IMPACT OF SURE-P GRADUATE SCHEME TOWARDS NIGERIAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
(A CASE STUDY OF GRADUATES IN ABIA STATE)
ABSTRACT
In this research work titled “The impact of Sure-P graduate scheme towards Nigerian economic development with particular reference to Graduates in Abia metropolis. The specific objectives of this project work include; the researcher examined the impact of Sure-P on the economic development of Abia state. Evaluated the contribution of Sure-P in the provision of employment opportunities for graduates in Abia state. Ascertained the relationship between Sure-P and economic growth of Nigeria. Determined the problems militating against the management of sure – p in Nigeria and Abia state in particular. And also proffer possible solutions to the problems identified. Data for the study was sourced from two main sources Primary and Secondary. Primary data were sourced from the use of questionnaires and oral interviews. Secondary data were sourced from journals, and other relevant materials. Extensive literature review was carried out on the direct literature and indirect literature on books, journals and past works. The research instrument used in this study includes oral interview and questionnaire. The questionnaire is structural as to contain both close and open ended question. Simple tables and percentages were used in treatment of data. At the end the researcher found out that Sure-P has significant impact on the development of Nigeria economy. Sure-P is welcomed development in Nigeria as it helps in reducing unemployment in Nigeria. The study also revealed that Sure-P helps in ensuring that the resources generated from subsidy removal is well invested for the development of our country Nigeria. based on the findings the researchers Recommendations were made that; selection of SURE-P beneficiaries should be devoid of political sentiments but should be based on equity and fairness, so that every eligible youth will benefit from the programme. Government should also provide the basic infrastructural facilities such as good roads, stable power supply and logistic facilities for the smooth operation of the programme in the study area.
Title page ii
Approval page iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgement v
Table of contents vii
Abstract x
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Background of the study . . . . . 1
1.2 Statement of problems . . . . . . 4
1.3 Objective of the study. . . . . . . 4
1.4 Research Question. . . . . . . . 6
1.5 Significance of the study. . . . . . .8
1.6 limitation of the study. . . . .. .. . 9
1.7 Scope and limitation of the study. . . . . 9
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.0 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Background of Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment
Program (SURE-P) in Nigeria 10
2.2 SURE-P MCH Supply Chain 11
2.3 Analysis of Subsidy and Reinvestment Programme
(SURE-P) and Youth Empowerment in Nigeria 14
2.4 Fuel Subsidy In Nigeria 16
2.5 Empowerment 17
2.3. Youth Empowerment 20
2.4. SURE- P And Employment Generation 23
2.5 Challenges of graduate Unemployment in Nigeria 27
2.6 The Concept of youth unemployment and its main causes 30
2.7 Unemployment In Nigeria: Causes 35
2.8 Psycho-Social Effect Of Unemployment 37
2.9 Causes of unemployment: 41
References
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Research Design and Methodology. . . . .43
3.1 Research design. . . . . . . .43
3.2 Area of study.. . . . . . . .43
3.3 Sources of data. . . . . . . .45
3.4 Research Population and sample size. . . .45
3.5 Research Instrument . . . . . .48
3.6 Validity and Reliability of the Instrument . . .49
3.7 Data Analysis. . . . . . . . 49
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 Presentation and Analysis of Data .. . . . 50
4.1 Data Presentation.. . . . . . . 50
4.2 Discussion of result . . . . . . . .51
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 Summary of Findings, Conclusion and
Recommendations . . . . . . . . 65
5.1 Summary of Findings. . . . . . . 65
5.2 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . 67
5.3 Recommendations.. . . . . . . 68
Bibliography . . . . . . . . 69
Appendix I. . . . . . . . . 70
Appendix II . . . . . . . . 71
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
According to Adebayo, (1999) Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme is an intervention sequel to the mass protest against the removal of oil subsidy, championed by organized labour and civil society early 2014. The move by the incumbent administration was a means of cleansing the sector from the myriads of corruption that plagued the effective operation of the oil sector, thereby hampering the plausible benefits to be felt in the Nation’s economy.
As a matter of fact, the proponents of SURE-P said that the programme was basically a cushioning effect of the pains occasioned by the partial removal of subsidy in the downstream sector of the petroleum sub sector, with a view to transferring the proceeds to more critical needs of Nigerians, especially the infrastructural needs.
According Adebayo, (1999) Unemployment is one of the fundamental developmental challenges facing Nigeria at the moment. Research have shown that unemployment was high in the 1980s, but the available reports from various local and international bodies, and the glaring evidence of joblessness in this decades are clear indications that there was no time in Nigeria’s chequered history where unemployment is as serious as now. One cannot really conclude that the government at one level or the other have not done anything at one time or the other, to reduce unemployment in Nigeria. For instance, the creation of National Directorate of Employment (NDE) and its skills acquisition programmes, NAPEP, PAP, the SURE-P,YOUWIN, just to mention a few, are some of the various intervention mechanisms aimed at ensuring economic growth that is rich with job creation opportunities. Besides, the Federal Government over the years has been claiming strong real GDP growth rate measuring at 6% or 6.5% since 2005 till date (see Aganga, 2010 and Ogunmade, 2013). This is apparently a paradox. A situation whereby, there is a decade of strong real GDP of 6.5% economic growth, and in the same period, unemployment rate continue to rise annually from 11.9% in 2005 to 19.7% in 2009, and over 37% in 2013% (Aganga, 2010 and Ogunmade, 2013). The apparent economic growth has not lead to economic development. The rate of poverty is still very high, the industries are still in shambles, technological development is till at rudimental stage, income inequality is high, immortal mortality rate and child mortality rate is high, and in fact, Nigeria development index is still very low.
Unemployment according to ILO (2006), is among the biggest threats to social stability in many countries (including Nigeria), putting the global rate at 12.6% (ILO, 2012). When compared with her counterparts in the continent, Nigeria’s unemployment crisis is more serious. For instance, South Africa’s unemployment rate is currently standing at 25.2%, and in Ghana is about 14% in 2010, while Nigeria is around 37%. Recent statistics by the World Bank has put the unemployment rate in Nigeria at 22 percent, while the youth unemployment rate is 38 percent. The report shows that the bracket age of 15-35 years olds account for close to 60 percent of the Nigeria’s population and 30 percent of the work force. The report also indicates that approximately 4 million people entered into the labour market every year (Subair, 2013).
1.2 Statement of the problems
According Kolade (2013), he disclosed that the Programme requires N273.52 billion in its 2013 budget, said that one of the major problems the SURE-P was facing has to do with the fact that it never came up with brand new programmes on its own, adding that the beneficiaries of the mass transit buses are the National Road Transport Operators and some organizations in transport business.
One of the problems of the SURE-P intervention attempts is that there projects duplication that we don’t seem to know how payments are paid to these contractors working on these projects.’’
The committee said however that unless the organization provides its full details of 2012 dealings, it would not debate the 2013 budget and therefore directed the chairman, Dr Christopher Kolade to furnish it with the details before it considers the next sitting date to debate on the budget.
According to Senator Abe, “there is no need to discuss anything on the 2013 budget when there are issues unresolved here in the 2012 budget. From the mood of members of this committee, nobody is ready to discuss anything on issue regarding 2013 budget”.
1.3 Objective of the study
The aim of this research work is to examine the impact of Sure-P in economic development in Nigeria. The specific objectives of this research work includes the following
1. To examine the relevance of Sure-P on the development of Nigerian economy.
2. To evaluate the relationship between Sure-P and economic growth of Nigeria.
3. To identify the problems hindering the successful operation of the sure-P programme in Nigeria.
4. To proffer possible solutions to the problems identified.
1.4 Research Questions
The researcher developed the following research questions;
1. How relevant is Sure-P on the development of Nigerian economy?
2. Is there any relationship between Sure-P and economic growth of Nigeria.
3. What are the problems hindering the successful operation of the sure-P programme in Nigeria?
1.5 Research Hypotheses
Ho1: Sure-P on do not have any impact on the economic development of Abia state.
Ho2: Sure-P do not have any contribution in the provision of employment opportunities for graduates in Abia state.
Ho3: There is no relationship between Sure-P and economic growth of Nigeria.
Ho4: There are so many problems militating against the management of sure – p in Nigeria and Abia state.
1.6 Significance of the Study
Sure-P is welcomed development in Nigeria as it helps in reducing unemployment in Nigeria.
Sure-P is also important in the area of ensuring that the resources generated from subsidy removal is well invested for the development of our country Nigeria.
This research work will be of immense help to the researcher as it will help her to know more on the impact of Sure-P in economic development in Nigeria. It will also be of great importance to Nigerian youths and youths in Abia state in particular as it will enrich their knowledge on the benefits and usefulness of the tax paying by individuals and organizations.
This study will be of great importance to the students and other researchers since it will serve as a reference point for the upcoming researchers. This research will also be of immense help to the Board of Internal Revenue and FIRS in the area of generating income for the development of the country. Finally, this study will be of great importance to the general public as it will help the policy makers to enact laws that will guide the administration of taxation in Nigeria as it is the major source of revenue for the government.
1.7 Scope And Limitations Of The Study
The study shall focus on Taxation as a major source of government funds and the impact on management decision making with specific reference to Abia state board of internal revenue.
The researcher in carrying out this study encountered numerous problems, which include:
FUND: This included lack of enough fund to move around and visit the organizations. The researcher has to visit the organizations more than two times. The researcher equally needed enough money to source materials as needed. High cost of transportation in the city due to long distance also imposed its own limitation on the researcher.
LACK OF RESEARCH MATERIALS: lack of research materials was also one of the problems faced by the researcher in the cause of this research work.
RESPONSES BY THE RESPONDENTS: Another constraint to the researcher is that some of the respondents found it difficult to express their view with regards to the subject matter.
1.8 Definition Of Terms
To make this research clearer and understandable, some terms are defined by the researcher to make the research comprehensive.
Small Scale industry: These are those whose annual turnover does not exceed N200,000,000 or capital expenditure does not exceed N200,000,000. (CBN).
Cooperative: This is an autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly owned and democratically-controlled enterprise(ICA, 1995:34).
RURAL AREA: This connotes the interior or remote parts of the local government which the central government wants to develop by creating local government. (Aremu, (2010:42).
RURAL DEVELOPMENT: Deriving from our understanding of what development is then, that part of development that seeks to enhance the quality of life in the rural areas by providing basic infrastructural facilities. (Develtere, 2008:28).
LOCAL GOVERNMENT: The third tier of government with in the state charged with the responsibility of development and administration of the people at the grass root level. (Ejeakanonu, 2007:89)
SHARE THIS PAGE!