Youth Capacity Building in Enugu State: The Role of Entrepreneurship Development

This study undertook an empirical view towards analyzing the role youth capacity building can play in entrepreneurship development. This study took a descriptive approach in its design and covered a sample of 519 rural entrepreneurs drawn from selected rural communities across the three geo-political zones of Enugu state using purposive sampling technique. Data was gathered using a five point likert scale questionnaire and was analyzed with chi-square test using the 23.0 versions of statistical package for social sciences (SPSS). The data analysis was based on the 413 questionnaires that were validly filled and returned by the respondents. The study noted that capacity building is not a choice; it is a fundamental route to youth entrepreneurship development. Hence, giving hand-outs or even equipment without needful entrepreneurial knowledge is no longer fit to pass as youth capacity building. It was therefore concluded that for sustainable entrepreneurship development especially among the youths in Enugu state, there is need for well structured and functional capacity building programmes. The paper recommends that; to ensure consistency and relevance of capacity building in the act of entrepreneurship development, states must institutionalize capacity building, Governments should invest in and leverage on existing educational institutions to advance and reduce the cost of entrepreneurship development oriented capacity building and that there is need to invest massively on innovation biased capacity building programmes.


Introduction
Globally, the growing pressure on governments resulting from interdependence of nations and increased citizen"s right awareness has made it expedient for a shift in the strategy for attaining development. Countries in the third world nations especially Africa have always looked upon developed countries for "aids and grants" in other to meet their national needs. However, over time and due to global economic recession that may have affected the budget of first world countries and their budget in aids and grants to third world countries, there is a call by development experts for the leadership of third world countries to look inwards and drive their developmental initiatives on the unique competencies they enjoy. This call for the exploration and exploitation of internal strength therefore brings to the fore the strategic need to begin to develop the unique and strategic competencies of the third world nations. In Africa and indeed in West Africa, questions of development are common; the need to turn to internal competencies through a reengineered leadership process is often discussed. It is however a consensus opinion that capacity building should provide the lead. Capacity building has different meanings and interpretations depending on the person that used it and in what context it is used. It is generally accepted that capacity building as a concept is closely related to education, training and human resource development. This conventional concept has changed in recent years towards a broader and more holistic view, covering both institutional and country specific initiatives (Williamson et al., 2003). Groot and Molen (2000) defined capacity building as the development of knowledge, skills and attitudes in individuals and groups of people relevant in design, development, management and maintenance of institutional and operational infrastructures and processes that are locally meaningful. This is a broader approach while still focusing mainly on education, training and human resource development. According to United Nations Committee of Experts on Public Administration (2006), capacity building takes place at three levels, that is, at the individual level, institutional level and the societal level. Capacity building on an individual level means the development of conditions that enable individuals to build and enhance existing knowledge and skills. Additionally, it requires the conditions that will allow individuals to engage in the process of learning and adapting to change. To this end, skills development can certainly constitute a powerful tool for poverty reduction. It becomes apt as provided by this paper to establish a relationship between capacity buildings as a solution to rural entrepreneurship development

Statement of the Problem
In Nigeria, it is common for government and politicians who seeks political offices to list and espouse youth empowerment as one of their cardinal programmes. While these politicians exploit the apparent needs of the youths to drive their political agenda, the fail in most instances to provide a clear cut strategy through which this will be achieved, hence relegating it at the background once elected. Those who seek re-election in order to secure the support of the youths provide them with materials like tricycle, grinding machines, motorcycles, etc. while these items may not be discountenanced, a critical input towards converting them into sustainable means of income is often lacking. This bridge in economic knowledge and strategic orientation at the long-run leaves the beneficiaries at the same economic spot. This study is therefore poised to examine entrepreneurship development as a catalyst to youth capacity building

Objectives of the Study
The general purpose of this study is to x-ray how entrepreneurship development functions as a viable catalyst of youth capacity building. Its specific objectives are; i. To examine strategic orientation training effects on youth"s access to market and opportunity information ii. To examine the effects of business resource control on access to business linkages

Hypotheses
The study was guided by the following hypotheses; H O1 : Strategic orientation training does not have significant effects on youth"s access to market and opportunity information H O2 : Business resource control does not have significant effect on access to business linkages

