Contributions of Community Based Organisations to Poverty Alleviation in Oyo State, Nigeria

Abstract

In Nigeria, Community Based Organisations (CBOs) have been involved in diverse development and
poverty reduction programmes in many states. In Oyo State, their involvements have been evident for more than five decades now, a long time enough for their impacts to be readily felt, thus due for empirical evaluation. This study therefore evaluated activities of CBOs, as institutions of civil society, in poverty reduction in Oyo State, Nigeria. Data were collected through questionnaire administration on 1,104 households across three (3) Senatorial Districts in the State. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were also conducted for registered CBOs in the districts.
Descriptive statistics were used in analysing the data collected. Findings revealed that many CBOs existed in the areas, out of which the Landlord Associations and Town Unions accounted for 60 per cent. The projects that have abated poverty which were undertaken by these CBOs were in the areas of economy and empowerment (63.7%), security facilities and services (23.0%), and infrastructure provision (13.3%). Any attempt towards sustainable development should therefore take into cognisance the impact that these two organisations, among others, are
capable of exerting in locations that exemplifies similar cultural, social, economic and political characteristics.

Full text

www.ees.uni.opole.pl
ISSN paper version 1642-2597
ISSN electronic version 2081-8319
Economic and Environmental Studies
Vol. 17, No. 2 (42/2017), 185-203, June 2017
Correspondence Address: Oluwafemi ODUNSI, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Obafemi Awolowo
University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria. Tel.: +2348068806305, E-mail: odunsioluwafemi@gmail.com.
© 2017 Opole University
Contributions of Community Based
Organisations to Poverty Alleviation
in Oyo State, Nigeria
Olutayo O. ODUNOLA
Ladoke Akintola University of Technology Ogbomoso Oyo State, Nigeria
Oluwafemi M. ODUNSI
Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
Abstract:
In Nigeria, Community Based Organisations (CBOs) have been involved in diverse development and
poverty reduction programmes in many states. In Oyo State, their involvements have been evident for more than
five decades now, a long time enough for their impacts to be readily felt, thus due for empirical evaluation. This
study therefore evaluated activities of CBOs, as institutions of civil society, in poverty reduction in Oyo State,
Nigeria. Data were collected through questionnaire administration on 1,104 households across three (3) Senatorial
Districts in the State. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were also conducted for registered CBOs in the districts.
Descriptive statistics were used in analysing the data collected. Findings revealed that many CBOs existed in the
areas, out of which the Landlord Associations and Town Unions accounted for 60 per cent. The projects that have
abated poverty which were undertaken by these CBOs were in the areas of economy and empowerment (63.7%),
security facilities and services (23.0%), and infrastructure provision (13.3%). Any attempt towards sustainable
development should therefore take into cognisance the impact that these two organisations, among others, are
capable of exerting in locations that exemplifies similar cultural, social, economic and political characteristics.
Keywords:
Community Based Organisations, Development Planning, Poverty Alleviation, Community
Development, Civil Society
JEL codes: I32, O20, R58
https://doi.org/10.25167/ees.2017.42.3
1. Introduction
Poverty is a world-wide phenomenon, but it is a prominent feature in developing countries where

OLUTAYO O. ODUNOLA AND OLUWAFEMI M. ODUNSI
186
more than one person in five subsists on less than one dollar per day (World Bank, 2005). Nigeria,
which is the most populous developing country, is not exempted. Prior before now, the country
was among the richest 50 countries in the early 1970s (Obadan, 2002). While in the 1990s, the
country has been described as a paradox (World Bank, 1996), obviously as a result of persistent
increase in poverty incidence. The paradox was that the poverty level contradicted the country’s
immense wealth. Nigeria was therefore adjudged to be one of the poorest countries as she was
ranked 151
st
among 174 countries rated on Human Development Index (HDI) scale in 2005
(UNDP, 2005). The poverty assessment survey in Nigeria showed that over seventy per cent of the
population was living on less than one dollar per day and over fifty per cent were living below the
national poverty line (Food and Agriculture Organisation, (FAO) 2006).
The level of poverty in the country has caused many households to live in poor
unsatisfactory and overcrowded conditions without adequate access to potable water, sanitation
facilities and other basic services (UNDP, 1996; World Bank, 1996; Federal Office of Statistics
[FOS], 1999). While such poverty level is pervasive and persistent as well as when coupled with
the need for survival, the stage is set for criminal activities and other social vices including robbery,
political gangsterism and prostitution (Odunola, 2004). Due to the extent of the incidence of
poverty, successive governments in Nigeria, in collaboration with various international
organisations such as the World Bank, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United
Nations Children Education Fund (UNICEF) and United Nations Industrial Development
Organisation (UNIDO) have initiated specific, multi-dimensional and multi-faceted programmes
(Okunmadewa, 2001). Few of the programmes were National Directorate of Employment (NDE),
Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI) and Operation Feed the Nation
(OFN). They all focused on the creation of employment, improvement of welfare, development
and increase in productivity.
Despite all these efforts, the poverty level has remained high in most parts of the country.
The impact of the programmes was hardly felt. In addition, studies (Obadan 2002, Ajakaye 2003)
indicated that all the past poverty reduction programmes were unable to achieve the set targets for
reasons which were policy inconsistency, poor governance, lack of transparency and
accountability, inadequate data base, non-involvement of all the stakeholders, overlap of functions,
confusion of development programmes with poverty alleviation strategies and improper targeting
of the poor. There is thus a prevalent of what can be referred to as the proliferation of ‘Property

CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS
TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION IN OYO STATE, NIGERIA
187
Acquisition Programmes’ among the decision makers, implementers, government officials, and
the fortunate community group leaders in Nigeria, instead of Poverty Alleviation Programmes
(Odunola, 2004). Perhaps this explains why Agbola (2005) emphasised that “the rich could not
sleep because the poor were awake and the poor were awake because they were hungry and
possibly angry”.
Considering the high rate of plan attrition and failure to achieve the enunciated poverty
alleviation objectives with many of the political actors working at cross purposes, there is a
necessity for a paradigm shift towards community engagement or community-driven development.
The approach promises to address the inherent flaws of inconsistency, improper targeting, lack of
transparency and accountability, non-involvement of stakeholders, overlap of functions and
benefit-capture syndrome, among others. It is expected to be one in which the profit motive only
will not be the overarching criterion. In view of this, development planning is a proposed action
undertaken by concern on how development processes can contribute to the objective of poverty
alleviation. The approach, according to Okafor (2005), was induced by spatial inequalities in the
distribution of resources and fruits of economic development, inadequate and breakdown of urban
infrastructure, unemployment rate and over-urbanisation, as well as poverty.
Different stakeholders such as planning agencies, planners, research institutions,
government, non-governmental organisations and the civil society are involved in developmental
planning process. Although, the government has been much more involved in developmental
process in developing countries, the clamour for government effectiveness was higher in many of
these countries where the government has failed to deliver basic facilities and services including
roads, water supply, health care and education (World Bank, 1997). Kusek and Rist (2004)
observed that most programmes and strategies were implemented based on external untested
assumptions and prior understanding of individual, group and community perceptions underlying
causes and or influencing factors about development.
Government and international organisations now appreciate the role of NGOs as genuine
and effective channels to ensure poverty programme implementation because of their presence,
knowledge of the needs and interest of the poor. Chilowa and Gaynor (1992) argued that some
NGOs have been increasingly moving away from a project focus development to a problem solving
approach. They engaged local communities in long-lasting rural development, poverty alleviation
and slow rural to urban migration, through income and employment-generating activities, social

OLUTAYO O. ODUNOLA AND OLUWAFEMI M. ODUNSI
188
services, marketing and rural savings system. For instance, consultative survey conducted by
Okunmadewa (2001) on poverty alleviation in Nigeria revealed that some NGOs’ and CBOs’
programmes reach the poor better than public sector managed programmes, especially, those in
remote geographic regions and the less privileged or disadvantaged group.
Other evidence that proved NGOs to be the source of best-practice for target projects in
recent time abound. For illustration, an Indian NGO Myrada, acted as an intermediary between the
poor people and commercial banks to create financial capital for poverty alleviation. Also, Mopawi
NGO in Honduras, in conjunction with indigenous communities of La Mosquila, relentlessly
lobbied an international NGO research bodies and indigenous organisations to raise awareness on
the need to improve the lives of the poor by involving government and local communities in
decision-making and management (Soyibo Alayande and Olayiwola, 2001). The NGOs and
parental involvement in schools establishment and subsidisation of teachers recruitment in
Pakistan has led to increase in girls’ enrolment by 33 per cent in Quetta and 22 per cent in rural
communities.
In Nigeria, NGOs and CBOs have been involved in diverse development and poverty
reduction programmes in many states. In Oyo State, their involvements have been evident for more
than five decades now, a long time enough for their impacts to be readily felt and due for empirical
evaluation. This study therefore evaluates CBOs activities as an institution of civil society in
poverty reduction in Oyo State, Nigeria. In the context of this study, CBOs are grassroot
organisations which promote the people’s ability to control their well-being (Onibokun and
Faniran, 1995). The organisation is built on the principle of co-operation and organised group
work. This attribute is important in the identification and prioritisation of community problems
and seeking solutions to the problems (Wahab, 1996).
2. Study Area
The study was carried out in Oyo State, Nigeria. The State covers approximately 28,454 square
kilometres and ranked 14th by size among the States in Nigeria. The landscape consists of old hard
rocks and dome shape hills, which rise gently from about 500 metres in the southern part and
reaching a height of about 1,219 metres above sea level in the northern part. Major rivers which
are Ogun, Oba, Oyan, Otin, Ofiki, Sasa, Oni, Erinle and Osun, take their sources from the

CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS
TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION IN OYO STATE, NIGERIA
189
highlands. The Capital of the State is Ibadan and it is one of the major cities in Nigeria and in
Africa as a whole. The State comprises of three Senatorial Districts (as in other states of the
Federation) and thirty three Local Government Areas (LGAs). It is bounded by Ogun State in the
west, Kwara State in the North and Osun State in the East (Figure 1). The State has three (3)
Senatorial Districts which comprise Oyo North (with thirteen (13) LGAs), Oyo Central (with
eleven (11) LGAs), and Oyo South (with nine (9) LGAs).
3. Methodology
The study considered the identified senatorial districts in Oyo State, Nigeria. Out of the thirty-three
LGAs, twenty-nine per cent (29 %) was considered adequate to represent the state. This decision
was based on the survey methodology applied by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) for the
conduct of National Living Standard Survey in 2004, where twenty-nine per cent of the 36 States
of the Federation were selected as the study areas (NBS, 2004). Ten LGAs were sampled (29% of
33 LGAs). The 2006 population census figures of the sampled LGAs were projected to 2010 based
on the national growth rate of 2.83. To arrive at the sample size, sampling ratio of 0.05 per cent of
the total population was adopted. This decision was based on Neuman’s (1991) assertion that larger
population permit smaller sampling ratio for equally good samples. Thus 0.05 per cent of 2,206,146
which equals to 1,104 were sampled. Data were therefore collected from 1,104 sample households
across the three senatorial districts through questionnaire administration.
Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were likewise conducted for registered CBOs such as:
Community Development Associations (CDA), Youth Associations (YA), Religion Based
Associations (RBA) and Town Unions (TU). The FGD was conducted in each of the sampled
LGAs. This was to obtain necessary information to supplement and corroborate (or otherwise) the
primary data obtained through questionnaire administration. For each of the FGD session, between
5-8 members of registered CBOs whose membership was not less than five years and who were
not part of the elected executives of the CBOs were involved in the discussion for between 2-3
hours. The interview took place at community halls and the participants were allowed to pass
comments freely on issues pertaining to the roles of CBOs in poverty alleviation activities in their
respective areas. Descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentages and mean index were used
in analysing the data collected. The index was computed as a sum of the weights resulting from the

OLUTAYO O. ODUNOLA AND OLUWAFEMI M. ODUNSI
190
Likert scale with ‘very significant’ ≥70 per cent,‘significant’69-60 per cent, ‘less-significant’ 59-
50 per cent ‘not significant’ 49-40 per cent, and ‘not significant at all’ 39-0 per cent with weighted
values of 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 respectively. Outcomes of responses greater than or equal to 4 represented
a significant impact level, any responses greater than or equal to 3 represented little improvement,
while responses equal to or less than 2 represented no impact at all.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Identification of Community Based Organisation
A search through the literature by Adeboyejo (2006) revealed that local institutions were viewed
from two broad perspectives. First, it served as a typology of civil society that idealises their
potential in advancing democratic governance and second, as an agent of development and service
delivery in urban and regional landscape. These local institutions which serve as the intermediary
between local people and the government facilitate transmission from traditional set-up to
modernity and also promote economic interest among members of the association. The CBOs/local
institutions in this study were grouped into: youth association and age grade, town union, landlord
and development association, occupation/technical group, religious organisation, socio-cultural
group, elders’ forum and political development groups.
Findings revealed Landlord Associations and Town Unions accounted for 60 per cent of
CBOs in the study area while the other CBOs shared the remaining 40 per cent (see Table 1). The
breakdown showed that Youth Associations and Age Grades accounted for 2.8 per cent in Oyo
South (OS), 19.2 per cent in Oyo Central (OC) and13.9 per cent in Oyo North (ON), while Town
Union constituted 20 per cent, 11.5 per cent and 27.8 per cent in OS, OC and ON respectively.
Landlord Associations had the largest number of CBOs with 60 per cent in OS, 46.2 per cent in
OC and 33.3 per cent in ON. Occupation/Technical Groups, Religion Organisation and Socio-
Cultural Group accounted for 0.0 per cent in OS and OC. More so, the three CBOs in that sequence
accounted for 5.6 per cent, 2.75 per cent and 13.9 per cent in ON. The Elders’ Forum and Political
Development Groups constituted 12 per cent in OS, 23.1 per cent in OC and 2.75 per cent in ON.
It is apparent that any attempt towards sustainable development should take into cognizance the
impact that the Town Unions and the Landlord Associations; which were the most prevalent CBOs
are capable of exerting in Oyo State.

CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS
TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION IN OYO STATE, NIGERIA
191
4.2. Community Based Organisations and Year of Establishment
The age of the CBOs may likely influence their performance positively or negatively. The CBOs
in the study area were classified by years of existence and the details are as presented in Table 2.
On the aggregate, only a few CBOs were founded before 1970 while majority were established
between 1971 and 2000. For instance not more than 13.8 per cent of the CBOs came into existence
before 1970. When analysed based on Senatorial Districts, before 1970, no registered CBOs were
found in OS, while 3.8 per cent and 30.6 per cent of them were found in OC and ON respectively.
Between 1971 and 1980, there were 40 per cent registered CBOs in OS, 3.8 per cent in OC and
27.8 per cent in ON. Registered CBOs for years between 1981 and 1990 in OS were 24 per cent
while there were 34.6 per cent in OC and 11.1 per cent in ON.
Moreover, for years between 1991 and 2000, 24 per cent of registered CBOs were found in
OS, 38.5 per cent in OC and 16.7 per cent in ON. For the year 2001 and above in OS, 12 per cent
CBOs were found, while 19.3 per cent and 13.9 per cent existed in OC and ON respectively. The
study showed that registered CBOs reduced from years before 1970 to year 2001 and above in OS
and ON while an increase was noticed in OC between years 1981-2000 alone. The increase in OC
alone may imply that most projects implemented by the state or federal governments during this
period might be contrary to community needs and the sustainability of such project might not be
ascertained. The FGD group reveals that the recently established CBOs focus more on development
projects aimed at poverty reduction, thus there is need to support the new CBOs in order to
encourage the upcoming ones.
4.3. Membership Strength of Community Based Organisations
Membership strength is one of the factors likely to determine both the financial capability and
popularity of the CBOs within and outside the community. Details of membership strength are as
presented in Table 3. On the aggregate, majority (50.6 per cent) of the CBOs had between 21 and
60 members. However, a substantial proportion 41.3 per cent had above 60 members. It was also
observed that less than one-tenth of the CBOs had members of less than 20. On senatorial basis,
CBOs with less than 20 members accounted for 4 per cent in OS, 11.5 per cent in OC and 8.3 per
cent in ON. The CBOs with 21- 40 members accounted for 20 per cent in OS, 19.2 per cent in OC

OLUTAYO O. ODUNOLA AND OLUWAFEMI M. ODUNSI
192
and 33.4 per cent in ON. While CBOs with 41- 60 members accounted for 32 per cent in OS, 23.1
per cent in OC and 22.2 per cent in ON. CBOs with membership of 61- 80 were few and they
accounted for 8 per cent in OS, 7.67 per cent in OC and 5.6 per cent in ON. However, CBOs in
membership range of 81-100 accounted for 16 per cent in OS, 8.3 in per cent in ON and 7.7 per
cent in OC. The study further indicated that CBOs with membership of 101 and above constituted
20 per cent in OS, 30.8 per cent in OC and 22.2 per cent in ON.
4.4. Development Projects Undertaken by Community Based Organisations
Community Based Organisations are grassroots organisations managed by members on behalf of
members (Edwards and Hulme, 1992; Ohakweh and Ezirim, 2006; UN HABITAT, 2011). CBOs
perform vital and diverse functions which include mobilization of labour, infrastructural
development, cultural activities, conflict resolution, and provision of emergency relief (Narayan
and Shah, 2000). Over the years, the importance and potentials of Community Based Organisation
are recognised by the government, non- governmental and development agencies as the only
organisations the poor own, trust and can rely on. Various development projects undertaken by the
CBOs in the Senatorial Districts in Oyo State were discussed in this section.
Three categories of projects (economy and empowerment, security facilities and services
and infrastructural provision) were implemented by various CBOs across the Senatorial Districts
in Oyo State. These CBOs comprised Youth Association /Age Groups, Town Unions, Landlord
Associations and Elders’ Forum, Occupation/ Technical Groups, Religious Organisations and
Socio-cultural Groups. A total of three-hundred and seventeen (317) projects were implemented
across the three Senatorial Districts of the sampled registered CBOs, with eighty-three projects
implemented in OS, one-hundred and eleven (111) projects in OC and one-hundred and twenty
three (123) projects in ON (see Table 4). Infrastructural development activities accounted for 63.7
per cent of the development; this is followed by security with 23.0 per cent and the remaining 13.3
per cent accounted for economy and empowerment projects.
Out of the eighty-three projects executed in OS, infrastructural facilities constituted
65.1 per cent, security projects accounted for 25.3 per cent while 9.6 per cent represented economic
and empowerment projects. In OC where one-hundred and eleven projects were executed, 72.1 per
cent were infrastructure projects, 19.8 per cent were security projects and 8.1 per cent were
economic and empowerment projects. Also, out of the one-hundred and twenty three projects

CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS
TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION IN OYO STATE, NIGERIA
193
executed in ON, 55.3 per cent constituted infrastructural projects, 24.4 per cent were security
projects while economy and empowerment projects accounted for 6.50 per cent.
The study informed that more infrastructural projects were undertaken by the CBOs with
highest infrastructural development from OC (39.6 per cent) followed by ON (33.7 per cent) and
OS (26.7 per cent) respectively. The security projects ranked second with the highest value of 46.1
per cent from ON, followed by 30.1 per cent in OC and the least with value of 28.8 per cent in OS
in that order. Surprisingly, the least category of great development concern to CBOs is economy
and empowerment programmes which one would have thought would have come first because it
was ranked highest by the FGD group as means of lifting the poor above poverty level. It actually
accounted for 59.5 per cent in ON, followed by 21.4 per cent in OC and 19.0 per cent in OS
respectively.
4.5. Perceived Impacts of Community Based Organisations’ Projects on poverty Reduction
The impact is the expected effects of a project on a targeted population. It measures the ultimate
change in the conditions of beneficiaries resulting from a project. Due to multi-dimensional
perspective of poverty certain indicators from the initial categories of projects undertaken by the
CBOs are used to compute the Impact of CBOs Projects on Poverty Reduction Index (ICPPR).
This index measured both the constraints to poverty reduction before CBOs projects
implementation and the extent of changes that occurred after CBOs projects implementation in
Oyo State. In computing (ICPPR) the average of the responses measured on Likert scale was first
determined and this was represented by Y, the mean of sub-classes of CBOs project represented
by X and the mean of the aggregate ICPPR were computed with the deviations of the ICPPR from
it for ranking the projects in order of their constraints perpetuating poverty before CBOs
intervention and the impacts after CBOs interventions.
Findings revealed that in the three senatorial districts, assistance to the needy’, had an
aggregate ICPPR of 2.42 and 3.15 before and after the execution of the projects respectively (see
Table 5). This indicated an insignificant impact since the ICPPR was less than 4 which is the
critical value for impact. The security category had an aggregate ICPPR of 3.34 and 2.89 before
and after the execution of the projects correspondingly. This implied that crime rate was higher
before project intervention in Oyo State and little impact is made after project execution. Therefore,
crimes such as rape/ indecent assaults’, ‘burglary/house-breaking’, ‘breach of public peace’,

OLUTAYO O. ODUNOLA AND OLUWAFEMI M. ODUNSI
194
‘kidnapping and physical insecurity’ among others induced by poverty has reduced to some extent
though of little significance.
On socio-cultural heritage category with the aggregate ICPPR value of 2.18 and 3.10 before
and after project execution by the CBOs showed an insignificant impact since the ICPPR was less
than 4 which was the critical value for impact; although noticeable improvement was observed.
Access to infrastructure had aggregate ICPPR before and after projects execution with value of
2.37 and 3.35 respectively. This showed an insignificant impact since the ICPPR was also less than
4 which was the critical value for impact, although little improvement was noticed. The economic
and empowerment category had ICPPR of 2.38 and 2.88 before and after project execution. Which
was also an indication of insignificant impact since the ICPPR was less than 4 which was the
critical value for impact, but there was an improvement.
The major constraints perpetuating poverty before CBOs interventions in descending orders
were: security 0.88, socio-cultural heritages -0.38, infrastructural problems -0.19, economy and
empowerment -0.18 and philanthropic -0.14. The security project category although with the
deviation of -0.18 accounted for the highest impact in reducing poverty. Second on the rank was
infrastructural provision category with the deviation 0.28. Rank next was socio-assistance to the
needy 0.08, followed by socio-cultural heritage with value of 0.02.
5. Conclusion
In Nigeria, the failure of the government to deliver fundamental economic goods, infrastructural
facilities and services and the realisation of effective development that are people-centred have
made Community Based Organisations a force to be reckoned with in the development processes.
This study has thus examined the contributions of CBOs as agents of and in poverty reduction.
Other issues assessed were the relationship between the characteristics of CBOs and their levels
of involvement in poverty alleviation processes, the differences in the level of CBOs involvement
in poverty reduction processes among the three Senatorial Districts, the impact of CBOs
development activities on poverty level in Oyo State.
Of interest to this study was the extent to which constraints accentuating poverty have been
addressed with respect to projects implemented. Findings from this study have actually provided
us with evidence of developmental projects that were embarked on and implemented by CBOs.

CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS
TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION IN OYO STATE, NIGERIA
195
The concentration of these CBOs towards infrastructural development programmes in their various
communities was a pointer to government inefficiency in the provision of basic infrastructural
facilities and services that would have abated poverty. This emphasised the need to include
Community Based Organisations (especially Landlord Associations and Town Unions) and their
networks in development and implementation of policies and programmes that will enable the Oyo
State Government to better understand and serve the needs of the poor. This could also serve as a
template that could be replicated in other states in Nigeria as well as other developing countries of
the world exemplifying similar cultural, social, economic and political characteristics.
Literature
Adeboyejo, A. T. (2006). Local institutions and infrastructure development in Ogbomoso, Nigeria. In: Inyang, H.;
Menezes, G.B.; Braden, C.L.; Fodeke, B. (eds.). Conference Programme and the Journal of Abstracts of
Presentations: 10-15. September 2006 ICIDEN Abuja Nigeria. 185-217.
Agbola, S. B. (2005). The Housing Debacle: An Inaugural lecture. Ibadan: University of Ibadan Press.
Ajakaye, D. O.; Olomola, A. S. (2003). Overview of poverty and poverty alleviation in Nigeria: a multi-dimensional
perspective. In: Ajakaiye, D. O.; Olomola, A.S. (eds.). NISER New World Press Ibadan: 1-31.
Chilowa, W.; Gaynor, K. (1992). Poverty and poverty alleviation in Malawi: design and management of targeted
poverty alleviation projects in Anglophone Africa. Paper Presented 22-25 May 1992EDI Seminar, Kampala.
Edwards, M.; Hulme, D. (1992). Making a Difference: NGOS and development in a changing world. London: London
Earth Scans Publications.
Federal Office of Statistics [FOS] (1999). Poverty profile for Nigeria (1980-1996). Abuja: F.O.S.
Food and Agriculture Organisation (2006). FAOSTAT: Food security statistics in Nigeria. Available at: http/ Nigeria
http//www.fao.org.faostat/food security\ countries Nigeria.epdf. Accessed 6 October 2006.
Kusek, J. Z.; Rist, R. C. (2004). A handbook for development practitioners: ten steps to a results-
based monitoring and evaluation system. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Narayan, D.; Shah, T. (2000). Connecting the local to the global: voices of the poor. Framework Paper Prepared for
Workshop on Local to Global Community for Voice of the Poor 11-13 December. Washington, D.C.: World
Bank, Poverty alleviation and Economic Management Network.
National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) (2004). National Living Standard Survey. Available at:
www.proshareng.com/news/download.ph. Accessed 18 October 2008.
Obadan, M. I. (2002). Integrated approach to rural poverty alleviation in Nigeria. Annual Lecture Series Delivered at
Samuel Adegbite Foundation on February, 22nd 2002.University of Ibadan.
Odunola, O. O. (2004). An appraisal of poverty alleviation strategies in Nigeria (1975-2002). M.Sc Project. Dept. of
Urban and Regional Planning. Ibadan: University of Ibadan, xii-205pp.
Ohakweh, A. O; Ezirim, O. N. (2006). Project planning and evaluation: planner’s perspective. River State:
Alpha Armour Investment Ltd Port-Harcourt.
Okafor, S. I. (2005). Regional Development Planning. In: Agbola, T. (ed.). Reading in Urban and Regional Planning:
305-320. Macmillan Nigeria Publisher Limited.
Okunmedewa, F. (2001). Poverty alleviation in Nigeria: a four-point demand. An Annual Guest Lecture Delivered on
March 15, 2001 at University of Ibadan.
Onibokun, A.G.; Faniran, A. (1995). Community Based Organisations in Nigerian Urban Centers: a critical evaluation
of their achievements and potentials as agents of development. (CASSAD) Monograph Series 7. Odua Printing
Company Limited.
Soyibo, A.; Alayande, B.; Olayiwola, K. (2001). Poverty alleviation strategies in Nigeria. In: Abumere, S. I.; Soyibo,
A. (eds.). Development Policy and Analyses: 173 – 213. Development Policy Centre.

OLUTAYO O. ODUNOLA AND OLUWAFEMI M. ODUNSI
196
UNDP (1996). Nigerian human development report. United Nations, Development Programme. Acdees Publisher
Lagos.
UNDP (2005). Mozambique national human development report. Published for the United Nations Development
Programme. UN Plaza.
UN-Habitat (2011). Global report on human settlements. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. United
Nations.
Wahab, B. (1996). Community development association and self-reliance. The case of Isalu Community Development
Union, Iseyin, Nigeria. In: Blunt, P.; Warren, D.M (eds.). Indigenous organizations and development: 56-66.
United Kingdom.
World Bank (1996). Nigeria: Poverty in the midst of plenty. The challenge of growth with inclusion. World Bank
Poverty Assessment Report 14733.
World Bank (2005). Good practice in lending: multi-sectoral projects incorporating gender. Malawi Social Action
Fund Project. World Bank Technical Paper 518.

CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS
TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION IN OYO STATE, NIGERIA
197
Figure 1. Map of Oyo State in its National Context
Source: Ministry of Land, Housing and Physical Planning Ibadan, Oyo State, 2010.

OLUTAYO O. ODUNOLA AND OLUWAFEMI M. ODUNSI
198
Table 1. Typologies and Distribution of Sampled Community Based Organisations in Oyo
State
Types of CBOs
Oyo South
(OS)
N
o
(%)
Oyo Central
(OC)
N
o
(%
)
Oyo Nort
h
(ON)
N
o
(%)
Tot
al
(%
)
Youth
Association &
Age grades
Ilupeju-
Idiobi CDA,
Ire akari
CDA
2
8.0
Arolu Youth
Devt; Iware
CDA, Mami
CDC, Ogele
CDA.
4
15.
3
Ayami,
Good
friend,
Igbo-
Ologun,
Oredegbe
Taraa
CDA
5
13.
9
11
12.
6
Town Unions
Agooro,
Isale Oba I
& II, Oke
Iserin,
Yejide
CDA,
Surulere
CDA
5
20.
0
Akanra
CDA,
Onipasan
Oke Afa
CDC,
Alapata
Jagun (3,
11.5%)
3
11.
5
Ajangba,
Alasa
CDA,
Ehinke
CDA, Isal
e-Abudu,
Iya/Moko
la,
Kinnikinn
i CDA,
koso
CDC,
Laha
CDC Kisi
Town
Union.
9
25.
0
17
19.
5
Landlord
Associations
Adekile CD
A, Akere,
Arowosanye
II,
Binukonu,
Borokini,
Ifelodun,
Ifesowapo,
Itesiwaju,
Koloko
Idiobi Oke
Irorun,
Olorunsogo,
Oluokun,
Oyapidan,
Pako I & II
13
52.
0
Abonde,
Ajia Comm,
Devt Ass,
Alabidun
CDA,
Ifelodun-
Adeleke,
Ifesiwaju, Ija
do
CDA,Iresapa
, Iwajowa,
Iware CDA,
Mami CDC
10
38.
6
Abogunde
,
Asunnara
CDA,
Igbobale,
Isale Ora
Parapo
landlord,
Obanla,
Oke
Owode,
Okelerin
Opomaalu
, Osupa
CDA
Saga/Isale
-Ora,
Oke-
eletun,
Oke-oro
12
33.
3
35
40.
2

CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS
TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION IN OYO STATE, NIGERIA
199
Occupation/Techn
ical groups
Aworawo
CDA
1
4.
0
Lademon,
1
3.8
Cattle
dealer,
Idiko Ago
Elite club
2
5.6
4
4.
6
Religious
Organisations
Nil
Itesiwaju
Oke,
1
3.8
Isale
Alufa
1
2.
7
2
2.
3
Socio-cultural
Groups
Nil
Nil
Agede
CDC,
Dynamic
Sisters,
Igbobale,
Iju
patriots,
Isale
Abudu.
5
13.
9
5
5.
7
Elders Forum and
Political
Development
Groups
Balaro,
Ilupeju
CDA,
Surulere
CDA.
3
12.
0
Akeetan
CDA, Idode
CDA,
Igbowa
CDA, Iyaji
CDA,
Pakoyi (6,
23.1%)
6
23.
2
Katangua
CDA
1
2.
7
10
11.
5
Others
Ajao/Round
er.
1
4.0
Fasola CDA,
1
3.
8
1
2.
8
3
3.
5
Total
25
100
26
10
0
36
100
87
10
0
Source: Authors’ own elaboration.
Table 2: Year of Establishment of CBO
S/N
Year of
Establishment
OS OC ON TOTAL
CBOs
% Cobs % CBOs % CBOs
%
1 Before 1970 0 0.0 1 3.8 11 30.5 12 13.8
2 1971-1980 10 40.0 1 3.8 10 27.8 21 24.1
3 1981-1990 6 24.0 9 34.6 4 11.1 19 21.8
4 1991-2000 6 24.0 10 38.5 6 16.7 22 25.3
5 2001 &
Above
3 12.0 5 19.3 5 13.9 13 14.9
TOTAL 25 100 26 100 36 100 87 100
Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

OLUTAYO O. ODUNOLA AND OLUWAFEMI M. ODUNSI
200
Table 3: Membership Strength of Community Based Organisations
S/N
Membership Strength
OS
OC
ON
TOTAL
CBOs % CBOs % Cobs % CBOs
%
1 Less than 20 1 4 3 11.5 3 8.3 7 8.1
2 21-40 5 20 5 19.2 12 33.4 22 25.3
3 41-60 8 32 6 23.1 8 22.2 22 25.3
4 61-80 2 8 2 7.7 2 5.6 6 6.8
5 81-100 4 16 2 7.7 3 8.3 9 10.4
6 101 &above 5 20 8 30.8 8 22.2 21 24.1
TOTAL 25 100 26 100 36 100 87 100
Source: Authors’ own elaboration.
Table 4: Community Based Organisation Development Projects in the Senatorial Districts
S/N Project Description Senatorial Districts
OS (%) OC (%) ON (%) Total (%)
1 Infrastructural
Development
54 (r =
65.1) (c =
26.7)
80 (r = 72.1)
(c = 39.6)
68 (r = 55.3)
(c = 33.7)
202 (r = 100)
2 Economic &
Empowerment
8 (r = 9.6)
(c =19.0)
9 (r = 8.1)
(c =21.4)
25 (r = 20.3)
(c = 59.6)
42 (r = 100)
3 Security 21 (r =
25.3) (c =
28.8)
22 (r = 19.8)
(c = 30.1)
30 (r = 24.4 )
(c
=41.1)
73 (r = 100)
4 Total 83 (c =
100)
111 (c = 100)
123 (c = 100)
317
c = column percentage
r = row percentage
Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS
TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION IN OYO STATE, NIGERIA
201
Table 5: Levels of Poverty before CBOs Projects Intervention and after CBOs Projects
Intervention in Oyo State.
S/
N
Impact Indicators
CBOs Impact Rating Index in Oyo State
Respondents Level of Poverty
Before CBOs Project
Implementation
Respondents Level of Poverty
After CBOs Project
Implementation
No
SW
V
Y
X
No
SW
V
Y
X
1 Philanthro
pic
Social -
assistance to
the needy
106
7
259
2
2.4
2
2.4
2
-
0.1
4
0.0
2
104
9
331
4
3.1
5
3.15
0.0
8
0.0
1
2 Security Rape/indece
nt assaults
102
6
373
1
3.6
3
3.4
4
0.8
8
0.7
7
977 271
7
2.7
7
2.89
-
0.1
8
0.0
3
Burglary/hou
se braking
105
6
375
7
3.5
5
104
7
278
7
2.6
6
Breach of
public peace
540 164
8
3.0
5
536 142
0
2.6
4
Kidnapping
and physical
insecurity
104
6
368
0
3.5
1
103
6
361
2
3.4
8
3
Socio-
cultural
Heritages
Inclusion of
people in
development
processes
102
1
203
3
1.9
9
2.1
8
-
0.3
8
0.1
4
104
0
350
4
3.3
6
3.09
9
0.0
2
0.0
0
accountabilit
y and
transparency
103
5
221
6
2.1
4
102
9
291
2
2.8
2
Social
solidarity
103
6
237
7
2.2
9
103
0
311
8
3.0
2
influence and
control on
development
s
103
6
244
3
2.3
5
105
4
323
5
3.0
6

