The level of political participation in rural areas

Project Abstract

Political participation in rural areas has been a topic of interest for researchers and policymakers alike due to its implications for democracy and governance. This research project aims to investigate the level of political participation in rural areas and explore the factors that influence it. The study utilizes a mixed-methods approach, combining surveys, interviews, and focus group discussions to gather data from rural communities. The findings indicate that political participation in rural areas is influenced by a combination of individual, community, and structural factors. Individual factors such as education level, income, and political awareness play a critical role in shaping participation levels. Community factors, including social networks, local leadership, and access to information, also impact political engagement in rural areas. Moreover, structural factors such as the availability of resources, government policies, and the presence of political parties influence the opportunities for political participation in rural communities. The study highlights the importance of considering these multi-dimensional factors when analyzing political participation in rural areas. The research also reveals that there are variations in political participation across different rural regions, with some communities demonstrating higher levels of engagement than others. These variations can be attributed to a range of factors, including historical context, economic development, and cultural norms. Furthermore, the study explores the impact of technology on political participation in rural areas. While access to digital tools and social media platforms has the potential to enhance political engagement, the research findings suggest that digital divide issues persist in many rural communities, limiting the impact of technology on participation levels. Overall, this research contributes to a deeper understanding of political participation in rural areas and provides insights that can inform policy interventions aimed at enhancing democratic processes and citizen engagement in rural communities. By shedding light on the complex interplay of individual, community, and structural factors that shape political participation, this study offers valuable implications for promoting inclusive and participatory governance in rural areas.

Project Overview

<p> </p><div><p><strong>INTRODUCTION</strong></p><p><strong>1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY</strong></p><p>Political participation includes the political activities of citizens aimed at influencing the political process. Such participation could be either in an individual or group basis. The political process may be the ways, directions and methods of governance or the input of the outcomes of the process. The political activities that may involve their participation: selection of leaders, influencing decision of government and the process of governance. Okafor &amp; Okeke (2008).</p><p>Political participation includes those action of private cities by which they seek to influence or support government and politics. Political participation could either be conventional or orthodox and unconventional or unorthodox. Writing on convention and non-conventional political participation. Janda etal state as follows:-</p><p>Thus, conventional participation is legal, constitutional, acceptable and normal. Activities here may include voting, campaigns and attendance to party meetings, expressing political opinions, standing for elections, registration as a party member and as a voter for an election contesting for elective offices, party funding. These activities are in consonance with the normal political process. Unconventional political participation includes those activities that are not acceptable, not regarded as lawful and legal, not sanctioned or not normal. They include such activities as riots, strikes, violent, demonstration, arson, boycotts, rebellion, terrorism, cultism, protests, and the like. It is felt that a higher propensity for the emergence of unconventional participation is accentuated by the existence of narrow or very limited conventional modes. For people to express their feelings and be heard under a trained mode they have to resort to unconventional approaches.</p><p>Conventional (orthodox) political participation is of two fold. There could be supportive participation or influencing participation. Under the supportive dimension, our citizens express allegiance or loyalty to the state and government. Examples include singing the national anthem, reciting the national pledge or making reference to such symbols as the national flag and the coat of arms, turning out for voting purpose, etc.</p><p>The influencing dimension is concerned with efforts to modify or reverse government policy to suit political interests. Examples include trying to secure some benefits from government, asking for special social or welfare services from the government such as setting up a health canter, construction or rehabilitation of roads, sitting, a public school or police post. e. t. c.</p><p><strong>1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM</strong></p><p>From the above background of study, political participation is the vehicle through which citizens of a given society communicate their interests, demands, desires, support and or proposition to the authoritative decisions of the superstructure. However it seems the levels of people participation in politics are narrow may be due to the assertion that “politics is a dirty game”. Since 2003, democracy has come to be regarded as the source for political participation active towards rural direction. Therefore, this study would seek to find solutions to the following problem:-</p><p>i. Low level of education.</p><p>ii. The culture of corruption.</p><p>iii. Parochial political culture.</p><p>iv. Subject political culture.</p><p>v. Primordial sentiment and low socio-economic development.</p><p><strong>1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS</strong></p><p><strong>The research questions to be investigated are:</strong></p><p>i. What is the profile cause of low level of education in ruralities of Ojo?</p><p>ii. Can culture of corruption affect political participation in ruralities of Ojo?</p><p>iii. Can parochial political culture contribute to the level of political participation in ruralities of Ojo?</p><p>iv. Is there any measure to be used to determine subject political culture in political participation in Ruralities of Ojo?</p><p>v. What is the consequence of low socio-economic development on ruralities of Ojo?</p><p><strong>1.4 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES</strong></p><p>To guide the study, the following null research hypotheses were raised to be tested:</p><p>i. Low level of education cannot be significantly responsible for the level of political participation in ruralities of Ojo.</p><p>ii. Culture of corruption cannot affect level of political participation in ruralities of Ojo.</p><p>iii. Parochial political culture cannot contribute to low level of political participation in ruralities of Ojo.</p><p>iv. Low socio-economic development cannot be significantly responsible for level of political participation in ruralities of Ojo.</p><p><strong>1.5 SCOPE OF STUDY</strong></p><p>The scope of this study is the level of political participation of the ruralities in Ojo local government area of Lagos state. The scope was chosen due to the low level of political participation of the people in the area and individual development.</p><p><strong>1.9 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY</strong></p><p>The significance of this study will encourage active participation of individuals in the political process of their community. The study will also make the citizens to share in governance through expression of consent, choice, rejection of the leader and certain policies considers obnoxious. Through participation, the citizen makes some input in governance through the expression of demands, preferences, orientations, judgments and political process.</p><p><strong>1.10 DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY</strong></p><p>The study will be limited to the ruralities in Ojo local government area of Lagos state on the level of political participation in 2008-2009.</p><p><strong>1.11 DEFINITION OF TERMS</strong></p><p>1. Influence: Power to produce an effect, esp. on character, beliefs or action.</p><p>2. Political Participation: Is the involvement of individual in political activities. It can be through electional activities covers voting, campaigns, seeking to persuade others to vote for a given candidate or party.</p><p><strong>References</strong></p><p>Okafor C.U &amp; Okeke, M.I. (2008): Political Culture. The Nigeria Perspective Academic Publishing Company Enugu.</p><p>Oghenekaro, M. Ogbinaka (2008): A Course Text on Government 1. Obaroh &amp; Ogbinaka Publishers Limited Lagos.</p><p>Bamigbose, J.A (2008): Political Science and Government. Lagos: Ijede Commercial Enterprises.</p><p>Raufu, S.A (2010): Introduction to Political Science. Lagos: Leo Prints Nigeria.</p><p>Segun Aderigbingbe, (2006): Basic Approach to Government. Lagos Joja Educational Research.</p><p>Oyediran, O (2009): Nigeria government and Politics under Military Rule. Ibadan: Macmillan Press Ltd.</p><p>Nnoli, O. (2000): Introduction to Political Science. England: Longman Group Limited.</p><p>Dubby, B.J (2003): Introduction to Nigeria Government and Politics. Macmillian Press Ltd.</p><p>Remi Anifowose &amp; Francis, C. Enemuo (2007): Elements of Politics. Lagos, Sam Iroanusi Publications.</p><p>Michele Micheletti, (2005): International Political Science Review, Vol. 26, No. 3.</p></div><h3></h3><br> <br><p></p>