MEMORANDUM ON LOCAL ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (LEEDS) : AGENDA FOR GRASSROOTS DEVELOPMENT

A case study for Egbeda Local Government

By Tomori M. A.


INTRODUCTION:

I will start this memorandum by introducing myself as one of the stakeholders resident in Egbeda Local Government. I am an Estate Surveyor and Valuer by profession and I have been living at Sarumi Village in Alakia/Olode Ward since February, 1985.

Egbeda Local Government was created in 1989 when it was carved out of Lagelu Local Government, a structure that has been in existence since 1961. It is bounded in the East by Osun River, in the North by Lagelu Local Government, in the South by Ona-Ara

Local Government and in the West by the Lagos-Ibadan Express Road. The Local government currently has 4 urban political wards and seven rural wards covering a total of 136.83km2. The headquarter is at Egbeda.

It has 40 primary schools apart from several private nursery and primary schools. The most common factory and small scale industries are block making, sawmills and metal and steel works. There are also big factories such as Nigeria Breweries plc, Coca-Cola Bottling Company, Bode Foam, Atlantic Carpet. Egbeda Lcoal Government also has some Hotels and Commercial Shopping Complex, New Gbagi (Bola Ige) International Market, Youth Village at Egbeda for Youth Development.

Table 1: Available Natural resources and Social Infrastructure in Egbeda

Local Government Area

S/No.

Resources and Facilities

Number in Quantity

Remarks

1.

Land Area

136.83km2

*Urban and Agricultural Land. No Forest Reserves

2.

Asejire Water Works

75,000 cub. Metres

*Serves majorly the Ibadan metropolis

3.

Spring Water at Ikuogbolekun/Sarumi area

Untapped

*Yet to be developed

4.

Public Primary Schools

40

N/A

5.

Private N/Primary Schools

97

*mainly in Urban Area

6.

Public Secondary Schools

12

N/A

7.

Private Secondary Schools

14

*mainly in Urban Area

8.

Public Health Facilities

20

N/A

9.

Private Health Facilities

27

*mainly in Urban Area

10.

Recreation and Tourism

(Main Hotels and Youth Village)

12

*The School Fields

are being used as Open spaces for social activites

11

Mineral Resources

3

*Tantalite (Wofun)

*Tourmaline (Egbed/Olodo)

*Aquamarine (Egbeda)

12.

Farm Products


*Maize, Cassava, Yam, Cocoa,

Vegetables

13.

Fisheries

1

Asejire Water Dams

Fish market

Source: Oyo State Valuation Office, 2007


Effects of Urbanization on Ibadan District Settlement:

The table below shows the population growth of the villages surrounding Ibadan metropolis. Some villages with insignificant population size in 1963 have now grown into urban settlements. The population of the Local Government was 129,461 in 1991 and 281,573 in 2006 a growth rate of 5.32% per annum

Table 2: Population growth of Ibadan District Towns

Local Government Area

District

Towns

Population Census Figures

    1963 1991 1996

AKINYELE

Moniya

Ojoo

Idi-Ose

-

822

-

12,929

13,915

3,789

14,923

16,061

4,373

EGBEDA

Egbeda

Erunmu

Alakia

Oremeji

Ogbere

Monatan

1,718

7,930

-

-

-

-

430

3,384

8,135

26,692

13,347

17,311

496

3,906

9,390

30,809

15,406

21,981

LAGELU

Lalupon

Ejioku

Akobo

3,080

2,885

1,421

6,918

3,005

10,047

7,985

3,469

11,597

ONA-ARA

Olunloyo

Ogberetioya

Olorunsogo

Aiyekale

-

-

-

-

6,985

12,684

21,444

7,770

8,062

14,640

29,752

8,969

OLUYOLE

Olomi

Odo-Ona

Odinjo

-

628

380

21,817

1,601

2,989

25,182

1,848

3,450

IDO

Omi – Adio

Apete

1,594

409

11,694

3,062

12,805

3,535


Source: National Population Commission 1963 and 1991

Akobo village has been transformed into a well planned high class Residential

Estate by the Oyo State Housing Corporation as part of the strategy to create a healthy environment. Podo area in Oluyole Local Government has become the industrial zone with a number of modern and international Industries springing up such as the British American Tobacco Nigeria Limited and Lead City University, a private tertiary institution.

A comprehensive study of the new areas surrounding Ibadan Metropolis conducted between 1995 and 2005 by the State Valuation Office, during the implementation of the property tax project initiated by the Oyo State Government, showed that Podo, Akobo, Alegongo, Erunmu (because of the proposed Dry Port), Monatan,

Egbeda (Ajoda New Town), Alakia, Apete and Moniya are areas with significant development potential because of the availability of vast land and good road network that link Ibadan with Lagos, Osun, Ogun and the Northern States. Petrol Stations and multipurpose Halls are dominating the property market (Please see TABLE 3 for more DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION on settlement in Egbeda Local Government Area)

ANALYSIS OF POPULATION SIZE OF SETTLEMENTS IN EGBEDA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA ON WARD BASIS

ELECTORAL

WARD

WARD STATUS

LOCALITIES

POPULATION

1991

PROJECT

POPULATION

1996

I

RURAL

Erumu

Adeleye

Oloro

3,384

186

_

3,906

215

II

RURAL

Ayede

Atari

oyindola

304

291

333

351

33336

384

III

RURAL

Efunwole

Apaso

Ore I

Gidigidi

Apoku

Olode

Ore II

132

108

-

201

151

-

179

152

125

-

232

174

-

207

IV

RURAL

Jooda

Ajiwogbo

Olodani

Gberimi

128

163

-

297

148

188

-

343

V

SEMI-URBAN

Jenriyin

Wakajaiye

Olukunle

Oki

Idi-Osan

196

-

137

1,026

68

226

-

158

1,184

78

VI

URBAN

Academy

Monatan

Molade

Adogba

Ayepe

18,214

17,311

-

-

-

21,023

19,981

-

-

-

VII

URBAN

Alarobo

Agbalegan

Olodo

2,593

1,541

689

2,993

1,779

795

VIII

RURAL

Awaye

Osegere

Olumakin

332

1,170

-

383

1,350

-

IX

RURAL

Egbeda

Koroboto

Mosafejo

Ogungbade

1,121

-

265

160

1,294

-

306

185

X

URBAN

Olosan

Alakia

Adegbayi

Akinfenwa

Isebo

Jagun

Aba-Ode

Sarumi

-

8,135

735

-

-

117

66

-

9,390

848

-

-

135

76

-

XI

URBAN

Alarere

Brewery

Saw-Mill

Efun Village

Ogbere-Oloda

Gbaremu

Oriyangi

Oremeji

-

-

12,691

13,347

-

-

26,692

-

-

-

14,649

15,406

-

-

30,809

-


What is LEEDS?

Simply put, Local Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (LEEDS) is a local government plan for prosperity and a way to let people know what the government is doing and the kind of local government they wish to live in now or in future. This in essence means there are roles for citizen groups and community organizations and NGOs to participate in the formulation and execution of collective action at the local government level. LEEDS therefore, encompasses the direct and indirect roles of formal institutions of local government, state and federal as well as the roles of informal sectors, networks of community organizations and neighbourhood associations (e.g. landlord associations, community development association etc.) in pursuing collective action by defining the framework for collective decision making and delivery of local public services.

LEEDS offers local government the private sector the non-profit organizations and the local community the opportunity to work together to improve the local economy. It aims to enhance competitiveness and thus encourage sustainable growth that is inclusive.

Vision of LEEDS:

LEEDS aims to restructure the Local government and to make it smaller, stronger,

better skilled and more efficient at delivering essential service. It seeks to transform the government from a haven of corruption to an institution that spurs development and services to the people.