OLUTAYO O. ODUNOLA AND OLUWAFEMI M. ODUNSI
202
Community
dignity and
prestige
104
7
225
4
2.1
5
101
9
326
0
3.1
9
0.2
8
4
Infrastruct
ural
Provision
Access to
transformati
onal
Information
102
9
220
6
2.1
4
2.3
7
-
0.1
9
0.0
4
101
6
303
2
2.9
8
3.35
0.0
8
Access to all
seasons road
104
8
228
0
2.1
7
103
2
279
0
2.7
0
Access to
water
106
1
255
0
2.4
0
105
2
302
2
2.8
7
Access to
electricity
104
5
242
5
2.3
2
105
9
315
0
2.9
7
Access to
health care
105
4
234
8
2.2
2
106
1
324
0
3.0
5
Access to
market
places
654 200
8
3.0
7
602 193
8
3.2
1
Quality and
hygienic
environment
102
6
215
0
2.0
9
105
4
337
6
3.2
0
Nutrition
adequacy
103
1
239
7
2.3
2
104
6
300
3
2.8
7
Access to
school
104
2
266
8
2.5
6
105
3
324
5
3.0
8
5
Economy
and
Empowerm
ent
Income 105
9
250
2
2.3
6
2.3
8
-
0.1
8
0.0
1
106
1
332
6
3.1
3
2.88
-
0.1
9
0.0
4
Employment
opportunity
104
9
249
3
2.3
7
105
9
290
0
2.7
3
Productivity 979 235
4
2.4
0
102
4
284
8
2.7
8
Total
Before CBOs projects intervention - Mean x = 2.56
After CBOs projects intervention - Mean x = 3.07
Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS
TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION IN OYO STATE, NIGERIA
203
Wkład Organizacji Społecznościowych w łagodzenie ubóstwa w Oyo State w Nigerii
rtykułu w języku polskim
Streszczenie
W Nigerii Organizacje Społecznościowe (ang.: Community Based Organisations (CBOs)) zostały
zaangażowane w różne programy mające na celu rozwój oraz ograniczanie ubóstwa w wielu
stanach. W stanie Oyo, ich zaangażowanie jest widoczne już od ponad pięćdziesięciu lat,
wystarczająco długo, aby rzeczywiście odczuć i empirycznie ocenić efekty ich działań. Niniejszy
artykuł ma na celu ewaluację wpływu działalności CBOs jako organizacji społeczności
obywatelskich na ograniczanie ubóstwa w Stanie Oyo w Nigerii. Dane zgromadzono dzięki
badaniom opartym na kwestionariuszach wypełnionych w 1 104 gospodarstwach domowych.
Przeprowadzono też dyskusje w grupach fokusowych z zarejestrowanymi Organizacjami
Społecznościowymi. Do analizy danych wykorzystano statystykę opisową. Wyniki badań ukazały,
że na analizowanym obszarze działa wiele CBOs, z czego 60% aktywności przypada na
Stowarzyszenia Gospodarzy (ang.: Landlord Associations) oraz Unie Miejskie (ang.: Town
Unions). Projekty, które przyczyniły się do zmniejszenia ubóstwa, przeprowadzono w obszarach:
gospodarki i praworządności (63,7%), usług i urządzeń bezpieczeństwa (23%), a także
infrastruktury (13,3%). Z tego względu pod uwagę powinny być wzięte próby dążenia do
zrównoważonego rozwoju, ponieważ owe dwie organizacje są w stanie wpłynąć na obszary
stanowiące przykłady aspektów kulturalnych, społecznych, gospodarczych oraz politycznych.
Słowa kluczowe: Organizacje Społecznościowe, planowanie rozwoju, ograniczanie ubóstwa,
rozwój społeczności, społeczeństwo obywatelskie