CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
Neoliberalism encompasses both ideological position and policy perspective that endorses economic individualism based on market competition, encourage free trade as well as foreign investment, and oppose state intervention and state run-welfare programs, the policy therefore represent anti-state development (Hague, 2008).
Iyaji (2005) asserted that the philosophy behind neoliberalism insist that the most profitable return to an economy occur, when all activities and services are traded on the market because the state is an inefficient provider of services as well as productivity resulting from privatization of state economy.
Mentain (2004) also opined that the process of globalization at the structural level has forced many developing countries to re-think and restructure the state- market relations in their respective countries to pay homage to market force. Whereas the objectives of these reforms program is either to restore a system back to its original state of efficiency or to be able to respond to institutional challenges internally and externally (Olaopa, 2015).
The Babangida regime adopted the World Bank /International Monetary Fund inspired neoliberal policy of structural adjustment programme (SAP) in order to finance its huge budget deficits in 1986, to give way primarily to free market enterprise, trade liberalizations and economic deregulation privatization of the state by divesting public investment and participation in commerce, reduction of public expenditure for essential service yet these decision lead to massive unemployment, fall in industrial capacity utilization and drop in social service provision (Ferguson, 2006).
Cavaragh and broad (2007) asserted that, the unimpeded private market force is the driving engine for growth and development. Whereas Mbah,(2014) argued that the neoliberal reform is profit-driven and therefore cannot actually provide social welfare service adequately without considering its profit margin. Aluko(2004) also viewed that urbanization in Nigeria is associated with less industrialization.
The advent of neoliberal reforms in Nigeria government strategy involves attracting of multinational corporations which has lead to high competition in open market, hereby resulting to destructionof local industries which often leads to urban crimes and unemployment (Taiwo 1990; William 2003).
Urban development in Nigeria is connected to the political and socio-economic services in the urban population centers as against the designated rural areas of the country (Sani, 2010). They affect the whole range of governmental organization and process for planning at all levels for purpose of decision making and for the performance of public services related to urban areas(Green, 2011). Thus urban development usually involves wider governmental participation, it also connotes large scale cooperation by the local, state and federal government, they exists a mixed jurisdiction to the complex urban problems or challenges thrown up by the urban phenomenon (Udental, 2011). Although the history of urban policy in Nigeria dates back to the colonial dispensation, urban development was for a long time neglected in Africa including Nigeria (Ugwu&Uyanga 2011). But based on the various urban policies in Nigeria, beginning with the colonial Europe Reservations policy of 1902, the township ordinance of 1917 which legalized the segregation of the European from the African residential areas, the Nigerian town and country planning ordinance of 1946, the national housing of 1972, the national housing policy of 1991 and the millennium development goals adopted, several efforts were made by successive Nigerian governments to control the development and the use of land, re-plan the improvement and development of different parts of Nigeria, they were also supposedly meant to create a flexible framework within which cities can grow so as to make their contributions to the social and economic of the country, however the policies did not achieve much because of implementation gaps, policy proliferation and disconnection as well as poor commitment (Ugwu&Uyanga 2011).
Urban development is expected to be a state- sanctioned programme designed to achieve revitalization of business districts, improvement and redevelopment of areas that are deteriorated, unsafe or poorly planned and as a collaborative tool for stimulating economic growth and national development through infrastructural development, sustainable growth and development often imply and demands consistent investment in infrastructure in countries at all stages of development. In Nigeria, the challenges of urban development are changing rapidly in the same pattern as technical, economic and social conditions, despite the changing economic realities the demand for infrastructure and their expansion that determine and constitute the bottom-line of urban development remain constant, because urban development in Nigeria have been bedeviled with poor planning, commitment gaps, policy disconnection, corruption and general poor government. For instance, laws from an integral part of the whole planning process and all expression and actions of those who design and invest in urban development are supposed to be within the limits prescribed by law since the law apply to the physical development, which is central to urban development because the legal framework that mounds the urban development apart from the problem of absence of a comprehensive plan for urban development, Nigeria should focus on the needs, desires and challenges inorder to provides the guidance essential to the preparation of specific plans and the budgeting to accomplish them.
There is also an attitudinal problem which center on lack of will or commitment by government, corruption, diversion of abundance of utilizable financial resources and even in the investment of huge financial resources in Nigeria, there is urban decay and deterioration (Gallion& Eisner 2010).
Urbanization came into existence in Enugu state as a result of discovery of coal in the area in 1917 by the European explorers. In the colonial period all planning enactments example, the cantonment proclamation of 1904, Ordinance No.29 of 1917, town and country planning ordinance of 1946 were all in operation in the old eastern region including Enugu. However the first indigenous planning law, the Nigerian urban and regional planning law decree No.88 of 1992 which was made to have national application has not been domesticated in Enugu state. This is however a situation that has created planning activities and not keeping pace with the population growth in the area.