LEEDS is about reorienting values, reducing poverty, creating wealth and generating employment. It is based on the notion that these goals can be achieved only by creating environment in which business can thrive, government is redirected to providing basic services, and people are empowered to take advantage of the new livelihood opportunities the plan will stimulate.

Appraisal of the Environmental Problems and Infrastructure Deficiencies

There are critical environmental problems associated with the destruction of resources, basic environmental infrastructure and service, and exposure of population to man-made hazards and pollution. Some of the problems identified in Egbeda Local Government Area are:

(i) Lack f the most basic solid waste services in crowded and low income

neighbourhood in the urban areas of Ogbere, Adogba, Isebo and other urban communities due to poor road network and lack of open dump sites.

(ii) Behind the Nigerian Breweries plc factory, commercial Sewage and Silages from domestic, commercial and industrial sources is flushed into the stream and the inadequate drainage system with many hazardous health effect associated with unsafe sanitation.

(iii) Lack of or inefficient transport services and infrastructure in the local government area is a major impediment to economic growth and urban

productivity. With the exception of Alarere Layout and few tarred roads linking Segelu Hotel to Iwo Road, all others are untarred roads with poor

drainage system. Majority of the roads, about 70% of the road network, needs upgrading including the rural roads and good drainage system.

(iv) Pollution of surface waters at the strabag old site (Ikuogbolekun area) where rock was blasted long time ago, can result in problems from direct contact. The pond poses danger to the community as many children had fallen into the unprotected water.

(v) Energy is a key input for urban development especially electricity. But many urban neighbourhoods in Egbeda Local Government Area have been thrown into darkness for months without succor from PHCN. Transformers are required for new areas and replacement of old transmers in Alakia/Sarumi area around the New Airport. Iron Benders, Sawmillers, other light industries are already embarking on survival strategy using generating plants which adds to the cost of production.

(vi) Water supply is a mirage in the urban sector of Egbeda Local

Government despite the capacity of Asejire Dam which supplies water to Ibadan Metropolis. Residents rely on private deep wells and there are many areas that require the attention of the local government in this regard especially, Alabidun, Sarumi, Akinfenwa, Ogbere, Oriyangi etc.

(vii) There are no historic structures nor religious monuments including open spaces for recreation and social ceremonies. The open spaces have been taken over in the process of developing or redeveloping the new urban areas for residential, commercial and industrial purposes.

Why Grassroots Developments are not Sustainable?

According to Prof. Ifeyori I. Ihimodu in lecture titled “Sustainable Local Level Development through Self-Help” at the third public lecture of Samuel Adegbite Foundation;. Most governments in Nigeria have been accused of totally neglecting the development of the rural areas or local communities contrary to the claims of these governments. Perhaps the criticism are that enough attention is not being paid to the development of the rural areas. It could also mean that the methods used by governments may not be appropriate. As highlighted in the earlier in this paper, the conditions at the local level are generally poor roads, water supply, electricity, health facilities, etc, are generally in poor state. These poor state of infrastructure translate into the poverty of the inhabitants of the rural areas and the urban local communities leading to poor health, poor diet and nutrition and poor education.

Generally, the model of development adopted at the local level has been the top-bottom approach. This model is predicated upon the assumption that the government (decision maker) knows the problems of the people in the areas to be developed and also that it has the wherewithal to do what needs to be done. Therefore, the beneficiaries are recipients who are expected to do little or nothing to bring development. Consequently, government tries to identify the needs of the people, do the planning and execute the programme. On the other hand, the beneficiaries are expected to receive the projects, use them, take care of them in order to elongate their life.

In may instance, markets were established outside the town/village settlements requiring some transport to use them. After the completion of the markets, the intended beneficiaries refused to use them. Even in the cities, market traders were forced by governments to occupy newly built markets like streets traders at Oritamerin were

moved to Bodija Market, traders at Old Dugbe market to Alesinloye market and Trailer drivers at Ojoo – end of Lagos-Ibadan express Road to Akinyele Trailer Parks including the resettlement of Old Gbagi traders at the multi-million Bola Ige International market after the 1980 Ogunpa Flood Disaster.

