Stephen Onakuse1 and Eamon Lenihan2
Livelihood Systems and Rural Linkages in Niger-Delta Region of Nigeria
Introduction
Since after the discovery of crude oil in 1956 and subsequent large-scale exploration
to date, an estimated nine out of ten of rural dwellers in the Niger-Delta villages lived
in poverty and gross livelihood insecurity (NDHDR, 2006; Onakuse et al., 2007). In
relation to the high income generated from oil exploration the rural livelihood system
of rural dwellers in the area witness no fundamental changes in social and economic
relationships while the environmental impact emanating from such exploration has led
to unprecedented economic deprivation and under-development of the area. NigerDelta area of Nigeria is the world’s third largest wetland, it is characterised by
significant biological diversity (NDDC, 1999). It also contains the bulk of proven oil
reserves in Nigeria. These reserves make Nigeria one of the largest producers of oil in
the world.
The Niger Delta Area (NDA) is bordered to the south by the Atlantic Ocean and to the
East by Cameroon, occupies a surface area of about 112,110 square kilometres
(NDDC, 1999; NPC, 2006). It represents about 12% of Nigeria’s total surface area.
The region comprises nine of Nigeria’s constituent states. The pattern of settlement in
the Niger Delta Area is largely determined by the availability of dry land and the
nature of the terrain together with navigable limits of the coastal rivers or estuaries
with small and scattered hamlets (Daniel Omoweh 2005, FOS, 2004; NPC 2006).
The Niger-Delta Area consists of saline mangrove swamps which stretch through the
coastal states with 504,800 hectares in the Niger Delta area and 95,000 hectares in
Cross River State (NDDC, 1999; FOS, 2004). The size of the mangrove forests rank it
as the largest in Africa and as the third largest in the world (FOS, 2004; NDHDR,
2006). Typically, the ecosystem fragility makes it vulnerable to destruction by
unsustainable human interventions such as oil exploration, exploitation and
1
2
Stephen Onakuse is with the Centre for Sustainable Livelihoods National University of Ireland, Cork
Eamon Lenihan is the Director, Centre for Sustainable Livelihoods, UCC Ireland
1
transportation processes. The inhabitants of historical settlements in the Niger Delta
area depend on fish and other mangrove resources for their livelihood. Mangrove
wood provide multi-purpose resource for fish stakes, fish traps, boat building, boat
paddles, yam stakes, fencing, carvings, building timber and fuel (NDDC, 1999).
Table 1.1: States composed of the Niger Delta Area, Land Area and Population
State
Land Area
Population
(square kilometres) (NPC 2006)
Abia State
4,877.
2,833,999
Akwa Ibom
6,806
3,920,208
Vállelas
11,007
1,703,358
Cross River
21,930
2,888,966
Delta
17,163
4,098,391
Edo
19,698
3,218,332
Imo
5,165
3,934,899
Ondo
15,086
3,441,014
Rivers
10,378
5,185,420
Totals
112,110
31, 224, 587
Sources: National Population Commission Provisional (NPC, 2006) Result based on
2005 Census
Across the Niger Delta area, 65 per cent of the population depends on the natural
environment—living and non-living—for their livelihoods while the other 35%
depends on remittance (CASS, 2003; Daniel Omoweh, 2005; Onakuse et al., 2007).
While the best contraception for the control and prevention of livelihood insecurity
are education, access to assets of production (agricultural lands), good health care
system, transport network, market, rule of law and many others, the government over
the years have initiated strategic programmes since after the Willink’s Commission
was set up in 1959 to look into the problems of the Niger delta area. Among the
recommendations of the Willink’s Commission was the establishment of a
development board, the Niger Delta Development Board to tackle the problem of
physical development of the difficult terrain of the area. The Federal government over
time has initiated programmes such as: Niger Delta Development Board (NDDB) in
1961; Niger Delta River Basin Development Authority (NDBDA) in 1976; Oil
Mineral Producing Areas Development Commission (OMPADEC) in 1992; and the
very current Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) in 2000 aimed at
developing the area. Despite all the programmes, Oil and gas exploration and
2
exploitation have continued to infringe on rural peoples livelihoods and their
environment in the area.
The study of the Niger-Delta area livelihood security3 is aimed to provide an
understanding of the nature and factors precipitating livelihood insecurity in the area.
The process and procedure for determining these understanding, explores the
devastation of the environment and ecological imbalance created by oil and gas
exploitation and its contribution to social and economic deprivation – that leads to
loss of fishing grounds, the disappearance of agricultural lands, serious health
consequences and other related environmental hazards.
To provide high-quality information to policymakers in national, state and local
governments on service provision through integrated community-based organizations
approaches
To understand the strategies rural dwellers use to cope with the impact of
environmental degradation based on informal safety nets and remittance
The study offers suggestions on policy improvement mechanism that could be
explored to address the underlying causes of livelihood insecurity and poverty in the
area. These policy options include interventions to support livelihoods, promote
livelihood security activities and create an enabling environment for communitybased informal safety nets.
Livelihood Systems in Niger-Delta Villages
Livelihoods4 in Niger-Delta villages are limited to a fairly narrow range of activities,
but these activities may be combined in complex ways and are sometimes short lived
3
Some analysts define livelihood security in terms of outcomes—particularly sustainable access to
sufficient income (Frankenberger 1996). A livelihood "comprises the capabilities, assets (stores,
resources, claims, and access) and activities required for a means of living; a livelihood is sustainable
which can cope with and recover from stress and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and
assets, and provide sustainable livelihood opportunities for the next generation" (Chambers & Conway
1992).
4
Livelihoods are the sum of ways in which people make a living. In most communities in low-income countries,
poor families balance a set of food and income-earning activities (Carney D. 1998). A means of earning a living employment, income, job, work, career, occupation, living, maintenance, means, subsistence, support etc.
