Mixed-methods study examines relationship between grassroots governance and sanitation service delivery in Nigeria, suggesting improvements could enhance outcomes.
The sanitation conditions of rural and local dwellers remain a topical issue in contemporary third world countries, such as Nigeria. This study examined the maintenance of public sanitation services and grassroots governance in selected local government areas of Rivers State, Nigeria. Specifically, the study evaluated the relationship between grassroots governance and the provision and maintenance of public conveniences, sewage systems, and refuse disposal services. The study was anchored on RDT, which explains how financial and administrative dependence constrains the capacity of local governments to deliver essential services. A mixed-methods research design was adopted, involving 400 respondents and 60 key observer informants drawn from 12 local government areas across the three senatorial districts. Data were collected through a structured questionnaire and interviews and, analyzed using descriptive statistics and Pearson’s product moment, alongside thematic analysis for qualitative data. Findings revealed a low grand mean of 2.08, indicating widespread dissatisfaction with sanitation service delivery, particularly in the areas of public convenience maintenance and refuse management. However, a strong positive and statistically significant relationship (r = 0.741, p < 0.05) was found between grassroots governance and public sanitation services. This implies that improved financial autonomy, administrative independence, and effective governance structures at the local level can significantly enhance sanitation outcomes. The study concluded that the persistent poor state of sanitation services is largely due to structural constraints, especially irregular funding and limited autonomy of local governments. It recommended strengthening grassroots governance to ensure sustainable and effective sanitation service delivery
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Edozie-Wali et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: