;

Rural Development in Nigeria: An Evaluation of the Performance of the Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructures (DFRRI) in Nkanu L.G.A. of Anambra State

By

Abstract

The
( DFRRI
D i r e c t o r a t e of Food, Roads and Rural I n f r a s t r u c t u r e s
which was set up i n February 1986 and Decree 4 of
1987 provided its l e g a l framework was meant t o b r i n g about
comprehensive r u r a l development i n Nigeris. The p o p u l i s t
approach i 1 1 1 p 2 i c i ti n DFHHI: o b j e c t i v e s and t h e lcr rye sums
of money, which has a l t e r n a t i v e uses, committed to DFHHI
p r o j e c t s with t h e aims of a c h i e v i n g - r u r a l development,
demand t h a t an o b j e c t i v e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e performance of
DFRRI at a micro l e v e l be undertaken,
T h i s study e v a l u a t e d t h e performance of DFRHI i n Nkanu
' Local Government w i t h r e s p e c t to t h e p r o v i s i o n of food,
Roads, w a t e r , etc. . L t a l s o e v a l u a t e d t h e p e r c e p t i o n of DFHHI:
as an agent of development by Nkanu people and t h e d e g r e e to
which they, as b e n e f i c i a r i e s of DFHHI p r o j e c t s , a r e i n v o l v e d
i n , b e n e f i t from or are v i c t i r n s of t h e DFRHI: miracle.
It was found t h a t twenty (20) p r o j e c t s were undertaken
by DFRHI i n Nkanu L.G.A. (14 Road p r o j e c t s , 4 Hand-dug w e l l s
and two A g r i c u l t u r a l Farms). 116.6 km of roads was
c o n s t r u c t e d i n phases 1 an,d 2. These r o a d s a r e n o t motorable
d u r i n g the r a i n y season as a r e s u l t of poor c o n s t r u c t i o n . Two
I,
o u t of f o u r hand-dug w e l l s undertaken by DFRRI a r e f u n c t i o n a l
w h i l e t h e two DFHRI h g r i c u l t u r a ~ farms are overgrown by weeds
due to n e g l e c t , Moreover, p r o j e c t b e n e f i c i a r i e s i n Nkanu
wcr;e not i n v o l v e d , i n identifying, e x e c u t i n g and m a i n t a i n i n g
DFHliI p r o j e c t s .
It is t h e c o n c l u s i o n of this s t u d y t h a t khe present
vvtop-downm approach adopted by DFRRI , which merely empowers
bureaucracy, should be de-ernphasised. The peopJe who are
the end-users and t h e a c t u a l beneficiaries should be
involved i n the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , implementation and maintenance
of DFRRI projects, in view of the p o p u l i s t approach i m p l i c i t i n DFHHL objectives.