For development projects established in a local area to be sustainable, they must be considered by the beneficiaries as their own. They must not be regarded as alien or external community. “Sustainable development, in this case, means development,

that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs.” Therefore, the beneficiaries/users, of the projects must be involved right from the initial stage of the projects, that is from project conception, identification, planning to implementation.

Community Driven Development Approach to LEEDS:

Community Driven Development (CDD) is broadly defined as giving control of decision and resources to community groups and local governments. CDD programmes operate on the principles of local empowerment, participatory governance, demand responsiveness, administrative autonomy, greater downward accountability, and enhanced local capacity. Experience has shown from the LEEMP (Local Empowerment and Environmental Management Projects) that, given clear rules of the game, access to information, appropriate capacity and financial support, poor community men and women can effectively organize themselves in order to identify community priorities and address local problems, by working in partnership with local governments and other supportive institutions.

There is growing awareness of the limitations of traditional “Top-Down” approaches for community development and poverty reduction as interest has shifted to the potentially powerful role of community participation in enhancing local public service delivery. This requires understanding the dynamics of communities and of local administration, and their interaction with higher levels of administration.

The United Nations defined Community Development (CD) as “A process by which efforts of the people within a particular geographical area are harmonized with those of government with a view to improving the economic, social and cultural conditions of community by integrating the community into the life of the nation and to enable such communities contribute fully to nation progress.”

The United Nations definition admits of:

(i) the need by the community to want to improve their condition of Living through their own and efforts;

(ii) the need for the government to recognize the efforts of the Communities, help in giving them direction towards national Progress and to harmonize such efforts with those of government; and

(iii) the full participation objectives of communities in efforts to attain National progress.

The main objectives of a Community Development (CD) are the establishment of organized systems of social services in order to make people self-reliance and able to participate fully in development of the nation and ensuring that communities are fully integrated into the nation through community specific development programme

Growing number of countries are devising partnership with local people to provide municipal environmental services. In Accra, Ghana, sanitation services in low income areas have improved greatly since NGOs and local entrepreneurs have been allowed to operate community pit latrines. Dislodging and disposal are carried out by the City’s Central Waste Management Department. This division of responsibility has proved more effective than attempting to operate a completely centralized sewerage system that had fallen into disrepair.

In Jarkata, neighbourhoods organize the collection of solid wastes by collecting monthy dues that are used to buy cart and hire a local garbage collector. At least once a month, one volunteer from each household assists in collecting garbage and cleaning the neighbourhood drainage system. The wastes are taken

to transfer station, they are pcked up by municipal authorities, a task that is gradually being contracted out to private companies (World Bank, 12992).

The combination of community collection and centralized disposal has allowed Jarkata to achieve an 80 percent waste collection rate which is considered high by developing country standards. This is the current practice in Oyo State, Nigeria under Ibadan Waste Management Authority.

Many environmental problems cannot be solved without the active participation of local people. Few governments can afford the costs of enforcing management programmes that local people do not accept. Participation can also help in afforestation, wildlife conservation, park management, improvements in sanitation systems and drainage, and flood control Local people can provide the manpower and knowledge for dealing with the aftermath of environmental disasters, and local knowledge of genetic diversity has led to a break through in production.

Participatory approaches offer three main advantages:

(a) they give planners a better understanding of local values, Knowledge, and experience;

(b) they win community backing for project objectives and community help with local implementation; and

(c) they can help resolve conflicts over resources use.

The Need for a Multidimensional Approach to Grassroots Development

During the 1970s and 1980s and even in recent time, the World Bank’s urban development projects in different parts of the world and Nigeria in particular, shows that living conditions for urban residents, including the poor, could be improved significantly and cost-effectively. While all these efforts brought benefits, however, they have suffered a failure to recognize that sustainable urban development requires an approach that is even more integrated across the physical environment, infrastructure networks, finance, institutions and social activities.