3
due to both environmental and communal conflict. For this reason, characterising
livelihood systems at the household level becomes difficult, except with reference to
the primary activity of the main income earners which are indigenous knowledge5 and
locally based. A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (including both material
and social resources) and activities required for a means of living. Livelihood
becomes sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks and
maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the future, while not
undermining the natural resource base (Chambers, R. and G. Conway, 1992).
The identity of and the peculiar nature of the Niger-Delta area environment, explicates
the vulnerability of the rural dwellers to lack of or absence of minimum levels of
sources of income and employment opportunities, access to health care, education,
safe drinking water, etc, that could lead to a situation that exists when people have
secure access to sufficient amounts of safe and nutritious food for normal growth and
development and an active life (Maxwell, 1999; FAO, 2002; Carney, 1998).
Livelihood insecurity is a siege of death coupled with the impact of environmental
destruction emanating from oil exploration, which shut out the bulk of the area human
population from the dignity befitting of human. This makes food insecurity a sociopolitical time bomb currently unfolding in the area – a burden for both the actor and
spectators.
Livelihood systems are much more than sets of material and economic conditions.
While rural dwellers in Niger-Delta have to cater for a large number of human needs
such as food and shelter, they also need to address concerns of the human attachment
to the environment. Hence, sustainability of rural livelihood systems is not only a
matter of physical resources and physical duration, but also of psychic fulfilment and
cultural meaning. The large and persistent gap between agricultural activities and
livelihood security in the Niger-Delta area with little or no formal sources of income
and unemployment suggests that livelihood security is dependent on agriculture in
rural areas—as many cannot afford to sustain their livelihoods through agricultural
practices as sources of income for the households as shown on table 2; it further
5
There are many closely related concepts in use - local knowledge, indigenous knowledge, traditional knowledge,
etc. - which refer to the knowledge that people in a given place and culture have developed over time, and continue
to develop. This is thus based on experience, often tested over centuries of use, adapted to local culture and
environment and dynamic and changing.
4
increases the number of the rural poor to remain in perpetual food insecure state in the
area.
Table 2: Source of Income of Poor and Non-poor Families at Niger-Delta Area
Sector
Poor Families
Non-poor Families
Labour
Farm and non-farm labour
Not a source of income
Agriculture
Any kinds of cereals, root crops
Rubber, Oil Palm and coconut
and legumes
Livestock
Chickens, ducks, goats
Goats, chicken, and ducks
Fishing
Fish/Shrimps/Sea food
Not a source of income
Processing
Palm wine, local gin & Banga
Not a source of income
Shop, kiosk
Shopkeeper
Owner
Skills used
Make fishing equipment,
Skills for outside salaried
basket making broom making from
employment or business skills
coconut leaves, and making fishing nets
Source: Participatory rural assessment activities in Niger-Delta (2003).
Livelihoods in the greater part of Niger-Delta area rural villages surveyed are
constantly exposed to the impact from environmental pollution causing a great loss in
both flora and fauna – a major source of livelihoods based on the indigenous people—
farming and fishing practices—which has been lost due to environmental degradation
and climatic changes as currently experienced worldwide. Of more importance to
them are the network of paths, tracks and access routes in the immediate village
vicinity, dotted with criss-crossing pipelines and oil stations on which they rely to
access water, firewood, fields, and local market opportunities. Therefore, increasing
mobility within the village is important to enable access to means of livelihoods –
income such as markets outside the village.
While rural roads can be social and economic arteries for communities in a broader
sense, the myriad of environmental impacts from oil and gas exploration further
compound the livelihood status of rural poor who lack access to assets of production
sufficient to feed a family, or who have just enough to sustain families but with no
surplus. Therefore, children becomes a potential source of future livelihood security
5
for poor families, through urban-rural remittances6 in cash and kind, including food
products known to have a profound effect on the livelihoods of different households
(Onakuse et al., 2007). The focus on the receiving household is based on how they see
remittances as an external source of income earned by someone living elsewhere
further remitted to secure livelihood for those left behind Dependence on remittance
is now an understood strategy rural communities adopt to cope with livelihood
insecurity (including informal safety nets) (Onakuse et al., 2007). The localised
impacts of remittance of livelihoods has covered the not readily accessible credit from
unprotected sources required for start-up capital to diversify their sources of income
which makes rural poor to be more dependent on agriculture and since remittance
since they are located away from major cities.
The assets, strategies, and outcomes at both households and community levels are
closely related and understood in terms of environmental degradation which increases
livelihood insecurity. The levels of vulnerability is further exacerbated by the
political, economic, corporate social responsibility of both major and minor oil
companies operation located either in the heart of the communities or near by.
The head of the family and individual decision-makers within households organise
and manage their labour-based, income-generating activities and other forms of
income through both formal and informal safety nets, kinship networks, and also
securing for the future through outward migration
Changes in Sources of Livelihoods since the Advent of Oil Exploration
The environment is important to people living in poverty in Niger-Delta area villages
surveyed not only because their existence to a large extent relies on subsistence
endeavours, which depend on natural resources, but also because they perceive their
well-being as tied to their environment in terms of livelihoods, health, vulnerability
and the ability to control their lives. Poorer people are more vulnerable to changes in
the environment, in part because social, political and economic exclusion means they
almost always have fewer choices about where they live. They bear the brunt of
6
Remittances are sums of money or goods sent between individuals over some distance, that is transfers between
migrants and their places of origin. For the purpose of this research, it is defined as income (in any form) received
by a household in one distinct place, from individuals or households living in another place to improve livelihood.
