Factors Affecting Women Participation in Rural Development … · 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Socio-economic Characteristics of the Respondents Table 1 revealed the age distribution

International Journal of Social, Politics & Humanities ISSN: 2797-3735, Volume 2, Issue 1, page 138 - 148

Zambrut

Zambrut.com. Publication date, 21 February 2019.

Akinyemi, G. G. & Okunlola, J. O. 2019. Factors Affecting Women Participation in Rural ..................... 138

Factors Affecting Women

Participation in Rural

Development Projects (Case in Ekiti State, Nigeria)

Gbenga Gabriel Akinyemi1 & James Olaniyi Okunlola

2

1Dr. Gbenga Gabriel Akinyemi &

2Dr. James Olaniyi Okunlola

Department of Agricultural Extension and Communication Technology

Federal University of Technology

Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria

Abstract: Participation of women in rural development projects has always been a major concern to

many Nigerians. Women involvement in rural development projects is expected to sustain development

projects in the rural areas. The study was carried out to identify the factors affecting women

participation in rural development projects in Ekiti State, Nigeria. A well-structured interview

schedule and participatory techniques such as key informant technique and Focus Group Discussion

were used to collect data from the 160 respondents randomly selected from four local government

areas out of the sixteen local government areas (LGAs) in Ekiti State. The results were analysed using

frequency, percentage and Pearson Product Moment Correlation (PPMC). The study revealed that

benefit of the projects to the community, commitment to community projects, interest towards

development projects, occupation, awareness towards the project, motivation from the friends/

colleagues, spouse influence/ cooperation , level of exposure and group member’s advice on project

participation were the factors influencing women participation in rural development projects. Despite

the participation of women in development projects, they were constrained with poor financial status

and non-priority nature of projects. Community members contributed counterpart funds to support the

projects. From the study, level of education has significant relationship with level of participation in

development projects. Women participation in all the levels of participation should be encouraged to

ensure sustainability.

Keywords: Women Participation, Rural Development Projects, Factors Affecting Women, Contributed.

https://zambrut.com/


Zambrut



1. INTRODUCTION

Rural urban drift poses serious challenges to the third world countries as only very few

governments have the resources and facilities to cope with such rapidly growing population

(Otto and Ukpere 2014). The major cause of the high migration to the urban areas is the neglect

of rural areas, in spite of the fact that over 65 per cent of Nigerians are rural dwellers. The rural

areas are generally characterized by high level of illiteracy, abject poverty, unemployment and

lack of other basic infrastructural facilities including housing, electricity and inadequate

communication facilities. The standard of living in rural areas is generally low, this has partly

informed the drift to urban areas where basic facilities are relatively more available and

standards of living are higher (Otto and Ukpere 2014).

In Nigeria today, many rural infrastructural projects have been embarked on in the rural

areas such as building of markets, health center, construction of boreholes and construction of

roads in order to develop the areas and encourage rural activities. Women participation in rural

development projects have been one of the major concerns, despite government intervention to

reduce poverty and problem facing farmers and the people living in the rural areas. There is an

obvious disparity between men and women in the aspects of education, health, employment,

legal matters, leadership, acquiring power and ownership of resources; consequently, women are

generally unable to participate fully in the development process. Thus, larger percentage of

women are poor, illiterate, deprived of adequate healthcare, victims of violence, deprived of

basic rights, discriminated against and suffer other forms of inequality as though their status is

below that of men and their situation is far worse than the men. Nevertheless, there are still more

initiatives that need to be taken to ensure that women are placed in their rightful position and

strategies that need to be formulated to ensure that women are able to contribute fully to the

development process (World Bank Report, 2009 cited in Mbogori 2014).

