. The social

development policy of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (2005) stipulated that

government is expected to establish a legal and structural frame work for the

execution of community development programmes as well as provide budget

allocation to fully integrate citizens into national development responsibilities which

have to be distributed among the three tier of government. In support of the above
statement, Fasokun (2008) stressed that government agencies in the field are always

out to assist community efforts. Government assistance may be in the form of award

of prizes to the best communities, which have been found to have effectively

mobilized their resources for development. Also agencies are also partners in the

funding of community development programmes. Some agencies are known to have

donated physical cash and equipment or may choose to single-handedly initiate and

complete project that have been collectively or jointly agreed upon or identified by

the people.

self-help projects in Nigeria

The overwhelming enthusiasm and active interest and participation among members

of various communities for self help projects and development has risen tremendously

in the past few years in Nigerian rural areas. The process of rural and community self

help projects involves grass root participation which means that the process of

initiating by a single group or individual, rather, the local people consult themselves

and get involved in the identification of local needs and in the conception and

formulation of any project aimed at self reliance and also related development and

thus projects will constitute a network of non-governmental agencies, individuals,

local unions and associations, elite indigenes among many others (Adedayo, 1991).

However, the issue of self help projects has been expansively dealt with in the late

1990s and early 1980s by different author and scholars like Igbozunike (1977) who

conceptualized self help project as a socioeconomic developmental arrangement in

which externally generated input of though, processes, ideas and materials is expected

to assume secondary status. And Olawepo (1997) added that the commonest approach

to this form of development strategies is community disbursement. It should be noted

that, these self help projects are always associated with rural area where participatory
development is encouraged. This because, rather than development impetus

originating from ‘top to down’, it is a reversal of process where development facet is

suggested and undertaken by the communities in relation to their felt needs. One

influence of community development via participation is that it encourages outsiders

to learn gradually from the rural residents who are always happy to be involved in

planning their development (Olawepo, 1997). According to the national development

plan, the main objective of self help in Nigeria is to raise the quality of life of the rural

communities by harnessing voluntary private effort to supplement government’s

effort. The Federal Government is to continue to promote and assist private activities

in the pursuit of its objectives. The state governments to will intensify their effort in

training community development workers and in the provision of technical services

for the identification, preparation and execution of approved local self-help projects

(Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1970).

Self Help Approach

Self-help calls for a firm recognition of the role of self, a definition of self in such a

manner that sees the local community, the local government, the state and indeed, the

nation as forming an inseparable aggregate of inter-linked selves. It calls for a stage

by stage process of drawing out of the selves schemes and projects which arise from

the innermost longings of each gradation of the self-schemes and projects which enjoy

the emotional and intellectual attachment of the different levels of self and therefore,

projects which are not likely to be abandoned as soon as a slight difficulty is

encountered, or those entrusted with its execution have made their money, earned

their promotions, earned national honours or left the scheme in retirement or disgrace.

Also, under the self-help approach to rural development, the logic is that individual

effort or community effort determines their fate. This philosophy of development is

an attempt made to enlist and inspire the people in the determination of desirable

change in goals and in the implementation of programmes to bring about the change

deemed desirable. It also highlights community development as the involvement of

the people. Self-help projects are focused on local participation by the people who

identify their needs, plan, take decisions and implement them to enhance their living

standard. The idea involves the spirit of “give and take”, joint efforts, social

cooperation and self-reliance. Locally, people are advised to say their problems with

the view to finding answers to them, depending on their initiatives, this involves the

provision of technical and social support services on a mutual basis. Through self-

help, unused local resources like the government funds are reserved, and the people at

the local level acquire skills, become competent and confident in the management of

their affairs. Self-help connotes more food for the needy, better health, better

primary /secondary education, developed infrastructure, self-satisfaction and self-

accomplishment in the life of rural dwellers, (Nath, 2008).

The Concept Of “Self-Help” As It Relates To Rural Development

The service approach to community development identified by Idode (1989) requires

the active involvement and initiative of the rural people. This approach focuses on the

provision of social amenities such as good or motorable roads, maternity centres,

electricity, low cost housing schemes, postal agencies, pipe-borne water, chemists and

so on, in the rural areas. The desired project goals may include developing the human,

organizational and management capacity to solve problems as they arise in order to

sustain improvements (Ogbodo, 2002). These are provided at the initiative of the

community itself. The service approach to community development is known as

―self-help‖ in Nigeria. Self-help programmes are most visible at this level.

According to Igbozurike (1977), a self help may be viewed as a regional resource

mobilization system in which most of the conceptional initiative and most of the

executorial responsibility rest with the occupants of the region or community

concerned. It is a socio-economic developmental arrangement in which externally

generated input of thought, processes, ideas, and materials is expected to assume

secondary status. The commonest approach to this form of development strategies is

usually through community association using direct labour approach, financial

contribution and community disbursement (Olawepo 1997). More often, it is

associated with rural area where participatory development is encouraged. This is

because, rather than development impetus originating from 'top to down' it is a

reversal of process, where development facet is suggested and undertaken by the

communities in relation to their felt needs. In defining the concept of self-help in

community development, Anyanwu (1992) asserts that ―it is the end-product of

community development as it helps local people to exploit to their advantage the

resources which would otherwise be dormant and thereby perpetuate the ignorance

and poverty of their community‖. The emphasis here is on what the people can do for

themselves, against what the government can do for them. Development, according to

Babalola (2004), comes through self-help and it is not a package of benefits given to

people, but rather a process by which the people of a country progressively acquire

greater mastery over its destiny. Falling from this statement is that development

cannot be trusted upon people; rather, it is the people themselves who will initiate

their development through self-help, once the enabling factors such as public

awareness, mobilization, empowerment and democratic principles are made available.

Thus true development must mean the development of man, the unfolding and

realization of his creative potential, enabling him to improve his material condition of

living through the use of resources available to him. It is a process by which man‘s
personality is enhanced. All these cannot occur without people‘s willing contribution.

Self-help exudes a sense of pride and commitment in the people where the community

projects are seen as our project rather than the government‘s projects. The principle of

self-help involves the learning of new techniques, ideas and technologies. Their

adoption, adaptation and usage are the benefits of everyone who participates in the

process of change for the improvement of their lives. Self-help development

according to Udoye (1992), cited by Akpomuvie (2010), should be both an object

(what) and a process (how). As an object, it should be an induced change for the

achievement of community improvement. As a process, it should be a well articulated

programme and effort to assist individuals to acquire attitudes, skills and concepts

required for their democratic participation in the effective solution of as wide a range

of community improvement problems as possible, in order of priority determined by

their increasing level of competence. Self-help is a self-motivated effort of the people

of a community to come together to improve their standard of living by pooling their

resources together and with a sense of belonging, tackle problems afflicting their

peaceful co-existence. The principle of self-help is fundamental to the success of

community development. It is the active participation of members of the community

in projects and programmes that enhances the improvement of their lives. According

to the United Nations (1956), it is the process by which the efforts of the people

themselves are united with those of the governmental authorities to improve the

economic, social and cultural conditions of the communities, to integrate these

communities in the life of the nation and enable them to contribute fully to national

progress. Community people or villagers are usually willing to cooperate with one

another to satisfy their mutual interest and needs. Village-project participants, usually

include both men and women, representing all interest groups in the
villages/communities such as village leaders, women groups, business groups, farmers

and disadvantaged groups. Babalola (2004) is of the opinion that the spirit of self-help

is as old as man himself. It has been with us in Nigeria even before the advent of

colonial administration. Communities in Nigeria have always shown the willingness

to improve their condition through the organization of various self-help projects like

road construction, bridges, markets, and so on. The traditional selfhelp process known

as community development programmes started as a form of voluntary exercise in the

past. This was when the community members trooped out voluntarily to participate in

projects that touched on the immediate needs of the entire community despite their

limited financial and material resources. Heck (2003) highlights the important

elements found in the practice of community or participatory self-help development

projects as opposed to the traditional development projects:

 Process instead of project approach: Conventional projects are usually planned

too much in detail (―pre-cooked‖) over a too short time span to obtain tangible

results and spread effects. Community Self-help projects are more flexible, such

that it can be expanded and replicated in similar areas with minimal outside

assistance and recurrent costs. 