6
natural hazards, biodiversity loss and the depletion of forests, pollution (air, water and
soil), and the negative impacts of industrial activities on and offshore.
Oil prospecting and exploitation are known worldwide for their negative
environmental and social impact on host community on the one hand and worldwide
on the other to include: loss of indigenous peoples' or peasants' lands, health
problems, destruction of rainforests, pollution of water sources and air (NDDC, 1999;
CASS, 2003; NDHDR 2006). The economic activities of Niger-Delta area comprise
of land based type on the drier land at the northern end of the Delta, which includes
farming, fishing, collecting and processing palm fruits, as well as hunting and water
based type of livelihood systems with a less diversified economy.
Decades of oil prospecting and exploitation in the Niger Delta have damaged much of
the ecosystem of the region. The Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation estimate,
based on reported cases of spillage, between 1976 and 1996, there were a total of
4,835 incidents resulting in the spillage of at least 2,446,322 barrels (102.7 million US
gallons), of which an estimated 1,896,930 barrels (79.7 million US gallons; 77
percent) were lost to the environment (NDHDR, 2006; NNPC, 2007). The result has
been a general deterioration of economic, social and political cohesion. Conflict has
become a booming business, with grave implications for future development
prospects. Already entrenched are productivity losses, weak entrepreneurial skills, the
destruction of traditional institutions that formerly served as reservoirs of social
capital, the disregard of formal and informal authorities, and insecure property rights.
This ongoing dissent denies the region lasting security, enduring peace and prosperity,
and the realisation of abundant opportunities.
Another calculation based on oil industry sources, estimates that: more than 1.07
million barrels (45million US gallons) of oil were spilled in Nigeria from 1960 to
1997. Nigeria's largest spill was an offshore well blow out in January 1980, when at
least 200,000 barrels of oil (8.4 million US gallons), according to industry sources,
spewed into the Atlantic Ocean from Texaco facility and destroyed 340 hectares of
mangroves. Directorate of Petroleum Resources estimates were that more than
400,000 barrels (16.8 million US gallons) were spilled in this incident. The entire
Niger Delta region being the longest mangrove forest in Nigeria, the mangrove is
7
particularly vulnerable to oil spills, because the soil soaks up the oil like a sponge and
releases it every raining season, thereby causing more damage to wider area than
anticipated (CASS, 2003; Daniel Omoweh, 2005; NDHDR, 2006).
Overall, the complete destruction of natural, social and cultural assets which gives
meaning to other assets of production by contributing to social cohesion and a sense
of shared identity and knowledge which, in turn, are often essential to enable
vulnerable groups to negotiate livelihood access within their locality have been
mortgaged through political insensitivity and corruption.
Because rural livelihoods are tied to land, the ownership of which is also vested in the
Nigerian state serves a constraint to its access. The traditional economy still subsists
on land and water resources with 80 percent of the population engaged in fishing in
the coastal communities. About 10 percent of the population are engaged in building
canoes, production of native salt, tapping palm trees, raffia palm trees, and petty trade,
among others as shown on table 2. The growth of other food crops is sustained with
the application of indigenous knowledge in the governance of both land and water
resources.
Food gathering through rural water and forestry resources among the rural poor
constitutes viable sources of livelihoods for the rural dwellers. But the consistent and
reckless activities emanating from oil exploration and transportation such as the one
of 1980, at Finuwa, Sangana, where one of the wellheads blew out, the entire jack-up
rig razed down, and spilled for about 4 weeks. An estimated 3 million barrels of crude
were spilled and all lost to the environment. Such spillage wholly affect the major
occupation of the people thereby making food gathering no longer protected as a local
livelihood security strategy, particularly as the rural resources have, under gas flaring
and oil spillages and indiscriminate dumping of untreated drilling water-based wastes
on land and into the swamps are the norm.
The well-being of various communities which are criss-crossed with numerous rivers,
most of which are tributaries of the River Niger surveyed that spread across the NigerDelta area of Nigeria has being compromised through oil exploration as the reliability
of livelihoods sources (agricultural practices, transportation, nutritious food, and
8
health services provision) becomes more uncertain and elusive as government policies
and laws such as the Land use Decree of 19787, which was extracted from the Mineral
Act of 1914 and the offshore littoral laws that makes peoples livelihoods and
environment more vulnerable to defend and protect against corporations indifference
and crude political patronage. The Niger-Delta area, hitherto despised by oil
companies’ exploitation who took delight in the subjugation of rural dwellers in the
area is culprit to the environmental squalor.
The Land Use Act Decree No. 6, which came into force in March 1978, appropriated
all lands in the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. In 1969, the Federal
Government promulgated the Petroleum Act, which forbade individuals from
engaging in mining petroleum resources. Decree No.13 of 1970, empowered the
centre (FGN) to acquire all federally collected resources, also Decree No. 9 of 1971
which empowers the Federal Government all rights to offshore rents and royalties.
These laws and decrees conspicuously differentiate between the Niger-Delta areas as
“oil bearing communities” while the Nigeria state retain the position of “oil
producing” instead of “oil expropriator”. These laws gives away communal lands,
rivers and forests to trans-national companies for the exploration and exploitation of
oil and gas and with its attendant loss of land for local livelihoods and dislocation of
indigenous communities.
The symptomatic nature of livelihood insecurity cutting across the surveyed villages
in the Niger-Delta region expose the Nigeria government economic system whose
basic operational logical is the removal from the people, especially the poor - of every
protection that the state had been compelled to provide against the worst ravages of
capitalism during colonial era and the early days of post-colonialism. This explains
the overall physical destruction that the planet earth faces from massive
environmental degradation from prospecting and exploration from the Niger Delta
area and other parts of the world.
