1
STATUS OF PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN TVET INSTITUTIONS AND INDUSTRIES IN DELTA STATE OF NIGER DELTA REGION IN NIGERIA
BY
AYONMIKE, Chinyere Shirley
(Researcher in Industrial Technology Education)
Department of Technical and Business Education,
Delta State University, PMB1 Abraka,
Delta State, Nigeria
Email:
Mobile: +2348033772087
AND
IGBERADJA, Serumu
(Researcher in Industrial Technology Education)
Department of Technical and Business Education,
Delta State University, PMB1 Abraka,
Delta State, Nigeria
Email:
Mobile: +2347034623644
AND
IGBERAHARHA, Omovigho Clever
(Researcher in Business and Entrepreneurial Education)
Department of Technical and Business Education,
Delta State University, PMB1 Abraka,
Delta State, Nigeria
Email:
Mobile: +2348033485476
AND
OKEKE, Benjamin Chukwumaijem
(Professor of Technical Education)
President /Vice Chancellor,
Federal University, Gausau,
Zamfara State, Nigeria
Email:
Mobile: +2348066393167
A Paper Presented at International Vocational Education and Training Association (IVETA) Annual Conference on “Promoting and Sustaining Effective TVET Partnerships” November 18-19, 2014 - Gaylord Opryland Hotel, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the state of partnership between TVET institutions and industries in Delta State of Niger-Delta Region in Nigeria. Four research questions and hypotheses guided the study. Survey research design was used in conducting this study. The population of the study comprised of all the TVET teachers and lecturers in technical colleges and tertiary institutions in Delta State from which a sample of 200 TVET teachers and lecturers were randomly selected. Questionnaire was used to collect data and data were analysed using mean and standard deviation for research questions and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for testing hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance using F-statistics. The study revealed among others, that partnership between industries and TVET institutions does not exists , and there are numerous challenges militating against such partnership. In conclusion, partnership between TVET Institutions and Industries can be established and sustained through collective efforts of TVET stakeholders, government, industries, and the general public.
Keywords: TVET, Institutions, Industries, Partnership, Delta State, Niger-Delta Region, & Nigeria
Introduction
The Niger-Delta, the delta of the Niger River in Nigeria is a very densely populated Region sometimes called the Oil Rivers because it was once a major producer of palm oil. The area was the British Oil Rivers Protectorate from 1885 until 1893, when it was expanded and became the Niger Coast Protectorate. The Niger-Delta is defined officially by the Nigerian government, and it extends over about 70,000 km² and makes up 7.5% of Nigeria's land mass. Historically and cartographically, it consists of present day Bayelsa, Delta, and Rivers States. In the year 2000, however, the Federal Government of Nigeria under President Olusegun Obasanjo's regime included Abia, Akwa-Ibom, Cross River , Edo, Imo and Ondo States in the Niger-Delta Region. Over 30 million people of more than 40 ethnic groups including the Bini, Efik, Ibibio, Igbo, Annang, Oron, Ijaw, Itsekiri, Isoko, Urhobo, Ukwuani, and Kalabari, are among the inhabitants in the Niger-Delta Region.
Delta State is an oil and agricultural producing state of Nigeria, situated in the Niger- Delta Region, Warri is the economic nerve center of the state and also the most populated, located in the southern end of the state. The state has a total land area of 16,842 square kilometers. Delta State plays host to both multinational and indigenous companies/industries, some of these industries include Chevron, Agip, Exxon Mobil, Niger Construction, Beta Glass, Aladja Steel, Sectraco Construction, Gomene Construction, Flour Mills, WoodLand, African Timber and Plywood (ATP), Asaba Aluminum, Lone Star Drilling, Shell Petroleum, Pan Ocean, and Top Feeds. However, some of the Industrial/Trade Zones of Delta State include Asaba, Warri, Agbor, Sapele, Koko, Oghara, Ogidigben, Ughelli, Patani, and Burutu. Despite, the fact that Delta State plays host to various industries, partnership between educational institutions and these industries that are operating in Delta State are hard to come by.