 The target group is predominantly or exclusively formed by the rural

disadvantaged people. However, also non-poor or better-off rural people (local

leaders, influentials, etc.) as well as government and NGO officials are to be

actively involved in various project actions, in particular to improve the delivery

of services and facilities to the target group and to learn from each other. 

 Education for participation which is given in addition to the classic (teacher-

student) types of training provided in conventional projects to transfer technical

know-how. A major objective of the educational process is awareness creation or

 conscientization: the poor will gradually become critically aware of their

economic and social conditions, the causes of their deprivation and dependency

syndrome as well as their potentials to change their plight through joint efforts by

clustering into small action groups. Participatory education attempts to develop

capabilities among the beneficiaries to strive for full participation as well as self-

development particularly when the project is over. This education is non-

directive, dialogical (two-way) and built upon indigenous knowledge.

 The structuring of the target group by means of group formation and group

action. This entails strengthening of existing groups or organizations and/or the

promotion of new,self-created and self-managed ones. The existing groups may

be traditional groupings, farmer associations, cooperatives, women's, youth and

village groups and/or trade unions. The groups and organizations which may later

on somehow federate, form the basis for sustained participation and can be

regarded also as a ―receiving system‖ through which the poorer people can

mobilize their own resources and be ―reached‖ effectively by any development

agency.

 Resource mobilization by group members which includes pooling of know-how,

ideas, assets, savings and/or labour as well as obtaining services and facilities like

training and credit. This is done in a gradual learning process.

 Economic and social activities. Starting with small, low-risk, well-known

income-raising and socio-cultural group activities of any feasible type, the groups

will undertake gradually larger, more complex ones, also on an inter-group basis.

 The inclusion of group promoters in or attached to the project staff with the

following two main roles: a) to help develop the economic and other activities of

project groups and facilitate their access to resources and services; b) to help
 develop adequate participatory education and training activities for, with and

between beneficiaries in order to increase critical awareness and stimulate

meaningful and increasingly independent group actions (self-reliance). The above

roles could best be performed by specific change agents (group promoters or the

like) who work exclusively and directly with the beneficiaries and their groups to

enhance participation. In projects which unfortunately have no arrangements

and/or funds to recruit group promoters, the roles of the latter could be performed

in part by ad-hoc trained technical project staff.

 Promotion of self-reliance and self-development. The relationships between

supporting government, NGO and project staff and the intended beneficiaries is

deliberately shaped in such ways that self-reliance and self-development are

encouraged amongst the target group and dependence on project inputs is

gradually reduced. Project staff members encourage the beneficiary groups to

identify themselves problems and seek adequate solutions and actions. Self-

reliant groups are the main indicator for a successful participatory project.

 The development of coordination and cooperation mechanisms which enable the

beneficiaries to participate actively in as many project actions as possible. The

latter include identification of needs and potentials, setting of project objectives,

planning and carrying out of activities as well as monitoring and evaluation. The

project avoids thus by all means to become just only a delivery vehicle.

The above are all important elements in any project design to attain full participation;

they are, however, not all indispensable for certain forms of ―minor‖ or partial

participation. What distinguished past approaches from integrated rural development

is that these have often been pursued independently of one another and their

interrelationship has not been grasped. Also, political bottleneck, high capital
intensive nature of the schemes, excessive centralization of planning and control and

lack of rural settlers' participation in decision making, lack of suitable co-ordinating

inter-ministerial institution for implementation render the rural developments schemes

unsuitable as effective problem solving strategies (Ogundele, 2002). The failure of the

past and emphasis placed in rural development by present day government led to

greater attention being paid to integrated rural development programmes with more

emphasis on self-help. It is observed that integrated rural development encompasses

much more than an increase in agricultural production and productivity. It includes

small town development, extension of health services, expansion of local trade and

commerce, organization of cooperatives, the provision of credits, improvement on

housing and water supply, sanitation, roads and communication are all within the

scope. Hence, it is therefore regarded as a concept for planning and implementation,

providing framework for mobilization of human and material resources to achieve

social and economic integration within the rural communities.

Evolution of Self-Help Development Activities in Nigeria

That community participation in rural project development is an important element

and a sure way to the speedy development of the rural areas in Nigeria is well attested

to in development literature (Udoye, 1986 and 1987; Muoghalu, 1986; Okafor, 1984).

The need to develop the rural areas and to a large extent, reduce the contrasting

scenario of urban opulence and rural decadence has equally received ample

documentation in literature (Hansen and Schulz, 1981). The evolution of the practice

of self-help development activities has the following periodic dimensions; the pre-

colonial, the colonial up to 1939, the period from 1940 to the Nigerian Civil War, the

civil war years and the post civil war years to the present democratic settings. Before

the onset of colonial administration, communities across Nigeria had employed

communal efforts as the mechanism for mobilizing community resources to provide

physical improvement and functional facilities in the social, political and economic

aspects of their lives. Communal labour was employed in constructing homesteads,

clearing farm lands, roads or path way, construction of bridges and for the provision

of other social infrastructural facilities required by the people. Some of the relevant

institutions were the age-grades and the village councils. Though some of these

institutions have persisted, the difference between self-help activities undertaken in

the past and those prosecuted today are not hard to find. Differences exist in the scope

of the operations, equipment utilized and the extent of government involvement. As

Idode (1989) observed, in the past, self help efforts in Nigeria particularly in Bendel

State now Edo and Delta States mainly related to the construction of footpaths or

roads, dredging of rivers and streams, clearing of public land and market places.

Later, Idode further observed, the scope of operation included the building of schools

and market stalls. Projects such as pipe-borne water, road tarring, dispensaries,

cottage hospitals and so on, were not usually attempted. Furthermore he continued,

equipment used was simple; hoes, cutlasses, diggers and shovels were generally

utilized. The construction of walls did not follow any standard measurements as the

people used their imagination to plan and construct such projects. At this stage, there

was little or no government involvement as the planning and execution of these self-

help projects was the sole responsibility of the people. Where the government was

involved at all, was for the purposes of taking over completed projects for operation

or maintenance. But where neither the state government nor the local government

councils were interested in such project, the missionaries took over. During the

colonial period, community development efforts took a compulsive and coercive turn.