7
The Land Use Act ("LUA") was promulgated in 1978 for the purpose of vesting all land within the
territory of Nigeria in the Government of Nigeria, with the intention that such land is to be held by the
Government in trust for the people of Nigeria and allocated or administered for the use and common
benefit of all Nigerians in accordance with the provisions of LUA. The Land Use Act transfers the right
of ownership of lands from individuals, households, and communities to the state governors.
9
FAO (2002) identified three groups of vulnerable households: those which would be
vulnerable under any circumstances: for example, where the adults are unable to
provide an adequate livelihood for the household for reasons of disability, illness, age
or some other characteristic; those whose resource endowment is inadequate to
provide sufficient income from any available source; and those whose characteristics
and resources render them potentially vulnerable in the context of social and
economic shocks: e.g. those who find it hard to adapt to sudden changes in economic
activity brought about by economic policy. But in the context of Niger-Delta area, the
fourth group comprises of those whose natural resources characteristically denies
them their livelihoods due to exploration activities.
Research Methodology
A review of the broad literature on the evolution of livelihood changes in the NigerDelta area was undertaken with a particular focus on the role of environmental
degradation. The scope of the study was limited to rural communities who dwell side
by side or with the exploration activities in their communities while making use of
substantive field research to explore the overall impact and depth of environmental
degradation of livelihood activities. The selection of communities where the
research was conducted was based on the high level of oil
production activities in the area, and the fact that agricultural
production is the major occupation of the people.
Purposively selected communities were surveyed using a semi-structured interview
guide to give a good quantification of the differences between various oil exploration
impacts on the environment on households and in the study villages. However, the
research was combined both qualitative and quantitative methods.
The nature and scope of rural livelihoods and the ways in which rural economic
growth is conducted differs from across individuals, households and communities.
The methods and tools used for the study were both qualitative and quantitative. The
study consciously focused on poor areas to ensure that elements that impact on the
poor’s livelihoods could be better captured. Instead of assuming an automatic link
between efficient and constructive environmental responsibility for livelihood
security, the study methodology gave due consideration to the intervening activities
10
on rural, economy environmental, and institutional factors that determine how people
respond to the various shapes of livelihood constraints and opportunities if any.
A team of 25 trained enumerators and a research coordinator were recruited for the
survey; armed with field research methodology, interviewing skills and familiarity
with the community local languages in the study area such as Yoruba, Urhobo, Itsekiri
and most importantly Pidgin English. The questionnaire was pre-tested extensively in
different rural villages across the area to have a feel of what and how the people might
react to enumerators taking into consideration the volatile nature of the area both
communal, ethnic and the current hostage taking syndrome. The initial qualitative
activity entails a series of household head interviews conducted in a number of
communities across the study area. These interviews were designed and conducted to
enable modification on survey questionnaire and hypotheses if any and to provide a
detailed reconnaissance survey of the study area.
The focus group discussions was organised in such a way that it took into
consideration gender, age and status of respondents. This allows for different focus
group discussions based on the above consideration. Both interviews and focus group
discussions were organised in order not to interfere with the various tasks of each
household members who are actively involved in sourcing for means of livelihoods;
usually in the evenings after coming back from the farms or creeks.
At the village level at the early stage of the study a framework through which both
discussions with key informants and focus group will be adopted to complement the
household survey questionnaire with a sample of 810 households (90 in each state)
spread across the selected villages, focusing on livelihood strategies changes,
especially agricultural pattern. The use of observation and pictures in addition to the
questionnaire, focus group and key informants becomes inevitable as follow-up
qualitative investigations in interpreting survey findings. The settlement pattern
cutting across the area creates difficulties in proper identification for each housing
unit as there was no listing of households available for the enumeration areas.
However, the final sample size was 810 households cutting across the nine states, 27
local government areas, three villages from each local government area and ninety
households from each village.
11
The major limitation of the survey was travelling through the creeks since most of the
roads are not accessible by car. The available means of transportation was by
trekking, cycling and through water transport by canoes
The Challenges
The pervasive livelihood insecurity precipitated by the oil and gas extraction on the
entire delta environment remains a major challenge to initiating and attaining a
livelihood system across the area. Therefore, it is not possible to discuss sustainable
livelihoods in the Niger-Delta without referring to oil extraction and its impacts on the
environment. For example, (ERA 2002; CASS, 2003; NDHDR, 2006) studies have
shown that non-timber forest products, such as firewood, snails, medicinal plants and
spices, have significantly declined in recent years due to pollution and deforestation.
Focus group participants claimed that constant discharge of effluent and waste from
oil operations onto land, into mangrove and freshwater swamps, and into the sea have
destroyed their food and cash crops in addition to destroying arable and fertile
farmlands with further alteration on the ecosystem. The people of the oil producing
communities are living with the oil are suffering with the consequences of the
exploration.
Agriculture remains the most dominant economic activity in the Niger Delta area with
crop farming and fishing activities account for about 90% of all forms of activities in
the area while about 50%-68% of the active labour force is engaged in one form of
agricultural activity or the other including fishing and farming (FOS, 2004). The
agricultural pattern in the area remains the use of land rotation or bush fallow system
characterised by land and labour being the principal inputs of production. The advent
of oil extraction and production has led to adverse environmental impact on the soil,
forest and water of the Niger Delta area communities. This has ultimately affected
subsistence agriculture in a variety of ways, such as rural urban migration and
exalting pressure on scarce fertile lands to obtain other means of livelihood.