The efficient use of rural women for development projects side by side with men is an

important means of achieving improvement in several aspects of rural life. Most planners of rural

development policy believe erroneously that rural workers are mostly men (Aazami et al. 2011),

however, in recent decades, social scientists focus on the importance of individual, economic,

and social factors affecting women's life directly or indirectly, to provide an environment for the

promotion of their participation in rural development process (World Bank, 2003). Rural

development is a means of bringing about enduring changes in the structure of the rural sector in

a manner that productivity and output are increased, the technology and techniques of production

are radically revolutionized with enhanced standard of living (Nkorn, 2000 cited in Otto and

Ukpere 2014). Rural Development Project focus on the design of sustainable rural development

programs, to include the promotion of non-farm rural activities through the strengthening of local

governments and institutions, developing selective infrastructure investments and focusing on

education.

To have full participation of rural dwellers in rural development projects, the new approach

to community development, have been evolved and one of this is the “Participatory Approach”,

Participatory Approach in Community Development is a strategies that involves the stakeholder

from project conception to design, planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation in order

to inculcate principle of ownership and sustainability (Okunlola 2017). Despite the new

approach, it is important women participation needs to be determined in order to know the

progress and achievement brought to the community through the rural development projects. In

view of these, the following research questions were addressed; what are the socio-economic

characteristics of the women in the study area?, to what extent are women involved in the rural

development projects?, what are the factors influencing women participation in rural

development projects? what are the constraints to women participation in the development

projects in the study area?


Zambrut



1.1 Objectives of the study

The general objective of the study was to identify the factors affecting women participation

in rural development projects in Ekiti State. The specific objectives were to:

a. ascertain the socio-economic characteristics of the respondents in the study area;

b. determine the level of women participation in rural development projects;

c. examine the factors influencing women participation in the rural development projects in

the study area;

d. identify the constraints to women participation in development projects in the study area.

2. METHODOLOGY

A Multistage sampling procedure was used in the selection of respondents for the study.

Random sampling technique was used in selecting four local government areas out of the sixteen

local government areas (LGAs) in Ekiti State. The LGAs are: Ekiti East, Ekiti Southwest, Ikole

and Ido Osi Local Government. The second stage involved random selection of four rural

communities from each of the Local Government Areas making a total of sixteen communities.

The communities are: Kehinde, Sunday, Giwa and Paul communities in Ekiti East Local

Government Area; Fatula, Odo ugo, Gbodigbodi and Orisunmibare communities in Ikole Local

Government Area; Ifisin, Aaye, Igbole and Ora communities in Ido Osi Local Government Area;

and Osun, Alawaye, Ogotun and Ilupeju communities in Ekiti southwest Local Government

Area. The third stage involved random selection of ten women from each community making a

total of 40 respondents per Local Government Area. Therefore, a total of 160 respondents

constituted the sample size for the study.

Both Primary data and Secondary source were used for this study. The primary data was

obtained with the aid of pre-tested and validated interview schedule. Focus Group Discussion

was also carried out to further obtain information from the respondents. The Secondary source

were obtained from journals, textbooks, reports and other relevant published materials including

the internet. A test-retest method was also used to ascertain the reliability of the instrument.

Descriptive statistics such as frequency counts, percentages, means and inferential statistics such

as Pearson Product Moment Correlation (PPMC) analysis was carried out.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Socio-economic Characteristics of the Respondents

Table 1 revealed the age distribution of the respondents. About 36% of the respondents

were within the age of 31-40, 22.5% were within the age group of 41-50, 20.0% were within the

age of 21-30, while 1.3% were within the age group of 71-80. The mean age of the respondents

was 40 years. This result indicated that most of the women participating in rural development

projects were relatively young, active, matured and physically capable of performing rigorous

operations involved in development projects. Findings show that majority of the respondents

(75.6%) were married, 11.3% were single, 11.2% were widowed while 1.9% of the respondents

were divorced. Both the married and unmarried participate in rural development project

irrespective of their status whether young or old, but the married constituted the largest

population that participates in rural development projects. The implication of the result was that

married people possess the sense of being responsible, they tend to participate actively in rural

development projects to develop their communities in order to have better standard of living.