The alien governmental apparatus with its clientele (Warrant Chief) arrangement,
extorted taxes and compulsory labour from the people. Taxation by itself questioned

the rationality of further labour conscription for road and other infrastructural

development at the instance of the District Commissioner. The contradictions in the

new development effort, therefore, did not fire the corporate imagination of the people

and this was given expression by the tax debacle of 1929, popularly known as the Aba

women riot. It question the whole essence of the tax laws as established then, the

imposition of the Roads and River Ordinance and the apparent shirking of

development responsibility by a government that had already extorted taxes for this

purpose. Apart from the establishment of governmental exploitative infrastructural

apparatus, linking the major seats of government through forced labour, no serious

selfhelp programmes eliciting popular participation was encouraged. Any

development that occurred was a byproduct of profit (Hancock, 1942). Nonetheless at

very local levels, the family, interfamily and village settings, the precolonial trappings

of mutual assistance through self-help persisted for the construction of homesteads,

clearing farmlands, clearing water points and for providing other socially felt needs.

Church organizations were also able to cooperate with members for the building of

schools. By the late 1940’s however, an element of modern community concept in

rural development was introduced in the form of mass mobilization for self-help

activities. This was heralded by the abrogation in Britain of the Colonial Development

Act which was replaced by the Development and Welfare Act in 1939. As rightly

noted by Arndt, (1981), this gave a positive economic and social content to the

philosophy of colonial trusteeship by affirming the need for minimum standards of

nutrition health and education. At the local level, the earlier Native Authority

Councils were replaced by the Country Council. Suffice it to say that this

development led to the establishment of Community Development Division at the

local level and thus became an important organ of government, charged with the

responsibility of channeling and coordinating the efforts of the people towards

promoting social and economic development (Onwuzuluike, 1987). The Development

and Welfare Fund provided for the colonies by the British Government was thus able

to permeate to the grassroots level through this third tier of government.. By the late

1940’s however, an element of modern community concept in rural development was

introduced in the form of mass mobilization for self-help activities. This was heralded

by the abrogation in Britain of the Colonial Development Act which was replaced by

the Development and Welfare Act in 1939. As rightly noted by Arndt (1981) this gave

a positive economic and social content to the philosophy of colonial trusteeship by

affirming the need for minimum standards of nutrition, health and education. At the

local level, the earlier native authority councils were replaced by the Country Council.

Suffice it to say that this development led to the establishment of Community

Development Division at the local level and thus became an important organ of

government, charged with the responsibility of channeling and coordinating the

efforts of the people towards promoting social and economic development

(Onwuzuluike, 1987). The Development and Welfare Fund provided for the colonies

by the British Government was thus able to permeate to the grassroots level, through

this third tier of government By the beginning of the war in 1967, the observations of

Sir James Robertson, aptly typified the state of development needs and awareness and

the immense role the governments expected self-help activities to play to compliment

their efforts. After the Nigerian Civil War (1967- 1970), the need for massive

reconstruction work further aroused the people a revival of the spirit of self-help

which is deeply rooted in their rich traditions. Most communities realized that the

only way for immediate reconstruction of the war ravaged facilities was through self-
help. This period also marked the evolution of a multiplicity of social clubs with aims

consonant with social insurance and self-help. Further efforts by government to

motivate development at the grassroots, led to the enactment of the 1976 Local

Government Reform to create new growth centres for further spatial spread of

development. In addition is the creation at the state level of local government service

commission, the conferment of wider powers and functions to the Local Governments

by the 1979 constitution and the enactment of the special Development Fund Law,

aimed at generating more funds for community development at the local level. Thus,

deliberate government support became necessary to increase the spate of development

activities by the various communities. The period between 1973 and 2007 marked a

watershed in rural development efforts in Nigeria. The period witnessed deliberate

government efforts at mobilizing the people for rural development. A number of task

forces and bodies were set up to oversee, organize and to direct partnership with the

people on self-help activities. They include: Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural

infrastructure (DFRRI), Rural Electrification Schemes; Credit Schemes to small

holders through various specialized institutions such as People’s Bank, Agricultural

and Cooperative Development Bank, Community Banks, NERFUND, SME Credit

Schemes, the Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP), Universal Primary

Education Schemes and Low Cost Housing Schemes, Health Scheme as the Primary

Health Care Programme, National Directorate of Employment (NDE), Better Life for

Rural Women Programme as well as the Family Support Programme (FSP). More

recent programmes include the National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP) as

well as the Small and Medium Industries Equity Investment Schemes (SMIEIS). The

various state governments had also articulated blueprints on rural development,

adopting the Integrated Rural Development Strategy as their strategic option to carry
development to the masses of the people. From the foregoing historical analysis, two

principles underlying self-help activities have emerged. These are (a) the principle of

individual and corporate survival and (b) the principle of societal “felt need”. These

two principles have variously acted as the motive force in organizing and mobilizing

the people in their pursuit of self development

Community Youth Participatory In Community Development

According to Paul (1987) as cited in World Bank (1998), Community youth

participation in the context of development refers to "an active process whereby youth

influence the direction and execution of development projects rather than merely

receive a share of project benefits. It is an evolutionary process in which activities at

the project or micro-level can create the conditions for increased popular participation

in the planning and implementation of development programs at the local level". Not

all the basic needs of the rural poor can be met immediately, it is therefore necessary

to prioritize their different needs and the process of deciding which need ought to be

satisfied first is fundamentally the concern of the rural people themselves and thus the

need for youth participation of the rural people is essential in rural development.

Community youth participation in project planning and implementations universally

acknowledged as an essential input for the socio-economic transformation of the rural

areas. Such local participation enables the rural people to identify problems, to

prioritize them and to devise and design locally acceptable solutions to the problem

and thus give them a desired sense of belonging which will ensure the success of the

projects and programmes imported upon (Agboola, 1988). Youth Participation in rural

development efforts in Nigeria has almost come full circle, from the pre-colonial

period when rural dwellers have identified their problems themselves, proposed

solutions to them and solved them, to the post-colonial and contemporary times when
rural problems are identified for the rural dwellers and the solutions are prepared and

executed by ownrural bureaucrats. This is seen in the pre-colonial times when

community youth participation is seen in clearing and widening of rural roads,

dredging of water courses, building and maintenance of Oba’s or Emir’s palaces and

markets and so on through their chief in the community (Agboola, 1988). The

participation of the rural youth in rural development in these contemporary times can

be seen in grading of rural roads, building of primary schools, clinics and dispensaries

among others (Olawepo, 1997).

2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Two theories that establish the framework for effectiveness in the participation of

citizens in development programmes are reviewed and their relevance are examined

for the purpose of achieving improvement in the welfare of the rural dwellers through

citizens‘ participation in self help projects in Nigeria.

Basic Needs Approach

According to Kapur (1982), the objective of development is to ensure that people‘s

basic needs such as food, shelter, health, education, water and transport are met

through the active participation of the people themselves. In his book, “First things

first”, Streeten puts forward the following description of the basic needs approach.

First, Basic Needs means the provision of people’s minimum requirements for water,

housing, clothing, food and sanitation. Second, Basic Needs may mean allowing

people to define their own wants rather than what is stated by experts or professional

bodies. Third, those who oppose the buyer’s rationality model argue, instead, for

government intervention in education, water and sanitation, and guidance in

consumption. Fourth, basic needs can also refer to the liberty of the people to express
themselves through personal and group participation in planning and implementing

projects.