Farm land pollution was identified as a major problem as a socio-economic impact of
oil exploration in Niger Delta the consequences well entrenched through decline in
soil and Marine resources, land degradation, regular displacement without
12
resettlement during oil spills, fall in output of the agricultural product, intensive
exploitation of other fertile lands leading to increase livelihood insecurity. Oil
exploration and production in the Niger Delta, is known to release detrimental
materials into the environment e.g. during exploration, drill cuttings, drill mud and
fluids used for stimulating production are released into the environment with heavy
consequences of agricultural lands. The major constituents of drill cuttings such as
barytes and bentonite clays when dumped on the ground prevent plant growth until
natural processes develop new topsoil.
People survive primarily through their own labour (growing crops; hunting and
gathering; working for a meal or sack of grain; trading and bartering; income
generating activities; etc.). Different options for survival are available to different
people depending on where they live (the agro-ecological zone) and what resources
they have (cash, savings, loans, labour, and so on). The possibilities are many but not
endless; in fact, the range of options are rather limited. People produce food; they
exchange things for food; or they earn cash to buy food. Therefore, investment in
existing CBOs through traditional knowledge could contribute to the sustainability of
livelihoods in the longer term (Anna Toner 2003, Onakuse et al., 2007). The key role
of community-based organisations harnessed through informal associations, networks
and extended families at rural community level, and by the social relationships that
connect local initiatives to create opportunities for livelihood security methods, could
create an easy access to actualising rural poor people livelihood security (Onakuse et
al., 2007).
The other challenge which keeps on re-appearing in all areas is the lack of linkage
between economic growth and poverty reduction as shaped by low employment
intensity of the growth process and the inability of the poor people to integrate into
the growth process and reap the gains from employment opportunities. Ramallion
(1992), posit that farm size and the head of the household- labour availability in the
household are vital indicators to determine landlessness, an important asset of
production. However, the three indicators may not provide by themselves a complete
picture of the economic dimensions of livelihood security at the household level when
the impact of environmental degradation on this vital asset of production has
continued unabated for five decades. The general impact of oil exploration in the
13
Niger-Delta area of could be classified under three key dimensions of human poverty
—insufficient livelihoods, poor health and vulnerability8.
A quick overview of the impact of some of these activities shows that the heat from
gas flare kills vegetation, suppresses the growth and flowering of some plants, and
diminishes agricultural production. Plants, animals and humans in the vicinity of the
gas flares which are continually exposed to light with no respite at night (See picture
1 below). In Nigeria, over 70% of associated gas is flared with a notorious record of
25% of all gas flared in the world. The Niger-Delta area is home to the total gas flared
in Nigeria whereas the average rate of gas flaring in the world is about 4%
Biography and Socio-economic Analysis
In the course of the research, various communities visited travelling through the
creeks and rivers in the area could be observed to be confronted with the dangerous
gas flares, oil wells and pipelines flow-stations and seismic lines criss-crossing farm
land and waterways. The pollution of the air was quite obvious with the continuous
oil spills disrupting the ecological balance making both farming and fishing
impossible for many communities. Lack of access road, good transport networks and
lack of access to agricultural lands are abundant constraints to local livelihoods and
economic development especially when markets. Schools and hospitals are located far
away from rural dwellers in all the villages explored.
Age and Sex Structure
Table three shows the descriptive characteristics of household surveyed. Overall, the
mean household size for all household was 5.1 with a 0.4% difference between male
and female. However, the differences are magnified still further when the sample is
disaggregated into male- and female-headed households by mean age of household
head and educational level. In all the study locations, there appears to be a high
8
Vulnerability refers to the full range of factors that place people at risk of becoming food insecure.
The degree of vulnerability of an individual, household or group of persons is determined by their
exposure to the risk factors and their ability to cope with or withstand stressful situations (FAO 2002).
14
correlation between large family size and livelihood insecurity based on the
dependency ratio significant at the 5% level.
Table 3: Descriptive characteristics of Niger-Delta households, by head of
household
All
Male-headed
Female-headed
Characteristic
households’ households’
households
Mean household size (persons)
5.1
5.2
4.8
Mean age of head (years)
(2.3)
(2.0)
(2.8)
38.0
39.0
37.0
(11.8)
(10.2)
(14.2)
12.2*
7.5*
(7.7)
(8.3)
(5.4)
1.2
1.1*
1.5*
(0.8)
(0.7)
(1.0)
Mean education level of head (years) 10.5
Dependency ratio
Source: Field Survey Data (2003).
Note: Numbers in parentheses are standard deviations.
*Significant at the 5 percent level.
Women across the study states are deemed to be responsible primarily for household
tasks, and they spend more time on most household tasks. This brings about a wide
gender9 disparity in all the various household activities tasks across the surveyed
villages. In their travel within the community and outside, men and women have
different travel patterns, tasks, and responsibilities. In local travel, responses indicate
that both men and women share responsibility to undertake crop production. For
water collection, men overall have a slightly lower responsibility (10%) than women
(46%). In collecting firewood, another major household task requiring travel within
the immediate village area, men and women have different responsibilities. However,
in looking at the total time spent to undertake these tasks, women spend nearly thrice
as long in firewood collection tasks as men (62% to 22%). The importance of
9
Gender in this context, being the socially constructed roles of men and women and the politics of their
relationship
15
firewood collection by women dominates other tasks due to its processing role in fish
preservation. But, men are much more involved in local gin production when
compared with women (80% to 20%)
Housing: Ownership and Facilities
Only 47 percent of households own their houses, while 39 percent reside in family
compounds and 10 percent rented homes. The remaining 4 percent engage in
squatting and shuttling in and out of the village (This group is composed primarily of
new migrants displaced by oil spillage and or total destruction to sources of livelihood
who lodge with family members, supposedly temporarily). The majority of homes (71
per- cent) are made of thatch, wood and mats. Toilet facilities are mainly in the open
field, pit toilet and directly into the rivers as shown on table 4. The hygiene of toilets
system was very poor throughout the villages with indiscriminate waste disposal and
sometime burning in backyard pits. The pit toilets are water-logged as the water table
in most villages is very high. The high levels of the water table makes little or no
difference between those defecating directly into rivers and the water-logged pit
toilets due to their eventual seepage to the open rivers and streams during high tides.