Public Private Partnership (PPP) is a contractual arrangement which is formed between public and private sector companies involving the private sector in the development, financing, ownership, and or operation of a public facility or service. In such a partnership, public and private resources are pooled and responsibilities divided so that the partners‟ efforts are complementary (Egbewole, 2011). Also, Public-private partnership (PPP) is generally defined as a system in which a government service or private business venture is funded and operated through a partnership for the purpose of delivering a project or services that was traditionally provided by the public sector(Haruna, 2013).
Although there is no universal consensus about the definition of public-private partnerships, the following elements typically characterize a PPP: The infrastructure or service is funded, in whole or in part, by the private partner. Risks are distributed between the public partner and private partner and are allocated to the party best positioned to manage each individual risk. PPP are complex structures, involving multiple parties and relatively high transaction costs (Egbewole, 2011). Public private partnership arose as a medium for infrastructure development, i.e. to make available adequate infrastructure through public private partnership‟s development. Such partnerships are characterized by the sharing of investment, risk, responsibility and reward between the partners (British Colombia Ministry of Municipal Affairs, 1999).
PPP is viewed as a generic term for the relationships formed between the private sector and public bodies often with the aim of introducing private sector resources and/or expertise in order to help provide and deliver public sector assets and services (Okoye & Okwelle, 2013 citing Education International, 2009). The perception of Public-Private Partnership (PPP) in TVE recognises the existence of alternative options for providing educational facility and services besides public finance and public delivery (Olabiyi, Okafor & Bamidele, 2014). Public-Private partnership according to Ahmed (2010) in Olabiyi, Okafor and Bamidele (2014) refers to a contractual agreement between a government agency or authority and a private sector entity that allows for greater private participation in the delivery of public infrastructure project.
The fundamental objective of a PPP is to encourage the private sector to use its facility to raise capital and the capability to build projects on time and to budget for the welfare of the technical vocational institutions, without having to compromise its profit motive (Olabiyi, Okafor & Bamidele, 2014). At the same time, technical institutions would retain its responsibility to provide goods and services to the public at affordable rates (Aimola, 2010 in Olabiyi, Okafor & Bamidele, 2014). Public – Private Partnership therefore is one of the new trends in partnership strategies; it is being popularized as an alternative approach to the delivery of goods and services (Odekunle & Babalola, n.d). It refers to contractual arrangement between the public sector and the private sector to achieve well-defined and shared objectives in a cost effective, efficient and sustainable manner. This arrangement always specifies targets, responsibilities, priorities and feedback processes. It primarily involves sharing of resources, knowledge and risks between the two sectors so that the country at large can benefit from the arrangement (Oni and Akinbinu, 2005).
PPP is a voluntary arrangement between non-governmental organization and government to execute or jointly carry out a project with the aim of sharing the profits and bear any involving risk together (Aina & Akintunde, 2013). More so, PPP describes a relationship in which public and private resources are put together in achieving a goal or set of goals mutually beneficial to both the private entity and the public (Witters, Marom & Kurt, 2012 in Aina & Akintunde, 2013 ). Hence, Aina and Akintunde (2013) posited that Public-Private Partnership in Education (PPPE) is a relationship in which the public (government) and private resources are voluntarily put together mainly for achieving educational goals. Okpor and Hassan (2012) posited that Public-Private Partnership is becoming an obvious facilitator and approach to sustainable national development of any society, and the conceptual aspect of such relationship is based towards contributing and providing for Technical and Vocational Education for the realization of set goals of Vocational Technical Education in Nigeria.
However, Okpor and Hassan (2012) citing Karean and Garba (2008), opined that in Nigeria and other developing countries sustainable access to technology development and product are best achieved through Public Private Partnership with Vocational Technical Education. If Vocational Technical Education is to be meaningful and successful in Nigeria, then relationships are needed between public and private sectors to partner effectively with Vocational Technical Education and skill acquisition programmes. Puyete (2005) in Okpor and Hassan (2012), stressed that in an ideal situation, as obtainable in developed societies of the world, the training and Education of nations citizenry is a collective effort of both governmental and Non-governmental organizations, private firms, and private individuals or philanthropist.
Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors (2009) posited that the Canadian Council for Public Private Partnerships defines PPPs as a cooperative venture between the public and private sectors, built on the expertise of each partner that best meets clearly defined public needs through the appropriate allocation of resources, risks and rewards. In German, the Federal Report on PPP in Public Real Estate commissioned by the German Federal Department of Transportation, Construction and Real Estate (2003) in Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors (2009) defines PPPs as a long-term, contractually regulated co-operation between the public and private sector for the efficient fulfillment of public tasks in combing the necessary resources (e.g. how-how, operational funds, capital, personnel) of the partners and distributing existing project risks appropriately according to the risk management competence of the project partners (Alfen et al., 2009).
In the United Kingdom, PPPs include Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and other arrangements where the public sector contracts to purchase quality services on a long term basis to take advantage of private sector management skills. These include concessions and franchises, where a private sector partner takes on the responsibility for providing public services, including planning, designing, financing, constructing, operating and maintaining the specified services (Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors, 2009 citing HM Treasury, 2003).
According to Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors (2009) the key features of most PPP projects are as follows:
v A private sector partner invests in public infrastructure facilities, and provides related non-core services to the public sector client or the community,
v The public sector client retains ultimate responsibility/accountability for the delivery of the underlying core services to the public,
v The public sector client and private sector partner work together under a long term contract, whereby the payment to the private sector partner is spread over the term of the contract and is made only to the extent that the required outputs are maintained to the specified service standards.
According to Deich (2001) in Okoye and Okwelle (2013) a private public partnership exists when the private sector joins with the public sector in pursuit of a common goal. The personnel composition and structure of any private public partnership is unique. However, all effective partnership shares the following characteristics in common.
v The public sector appoints representatives who are authorized by their sector (say federal or state government) and the private sector (say civil groups or organization) will elect or appoint representatives.
v Both partners usually work together to achieve common objectives or goals.
v Each partner contributes money, technical expertise and time for the success of the partnership.
v Administrative/management responsibilities and decision-making rights/privileges are shared among the personnel composition.
According to Aina and Akintunde (2013) government alone cannot bear the burden of functional education in Nigeria; there is that need for private sectors to be more actively involved. Individuals and nongovernmental agencies have a vital role to play in PPPE to ensure quality and functional education. There are lots of risks involved in education leading to wastages in educational system of the nation; since government is the major or only active actor in the sector it bear the risk alone. Involvements of other actors in the sector will lessen the risks and perhaps curtail the wastages. According to Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, and Guáqueta (2009) there are ways in which the public and private sectors can join together to complement each other’s strengths in providing education services and helping developing countries to meet the Millennium Development Goals for education and to improve learning outcomes.
The concept of a public-private partnership (PPP) recognizes the existence of alternative options for providing education services besides public finance and public delivery (Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, & Guáqueta, 2009).Public-private partnerships are also being used to build school infrastructure. PPPs are a useful way to increase the funding available for constructing or upgrading school buildings and often yield better value for money than traditional public sector investments (Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, & Guáqueta, 2009). In such partnerships, the government usually contracts a private company to build and/or maintain school buildings on a long-term basis, typically 25 to 30 years. In this type of PPP, the private sector supplier assumes responsibility for the risk inherent in the ownership and efficient operation of the project’s facilities. This method of financing school buildings is used in many OECD countries but most extensively in the United Kingdom. In recent years, several developing countries have also tried this approach, though it is too early to see results.
Advantages of public-private partnerships
Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, and Guáqueta (2009) posited that theoretical literature on the topic suggests four positive outcomes of the private provision of public services:
v PPPs can create competition in the education market. The private sector can compete for students with the public sector. In turn, the public sector has an incentive to react to this competition by increasing the quality of the education that it provides.
v PPP contracts can be more flexible than most public sector arrangements. Generally, the public sector has less autonomy in hiring teachers and organizing schools than the private sector does. Public-private contracts can be a better method for the supply of and demand for education. Flexibility in teacher contracting is one of the primary motivations for PPPs.
v Governments can choose private providers in PPP contracts by means of an open bidding process in which the government defines specific requirements for the quality of education that it demands from the contractor. The contracts often include measurable outcomes and clauses that specify the condition to deliver a certain quality of education, and the contractor with the best or lowest cost proposal is then chosen. This one characteristic of the contract alone can raise the quality of education.