In the view of Pitt (1976), Basic Needs framework is an approach through which the

indigenous people make use of the resources they have to fashion complex things that

help to improve their general welfare. Ekejiuba (1983) adds that Basic Needs

Approach stresses ―total local community mobilization and popular participation in

identifying, defining, promoting, executing projects as well as in defining values and

needs that are dictated by the existential conditions of the target group‖. This approach

gives momentum to localizing the rural development planning process so as to meet

the exact requirements of the rural dwellers in Asaba Local Government Area and

create more effective feedback mechanisms through a process of mutual adaptation

and innovation. Through this process of ―development from within‖, the rural people

will become the beneficiaries of development. They will also be given a greater

degree of control over the direction of change which is a pre-requisite for self-

reliance. This theory adequately describes the situation of the communities within

Asaba Local Government Area, and rural Nigerian societies in general. There are few

motorable roads, and most of the rural areas are without good drinking water and

health facilities. Most of the occupants are involved in low-paying jobs and

unrewarding activities, the literacy level is low, and a large percentage of the

population live below poverty line. Thus, development programmes should be turned

towards involving the rural people in identifying, executing and maintaining

development projects that will satisfy their basic needs, instead of ―planning from

the top and delivering to the bottom”.

Integrated Rural Development Approach

Integrated rural development has been defined as ―a consciously formulated

systematic multisectoral programme to attain the integration of the people in the

mainstream of income groups in country‖ (Olatunbosun, 1976). In the same vein,

Floyd (1972) has referred to it as systems approach‘ to solving rural development

problems. Mabogunje (1980) stated that rural development is concerned with the

improvement of the standard of living of the low income population living in rural

areas on a self-sustaining basis through transforming the socioeconomic spatial

structures of their productive activities. One of the fundamental problems confronting

most of the Third World countries is how to spread the fruits of socio-economic

growth and development which are usually concentrated in few cities to the bulk of

the population which is rural. In Nigeria, more recent policy for regional planning is

taking shape around the concept of integrated development. Recognized as perhaps

the bedrock of regional development policy, the strategy is aimed at bridging the gap

between urban and rural sectors. This will help in the area of equable distribution of

wealth and personal income between the urban dwellers and rural segments of the

society. It is observed that over 70% of the Nigerian population live in the rural areas

and well over 95% of the people living in the urban centres have rural inhabitants.

The scenario of rural life in Nigeria, communities in Asaba Local Government Area

as an example, is typical: low per capita income, low level of literacy, high infant

mortality, poor housing and other infrastructural facilities. The idea of meeting these

ever-growing rural poverty problems brought about the concept of integrated Rural

Development. In order to improve the well being of rural settlers, an integrated rural

development must work towards achieving the following objectives: gainful

employment for members of communities in the area to enable them improve their

level of consumption patterns especially in food and nutrition; equal access to social
services and social security like the people in urban centres; increased mobilization

and motivation of the rural communities to achieve wider participation in decision-

making relevant to their welfare; environmental sanitation; expansion of local trade

and commerce; extension of health services; organization of cooperatives; the

provision of credits to small and medium enterprises (SMEs); and improvement on

housing, water supply, roads and communication. Since rural development is complex

process involving environmental, economic, social, technical and spatial inter-

relationships; an approach to it must involve a package approach providing all the

necessary inputs, which is in no small measure lacking in the communities of Asaba

Local Government Area.

Application Of Theory To Modern Day Rural Development

Past studies on diffusion theory have shown strong influence of the awareness of

ideas and innovation by a member of the community in which it spreads to all other

members of such community. Also is the influence of distance on diffusion process

which shows that a further away member of the society may not be aware of the

innovation or ideas from the source on time unlike someone else to the source. Thus,

this theory depicts an application to rural development through self help projects by

the process of social contract through spatial range and dimension and field of

influence. A member of the community develop an idea of rural development through

a self help project and pass it down to other members of the community through

community unions and associations in most cases. The expansion and diffusion

process is most applicable in rural development through self help projects in which

ideas, innovation and communication spread spatially and temporarily until increasing

members of individuals in the society became aware of the phenomena i.e. became

aware of the need for self help project for rural development.
2.3 EMPIRICAL REVIEW

Ezenyem (2012) carried out a study titled “Families Involvement in Self-help

Community Projects for Sustainable Development: A Case Study of Amadunu

Community in Nnobi Idemili South Local Government Area of Anambra State”. The

population of the study consisted of 200 respondents. Questionnaire was used for data

collection, while simple percentage was used to analyze the data collected. Some of

the major findings were that: the people of Amadunu community participated actively

in community development efforts as could be seen from the various projects they

embarked upon and which some were completed, while others were nearing

completion. Ezenyem’s study is related to this present study because both emphasized

on self-help community development but vary in the aspect that the former centered

on families involvement in self-help projects while the later focused on youths

involvement in self-help community development projects.

Nwankwo (2008) carried out a study titled “Factors Militating against the

Involvement of Women in Community Development Projects in Oyi Local

Government Area of Anambra State”. The population for the study consisted of 600

registered members of women organizations in the local government. The researcher

used simple random sampling technique to determine the sample size of 300

respondents for the study. A 20-item questionnaire was the instrument used to elicit

information from the respondents. The data were analyzed using mean and standard

deviation. The findings revealed that illiteracy among majority of the women and

inadequate mobilization were major factors that affected the women’s involvement in

community development projects in Oyi Local Government Area of Anambra state.

The study is related to this present study because both studies focused on involvement

of youths and women in community development projects but differed from the
former which examined only the factors militating against the involvement of women

in community development projects while the present study was centered on

ascertaining the projects embarked upon, areas of youths involvement in community

development projects and the constraints.

Finally, Anderson (2005) carried out a study to determine the level of youth’s

participation in community development projects in Lima town in the South

American country of Peru. The study adopted a descriptive survey research design.

The population for the study was 150 youths purposively selected from 305 youths in

five localities. There was no sampling because the population was a manageable size.

Using a one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyze the data, it was revealed

that a small percentage of 31.5% or 71 youths involved voluntarily in community

development projects in Lima, while majority 68.7% of youths, because of their

illiteracy and poverty, exhibited a laissez faire attitude towards the development of

their community. Both studies are related in scope but differed in the analytical tool

used and the area of study.

 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

In this chapter, we described the research procedure for this study. A research

methodology is a research process adopted or employed to systematically and

scientifically present the results of a study to the research audience viz. a vis, the

study beneficiaries.

3.1 Research Design

Research designs are perceived to be an overall strategy adopted by the researcher

whereby different components of the study are integrated in a logical manner to

effectively address a research problem. In this study, the researcher employed the

survey research design. This is due to the nature of the study whereby the opinion and

views of people are sampled. According to Singleton & Straits, (2009), Survey

research can use quantitative research strategies (e.g., using questionnaires with

numerically rated items), qualitative research strategies (e.g., using open-ended

questions), or both strategies (i.e. mixed methods). As it is often used to describe and

explore human behaviour, surveys are therefore frequently used in social and

psychological research.

3.2 Population of the Study

According to Udoyen (2019), a study population is a group of elements or individuals,

as the case may be, who share similar characteristics. These similar features can

include location, gender, age, sex or specific interest. The emphasis on study

population is that it constitutes individuals or elements that are homogeneous in

description.
This study was carried out on the evaluate youths participation in self help community

development in Asaba Local Government Area. Hence, the population of this study

comprises of youths of selected communities in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta

state.

3.3 Sample Size Determination

A study sample is simply a systematic selected part of a population that infers its

result on the population. In essence, it is that part of a whole that represents the whole

and its members share characteristics in like similitude (Udoyen, 2019). In this study,

the researcher adopted the convenient sampling method to determine the sample size.

