Jide Ibietan1
, Peter Ndukwe2
Abstract
The central thesis or argument of this paper is that the performance of local governments in Nigeria,
especially in the fourth republic can be interrogated through the Efficiency Services theory. The kernel of
this theory is that local government acts as an efficient agent for providing services that are local in character.
Through a heavy reliance on secondary data backed by practical observation and analytical framework, the
paper observed that the leading personnel, policy outcomes and political/administrative environments of
local government administration in Nigeria (within the period of study) portrayed them as failed institutions.
The paper canvassed the need for synergy and collaborative approach to community development and reform
initiatives anchored on “theory to practice” policy inclination.
Keywords: Local Government; Administration; Community; Development; Efficiency; Services.
1. Introduction
The local government being the government nearest to the populace, is one of the best agencies for
generating motivations and encouraging mobilisation for self-help, as well as including the much needed
wider participation of the local population in the decision making process at the local level (Ukah, 2012).
According to Edward Scouma, (in Eluwa, 2012:11),
The so-called third world is a rural world where any meaningful discussion of community development
really means not only “talking of overall national development,” but because “it is in community that the
problems of inequitable distribution of resources or a marked lack of purchasing power and of grinding
poverty in which the wretched members of society stagnate and stare one in the face with brutal clarity.
The raison d’etre of the local government in Nigeria is to, at least stop the deteriorating living conditions
in the various communities of the country. An effective local government will be better disposed than the
state or federal government, not only to stem the grim reality of the rising tide of grassroots poverty but also
be better positioned to evoke communal efforts and networking to manage and mobilise the support of local
citizenry in participating in all the programmes that may affect them (Eluwa, 2012).
As an agent of development, the major priorities of any local government should include reduction of
poverty in the community, increasing the standard of living of the local dwellers, provision of social
amenities, enhancing the participation of the local citizens in political activities that concern them, enhancing
their individual human capabilities, boosting nationalism, inspiring creativity and innovation as well as
educating the local people (Bello-Imam, 2007).
Conceptual Discourse
The concepts of Local Government and Community Development are discussed in this section. It also
presents the logical interconnection and challenges inherent in the nature and practice of these concepts in
Nigeria.
1Department of Political Science & International Relations, Covenant University, Ota, Ogun State, Nigeria
2Department of Political Science & International Relations, Covenant University, Ota, Ogun State, Nigeria
J. Ibietan & P. Ndukwe
752
The Concept of Local Government
The performance of local governments has been receiving increasing attention in Nigeria over the past
decades, from both academic and civil society sectors. All over the world and especially in Africa, local
government is seen as a means of enhancing development and service delivery, improve governance and
deepen democracy (Buccus,Hemson, Hicks and Piper, 2007).
The National Guidelines for Reforms ofLocal Government (1976:1)in Nigeria defines Local
Government as:
Government at local levels exercised through representative councils established by law to exercise
specific powers within defined areas. These powers should give the council substantial control over local
affairs as well as staff and institutional and financial powers to initiate and direct the provision of services
and so determine and implement projects so as to complement the activities of the state and federal
Governments in their areas and to ensure through devolution of functions in these councils and through the
active participation of the people and then traditional institutions that local initiative and response to local
needs and conditions are maximized (cited in Bello, 1986:12).
This explains the legality of local governments which has the backing ofthe fourth schedule of the 1999
constitution to enforce authority and power within its territorial boundary. It is expected to discharge duties
which ensure effectiveness at the local level and this should in some ways contribute to the overall growth
and development of the nation.
Mabogunje (in Ibietan, 2010:32) cited some of the major expectations from local governmentswhich
include:
a) Improving the living standards of the subsistence population through mobilisation and allocation of
resources to achieve desirable balance over time between the welfare and productive services available
to the rural subsistence populations.
b) Ensuring mass participation aimed at achieving both allocative rationality plus equity with redistributive
efficiency.
c) Making the process self-sustaining: this requires appropriate skills acquisition and development;
capacity building; and availability/presence of functional institutions at local, state and federal levels to
facilitate optimal use of available resources and the development of the rural areas.
Nigeria operates a federal system with feeble attempts at democratic practice and has three tiers of
government namely: the federal government, the state government and the local government being the third
tier. It is pertinent to note that the practice of federalism inNigeria has had severalinterferenceby the military
who imported their unitary command system into governance. A semblance of this unitary command still
exists in the present democratic dispensation as power is concentrated in the hands of the federal
government, impinging on the true practice of federalism as devolution appears shaky. The practice of
federalism in Nigeria deviates from the letter and spirit of federalism as advocated by K.C. Wheare who is
credited with developing a concise treatise of federalism (Ibietan, 2010:31). Onyeoziri (in Ibietan, 2010:205)
further argues that the inconsistencies characterizing the logic of federal practice especially in Nigeria where
each level/tier of government which is supposed to be coordinate and independent in its sphere becomes
subordinated and this is contrary to the letter and spirit of federalism as advocated by K. C. Wheare (1784)
who developed the original idea of federalism (Ibietan, 2010). Onyeoziri (in Ibietan, 2010:205) further
corroborated that the imperfections in the state institutions also create some disabilities for the federal
practice. He therefore cautioned on the lacuna in discussing federalism without backing it with “asuitable
theory of state” (which is the infrastructure) onto which federalism is grafted. Thus, a mutual reinforcement
of the two variables offers a reliable strategy in guaranteeing stable federal arrangements (Ibietan, 2010:206).
When there is an effective federal practice, then there can be proper deconcentration and devolution of
powers to subnational governments, to perform their duties.
International Journal of Management Sciences
753
The Nigerian federal structure allows the existence of the local government as the third tier of
government. Section 7(1) of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria specifically guarantees
a democratically elected local government system. The fourth schedule of the same constitution similarly
defines the roles of the local governments (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999).The Nigerian federation
currently has 774 local government units created for grassroots administration and for delivering services to
the people at the various local levels as well as creating a relationship with the local people through which
the government can be responsive to their needs and demands. In addition, local governments also exists to
ensure effective political involvement of the local people in the policy making process as well as in the
affairs of government (Afrobarometer, 2013:1). Some scholars are of a contrary opinion that the local
governments have not performed their functions as agents of development; rather they have attaineddisrepute
for corruption, fiscal disorderliness and overall irresponsibility. The lack of uprightness, transparency and
accountability at the local level of government constitute a heavy toll on the welfare of average Nigerians
(Agbo, 2010:20).
Local government as the name implies is the government established for the sole purpose of directly
governing the local populace. This means that the government at the local level is expected to be transparent
and accountable to the local people for whom it was created and the provisions of the constitution ought to be
reflected through the running of this tier of government. As an aberration to good governance, corruption
exists at the three tiers of government, and local governments in Nigeria are often seen as nurturing grounds
for barefaced corruption and near absence of transparency and accountability in the conduct of its
governance (Abubakar, 2010: 25). Gabriel(2011) argues further that corruption has become an everyday
issue in the context of the Nigerian governments, as there are frequent cases of stealing, embezzlement and
mismanagement of funds. “Thieving has become a major interest and diversion for Nigerians in high places.
It has become a big time occupation. All arms of government are affected and the local government is not
excluded” (Gabriel, 2011:19). The lack of autonomy and financial power to attract and retain qualified
personnel are also major problems as local governments do not possess the necessary resources needed to
formulate and fully implement programmes that arebeneficial to the communities they govern. This lack of
autonomy is partly attributed to constant interference and impediments on the affairs of the local
governments by the state governments.
Lawal (2000) opined that local government is the tier of government closest to the people and it is
vested with certain powers to exercise control over the affairs of people in its domain. A local government
council is therefore expected to play the roles of promoting the democratic ideals of a society and cocoordinating
development programmes at the local level. It is also expected to serve as the basis of socioeconomic
development in the locality.
Despite the numerous challenges it faces, local government is essentially a pathway to, and patron of
national integration, organization and development (Lawal, 2000).Oviasuyi&Isiraojie (2010) averred that
local governments exist in Nigeria, yet the resident populations in it aredeniedthe benefits of its existence.