The main sources of drinking water includes: tube well, ring well rivers/canal and
sparingly rainwater. There was no single village surveyed with pipe borne water as
shown on table 4.
Key informant and focus group discussion revealed that the cost of erecting good
toilet facilities in the swampy and river nature of the area is responsible for the
unhygienic conditions. This phenomenon was reported in 700 of 810 enumeration
areas. Since most of the houses are suspended above rivers and swamps, the floors
can only be made of woods and sometimes with made of mud with very few houses
having cement flooring. Table 4 shows the electric power distribution across the
villages across the nine states, where the very poor use mostly kerosene lanterns for
lighting their houses.
As shown in table 4, these various shortcomings are linked to series of neglect by
successive government of Nigeria and oil exploration companies practices linked with
environmental degradation across the rural villages in the area which are predisposing
16
factors to water contamination and associated diseases throughout the Niger Delta
area.
Table 4: Access to Water, Sanitation, Housing and Transportation
Item
Share of Households (%)
Abia A/Ibom Bayelsa C/Rivers Delta Edo Imo Ondo Rivers
Drinking Water
Tube Well
30.0
28.1
32.2
30.0
31.1
24.4
30.0
31.1
27.8
Ring Well
14.0
16.7
15.8
18.9
16.7
14.4
16.7
17.8
16.7
Piped to House 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
River/Canal
52.0
52.2
45.0
45.1
48.2
41.1
53.3
47.1
50.8
Rain Water
3.0
4.0
7.0
6.0
2.0
20.0
0.0
4.0
7.0
Open field
31.1
28
30
33.2
28.9
40.8
28.4
26.7
31.1
Pit toilet
41.1
37.3
35.8
32.4
40.9
41.1
40.7
43.3
34.0
Direct to Rivers 22.2
9.6
7.6
28.9
8.6
6.7
5.6
6.6
7.8
Water sealed
5.6
1.3
1.1
4.4
6.9
3.3
18.9
4.4
21.1
Unsealed
0
23.6
25.6
1.1
14.7
8.1
6.4
19.0
6.0
Sanitation
Types of Housing
Mud
3.6
5.6
4.5
3.6
1.6
6.7
5.6
2.6
4.4
Multi-faceted
34.4
14.4
13.2
25.6
31.1
28.9
33.3
12.2
45.6
Thatch
52.0
55.0
60.2
37.8
43.3
60.3
60.1
52.2
30.0
Huts
10.0
25.0
22.1
33.0
24.0
4.1
2.0
33.0
20.0
Public Transport 24.4
37.4
18.2
38.7
22.2
36.7
39.4
17.7
33.3
Private car
8.1
5.1
6.2
4.2
3.3
8.0
11.1
14.2
7.1
Motorcycle
16.7
19.7
12.7
13.3
15.6
26.7
16.7
14.7
19.8
Bicycle
16.7
16.7
35.6
15.6
25.6
14.4
14.7
15.6
15.8
Transportation
17
Water Canoe
3.0
4.0
11.1
9.1
20.6
3.1
6.0
30.0
10.0
Trekking
31.1
17.1
16.1
19.1
12.8
11.1
13.1
8.9
14.0
Kerosene Lantern 74.4 62.2
73.3
68.2
87.9
62.3
59.4
81.1
72.8
Electricity
24.4
33.8
24.7
31.8
11.1
35.4
36.6
17.7
22.2
Gas Light
1.2
4.0
2.0
0.0
1.0
2.3
4.0
1.2
5.0
Electricity
Source: Household survey data (2003).
An aggregation by ranking across the rural village’s shows that based on priority
needs of local community members through focus group discussion educational
facilities was ranked to be the highest priority (36.4 per cent), followed by a good
water supply (17.1 per cent), health facilities (15.6 per cent) and facilities to create
jobs (11.9 per cent). Other priority needs were roads (7.8 per cent), electricity (6.7 per
cent), and a clean environment (4.5 per cent). The priority needs of local populations
differs from one community to another especially as their livelihood activities vary
The level of involvement in livelihood activities directly affects the income levels of
household heads both male and female inclusive (see table 5). About 46% of
employed persons in the surveyed households earn less than 5,000 Naira per month.
The proportion declines to 20% in the income group 5,001 to 10,000 Naira per month
and 11% falls within the 10,001 to 15,000 Naira income range. The proportion of the
employed declines further to 9% in the 15,001 to 20,000 Naira income groups, while
about 14% of respondents earn 20,000 Naira and above
There is a variation in the level of income of the employed household members
among the States. The proportion of the employed household members earning less
than 5,000 Naira a month is highest in Cross River 70%), Akwa Ibom (57%), and Imo
(55%), with over 50 per cent of the employed earning less than 5,000 a month. On the
other hand, Bayelsa States (9%), Delta (11%), Ondo (13%), and Rivers (14%), have
the highest proportions of the employed household members earning 20,000 Naira
and above.
18
Table 5: Distribution of respondents according to level of involvement in livelihood
activities
Level of involvement
Livelihood activities
Rarely
Often
V. Often
of respondents
Freq.