3.4 Sample Size Selection Technique and Procedure

A study sample is simply a systematic selected part of a population that infers its

result on the population. In essence, it is that part of a whole that represents the whole

and its members share characteristics like similitude (Udoyen, 2019). In this study,

the researchers adopted the simple random sampling (srs.) method to determine the

sample size.

In this study, the researcher adopted a convenient sampling method to determine the

sample size. Out of the entire population of youths in youths of selected communities

in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state, the researcher conveniently selected

147 participants as the sample size for this study. According to Torty (2021), a sample

of convenience is the terminology used to describe a sample in which elements have

been selected from the target population on the basis of their accessibility or

convenience to the researcher.

3.5 Research Instrument and Administration

The research instrument used in this study is the questionnaire. A survey containing

series of questions were administered to the enrolled participants. The questionnaire

was divided into two sections, the first section enquired about the responses

demographic or personal data while the second sections were in line with the study

objectives, aimed at providing answers to the research questions. Participants were

required to respond by placing a tick at the appropriate column. The questionnaire

was personally administered by the researcher.

3.6 Method of Data Collection

Two methods of data collection which are primary source and secondary source were

used to collect data. The primary sources was the use of questionnaires, while the

secondary sources include textbooks, internet, journals, published and unpublished

articles and government publications.

3.7 Method of Data Analysis

The responses were analyzed using frequency tables, and mean and standard

deviation, which provided answers to the research questions.

In using the mean score, the four points rating scale will be given values as follows:

SA = Strongly Agree 4

A = Agree 3

D = Disagree 2

SD = Strongly Disagree 1

Decision Rule:

To ascertain the decision rule; this formula was used

4+3+2+1 =10
= 2.5
4 4
Any score that was 2.5 and above was accepted, while any score that was below 2.5

was rejected. Therefore, 2.5 was the cut-off mean score for decision taken.

3.8 Validity of the Study

Validity referred here is the degree or extent to which an instrument actually measures

what is intended to measure. An instrument is valid to the extent that is tailored to

achieve the research objectives. The researcher constructed the questionnaire for the

study and submitted to the project supervisor who used his intellectual knowledge to

critically, analytically and logically examine the instruments relevance of the contents

and statements and then made the instrument valid for the study.

3.9 Reliability of the Study

The reliability of the research instrument was determined. The Pearson Correlation

Coefficient was used to determine the reliability of the instrument. A co-efficient

value of 0.68 indicated that the research instrument was relatively reliable. According

to (Taber, 2017) the range of a reasonable reliability is between 0.67 and 0.87.

3.10 Ethical Consideration

The study was approved by the Project Committee of the Department. Informed

consent was obtained from all study participants before they were enrolled in the

study. Permission was sought from the relevant authorities to carry out the study. Date

to visit the place of study for questionnaire distribution was put in place in advance.
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4. 1 Introduction

This chapter presents the analysis of data derived through the questionnaire and key

informant interview administered on the respondents in the study area. The analysis

and interpretation were derived from the findings of the study. The data analysis

depicts the simple frequency and percentage of the respondents as well as

interpretation of the information gathered. A total of one hundred and forty-seven

(147) questionnaires were administered to respondents of which only one hundred and

forty-one (141) were returned and validated. This was due to irregular, incomplete

and inappropriate responses to some questionnaire. For this study a total of 141 was

validated for the analysis.

4.2 Data Presentation

The table below shows the summary of the survey. A sample of 147 was calculated

for this study. A total of 141 responses were received and validated. For this study a

total of 141 was used for the analysis.

Table 4.1: Distribution of Questionnaire

Questionnaire Frequency Percentage

Sample size 147 100

Received 141 96

Validated 141 96

Source: Field Survey, 2022

Table 4.2: Demographic data of respondents

 Demographic Frequency percent

information

Gender

Male 87 61%

Female 54 39%

Age

20-24 17 12.1%
25-30 56 39.7%
31-35 35 24.8%
36+ 33 23.4%
Education

Dropout 30 28.3%

Basic Education 10 7.0%

Secondary Education 39 27.6%

Tertiary Education 62 44.0%

Occupation

Student 30 21.2

Self-employed 82 58.1

Employed 20 14.2

Unemployed 9 6.3

Source: Field Survey, 2022

4.3 ANSWERING RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Research question 1: What are the self-help community development projects

embarked upon by communities in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state?

Table 4.3: Respondents on the self-help community development projects embarked

upon by communities in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state.

S/ ITEM STATEMENT SA A D S X S. DECISIO
N 4 3 D D N
2 1
1 Involved in Rural 99 2 1 09 3. 4.5 Accepted
electrification project 1 2 5
2 Water bore-hole 78 4 1 06 3. 4.4 Accepted
3 4 4
3 Construction of community 86 1 2 14 3. 4.3 Accepted
market 5 6 2
4 Construction of drainage 99 2 1 09 3. 4.5 Accepted
facilities. 1 2 5
5 Community health centre 78 4 1 06 3. 4.4 Accepted
project 3 4 4
6 Community school renovation 81 4 1 02 3. 4.4 Accepted
project. 0 8 4
Source: Field Survey, 2022

In table 4.3 above, on the self-help community development projects embarked upon

by communities in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state, the table shows that all

the items (item1-item6) are accepted. This is proven as the respective items (item1-

item6) have mean scores above 2.50. This depicts the self-help community

development projects embarked upon by communities in Asaba Local Government

Area, Delta state.

Research Question 2: What is the extent of youth participation in self help

community development in Asaba Local Government Area?

Table 4.4: Responses on the extent of youth participation in self help community

development in Asaba Local Government Area

Options Frequency Percentage

High extent 42 20.7

Low extent 89 63.1

Undecided 10 7

Total 141 100

Field Survey, 2022

From the responses obtained as expressed in the table above on the extent of youth

participation in self help community development in Asaba Local Government Area,

20.7% of the respondents said high level, 63.1% of the respondents said low level,

while the remaining 7% of the respondents were undecided.

Research question 3: What are the areas of youth’s involvement in self help

community development?

Table 4.5: Respondents on the areas of youth’s involvement in self help community

development.

S/ ITEM STATEMENT SA A D S X S. DECISIO

N 4 3 D D N
2 1
1 They were involved in 10 1 9 23 1. 3.5 Rejected
project planning process 1 7 5
2 Participate in determining the 16 0 8 41 1. 2.4 Rejected
type of facilities needed for the 4 0 4
project
3 Making suggestions for 14 1 2 86 2. 3.3 Rejected
improvement 5 6 2
4 Provision of raw materials 09 2 1 99 1. 3.5 Rejected
1 2 8
5 Active supervision of projects 16 0 8 41 1. 3.4 Rejected
so as to achieve desired project 4 0 6
objectives
Source: Field Survey, 2022
In table 4.5 above, on the areas of youth’s involvement in self help community

development, the table shows that all the items (item1-item5) are rejected. This is

proven as the respective items (item1-item5) have mean scores below 2.50.

Research question 4: What are the constraints to youth’s involvement in self help

community development in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state?

Table 4.6: Respondents on the constraints to youth’s involvement in self help

community development in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state.