Conceptual Review
Before defining capacity building, it is necessary to understand the meaning of the words "capacity" and "capabilities". Capability is defined as the knowledge, skills and attitudes of individuals. In contrast, capacity according to Baser and Morgan (2008) is the collective skill and ability of organizations to achieve a particular process either inside or outside the organization. Morgan (1998) defined Capacity as the organizational and technical abilities, relationships and values that enable countries, organizations, groups, and individuals at any level of society to carry out functions and achieve their development objectives over time. Capacity refers not only to skills and knowledge but also to relationships, values and attitudes, and many others such as behavior and attitude. All existing forms of capacity are task-driven and mission-oriented, referring to perform certain functions. Therefore it serves both as an objective and an approach, with an accent on participatory processes that are particularly valuable to play more active and productive roles in social and community development. In this broader view, capacity incorporates to the social capital concerns, which deals to an effort to change a society"s rules, situations and standards of behavior. Capacity in this sense is about the self-organization of a society and the will, the vision, cohesion and values to make progress over time (Morgan P. and Ann, 1996). Whatever is the meaning of the concept, the essence of capacity has clearly emerged as an organizing principle for all rounded development of individual, organization and community as a whole.
The subject of capacity, as a body of knowledge has a weak intellectual standing in the wider development world. It comes with no accepted and tested body of theory that people can use with any confidence. In wider sense the concept of capacity has not developed as a well defined area of development practice with an established body of knowledge. Capacity in human system is a continuous process. There is no end for capacity development it is everlasting process generates influence over the development of human knowledge (technology), structure of the system and human power (resource) as French and Bell (1992) suggests that capacity of organizations could be developed or changed by altering one or more of three major variables--people, structure and technology. Due to these factors in modern contemporary world the strategic capacity development is becoming as one of the driving force for country, organizations and individual. In the field of social development the term capacity is relatively new, emerging in the1980s. Despite its newness, capacity has become the central purpose of technical cooperation in the 1990s (United Nations Development Program, 1996). Therefore, capacity is seen as complementary to other ideas that dominated development thinking (and still play an important role) over the past four decades. This concept of capacity includes institutional building, institutional development, human resource development, development management /administration and institutional strengthening. These and other concepts related to development work such as organizational development, community development, integrated rural development and sustainable development have been subsumed as an umbrella for the general concept of capacity.
From the general concepts capacity one can understand that capacity influenced by many variables both inside and outside of the organization. Internal variables include work structures, decision making processes, information system, HRM system and practices. External variables include societal needs, politics, local, national and international laws, donor"s interest, and so on. So, what we can learn is that capacity as the ability to perform is influenced by different human systems that govern developments

The Essence of Capacity Building
According to (Cohen, 1993), public sector capacity building seeks to strengthen targeted human resources (managerial, professional and technical), in particular institutions, and to provide those institutions with the means whereby these resources can be marshaled and sustained effectively to perform planning, policy formulation, and implementation tasks throughout government on any priority topic." The (Berg, 1993), capacity building is characterized by three main activities: "skill upgrading both general and job-specific; procedural improvements; and organizational strengthening". Skill enhancement refers to general education, on-the-job training and professional strengthening of skills such as policy analysis. A procedural improvement refers to context changes or system reforms. Organization strengthening covers the process of institutional development. He concludes that capacity building is broader than organizational development in that it includes all types of skill enhancement and also procedural reforms that extend beyond the boundaries of a single organization. The core capacity building is wider and more holistic: there is a close relationship between human resource development and capacity development; there is an evolving relationship between training and capacity development; effective capacity development requires sustained attention over a longer period of time; capacity development attempts to move beyond administrative techniques and beyond projects; and capacity development attempts to accelerate interaction between organizations and their environment.
Reports of UNESCO (2006) underline that capacity building focuses on increasing an individual and organization"s abilities to perform core functions, solve problems, and objectively deal with developmental needs. This is supported by Horton (2002) who referred to capacity building as improving or upgrading the ability of the person, team and institutions to implement their functions and achieve goals over time. Capacity building is important for all levels, from individuals to national organizations (Horton, 2002). Capacity building also alludes to building the organizational capacities of communities, and supports the formation of non-profit organizations (Paul and Thomas, 2000). Self-dependence and a sense of ownership are real capacity building, and these are very important factors in the development process (McKechnie, 2003). Some authors argue that there are four common approaches to capacity building; top-down organizational (e.g. policy); bottom-up organizational (e.g. staff training); partnership organizational and community organizing approaches (Hartwig et al., 2008). It can be understood from the above statements that capacity building as instrument of development functions at all levels from individual to national organizations. The development of individual and national organizations depends on correct implementation of human resource as well as financial and material potential. Therefore, to enhance the effectiveness of the Individual and organization the researcher believes that training and development as strategy of development must be introduced in all sphere of capacity building activities.

