Date post: | 02-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | sheryl-perry |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Stakeholder Involvement and Performance of Poverty Eradication Projects in Uganda: A study of NAADS
Projects in Mukono District
Presented at the 10th ORSEA Conference, University of Nairobi, October 16-18, 2014
ByHassan B., Kusemererwa C., Ssekakubo j., Ntayi J M. and
Ngoma.MMUBS
Introduction
Conceptual frame work and objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion and managerial implication
The government set up various projects to eradicate poverty in line with the MDGs
◦ Entandikwa sheme (small business startups)◦ National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS)◦ Northern Uganda Social Action Fund (NUSAF)◦ Bona Bagaggawale (prosperity for all)
The projects have however registered 60% failure rate, with some projects in some districts registering 100% failure (Auditor general’s report of 2008 and 2012)
Consequently, the poverty level has remained high with
over 31% of the population still living below a dollar a
day.
Studies on NAADS projects are silent about stakeholder
involvement
This study therefore bases on stakeholder theory to
argue that low normative stakeholder involvement in
NAADS projects could provide a better explanation to
this phenomena.
Stakeholder Involvement
Involvement by Role
Involvement by Setting
Project Centrality
Project performance
•Scope•Cost •Project quality•Project objectives
• Cross sectional, positivistic and correlation designs.
• Using Bartlet et.al (2001) table, a sample of 323 out of
a population of 2,062 projects
• Multi-stage random sampling
• 356 Farmers and 14 project coordinators were
selected
• Adapted existing validated instruments
• Pre-tested instrument
• Reliability tests were conducted for the instruments
• SPSS V16 was used for data analysis
Construct Measure Reliability
(Cronbach Alpha)
Involvement by Role
Kanungo (1982) 0.915
Involvement by Setting
Kanungo (1982) 0.753
Project Centrality
Kanungo (1982)
0.875
Project performance
Dvir et al. (2006); Kerzner (2006); Bryde ( 2005)
0.845
Mean SD 1 2 3 4Role(1) 4.2281 0.5725 1.00
Setting(2) 3.7342 0.9092 .394** 1.00
Centrality(3) 3.8633 0.6532 .441** .341** 1.00
Performance of NAADS Projects (6)
3.6718 0.4669 .413** .464** .441** 1.00
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Variable Model1 Model 2 Model 3 Collinearity Statistics
β β β Tolerance VIF
(constant) 2.079 1.912 1.615 Na naAge 0.031 0.023 0.03 0.92 1.087Gender -0.026 -0.023 -0.038 0.909 1.1
Marital status -0.01 -0.008 0.009 0.94 1.064
Number of years worked0.076 0.076 0.069 0.933 1.071
education 0.021 0.016 0.014 0.972 1.029Role 0.307** 0.198** 0.121** 0.947 1.056Setting 0.18** 0.154** 0.84 1.19Centrality 0.184** 0.76 1.316R 0.444 0.584 0.592 Na naR square 0.197 0.3 0.351 Na naAdjusted R square 0.18 0.283 0.332 Na naF- statistics 11.428 17.049 18.707 Na naSign. .000 .000 .000 Na naR square change 0.103 0.05 Na naF Change Statistic 46.769 40.953 21.512 Na naSig. F-Change .000 .000 Na na
• The correlation and regression models show that stakeholder involvement strongly and positively correlates with and predict performance of NAADS projects.
• At the policy level, there is need to increase project involvement by role, setting and project centrality of stakeholders of NAADS projects by ensuring that project coordinators consult and discuss with farmers the activities they can best carryon in order to build primary stakeholders interest and emotional attachment to NAADS projects
It was a cross sectional study
Concentrated on stakeholders of NAADS in
Mukono district
Thank you