S/ ITEM STATEMENT SA A D S X S. DECISIO

N 4 3 D D N
2 1
1 Youths are not given free hand 94 1 1 14 3. 4.5 Accepted
to be actively involved in 9 4 4
community development
projects
2 Low educational background of 81 4 1 02 3. 4.4 Accepted
majority of the youths 0 8 4

3 Lack of commitment of some 86 1 2 14 3. 4.3 Accepted

community leaders to involve 5 6 2
the youths leading to out
migration of youths.
4 Conflict in the community due 99 2 1 09 3. 4.5 Accepted
to corruption and fund 1 2 5
mismanagement.
5 Parents don’t allow their 80 4 1 04 3. 4.4 Accepted
children to be involved in 1 6 4
community development
projects.
6 Lack of clear ideas of what the 97 2 1 11 3. 4.5 Accepted
projects has to offer 3 0 5
Source: Field Survey, 2022
In table 4.6 above, on the constraints to youth’s involvement in self help community

development in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state, the table shows that all

the items (item1-item6) are accepted. This is proven as the respective items (item1-

item6) have mean scores above 2.50. This depicts the constraints to youth’s

involvement in self help community development in Asaba Local Government Area,

Delta state.
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Summary

In this study, our focus was on the evaluation of youths participation in self help

community development in Asaba Local Government Area. The study is was

specifically carried out to ascertain self-help community development projects

embarked upon by communities in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state,

ascertain the extent of youth participation in self help community development,

ascertain the areas of youth’s involvement in self help community development, and

determine the constraints to youth’s involvement in self help community development

in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state

The study adopted the survey research design and randomly enrolled participants in

the study. A total of 141 responses were validated from the enrolled participants

where all respondent were youths in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state.

5.2 Conclusion

Based on the findings of this study, the researcher concluded that;

1. The self-help community development projects embarked upon by communities in

Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state include; involved in rural electrification

project, water bore-hole, construction of community market, construction of drainage

facilities, community health centre project, and community school renovation project.

2. The extent of youth participation in self help community development in Asaba

Local Government Area is low.

3. Youth’s does not participate in the project planning process, in determining the

type of facilities needed for the project, in making suggestions for improvement, and
supervision of projects so as to achieve desired project objectives of self help

community development.

4. The constraints to youth’s involvement in self help community development in

Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state include; not given free hand to be actively

involved in community development projects, low educational background of

majority of the youths, lack of commitment of some community leaders to involve the

youths leading to out migration of youths, conflict in the community due to corruption

and fund mismanagement, parents don’t allow their children to be involved in

community development projects, and lack of clear ideas of what the projects has to

offer.

5.3 Recommendation

With respect to the findings and the aim of this study, the researchers therefore

recommend that;

(1) Community development stakeholders should see the youths as an important

segment of the populace and future custodian of the community, who should be given

opportunity like others, in all aspects of community development efforts such as, in

the planning process, implementation, supervision and evaluation of community

projects.

(2) Parents should make the education of their youths a top priority so that they can

actively be involved in community development activities, as this will contribute

immensely to civic engagement of youths than parental modeling.

(3) The elders in the community should cooperate and co-exist in a peaceful and

friendly environment with youths who are the prospective elders and leaders of

tomorrow.
(4) Government and non-governmental organizations should also assist various

communities in their self-help development projects like water borehole project, to

enable them improve their standard of living.

REFERENCE

Abegunde A. A. (2009). The role of community based organizations in economic

development in Nigeria: The case of Oshogbo, Osun state. Nigeria

international Non-Governmental Organization. Journal 4V (5) 256 252

Abiona, I. A. (2006). Learning from the animal kingdom: An approach to community

mobilization and citizen participation in community development. In Adult

Education and Development (pp. 275-282). Journal of the Institute for the

Cooperation of German Adult Education Association.

Aboyade, O. (1980), “Nigerian Public Enterprises as an Organizational Dilemma”.

Pp. 83-97 Colins, p(ed) Administration for Development Nigeria. Lagos:

Africa Education Press.

Abubakar, F. U. (1997). The Effect of Corruption in Nigerian Political Terrain. In The

Military Experience. Abuja: Apex Publishing Press.

Adedayo, A. (1985), “The Implications of community leadership for rural

development planning in Nigeria”, Community development Journal, Vol. 20

No. 1, pp. 51-60.

Adedayo, A.F., Taiwo, I.O. and Medupin, R. (1991), “Process and Patterns of

Community Self Help Development in Nigeria”, University of Ilorin Senate

research Report.

Adefemi, O. (2008). Dimensions and Issues in Community Development Projects.

Ibadan Gabesther Education Publishers.

Adejumobi A. (2010). Self-help community development in selected Nigerian rural

communities: Problem and prospects. Community Development Journal,

25(3), 225- 235

Afuye, H. O. (2005). Community Development in West Africa. Nigeria: Ibadan

Publishing Press.

Agbo, E. U. (2012). The Contribution of Co-operative Societies in Capacity Building

for Community Development in Igbo-Eze South LGA, Enugu State

(Unpublished B.Ed Thesis). Department of Adult Education and Extra-Mural

Studies, U.N.N.

Agboola, T. (1988)” The Participation of the Rural poor in rural development: A

Theoretical construct”, The Nigerian Journal of Social Studies, Vol. 30 No. 2,

pp. 15-25.

Ahmad, N. (2011). Participation on community development: Current Research

Journal of Arts and Social Sciences; 3(2) 15–16.

Akeredolu, A. (1976), Social Research and National Development in Nigeria, Central

proceedings of the conference on Social Research and National Development

in Nigeriaa, Vol. 1, pp. 71-73.

Akintayo, M.O. &OghenekohmoJ.E. (2004)Developing adult education and

community development:new Paradigms. Educational Research & Study

Group Publishers; Akumah, E. (2008). Educational administration

managerial: Issues and problems. Enugu

Akpomivie, B.O. (2009). Socio-Cultural Associations and the Development of

Urhoboland, Delta State, Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of

Ibadan, Ibadan.

Anyanwu, C. N. (2010). Community Development: The Nigerian Perspective.

CABESTER Educational Publishers Ibadan.

Anyauwu C. N. (2001). Principles and practice of adult education and community

development: Ibadan: ABI Print Publishing Company.

Anyawu C.N. (2002). Community education:The Africa Dimension Ibadan, Atlas

Nigeria

Aref, F. and Redzuan, M. (2009), Assessing the level of community participation as a

component of community capacity building for tourism development: Journal

of scientific research. 28(3):443-450,

Arndt, H.W. (1981). Economic Development; A Semantic History. Economic

Development and Culture Change, 29(3): 45 7-466.

Atte, O. D. (1986), “Overcoming Rural Underdevelopment in Nigeria”, The Quarterly

Journal of Administration, Vol. 20 No. 3&4, pp. 56-63.

Aziz, S. (1978). Rural Development: Learning from China. London: Macmillan Press.

Blackman R (2003) in Ghazala, M. and Vijayendra, R. (2004), (eds) “Community-

base and– driven development:

Celex Publishers ,Anyanwu, C.N. (2009). Introduction to community development:

Ibadan: GabestherEducational Publishers.

Christenson J.A. (2005).Empowering people for community development through

Non formal education (NFE) programme, journal of adult education and extra

mural studies university of Nigeria Nsukka:1 (1) 47 53.

Clark, I. E. (2010). Community Association: Theory and Practice. Arizona. USA:

Mark Gregor Printing Press. Effiong, J. B. (2012). Evidence from Yakurr

L.G.A, Cross River State. International Journal Of Social Science

Crofton Fiona S., (2001). Sustainable Community Planning and Development:

Participation Tools & Practices: Final Report. Ottawa: Canadian Mortgage

and Housing Corporation.