Basic Working Areas of Capacity Building
Each of the nine capacity areas are broken down into components, and each component contains a series of observable statements. The observable statements are the indicators against which an organization assesses its capacity. Each observable statement is ranked according to the organization"s level of achievement and the level of importance of the organization attaches to the area or function. (Morgan, 1998), Therefore, the following are defined as working areas of capacity; Identity and Governance: Governance, mission, and culture are the basis for the reputation of organization. It must have clearly defined identities, regulatory frameworks, values, mission statements, and governance structures that establish its identity and a mutually shared understanding of its objectives. Governance of the organization provides legitimacy, leadership, and direction to the organization.
Strategy and Planning: Strategy defines how an organization will achieve its mission. Strategic planning is an ongoing process that occurs at many levels within the organization for setting objectives and identifying the actions and resources needed to achieve those objectives. Staff and constituents need to be involved systematically in these planning processes and leadership should initiate regular review and modifications of the strategic plan and the operational plan to ensure organizational growth and health.
General Management: General management includes those components that keep the organization cohesive and on track with its mission. The organization should apply management processes and systems that ensure it uses its resources effectively to achieve its vision and goals and evaluate results (Morgan, 1998).
External Relations and Partnerships: Building external relations and maintaining healthy and productive partnerships enhances the ability of an organization to achieve its mission by effectively linking with important and influential groups in the broader environment. Effective relationships enable the organization to leverage resource and to network with likeminded groups to influence the policy and regulatory environment (Morgan, 1998).
Organizational Learning: Organizational learning is a process whereby an organization develops, captures, retains, and applies the knowledge and learning of individuals within that organization. Processes for collaboration through knowledge communities are institutionalized and aid the creation, sharing, adaptation, and use of knowledge.
Human Resource Management: Human resource management promotes and administers policies and procedures that ensure that staff has the skills, motivation, and opportunity to make their best contribution to the mission of the organization. Human resource management is also concerned with hiring, compensation, performance management, safety, well-being and other components of caring for staff (Morgan, 1998).
Financial and Physical Resource Management: Financial and physical resources are the tangible assets of the organization. It has the responsibility to exercise good stewardship of those resources accomplishing programmatic objectives in a cost efficient manner, ensuring that there are effective internal control systems, and maximizing the benefits derived from use of those assets.
Programming, Services and Results: The programming, services, and results section comprises the programs, services, and products that organizations provide to their constituents. An organization must utilize its resources to deliver quality services to its constituency and measure the impact of those services.

Specific Nature of Capacity Building
The total concept of capacity building is build-up of new capabilities (Kuhl, 2009). Capacity building is a concept that has different meanings for different people, but in general relates to enhancing or strengthening a person"s or organization"s capacity to achieve their goals. According to Kuhl, capacity building focuses on at least three interrelated activities: (1) building infrastructure to deliver promotion of programs, (2) building partnerships and organizational environments so that programs are sustained; and (3) building problem-solving capability. Virtually every capacity building issue turns out to be a complex situation involving individual, group, organizational and institutional behavior at a variety of different levels over both the short and long-term. Every capacity building and its specific nature include "hard" attributes (e.g. personal skills, functions, structures, infrastructure and resources) and "soft" attributes (e.g. motivations, beliefs) (Hunt, 2005). These attributes are pillars for promoting planned activities of capacity at every level of capacity building. The general nature of capacity building is creating ground for interrelated activities like infrastructure, organizational environments and problem solving capability to all levels of capacity. So, it is possible to say that capacity building promotes development and it shows the ways of solving problems in order to achieve the goal of organizational objectives.