If local governments are to promote the welfare of their residents and contribute to the national development, they must be sustainable and functional in the following sectors:

(i) Enhancing the Well-being of Local Residents:

The local government’s commitment to improving the living condition of the citizenry should be aimed at ensuring a healthy and dignified living standard for the poor that permits them to share the resources of the society. This goal requires participatory, gender-sensitive planning for meeting priority needs of the local communities.

The Local Agenda (LGD) called “Strategic Plan” describes the city development strategic for improving the living condition of the citizenry as a document containing the plan for reducing urban and rural poverty, agenda inequality, creating a healthy urban environment, enhancing personal security (i.e. minimizing the risk of crime, violence, traffic accidents, and natural disasters) and making cultural and recreational amenities available to all.

In pursuance of this local government Agenda, Egbeda local government should direct its efforts towards delivery of services critical to the poor by providing : micro-credits; access to affordable housing, basic infrastructure (such as health care, good road network, drinkable water and rural electricity), public transport; community centres; and programme for youths street children and the homeless.

(ii) Sound Local Government Financial Base:

The local budget process is the core of the system of fiscal administration because that is where the broad financial policies and programmes of the local government are developed and the size of government is established, with other functions contribution to its operation.

The budget process is a recurring cycle in which:

(a) the Chief Executive Chairman of the local government with the operating agencies, develops a service plan to respond to the conditions anticipated in the upcoming year;

(b) the appropriate legislative body reviews the plan and adopts a programme response based on the plan;

(c) the administration puts the adopted programme into effect; and

(d) an external review body audits and evaluates the executed programmes and reports its findings to the legislative body, Or the Executive Governor of the state and the citizenry.

Local governments therefore must observe the fundamentals of sound local government finance which include rational intergovernmental assignment of functions as well as:

  • Prudent expenditure management, that is, capital and Recurrent budgeting and investment selection practices including management of assets of the local government such as real estates.

  • Revenue mobilization and cost recovery: through the use of suitable licenses, fees and charges, property and other local taxations.

  • Equitable intergovernmental transfers: that are predictable and consistent with “hard budget” incentives.

  • Sound financial administration: including generally accepted accounting, auditing, disclosure of asset and liquidity management, procurement and payment procedures.

  • Access to credit: based on a legal and regulatory framework that allows flexible collateralization for Bank loans, local enterprises microfinancing scheme and access to capital markets by the local government for viable projects

(iii) Good Governance and Management

Improving the living condition of the residents of the local government in the urban or rural areas places big demands on good governance and management of the local government. Good governance implies inclusion and representation of all groups in urban society and entails accountability, integrity and transparency of local governments.

In all their activities, good governance is the sum of the many ways in which individuals and institutions, both public and private, participate in the planning and management of the common affairs of the city of local government area. Capable urban management requires a capacity to fulfill public responsibilities, with knowledge, skills, resources and procedures that draw on partnerships.

Good Urban Governance is not just about providing a range of local services but also about preserving the life and liberty of residents, creating space for democratic participation and civic dialogue, supporting market-led and environmentally sustainable local development and facilitating outcomes that enrich the quality of life of residents

A framework for good urban governance must embody three principles of good governance. It must be responsive, responsible and accountable.

(a) Responsive Governance

This principle expects the government to do right things, that is, to deliver services, consistent with citizen preference;

(b) Responsible Governance

The government should also do it right, that is manage its fiscal resources prudently. It should earn the trust of residents by working better and costing less and by managing fiscal and social risks for the community. It should strive to improve the quality and quantity of and access to public services. To do so, it needs to be benchmarking its performing with the best performing local governments.

(c) Accountable Governance

A local government should be accountable to its electorate. It should adhere to appropriate safeguards to ensure that it serves the public interest with integrity. Legal and institutional reforms may be needed to enable local governments to deal with accountability between elections, reforms such as a citizen’s charter and a provision for recall of public officers.