Dan E. (2011). Community participation in financing education in Nigeria: A

synthesis of issues, challenges and imperative. Enugu: Timex Enterprises.

Dunham, A (1970), The Community Organization. New York; Gowell. Hancock,

W.K. (1942). Survey of the British Commonwealth Affairs. Problems of

Economic Policy, 1918-1939, 2:267.

Ekpomban, M. (1976), “Operation Research International Community Development

in the Mid-Western State”, Social Research and National Development in

Nigeria, l1.

Esenjor, A.F. (1992). Nut and bolts of community development: Publisher escakin

Nigeria services, Delta state.

European Union. (1999). An Appraisal of Community Development Projects in

Eastern Europe. Oslo, Norway. Freire, P. (1973). Education for Critical

Consciousness. New York: Seabury.

Fasokun T.O. (2008).The role of education in poverty eradication education for

millennium development Essays in honour at professor

michealOmolewaVolbauconvalas, mawadevinoye R, (Eds) Ibadan spectrum

books 459/475.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (1970), “The Second National Development Plan 1970-

1974”, Federal Ministry of Information Printing Division, Lagos.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (1975), “The Third National Development Plan”, Special

Launching Edition Federal Republic of Nigeria Lagos. .

Federal Republic of Nigeria (2005) Nigeria Millennium Development Goals 2005

report. Abuja, National Planning Commission.

Gana, J. (1987), “Social Mobilization for Integrated Rural Development in Nigeria”,

The Nigerian Geographical Journal, Vol. 30&31 No. 1&2, pp-13-21.

Gana,J. and Mabogunje, A. L. (1981), Rural Development in Nigeria, UNCRD,

Gardner, J. W. (1997). Leadership Development, Leadership Papers. In Leadership

Studies. Programs sponsored by the Independent Sector, Washington D.C.

Hansen, W. and Schulz, B. (1981). Imperialism, Dependency and Social Class. Africa

Today. 29(3) 5-36.

Hermosillo, L. (2012). Community Leadership. Retrieved June 20, 2015, from

http://ucpsarnet. igboprojects.org/communityleadership

Hills, M. (2011). What is Community Development. Retrieved September 8, 2015,

from http:www.comdeu.come/authlfan.htm

Idode, J.B. (1989). Rural Development and Bureaucracy in Nigeria. Ibadan; Longman

Nigeria. Igboeli, M.O. (1992). “Self-help as a Strategy for Rural

Development: A Critique” in Olisa, M.S.O. and Obiukwu, J.I. (eds), Rural

Development in Nigeria: Dynamics and Strategy. Awka; Mekslink

Publishers.

Igbozurike, M. (1977), “Self in the Context of Strategies of Rural Development”,

proceedings of the 20th Conference of Nigerian Geographers

Association,pp43-50 July 1977, University of Iffe, Iffe, Nigeria.

Island, Lagos.

Ismail O.A. (2011). Civic education: A veritable tool for promoting responsible

citizenship in [16.] Nigeria, Nigerian Journal of Social Studies, XIV (2),68-76

Iwuchukwu, J. C., Ogbonna, O. I., & Agbati, I. O. (2015). Roles of Youth Groups in

Rural Community development in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Journal of

Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, 7(2), 41-47.

http://dx.doi.org/10.5897/JAERD2014.0639

Johnson, K. (2012). Dimensions of Community Development Projects in Guinea.

Africana Fep Publishers.

Kelly, W. A. (2008). Constraints to Youths Participation in Community Development.

Retrieved August, 2013, from http://www.fening.orgoekamldeve/ikap.htm

Kumar, S. (2002). Methods for community participation. A complete guide

forpractitioners London: ITDG Publishers.

Lele, U. and King, L. (1974), The Design of Rural Development Lessons from Africa,

Washington DC, Int’l Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

Limited. Anyauwu, C.N. (2004). Human development report: New York: Oxford

University Press Inc.

Liveright, L. P. (2013). Who is a Youth? Canton Publishing Company, Arizona, USA.

Mabogunke, A. (1980), The Development Process: A spatial perspective, Homes

&Meir publishers, Inc., New York.

Mark, P. N (2005). Community Agency and Local Development. University Park:

Pennsylvania State University Press.

Maxwell, G. N. (2013). Principles of Evaluation. Washington DC: National Academy

Press.

Mensah, C. (1970), Definition and Objectives of Rural Development, African

Contemporary Record, Annual Survey and Documents.

Mohammad N. (2010). Participation in development projects at grassroots: A case

study of Alampur and Jaganather union Parishad. A master thesis in the

Department of General and Continuing Education, North South University,

Bangladesh.

Muoghalu, L.N. (1992). “Rural Development in Nigeria: A Review of Previous

Initiatives” in Olisa, M.S.O. and Obiukwu, J.I. (eds) Rural Development in

Nigeria: Dynamics and strategies: Awka; Meklinks Publishers.

Ngbea, G. T. (2013). The Role of Education in Promoting: A Democratic Society in

Nigeria. Makurdi Aboki Publishers.

Nigerian National Baseline Youth Survey. (2015).

Nigerian National Bureau of Statistics Youth Survey Report. (2012). Report on the

High Unemployment Rate of Youths in Nigeria.

Nogoya, Japan. Idachaba, F.S. (1980), Food Policy, Technical Research paper, Zaria.

Nwana, O. (1991). Introduction to Educational Research. Ibadan, Heinemann

Education Books.

Nwankwo, O. (2011).The August meeting concept and community development in

Nigeria, West Africa insight

Nworgu, B. G. (2015). Educational Research, Basic Issues and Methodology.

University Trust Publishers Nsukka, Enugu.

Nyerere, J. K. (1979). Education for Liberation and Development. In The Tanzanian

Experience (p. 33). London, Evans Brothers Limited.

Nyerere, J.K. (1978). Freedom and development: London: Oxford University press.

Obetta, K. C. (2014). Utilization of Community Management Strategy in Community

Development Projects in Enugu State, Nigeria (Unpublished Ph.D Thesis).

Department of Adult Education and Extra-Mural Studies, U.N.N.

Obodoechi, O. (2009) Community Development. Enugu: Computer Edge Publishers.

Oduaran, A. B. (1994). An Introduction to Community Development. Asaba Local

Government Area Delta state, Nigeria: Uniben Press. Olufemi, C. (2014).

Juvenile Deliquency Among Youths: A Social Malady. Model Publication

Limited, Victoria

Oduaran, A.B. (1994). An introduction to community development: Benin: Unbend

Press.
Okafor, A.A. (2004). Poverty and human development in Nigeria: Challenges of the

millennium development goals: Nsukka; A Great AP express publisher

limited.

Okafor, C.E. (2000). An evaluation of people participation in rural development

project of non-governmental organization in Oyo and Ogun state,

Nigeria:Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ibadan.

Okafor, F.C (1984a), “Dimensions of Community Development Projects in Bendel

State, Nigeria”. Public Administration and Development, 4:249-258.

Okafor, F.C (1984c), “ Integrated Rural Development Planning in Nigeria: A Spatial

Dimension” Cahiers d, Etudes Africaene, 20:83-95.

Okpala, D.C.I. (1980). Towards a Better Conceptualization of Rural Community

Development; Empirical Findings from Nigeria. Human Organisation, 39(2):

161-167. society for Applied Anthropology.

Olatubosun, D. (1975). Nigerian Neglected Rural Majority. Ibadan; Oxford

University Press.