Table 1 revealed that 36.3% of the respondents completed secondary school, 21.3%

completed primary school only 15.0% had no formal education, 7.5% completed tertiary

education while 1.8% had adult education. The respondents level of education, had great impact

on their performance during projects planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation and

also influence their participation in development projects likewise projects sustainability. Fhika


Zambrut



(2015) supported that the more educated the people are, the more they tend to participate in

community development projects with more of them gainfully employed and have more

disposable income to make a financial contribution to community development projects. Results

in Table 1 showed that 56.3% of the women belong to social group. The social group provides

motivation to participate in development projects; serving as medium of information

dissemination; information about development project can easily be passed across through

various social groups. According to Adeleke and Ashimolowo (2015), group membership helps

members to become better informed about the world and about new technologies and groups

may serve as a stepping stone to some higher gains or status and serious involvement in the

group activities made them contribute meaningfully to community development projects.

Table 1: Socio-economic Characteristics of the respondents

Frequency

Percentage

(%) Mean

Age (years)

21-30 32 20.0

31-40 57 35.6

41-50 36 22.5 40 years

51-60 26 16.2

61-70 7 4.4

71-80 2 1.3

Marital Status

Single 18 11.3

Married 121 75.6

Widowed 18 11.2

Divorced 3 1.9

Level of Education

No Formal Education 24 15.0

Adult Education 3 1.8

Attempted Primary School 8 5.0

Completed Primary School 34 21.3

Attempted Secondary School 6 3.7

Completed Secondary School 58 36.3

Attempted Tertiary Education 15 9.4

Completed Tertiary Education 12 7.5

Membership of social group

Yes 90 56.3

No 70 43.7

Source: Field survey


Zambrut



3.2 Sources of Information on Rural Development Projects

Table 2 showed that 50.0% of the women got their information through extension agent

and radio broadcast, 44.4% of the women indicated family members as their source of

information, 36.3% indicated friend, 22.5% of the women had social group (women’s group,

religious organization and cooperative society) as their source of information while 1.9%

indicated newspaper as their source of information. This implies that extension agent and radio

broadcast are the major sources of information to the rural women.

3.3 Level of women participation in rural development projects

The level of women participation in building of market, building of women centre project,

building of community hall, building/renovation of palace and building/renovation of schools

shows high level of participation during project initiation, project planning, project

implementation, project monitoring and project evaluation. This could be attributed to the fact

that the projects were the felt needs of the communities. According to Okunlola and Adesida

(2015), they asserted that participation in development projects were based on the felt needs of

the communities as members contributed counterpart funds and in some instances provided the

required labour and materials utilized for the projects. Table 3 has shown that the women

participated fully in the project initiation ( ̅ ), project planning ( ̅ ), project

implementation ( ̅ ), project monitoring ( ̅ ) and project evaluation ( ̅ ), in

building of market and in building of women centre project, women participated fully in project

initiation ( ̅ ), project planning ( ̅ ), project implementation ( ̅ ), project

monitoring ( ̅ ) and project evaluation ( ̅ ) likewise in building of community hall,

building/renovation of palace and building/renovation of schools. However, there were low

levels of women participation in some rural development projects like construction of

roads/bridges, rural electrification project, street light installation project and water treatment

plant. The low level of women participation in rural development projects was due to

technicalities required for construction/building of the projects as machine was required to carry

out the project work with the help of expert which is not within the range of the women.

3.4 Factors influencing women participation in rural development projects

Results in Table 4 showed the factors influencing women participation in rural

development projects in the study area. It was revealed that benefit of the projects to the

community ( ̅ ), commitment to community projects ( ̅ ), interest towards

development projects ( ̅ ), occupation ( ̅ ), awareness towards the projects

( ̅ ), motivation from the friends/colleagues ( ̅ ), spouse influence/cooperation

( ̅ ), level of exposure ( ̅ ) and group members’ advice on project participation

( ̅ ) are the factors that influenced women participation in rural development projects.

During the focus group discussion (FGD), it was revealed that group members advice themselves

to participate in development projects in order to reduce the daily challenges encountered

especially in the area of getting portable water, health care service and proper education for the

children. Likewise, husbands support their wives to participate in developing their immediate

areas since they are not marginalized. It was also deduced that level of exposure influenced

women participation in rural development projects as a result of their training and past

involvements in development projects. A cosmopolitan woman participate well when it comes to

development projects because of her exposure but those with low exposure, may not see much

reason for participation.