%
Freq
%
Freq. %
Civil Service
-
-
-
-
9
4.5
Fishing
60
30
21
10.5
26
13
Processing
16
8
15
7.5
95
47.5
Gathering non-fish aquatic products
30
15
25
12.5
38
19
Sea food collection
24
12
29
14.5
65
32.5
Crop farming
29
14.5
21
10.5
7
3.5
Livestock rearing
9
4.5
4
2
5
2.5
Trading
10
5
11
5.5
25
12.5
Hired Labouring
6
3.0
1
0.5
1
0.5
Firewood collection
59
29.5
28
14
25
12.5
4.5
15
7.5
1
0.5
Timber and non-timber forest products 9
Source: Field Survey Data (2003)
However, there are variations between the nine States according to the level of
involvement. Over 56% of the people are actively engaged in agriculture in Cross
River, Edo and Ondo States. In Bayelsa and Rivers States, the proportion of the
people employed in agricultural and other related activities is less than 45%. Trading
and selling are quite significant in Akwa Ibom, Imo and Rivers States where over
27% of the employed household members are also engaged compared with the
position in Cross River State where the figure is less than 17% of the employed.
Reciprocal exchange (of cash and in-kind goods and services) plays an important role
in supplementing and even replacing labour-based income-generating activities. Other
19
social relations (the extended family, social networks, and so forth), play important
roles, both in finding and maintaining employment and in coping with crises. The
relative absence of males in the households sampled is as a result of most male
migrating to urban area for other employment opportunities since agricultural
activities are no longer sustainable for most households. Close relationships of family
and kinship groups are features of rural societies throughout rural villages in Nigeria
(Onakuse et al., 2007). These network relationships offer security in times of hardship
and are an important social safety net for the poor, with those better off in the group
obliged by tradition to look after the more vulnerable.
Table 6: Change in livelihoods Condition Over 5 Years (%)
Response
Socioeconomic Group
Better Off
Very Poor
Poor
Don’t know
3
9
16
Better now
5
23
51
Worse now
21
71
26
No change
53
15
7
100
100
100
Source: Household Field Survey Data (2003).
In all, the effect of environmental degradation and lack of wilful act by the
government at level in Nigeria help to explain why over one-third of the sampled
households and the village at large have no sustainable sources if income leading to
livelihood insecurity. The relationship between rural environment and livelihood
security are inextricably linked to assess to assets taking into account the traditional
means of livelihoods over the years and the sudden impact of oil exploration which
should be associated with relatively high mean incomes.
The subsistence nature of agriculture practices and fishing in the Niger-Delta area
among households with little or no other mean incomes significantly lower the
20
standard of living of members of such communities. A number of factors may explain
these trends: the mean income levels may be masking the efforts of generation upon
generations while creating a vicious cycle of dependency on migrant remittance; both
physical and economic development activities required for development automatically
becomes sedentary; propagating a clear difference gender access to income male- and
female-headed households who are most often occupationally disadvantaged.
Conclusions and Policy Recommendations
The study was focused on the nature of livelihood and food insecurity among rural
villages in the Niger-Delta, using both qualitative and quantitative research methods.
The remaining part of this paper describes the methodology, result and discussion. It
also describes how many activities, both related to agricultural intensification and
diversification and to non-farm activities. The concluding section presents the future
challenges to long-term livelihood security and sustainability of the Niger-Delta
region. The result from the analysis exposes the disposing factors to livelihood
insecurity and its impact on income at both individual and household levels
Exploration and exploitation activities of oil companies directly affect the lives of the
communities based on their relationship with their land as farmers, their swamps,
rivers and creeks as fishermen, and their cultural life. Livelihood insecurity with the
rural
villages
surveyed
centred
on
loss
of
agricultural
lands
to
oil
prospecting/exploration and spillage. The research findings emphasise the importance
of diversifying income sources at both the individual and household level in order to
cope with the aftermath effect of oil spillage that ruined agricultural activities (crop
production and fishing). To attain this requires a strategic focus on rural development
programmes.
These strategic programmes must be result-oriented, that is, focusing on outcomes or
outputs that would benefit the poor and the strategies must be issues-inclusive to
recognise the multi-dimensional nature of the prioritised environment of the area, so
that implementation will be feasible. Also, the strategies must be built around
partnerships, in recognition of the growing economic deprivation that pervades the
area for the past five decades and to review and update existing environmental laws to
protect the rights of citizens and set mandatory environmental standards for the oil
21
and gas business that are consistent with average global standards while the second
phase of NEEDS must be cast in a medium to long-term framework of development
activity in conjunction with operators in the area in order to lead consensus building
among stakeholders. The success of the above strategies are imperative based on a
principled and development-oriented political leadership, a government committed to
mass mobilisation, a competent civil service and public participation in programme
implementation
More pro-poor investments in the future require genuinely integrated project
components that offer the poor, too, some opportunity to diversify and broaden
livelihoods, and thus strengthen livelihood capital with which to make use of
improved agricultural practices and good rural roads networks.
To realise the full potential of the Niger-Delta poor people, a clear-cut invest in their
capabilities and empowering them with modern education and comprehensive health
care is imperative, through which malnutrition, social evils infant mortality and
female foeticide will be banished.
The federal government of Nigeria in collaboration with the state government and
local councils should deploy human and institutional capacities through the use of oil
and non-oil resources to secure means of production by empowering the people to use
their strengths and assets to improve their livelihoods. Also, the government at all
levels must ensure that every section of the region - particularly the weak and the
disadvantaged - is equal partners in, and beneficiaries of, the development process.
It must promote employment and guarantee sustainable livelihood security that
expand people’s capacities to generate and maintain their means of living, and
enhance their wellbeing and that of future generations. A sustainable livelihood
system that is efficient, equitable, ecological and able to cope with shocks and stresses
of current and future environmental degradation through exploration because
sustainability equal livelihood security. These must be supported by economic, social
and political policies, and their core assets—human capital, social capital, natural
capital and infrastructure —must be allowed to complement and re-enforce each
other.