The township ordinance No.29 of 1917 was enacted to classify urban settlements in Nigeria into different grades of cities and as well to establish broad physical layout of towns, in that ordinance Enugu was classified a second class township amongst other towns. The ordinance came as a result of discovery of coal and the consequent exploitation but only Lagos was classified a first class township but before the classification Enugu had remained an important town east of the Niger based on several functions which it served and has continued to serve to the present day(Iyi, 2009).
Available industries were scored 2 to 3 % for medium and large scale industries respectively, in the area of infrastructure administrative and commerce land uses formed the core of early Enugu urban, the markets have remained in the positions they were in the early stages of Enugu urban and as a result the attendant markets development forces have created pressure on the entire area, many barriers separate newer residential neighborhoods from the earlier settled areas of the town. For example, the economy of the area for now is mixed with greater bias to the informal sector activities; this was however against the earlier settlers who were engaged in mining and other forms of salaried functions (Okeke 1998; &Iyi 2007).
The major work of the Enugu capital territory development authority (ECTDA), is to administer the city’s infrastructure and urban development planning and coordinating between state level government departments tasked with governing Enugu power supply, roads and services but however the Nigerian infrastructure Advisory facility (NAIF) worked alongside ECTDA offering technical assistance to support more effective city development planning and service delivery. Rural electrification is also pursued vigorously as a necessary infrastructure for the success of small and large-scale industrial scheme.
1.2 Statement of The Problem
The present economic reforms of the federal government since 1999 appear to be a continuation of the previous reforms measure.Obasanjo’s administration in particular has pursued these measures especially with the introduction of the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS), the reform focus on the various areas; private alleviation, fiscal monitory income trade, debt policies as well as broadening of the productive base of the economy for sustainable growth (Donli, 2004). The supposed goal of neoliberal policy was to enhance growth and development however; demographic statistics reveal that the neoliberal policy has not brought about the massive improvement in the social welfare needs since independence the Nigeria government has hardly spent beyond 5% and 13% budgetary allocations on health and education (Abayomi, 2012). Whereas the economic growth rate into poverty reduction has however escalated the rate of poverty in Nigeria due to high cost of living as a result of privatization(Sen. 1999 and William 2003).
Prior to the emergence of neoliberal economic reforms in Nigeria, government strategy simply involved attracting foreign capital/multinational corporation which has however led to high competition in open market hereby resulting to stunt growth inlocal industries, urban crime and unemployment (Taiwo 1990 and William 2003).
There are various factors that has undermined urban development in Nigeria, some cities like port Harcourt, Abuja, kano, and Lagos consist of indigenous dwellers who always seek pre-ferential treatment with respect to urban administration, these requests constitute formidable barriers to re-development proposals and on the other hand non-native settlers usually feel reluctant to participate meaningfully in actives that will improve these cities, the revenue potentials of these cities are hardly fully exploited and when exploited the tendency for the revenue official to divert some of these funds to other pressing problem instead of providing the required facilities need in urban centers and hereby resulting to various urban problems such as over population, inadequate housing, water supply, transportation, poor sanitary condition, inadequate health facilities/ centers, high urban prostitution, increasing menace of cultactivities, vast emerging slums in urban centers declining productivity and poor education system, bad roads, inadequate electricity in Nigeria (Aina&Taiwo 1990).
Research questions:
1. How has the implementation of neoliberal economic reforms engendered infrastructural development of urban centers in Enugu state
Between2007-2016?
2. How has the infrastructural development of urban centers enhance socio-economic welfare of residents in Enugu state between 2007-2016?
1.3 Objectives of the Study
The study has broad and specific objectives; the major objective of this study is to determine the impact of neoliberal reforms on urban development in Enugu State between 2007-2016.
Therefore the specific objectives are
1. To ascertain whether the implementation of neoliberal reforms engendered infrastructural development of urban centers in Enugu state between 2007-2016.
2. To ascertain whether infrastructural development enhanced socio-economic welfare of residents in Enugu state between 2007-2016.
1.4Significance of the Study
This research work has theoretical and practical significance. The theoretical significance is that the study will add to existing knowledge, practically this study will contribute to the advancement of extent literature on neoliberal economic reforms and challenges of urbanization in Enugu state thus forming a verifiable source of reference for researcher.
Again, it is also expected that the empirical result and recommendations of this work will be useful to urban planners, as it will promote urban development in Enugu state.
Finally, the public will find this work very useful because it will serve as a foundation for continuation of research as well as for detailed information as regards neoliberal economic reforms activities in Enugu state.
1.5Hypotheses
1. Implementation of neoliberal reforms engendered infrastructural development of urban centers in Enugu state between 2007-2016.
2. The infrastructural development of urban centers has not enhanced socio-economicwelfare of residents in Enugu state between 2007-2016.