Entrepreneurship Development
Discussions on entrepreneurship development will be a futile exercise without an understanding of what entrepreneurship concept is all about. Hisrich and Peters (2002), sees entrepreneurship as a process of creating something new of value by devoting the necessary time and effort, assuming the accompanying financial, psychic and social risks, and receiving the resulting rewards of money and personal satisfaction and independent. Udu, (Udu et al., 2008), in their asserts that entrepreneurship is a process by which economic and commercial activities necessary for the improvement of the standard of living of the society are created by entrepreneurs-individuals, corporation, institutions and government. To Ogbor (2009), entrepreneurship is a purposeful and an organized search for change conducted after a systematic analysis of opportunities in the environment. He emphasized that entrepreneurship entails a philosophy precisely, because it is the way one thinks, one acts and therefore it can exist in many structures, be it business or government or in the field of education, science and technology or poverty alleviation. Suleiman (2010) defines entrepreneurship development as the process of enhancing entrepreneurial skills and knowledge through structured training and institutional building programmes. Entrepreneurship Development in this study simply refers to the process of strengthening the capacity of youths to acquire functional skills for economic independence through business sensitivity training. In the view of Stevenson (2007) the essence of entrepreneurial development is the ability to envision and chart a course for a new business venture by combining information from the functional disciplines and from the external environment in the context of extraordinary uncertainty and ambiguity which faces a new business venture. It then manifests itself in creative strategies, innovative tactics, uncanny perception of trends and market mood changes and courageous leadership.

Models/Theoretical Review
Latent Capacity Release Model/Theory: There is an argument to say that the traditional view of capacity building is problematic and largely meaningless. At the very least it is a contested concept, particularly by communities themselves (Taylor, 1995). As noted above the traditional view is based largely on the "deficit" model of democracy that is predicated on the basis that there is something missing within communities i.e. skills and competences. Communities are seen as "empty vessels waiting to be filled" (Taylor, 1995). An alternative model might more usefully be termed the "latent capacity release" model. The number and variety of community organisations and initiatives often found in so called marginalised or deprived areas is testament to the depth of skills and talents that lie within communities. The "deficit" model assumes that the problems facing communities are due in large part to their own lack of skills or abilities. It is very much based on a social pathology understanding of communities that implies they lack the necessary qualities and ingredients to become "good citizens". Such a view is reminiscent of 1960s thinking on communities and arguably has never been too far away. For those in power this model of capacity building is useful. It is top down, paternalistic and deflects attention away from the need to change the existing institutional and economic structures. It is a view that serves and supports the status quo. The focus and responsibility of change rests on the shoulders of the communitiesit is their duty to become better informed and therefore engage more effectively in civic life. The focus of attention is that the capacity of the community needs to be enhanced in order for them to participate more effectively in existing structures. It is not about changing the existing structures to be more sensitive and responsive to the needs of communities, it is about making communities fit the demands and needs of the structures. It is a one-way streetthat places little pressure on existing institutions to review how they act and engage with communities.

Methodology
This study took a descriptive approach in its design and covered a sample of 519 rural entrepreneurs drawn from selected rural communities across the three geo-political zones of Enugu state using purposive sampling technique. Data were gathered using a five point likert scale questionnaire and was analyzed with chi-square test using the 23.0 versions of statistical package for social sciences (SPSS). The data analysis was based on the 413 questionnaires that were validly filled and returned by the respondents

Conclusion
The study noted that capacity building is not a choice; it is a fundamental route to youth entrepreneurship development. Hence, giving hand-outs or even equipment without needful entrepreneurial knowledge is no longer fit to pass as youth capacity building. It is therefore safe to conclude that for sustainable entrepreneurship development especially among youths in Enugu state, there is need for well structured and functional capacity building programmes

Recommendations
This paper having surveyed many contributions of many authorities recommends that; i. To ensure consistency and relevance of capacity building in the act of entrepreneurship development, states must institutionalize capacity building ii. Governments should invest in and leverage on existing educational institutions to advance and reduce the cost of entrepreneurship development oriented capacity building iii. There is need to invest massively on innovation biased capacity building programmes for the youths