Zambrut



3.5 Constraints to women participation in development projects The major constraint to women participation in development projects are; poor financial

status ( ̅ ) which was ranked first and non-priority nature of projects ( ̅ ), ranked

second as stated in table 5. This could be attributed to the contributions attached. Women are

mobilized to contribute to counterpart fund or spend time with project as labour if it involves

construction work and this could affect the time for their primary occupation. According to Fhika

(2015), poverty is a contributing factor to the lack of participation in community development

projects. Those community members, who are not gainfully employed, do not have the income to

support their families and simultaneously contribute to development projects. Non-priority

nature of projects as a constraint to women participation could be attributed to the fact that

women may feel that their benefit from the project is low and therefore, not interested. In some

situation where projects are being carried out and the women view such as a non-priority project,

their interest wanes.

Table 2: Sources of Information on rural development projects

Source of information Frequency Percentage (%)

Friends 58 36.3

Family members 71 44.4

Extension Agent 80 50.0

Radio 80 50.0

Television 11 6.9

Newspaper 3 1.9

Social group (religious organisation,

cooperative society) 36 22.5



Zambrut



Table 3: Level of women participation in rural development projects

Development projects

Project Initiation Project Planning Project Implementation Project Monitoring Project Evaluation

Hig

h (

3)

Mo

dera

te (

2)

Lo

w (

1)

Mea

n

Hig

h (

3)

Mo

dera

te (

2)

Lo

w (

1)

Mea

n

Hig

h (

3)

Mo

dera

te (

2)

Lo

w (

1)

Mea

n

Hig

h (

3)

Mo

dera

te (

2)

Lo

w (

1)

Mea

n

Hig

h (

3)

Mo

dera

te (

2)

Lo

w (

1)

Mea

n

Building of Health Centre (5.1) (62.0) (32.9) 1.72 (5.1) (65.8) (29.1) 1.76 (7.6) (63.3) (29.1) 1.78 (15.2) (57.0) (27.8) 1.87 (13.8) (28.1) (7.5) 1.87

Construction of roads/Bridges (39.6) (0.0) (60.4) 1.79 (22.6) (17.0) (60.4) 1.62 (22.6) (17.0) (60.4) 1.62 (22.6) (17.0) (60.4) 1.62 (3.7) (5.6) (20.0) 1.62

Building of schools (7.0) (89.0) (4.0) 2.03* (6.0) (92.0) (2.0) 2.04* (14.0) (77.0) (9.0) 2.05* (11.0) (87.0) (2.0) 2.09* (5.6) (53.8) (3.1) 2.04*

Construction of borehole (19.2) (66.7) (14.1) 2.05* (0.0) (90.9) (9.1) 1.91 (5.1) (84.8) (10.1) 1.95 (5.1) (85.9) (9.1) 1.96 (30.3) (59.6) (10.1) 2.20*

Building of ICT centre (12.5) (25.0) (62.5) 1.50 (12.5) (25.0) (62.5) 1.50 (12.5) (25.0) (62.5) 1.50 (12.5) (25.0) (62.5) 1.50 (0.6) (1.3) (3.1) 1.50

Construction of Police Station (25.0) (0.0) (75.0) 1.50 (0.0) (25.0) (75.0) 1.25 (0.0) (25.0) (75.0) 1.25 (0.0) (0.0) (100) 1.00 (0.0) (0.0) (2.5) 1.00

Building of market (95.7) (4.3) (0.0) 2.96* (95.7) (4.3) (0.0) 2.96* (93.5) (4.3) (2.2) 2.91* (91.3) (6.5) (2.2) 2.89* (26.3) (1.3) (1.3) 2.87*

Erosion control project (0.0) (6.9) (93.1) 1.07 (0.0) (6.9) (93.1) 1.07 (6.9) (6.9) (86.2) 1.21 (6.9) (6.9) (86.2) 1.21 (16.3) (0.6) (16.3) 1.17