Lack of accountability is linked to the problems of transparency in which there is a large degree of participation of identified stakeholders. Transparency and accountability can be fostered through regularly organized open consultations of citizens on financial matters and other important issues and through creating public feedback mechanism such as City Consultative forum, village or Town Hall Forum, hotlines, establishing complaint offices, Radio programmes etc.

At the level of the officials, both elected and appointed, there is need to promote an ethic of public service, establish codes of conduct and provide for regular disclosure of assets. All this will, of course, be facilitated where administrative and procedural incentives for corruption have been removed, local taxation system simplified and administrative discretion in the processing of permits and licenses is reduced.

(iv) Public – Private Partnership

The decline in local government service delivery is evidenced by inadequate resource allocation, low revenue collection, low service coverage, mismanagement, corruption and lack of transparency and accountability. The option to address these problems are for the local government to form partnership with the private sectors.

The public-private partnership (PPP) in public service delivery cannot be overemphasized. It is an arrangement whereby, the private sector harnesses its financial and managerial resources to provide social amenities and infrastructure on behalf of the local government.

Public – Private Partneship can take many forms such as

(a) The private contractor or service provider operates the facility for a fee while the local government retains responsibility for capital costs;

(b) The private sector leases or purchases the facility from the local government, operates the facility and charges user fees;

(c) The private sector builds or develops a new facility, or enlarges or renovates an existing facility (e.g. Market, Shopping Complex, Fishpond or Housing Units) and then operates for a number of years.

(d) The private sector under (B.O) agreement build the needed infrastructure, operates the facility for some specified period of time and then transfer to the local government,

(e) The private sectorunder (B.O) contract build and operate the facility and is responsible for capital financing while local government regulates and controls the operation.

(f) The private sector builds the infrastructure and then transfers ownership to the public sector.

Public – Private Partnerships provide some advantages. In addition to providing a source of capital, they enable the public sector to draw on private sector expertise. Private sector involvement tends to lead to more innovative and efficient operations than if public sector provides the services on its own.

(v) Grants, technical and other support to Communities:

Grants are often provided by local governments in developed and developing countries for various community groups. Some of these grants are ad-hoc while others are provided annually. Grants to the Community may be offered to meet specific needs such as repair of dilapidated school buildings, to mitigate environmental disaster, build community halls and procurement of transformer.

Financial incentives can be provided to channel communities’ interests towards new areas of development activities as it was done

in the Republic of Korea by setting up competitions to see which village was successful in its Seamaul Undong activities.

According to the World Bank experts, many forms of technical support were effectively used in Brazil, Taiwan and China. In Brazil, technical training was given to enable communities to maintain school buildings. In Taiwan and China, technical support was extended to the communities to help them identify products,

markets, production techniques and the initiative has helped the local communities to produce both agricultural and industrial goods for a wide market.

(vi) Community Groups Empowerment:

It is a common practice all over the world that grants are often provided by local governments for various community groups and activities, including volunteer groups, charitable organizations, recreational and cultural activities. Some of these grants are ad-hoc while others are provided annually.

In reality, local government grants are almost never given to improve productive efficiency. They are generally given for one of two reasons:

(i) to appease specific groups who are persuasive in appealing to the social conscience of local councils to support their causes; or

(ii) to provide a particular service through a special board or other governmental bodies that is at least one step removed from direct council responsibility.

Local governments should look into the possibility of providing byelaws and incentives to self-Help-Groups (SHG). Some countries have employed the concept self-help as a strategy for development at the grassroots level. India is about the best example and some Asian countries. The concept is applied by encouraging the formation of Self-Help Groups (SHGs). In our rural communities, “A Self-Help Groups is a small economically homogeneous group of rural inhabitants voluntarily formed to make regular savings and mutually agree to contribute to a common fund to be lent/disburse to its members according to the groups decision. The importance and merits of the groups action include :

(i) the ability to inculcate sound habit of thrift, savings and banking in members;

(ii) the ability to mobilize small savings of the poor contrary to some belief that poor may be too poor to save, it has been shown that the poor can save (example is traditional saving scheme, Esusu).