Local governments have however been criticisedby many local dwellers in various parts of Nigeria fornot
living up to its expectation and actualising the purpose for which it was created.
The Concept of Community Development
Community development is a term that has been subjected by several authors to various perspectives,
each of them presenting definitions to connote their specialisation and practice. The assumption is that the
definition of community development can easily be arrived at by understanding the concepts of community
and development separately. However, community development is a broad concept, hence the various views
and definitions on the concept. “Development” is a progression that increases varieties. It means new
choices, variation, thinking about ostensible issues differently and forestalling change (Christenson and
Robinson, 1989).
Community development marries the idea of “community” with “development”. The notion of
community refers to a group of people with common traits. Therefore, community development depends on
J. Ibietan & P. Ndukwe
754
communication between people and cooperative action, rather than individual exploits which some
sociologists termed as “collective agency” (Flora and Flora, in Ikechukwu, 2012:5).
Ugwu (in Ikechukwu, 2012:2) asserted that “community development is one of the main boards upon
which national developmental policies and their implementation are hinged”. The concept of community
development is not completely new. What probably may appear new is the mode of application in modern
times and its ancestry as a union of community, organisation and economic development (Sanders in
Hanachor, 2012).
The Cambridge summary conference of (1948) in Hanachor (2009:5) averred that:
Community development is a programme designed to encourage improved living for the entire
community with the vigorous contribution and if possible, on the creativity and if not forth coming
instinctively, by the use of methods for instigating and motivating it in order to ensure its active fervent
reaction to the movement.
Hence, it purports trickle-down effects and efforts from the government to ensure the optimal wellbeing
of the people that reside in such communities, and this is done through the collaborative efforts of both the
government and the people.
Ogo (in Hanachor, n.d:2) opined that community development is a move by the community members to
provide their basic needs through their own efforts and sometimes with external assistance where necessary
and possible. He is of the opinion that whether this external assistance comes or not, it is believed by
professionals in community development that adequate injection of external assistance by local governments
in self-help efforts by the communities, reinforces local development actions. Hence, local governments
should seize the opportunity to offer such external assistance or acts as facilitators for community
development. Mexiro (in Hanachor, n.d:3) also argued that community development is “a planned and
organized effort to assist individuals to acquire the attitudes, skills and concepts, required for their
democratic participation in the effective solution of a wide range of community problems in order of
priority”. Community development when viewed in the light of educational process manifests in behavioural
change and acquisition of new skills and confidence as a result of repetition or practice and co-operation. It is
the responsibility of the local governments to act as facilitators in educating the local citizens as well as
spear-heading the planed efforts for empowering these individuals at the grassroots.
Murry (1966) in Bello and Bola (1987:1) using another approach (programme approach) explained it to
be:
The application under a single programme of approaches and techniques which rely on local
communities as units of achievement which endeavours to syndicate outside assistance with organised local
self-determination and effort which harmoniously seek to arouse local initiative and leadership as the
primary apparatus of change.
This means that when the external factors (government) constantly fulfill their duty by assisting
communities who willingly put in efforts, local initiatives will be put in motion and this will bring about
development in the communities.
Barikor (in Hanachor, n.d:3) gave a comprehensive and contemporary definition of community
development. He opined that community development by contemporary standards is “an amalgam of many
dynamic and complementary factors involving education, economic, socio-political, cultural effort to
emancipate the community from retrogressive tradition, poverty, ignorance and disease”. The local
governments in Nigeria are responsible for ensuring basic primary education among the community dwellers
as well as providing basic health care facilities but they have not lived up to the expectation of discharging
these duties. From an academic point of view, Anyanwu (1992:2) alleged that as an educational process,
“community development is usually employed as a means of educating the people of a community to help
themselves both as individuals and as groups”. Most local governments in Nigeria fail in this area as they
have been unable to adequately mobilise and educate the rural people. For community development to be
effective, people in a community must believe that collective efforts