Rural electrification (2.3) (2.3) (95.3) 1.07 (2.3) (2.3) (95.3) 1.07 (2.3) (2.3) (95.3) 1.07 (2.3) (2.3) (95.3) 1.07 (0.6) (0.6) (25.6) 1.07

Building of community Hall (57.5) (40.0) (2.5) 2.55* (57.5) (40.0) (2.5) 2.55* (55.0) (42.5) (2.5) 2.53* (52.5) (42.5) (5.0) 2.48* (13.8) (10.6) (0.6) 2.53*

Transformer installation

Project (2.7) (2.7) (94.6) 1.08 (0.0) (5.4) (94.6) 1.05 (0.0) (5.4) (94.6) 1.05 (0.0) (5.4) (94.6) 1.05 (0.0) (1.3) (21.9) 1.05

Street light installation project (0.0) (53.8) (46.2) 1.54 (0.0) (53.8) (46.2) 1.54 (3.8) (50.0) (46.2) 1.58 (3.8) (46.2) (50.0) 1.54 (0.0) (7.5) (8.8) 1.46

Building of Women Center (63.6) (36.4) (0.0) 2.64* (63.6) (36.4) (0.0) 2.64* (54.5) (45.5) (0.0) 2.55* (54.5) (45.5) (0.0) 2.55* (4.4) (2.5) (0.0) 2.64*

Building of Civic Centre (12.5) (87.5) (0.0) 2.13* (0.0) (93.8) (6.3) 1.94 (18.8) (81.3) (0.0) 2.19* (0.0) (100) (0.0) 2.00* (0.0) (10.0) (0.0) 2.00*

Construction of Water

Treatment Plant (12.0) (52.0) (36.0) 1.76 (0.0) (60.0) (40.0) 1.60 (0.0) (56.0) (44.0) 1.56 (8.0) (56.0) (36.0) 1.72 (1.3) (8.8) (5.7) 1.72

Renovation of schools (42.7) (51.2) (6.1) 2.37* (28.0) (65.9) (6.1) 2.22* (45.1) (53.7) (1.2) 2.44* (34.1) (64.6) (1.2) 2.33* (19.4) (30.0) (1.9) 2.34*

Building/Renovation of Palace (57.9) (31.6) (10.5) 2.47* (68.4) (21.1) (10.5) 2.58* (63.2) (31.6) (5.3) 2.58* (57.9) (36.8) (5.3) 2.53* (6.9) (4.4) (0.6) 2.53*

Building of motor parks (0.0) (66.7) (33.3) 1.67 (0.0) (66.7) (33.3) 1.67 (0.0) (66.7) (33.3) 1.67 (0.0) (0.0) (100) 1.00 (0.0) (1.3) (0.6) 1.67

Building of training/skill

acquisition centres (7.7) (30.8) (61.5) 1.46 (15.4) (30.8) (53.8) 1.62 (7.7) (30.8) (61.5) 1.46 (7.7) (38.5) (53.8) 1.54 (0.6) (2.5) (5.0) 1.46

Source: Field survey, figure in parentheses represent percentage


Zambrut



Table 4: Factors influencing women participation in rural development projects

Factors

Str

on

gly

agre

e (4

)

Agre

e (3

)

Dis

agre

e

(2)

Str

on

gly

dis

agre

e

(1)