(iii) the ability to utilize the collected funds productive;

(iv) the ability to link the groups (SHGs) with the banks (especially micro-finance or Old Community Banks) for the purpose of financing small scale enterprises.

(v) the ability to ensure excellent repayment of bank loans through peer pressure.The SHGs scheme would be attractive to newly established Micro-Financed Bank because the risks in offering loans to small borrowers would have been substantially reduced through high repayment rate and reduction in the transaction costs. The scheme would also be attractive to the group members as they haveopportunity to save from their low income, the opportunity to make productive investment as well as the opportunity to borrow from the banks.

The SHGs model, according to Professor Ihimodu (2008) has been effectively used in the development of the rural areas in India. The Indian Government encourages banks to finance SHGs. Many of the small scale enterprises were established by the SHGs. These include agro-processing, textile,. Mushroom growing, packaging ,technical workshops, etc. This state and Local Governments should follow the example of Indian governments initiatives and encourage the micro-finance banks to finance SHGs whenever the communities are given legal backing for the formation of such groups.

CONCLUSION:

The formation of Consultative Forum is imperative to discuss the Local Agenda on LEEDS implementation with regards to the needs of the various communities. To improve the lives of the local people, LEEDS will include plans for create jobs, creating affordable housing, improving health care services, strengthening the skill base, protecting vulnerable, promoting peace and security, create favourable environment for private enterprises and provision of drinkable water and other basic infrastructures.

The local agenda discussed will have to be translated into policy and institutions framework of the local government council by the Local Government Management Team (LGMT). The suggested policy an institutional framework should include:

* Removed of barriers to access low income housing, cheap and affordable land, credit and infrastructure;

* Regulatory framework and service delivery systems that support informal sector employment;

* Homeless shelters and programmes for street children.

* Public justice system that is respected and applied fairly.

* Gender sensitive employment policies such as children;

* Public and private commitment to respecting and preserving public areas, right-of-way and cultural heritage;

* Strong financial markets that channel savings to productive uses and broaden access to finance; and

* Availability of key physical infrastructure (transportation, power and telecommunication).

Investment in poor people and empowering them to participate in development is a way to increase their capabilities and widening their access to key service and by fostering social inclusion. Better access to quality education and health care expands opportunities for poor people to improve their own well-being.

For this strategy to work and be meaningful, the enabling law has to be put in place by the National Assembly which the State House of Assembly can domesticate to suite their peculiar environment and circumstances. Such alsw must compel everyone within the community to be participants in the activities of their (CDAs). It must defines functions and sources of funds and must enjoin corporate organizations who do their businesses with the communities to be members. Their corporate social responsibilities to their communities must be defined so that the CDAs can effectively mobilize everyone for participation and by so doing address the issue of development of their environment.


Bibliography

1. Central Council of Ibadan - Report of the 2006 Population Census Indigenes (C.C.I.I.) Review Committee submitted to C.C.I.I. Ibadan House, Oke-Aremo, Ibadan Oyo State in June, 2008.

2. Harry Kitchen - Delivering Local/Municipal Service (2005) published in the book “Public ServicesDelivery” edited by Anwar Shah (Public Sector Governance and Accountability Series).

3. Ifeyori I. Ihomodu - (Prof) – Sustainable Local Level (2008) Development Through Self-Help- a paper presented at the Third Public Lecture of Samuel Adegbite Foundation at the Premier Hotel, Ibadan 16/2/2008

4. Monica Das Gupta - Fostering Community – Driven Helene Grandvoinet Decvelopment: What role for the State? Maltia Romani (2005) World Bank Publication 6/14/2005.

5. Tomori M. A. - IBADAN, Omo Ajorosun: A New (2004) Perspective of Ibadan History and Physical Development published in 2004 By Pent-house publication (Nig.) Bodija, Ibadan.



000webhost logo