22
Measures that can reverse these trends include mainstreaming employment in macroeconomic policies, promote structural transformation and diversification, promote
governance for private sector and social development, harness globalisation and
regional integration, invest in human resources development, strengthen institutional
capacities and developing projects proposals for job creation in all the Niger-Delta
member states.
Curtailing the overall trend of livelihood insecurity in the region and subsequent
increases in livelihood security levels, requires a major rural development policy
strategy in conjunction with multi-national and indigenous oil companies to facilitate
create means of livelihoods rooted in the local knowledge with accelerated economic
growth-based on agricultural production, predominantly focused on income
generation for individuals and households.
Finally, while agriculture continues to play a major role in the provincial economy
and in the livelihoods of rural households, its development will depend increasingly
on improving productivity and access to markets. The link between livelihood
security and land one of the major assets of production cannot be underestimated
since rural dwellers survival is largely agrarian and as such, farming and trade in farm
produce constitute the main sources of livelihoods. From the above assertion, the land
use decree should the reviewed to accommodate people who have been pushed out of
farming due to lack of access to land
References
Carney, Diana, ed. (1998). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: What Contribution Can We
Make? Department for International Development, United Kingdom; and Hammer,
Lucia, Elizabeth Lovell,
Robert Chapman and Tom Slaymaker. 2000. Poverty and Transport: A Toolkit.
Overseas Development Institute
CASS (2003) Poverty Knowledge and Policy Processes in Bayelsa State, Nigeria.
Centre for Advanced Social Sciences, Port Harcourt, Research Report
23
Central Bank of Nigeria (2007) Financial System Strategy 2020 International
Conference, Abuja June 18, 2007
Central Bank of Nigeria (2006). Economic and Financial Review, Volume 44 Number
2. June 2006
Daniel Maxwell, Carol Levin, Margaret Armar-Klemesu, Marie Ruel,
Saul Morris and Clement Ahiadeke (2000). Urban livelihoods and food and
nutrition security in Greater Accra, Ghana. The International Food Policy Research
Institute; in collaboration with the Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research
and The World Health Organization (Research report; 112)
Daniel Omoweh (2005). The Paradox of Water Crisis and Rural Poverty in the Niger
Delta of Nigeria: The Case of Bayelsa State. Nigerian Institute of International
Affairs, 13-15, Kofo Abayomi Road Victoria Island Lagos, Nigeria
Daniel Maxwell, (1999). "Livelihoods and vulnerability: how different is the urban
case?" Presented to the 1999 Meeting of the Society for Applied Anthropology.
Tucson, Ariz.
Environmental Rights Action (2000), The Emperor Has No Clothes: Report of the
Conference on the Peoples of the Niger Delta and the 1999 Constitution, Benin City:
ERA/FOE
Food and Agricultural Organisation (2002). Towards Earth Summit. Social Briefing
Number 2
Federal Office of Statistics (2004). Socio-Economic Profile of Nigeria
Hoddinott J. (1999) Operationalisation of Household Food Security in Development
Projects: An Introduction (IFPRI)
Niger-Delta Development Commission (1999). A Brief History
Niger Delta Human Development Report (2006): Poor Human Development in NDelta —the State of Niger-Delta Environment
National Population Commission NPC (2006) Provisional Result based on 2005
Census
Onakuse S. and Eamon L. (2007). Community-Based Organisations Approach:
Household Food and Livelihood Security in Southern Nigeria. Joint International
Conference on Globalization: Migration, Citizenship and Identity University of
Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria, November 6-9, 2007
Ramallion, Martin. (1992). Poverty comparisons. Living Standards Measurement
Series Paper 88. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank
24
Timothy R. Frankenberger, Michael Drinkwater, Daniel Maxwell (1992)
Operationalizing household livelihood security, Forum on Operationalizing
Participatory Ways of Applying Sustainable Livelihoods Approaches - FAO
Proceedings
Author Information
Dr. Stephen Onakuse is a Research Fellow with the Centre for Sustainable
Livelihoods and a Lecturer with the Department of Food Business and Development
at the National University of Ireland – Cork. He has a particular interest in sustainable
livelihoods & socio-economic analysis, community development, Agricultural
innovations and vulnerability assessment, community-based organisations
development and livelihoods analysis, participatory appraisal and community needs,
situation and policy analysis, policy advice for poverty reduction strategies,
mainstreaming HIV/AIDS and socio-cultural issues. Present research includes: Focus
on household education, health and gender mainstreaming in rural development,
socio-economic and community analysis, environment and its impact on food
security, stakeholder assessment, identification of interest groups, corruption and
human rights issues in development and governance assessment and institutional
strengthening
Eamon Lenihan is the founding director of the Centre for Sustainable Livelihoods,
National University of Ireland - Cork. He has spent over 10 years as a development
practitioner, spending substantial periods of time in both South Asia and sub-Saharan
Africa. He has been a senior lecturer with the department of Food Business and
Development at the National University of Ireland - Cork for the past fifteen
years. During this period he has established collaborative links with many research
and teaching institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa. He is currently on the implementation
committee of BASIC (Building African Scientific and Institutional Capacity),
representing the European Union university partners. This programme is sponsored by
the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA). He is a member of the
executives of European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes
(EADI) the Network of EU universities engaged in tropical and subtropical food and
agriculture research (NATURA) He has lectured at the University of Zimbabwe and at
the Cooperative College in Moshi, Tanzania. Currently on the board of the Concern
Worldwide and has worked with various Irish and International NGOs. Present
research interests include: Exploring the two way linkages between Nutrition and
HIV/AIDS; Food/Agricultural production systems; rural livelihoods and food
Security, small-scale rural enterprises, small-scale/co-operative dairy enterprises, rural
credit and rural financial institutions and Natural resource management
25
26