Mean

Rank

Marital status 16 (10.0) 10 (6.3) 29 (18.1) 105(65.6) 1.61 17th

Level of education 22 (13.7) 10 (6.3) 20 (12.5) 108(67.5) 1.66 14th

Occupation 100

(62.5) 46 (28.8) 6 (3.7) 8 (5.0) 3.49* 4th

Membership of social group 13 (8.1) 19 (11.9) 28 (17.5) 100(62.5) 1.66 14th

Cultural factors 16 (10.0) 16 (10.0) 23 (14.4) 105(65.6) 1.64 16th

Interest towards development

projects

110

(68.8) 35 (21.9) 7 (4.4) 8 (5.0) 3.54* 3rd

Commitment to community

projects

107

(66.9) 47 (29.4) 5 (3.1) 1 (0.6) 3.63* 2nd

Motivation from the friends/

colleagues 70 (43.8) 56 (35.0) 14 (8.8) 20 (12.5) 3.10* 6th

Group member’s advice on

project participation 52 (32.5) 32 (20.0) 36 (22.5) 40 (25.0) 2.60* 9th

Religious factor 10 (6.3) 21 (13.1) 12 (7.5) 117(73.1) 1.53 18th

Domestic responsibilities 12 (7.5) 7 (4.4) 29 (18.1) 112(70.0) 1.49 19th

Level of exposure 61 (38.1) 37 (23.1) 24 (15.0) 38 (23.8) 2.76* 8th

Job security 28 (17.5) 9 (5.6) 69 (43.1) 54 (33.8) 2.07 13th

Benefit of the projects to the

community

134

(83.8) 15 (9.4) 11 (6.9) 0 (0.0) 3.77* 1st

Income prospects 30 (18.8) 34 (21.3) 56 (35.0) 40 (25.0) 2.34 10th

Employment opportunities 16 (10.0) 25 (15.6) 78 (48.8) 41 (25.6) 2.10 12th

Women discrimination 7 (4.4) 6 (3.8) 31 (19.4) 116 (72.5) 1.40 20th

Awareness towards the project 87 (54.4) 54 (33.8) 10 (6.3) 9 (5.6) 3.37* 5th

Social Class 20(12.5) 28 (17.5) 70 (43.8) 42 (26.3) 2.16 11th

Spouse influence/cooperation 51 (31.9) 50 (31.3) 32 (20.0) 27 (16.9) 2.78* 7th

Lack of self confidence 2 (1.3) 10 (6.3) 34 (21.3) 114(71.3) 1.38 21st

*Factors influencing women participation, Figure in parentheses represent percentage

S.D. Standard Deviation



Zambrut



Table 5: Constraints to women participation in development projects

Possible constraints Ma

jor

Co

nst

rain

t

(2)

Min

or

Co

nst

rain

t

(1)

No

t a

Co

nst

rain

t

(0)

Mean Rank

Bureaucratic nature of project design 11 (6.9) 45 (28.1) 104 (65.0) 0.42 7th

Non-priority nature of projects 58 (36.3) 52 (32.5) 50 (31.3) 1.05* 2nd

Lack of trust for women leaders 8 (5.0) 34(21.3) 118 (73.8) 0.31 9th

Lack of adequate communication network before and

during the project 18 (11.3) 51 (31.9) 91 (56.9) 0.54 4th

Lack of interest 14 (8.8) 56 (35.0) 90 (56.3) 0.53 5th

Low household size 8 (5.0) 69 (43.1) 83 (51.9) 0.53 5th

Religious factor 9 (5.6) 12 (7.5) 139 (86.9) 0.19 12th

Gender bias in project selection 15 (9.4) 19 (11.9) 126 (78.8) 0.31 9th

Poor financial status of women 103 (64.4) 50 (31.3) 7 (4.4) 1.60* 1st

Level of education 5 (3.1) 107 (66.9) 48 (30.0) 0.73 3rd

Non-involvement of women in the leadership and

project management 14 (8.8) 31 (19.4) 115 (71.9) 0.37 8th

Low level of project awareness among women 12 (7.5) 21 (13.1) 127 (79.4) 0.28 11th

Cultural limitations 3 (1.9) 10 (6.3) 147 (91.9) 0.10 14th

Domestic responsibilities of women 8 (5.0) 14 (8.8) 138 (86.3) 0.19 12th

Source: Field survey, figure in parentheses represent percentage, *Constraints to participation

3.6 Relationship between socio-economic characteristics of the respondents and level of

participation in development projects Correlation results in Table 6 revealed that there is significant relationship between the

socio-economic characteristics such as level of education and women level of participation in

development project. This implies that level of education could influence the participation of

women in development projects. This indicates that women with high level of education have

more opportunity to participate in projects initiation, planning, implementation, monitoring and

evaluation than women with low level of education. As educational level rises, the level of

participation expects to upswing and rising in educational level could bring about progressive

changes in the information, approach and aim of women in rural development project initiation.