Olawepo, R.A. (1997), “Self Help in the context of rural Development Strategies: An

explanation from a Rural Nigerian Environment”, Journal of Arts and Social

Science, Vol. 1 No.1, pp. 23-29.

Olorode (1984), “Integrated Subversion of Agricultural and Rural Development”, A

paper presented at the A.S.U.U. Conference on the State of Nigeria Economy,

University of Benin.

Omoruyi, F.O. (2001). The dynamic of community development: The Nigerian

approach. Asaba Local Government Area: Publishers New Era Publication.

Onah. V. (2013). Contributions of Community Leaders to Community Development

in Nsukka Urban
Onibokun, A. (1976), A Critical Review of Literature and an Analyses of Directions:

Africana-FEP Publishers.

Onibokun, A. (1976), A Critical Review of Literature and an Analyses of Directions,

Africana-FEP Publishers.

Onibokun, A.G. and Kumuyi, A.J. (1990), “Developing Rural Areas through the

Activities of Directorate for Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure: A fact or

Fallacy”, Iffe Social Science Review, Vol. 1 No. 1&2, pp. 34-47.

Onimode, B. (1982). Imperialism and Underdevelopment in Nigeria. The Dialectics

of Mass Poverty. London: Zed Press.

Onokerhoraye, A. G and Okafor, F.C (1994), Rural Development and Planning for

Africa. Benin-City: University of Benin Press. Onwuzulike, P.N. (1987).

Community Development in Adazi-Nnukwu. Unpublished N.C.E. Project.

Otite, O (2001), Aspects of Conflicts in Theory and Practice in Nigeria” in Otite, O.

and Albert, I.O (eds), Community Conflicts in Nigeria. Ibadan: Spectrum

Books Limited.

Oxford University Press.

Paul, S. (1987), “Community Participation in Development Projects, The World Bank

Experience”, Readings in Community Participation, Washington DC, EDI.

Raniga, T. and Simpson, B. (2002), Community participation: rhetoric or reality.

Social work: A Professional Journal for the Social Worker, 38(2):182-190. [

Reid, J. N. (2000), Community Participation “How people power brings sustainable

benefits to communities” USDA Rural development office of community

development.

Robertson, J. (1963). The Challenge of Underdeveloped Territories. Journal of

African Affairs, 62(248): 236-244.

Rodney, W. (1972). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Dares Salam: Tanzanian

Publishing House. Udoye, E.E. (1992). “Grassroots Involvement in Rural

Development” in Olisa, M.S.O. and Obiukwu, J.I. (eds) Rural Development

in Nigeria: Dynamics and Strategies. Awka; Mekslink Publishers.

Rowland, B. C. (2011). The Meaning of Community Development. New Delhi:

Eleventh Conference of the Society for International Development.

Sarta, L (1978), Rural Development Learning from Ghana, The MacMillan Press Ltd,

Nigeria. United Nations (1976), Rural Development Sector Policy Paper,

World Bank, Geneva.

Sieng, M. (2012). Community leadership. Retrieved April 20, 2013,

from

http://ucpsernet.igboproject.org/forununlcommunitybuildingcommunityleader

ship/communityleadership

Tolu, L., & Abe, O. (2011). National Development in Nigeria. Issues, Challenges and

Prospects.

Tommorrow, 1(6).

Trammelan, R. V. (2010). Focus Group Discussion. In An Essential Factor on Project

and Programme Evaluation.

Tshabalala, E.L. (2006), The role of community participation in the integrated

development plan of Govan Mbeki Municipality. Department of social work

and criminology: University of Pretoria.

Udensi, L. O., Daasi, G. L. K., Emah, D. S., & Zucbec, S. A. (2013). Youth

Participation in Community Development Programs in Cross River State,

Nigeria. Implications for Sustainable Youth Development in Nigeria. Journal

of Humanities Social Science, 13(5), 61-67.

Ugochukwu, C (2010). The role of women in national development: National Council

of Women Societies Magazine.

UN (2005), A division for sustainable development. Indicators for sustainable

development: Review and assessment, background paper, New York.

UNDP (2004), Human development report;New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

United Nations Organisation (1956). Twentieth Report of the Administrative

Committee on Coordination to the Economic and Social council, 24th

Session, Anex III, Docuemtn E/2931, Oct 18.

United Nations. (2008). Annual Year book of Statistics.

Waterson, A. (1965). Development Planning: Lesson of Experience. Baltimore; John

Hopkin University Press.

William, S.K.T. and Dunchan, L. (1978), Strategy for Rural Development in Nigeria,

University of Iffe Press, IleIffe, Nigeria.

Williams, G. (1976). Nigeria Economy and History. London; Rex Collins

Williams, S.K.T. (1978). Rural Development in Nigeria. Ife; University of Ife Press.

World Bank (1975), Rural Development Sector Policy Paper, World Bank.

World Bank (1998), "The Role of Community Particip ation in Development

Planning and Project Management Michael Bamberger",

World Bank (2003), Reaching the rural poor: A renewed strategy for rural

development; Washington DC.

World Bank (2004), World development report: Making services work for poor

people. Washington DC:

World Bank. (2010). Community based Monitoring and Evaluation Team.

World Youth Data Sheet. (2010). Population Dynamics of Developing Countries.

Zaden, B.S. (2010). Participation and community development: Current Research

Journal of Social Science, 2 (1), 13-14.

Zeldin, S. (2002). From Periphery to Centre: Pathways for Youth Civic Engagement

in the Day-to-Day Life of Communities. Journal of Applied

Developmental Science, 6, 213-220.

 APPENDIXE

QUESTIONNAIRE

PLEASE TICK [√] YOUR MOST PREFERRED CHOICE(s) ON A QUESTION

OF YOUR CHOICE

SECTION A

PERSONAL INFORMATION

1. Gender

Male [ ]

Female [ ]

3. Age

20-30 [ ]

31-40 [ ]

41-50 [ ]

51+ [ ]

4. Education

Dropout [ ]

Basic Education [ ]

Secondary Education [ ]

Tertiary Education [ ]

5 Occupation

Student [ ]

Self-employed [ ]

Employed [ ]

Unemployed [ ]

SECTION B
Please indicate the extent to which you are satisfied with the following items by

ticking in any option presented in the boxes below.

Research question 1: What are the self-help community development projects

embarked upon by communities in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state?

S/N Statement SA A SD D

1 Involved in Rural electrification project

2 Water bore-hole
3 Construction of community market
4 Construction of drainage facilities.
5 Community health centre project
6 Community school renovation project.
Research Question 2: What is the extent of youth participation in self help

community development in Asaba Local Government Area?

Option Please tick

High extent

Low extent

Undecided

Research question 3: What are the areas of youth’s involvement in self help

community development?

S/N Statement SA A SD D

1 They were involved in project planning

process
2 Participate in determining the type of facilities
needed for the project
3 Making suggestions for improvement
4 Provision of raw materials
5 Active supervision of projects so as to achieve
desired project objectives

Research question 4: What are the constraints to youth’s involvement in self help

community development in Asaba Local Government Area, Delta state?

S/N Statement SA A SD D

1 Youths are not given free hand to be actively

involved in community development projects
2 Low educational background of majority of the
youths
3 Lack of commitment of some community leaders
to involve the youths leading to out migration of
youths.
4 Conflict in the community due to corruption and
fund mismanagement.
5 Parents don’t allow their children to be involved in
community development projects.
6 Lack of clear ideas of what the projects has to offer