This finding is in line with Onuekwusi et al. (2012), they discovered that years spent in school

was positively related to level of participation in rural development. Other socio-economic

variables such as age and marital status has no significant relationship with women level of

participation in development project. It implies that age, marital status, household size and

monthly income does not influence women participation in the project cycle. The implication is

that women of different age categories, marital status, household size and income could be

involved at any stage of project.


Zambrut



Table 6: Pearson Product Moment Correlation (PPMC) Relationship between socio-

economic characteristics of the respondents and level of participation in development

projects

r value P value Decision

Project initiation

Age 0.025 0.756 NS

Marital Status -0.128 0.106 NS

Level of Education 0.213 0.007 S

Project planning

Age 0.040 0.617 NS



Project

implementation

Age 0.029 0.716 NS



Project monitoring

Age 0.034 0.670 NS



Project evaluation

Age 0.036 0.651 NS



Source: Field survey, Significant at p<0.05 (S=Significant, NS=Not significant

4. CONCLUSION

The study revealed the participation of rural women in development projects in Ekiti State

as effective with most percentage of the women participants relatively young, active, matured

and physically capable of performing rigorous operations involved in development projects.

Married respondents participated more in rural development projects than unmarried

counterparts and they form themselves into groups to contribute to the success of the projects as

revealed in the study; however, poor financial status and non-priority nature of projects are major

constraints to women participation in development projects in the study area.

Women should be motivated and encouraged by development partners and other

stakeholders to engage more in development projects especially projects with low participation

such as construction of roads/bridges, police station and erosion control project among others.

Government, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), development partners and stakeholders

must incorporate women, at all level of participation, in rural development projects to enhance

sustainability of projects. Effort should be made using different information sources to create

awareness and mobilize women to participate in development projects.


Zambrut



5. REFERENCES

Aazami, M., Homa, S. and Karim, N. M. (2011). Socio– economic factors affecting rural WP in

productive co operations: Case study of Paveh ballmaking cooperative. African Journal

of Agricultural Research 6(14), 3369-3381.

Adeleke-Bello, O. O. and Ashimolowo, O.R (2015). Beneficiaries’ perception of selected rural

women empowerment projects in Ogun State, Nigeria. African Journal of Agricultural

Research. 10 (44): 4108-4116.

Fhika, J.R. (2015). Participation of Rural Community Members in Rural Development in

Tanzania. PhD. Thesis, University of South Africa, pp 108-200.

Nkorn, A.A. (2000). Rural Development As a spring board for Poverty Alleviation in Nigeria.

Port Harcourt: Zoomter Print Communications Ltd. No. 2/3, Kluwer Academic

Publishers. Pp 605.

Okunlola, J.O. (1999). Participatory Approaches in Research. Social Science Research:

Approaches, Techniques and Reporting. Shann Books Nig. Ltd. Pp 30-31.

Okunlola, J.O. and Adesida, I.E. (2015). Effects of Community Participation on the

Sustainability of Rural Infrastructure in Ondo State, Nigeria. Asian Journal of

Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology 7(1): 1-9.

Otto, G. and Wilfred, I. U. (2014). Rural Development Projects in Nigeria: The case of Rivers

State. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy. 5(3):

604.

World Bank, (2003). Engendering Development through Gender Equality in Rights, Resources

and Voice, Oxford University Press Washington, DC.

Zambrut Journal, Link Access;

https://zambrut.com

https://zambrut.com/women-participation/

© Copyright 2019 International Journal of Zambrut | Zambrut, Inc.


https://zambrut.com/women-participation/


Documents

Factors Affecting Women Participation in Rural Development … · 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Socio-economic Characteristics of the Respondents Table 1 revealed the age distribution