Abstract: Port Harcourt, one of Nigeria’s major cities has been experiencing rapid urbanization (of the order of 5% per annum on the average) since its founding by the British in 1913. The process of urbanisation is engulfing and transforming the way of life of the indigenous enclaves, which predate the founding of the city. This study has examined the impact of urbanization and its correlates on the socio-economic and socio-cultural aspects of life of the indigenes both subjectively (by questioning a probability sample of the indigenes) and objectively (from the judgment of experts using a state-of-the-art impact assessment methodology). The study found that while about one half of the respondents were pleased with urbanization, a little over one third were displeased with it. Reasons for pleasure included: development of the area, infrastructure development and improvement in aesthetics, while displeasure stemmed from increase in crime rate, destruction of traditional livelihoods, erosion of cultural values, among others. The study concluded that urbanization has indeed had both positive and negative impacts on the indigenous population and that there was reasonable agreement between subjective and objective impacts of urbanization. Finally, recommendations have been proffered to mitigate serious negative impacts including positive discrimination/affirmative action to help indigenes compete favourably with the usually more aggressive and better-equipped in-migrants.

INTRODUCTION

Port Harcourt is located in south-eastern Nigeria, some 40 km up the mouth of the Bonny River (Fig. 1). The present discussion refers to Port Harcourt municipality, which comprises 20 political wards (Fig. 2) and its component indigenous enclaves.

Both in the regional and national contexts, Port Harcourt has remained an important city since its founding because of its position as a port (the second most important in the country) and as one of the only two railway termini in southern Nigeria. In recent times, however, its importance has taken on added dimensions; for instance, the city has become the headquarters of the oil and gas industry in the country as well as the commercial, educational, political and administrative nerve centre of Rivers State, one of Nigeria’s 36 states.

Urbanisation in port harcourt: Port Harcourt was established as from November, 1913 because its site met the location requirements for a railway port-terminus set by British colonial surveyors, “deep water near high ground, which shall he connected with the mainland (Anyanwu, 1979).

Fig. 1:	Port harcourt in relation to Nigeria

The British colonial government needed a railway connection to evacuate the rich produce of south-eastern Nigeria and coal, discovered at Enugu Ngwo in 1912. By 1914, a total of 7,403 labourers were engaged in railway construction work at Port Harcourt and along the line.

Fig. 2:	Port harcourt municipality showing the 20 wards

Table 1:	Population Changes in Port Harcourt from 1953-1991

By 1946, the town had attained an estimated population of 34,000 (Anyanwu, 1979). According to the 1952-53 population census of Nigeria, the town’s population was 79,634. The 1963 national census population was 179,563, while the 1970 and 1973 populations were estimated to be 213,443 and 231,632, respectively.

The 1991 national population census put the population of the city at 440,399 persons. Table 1 shows the population changes from 1953-1991. The percentage change of 90.1% between 1973 and 1991 represents an average annual growth rate of 5%. In 2006, a national population census was carried out but the results are fraught with controversy. To obtain an insight into the 2009 population of the city, we prefer to project from the less contentious 1991 census figure. Assuming linear growth and an average annual growth rate of 5.8% (as established by the Nigerian National Population Commission) the 2009 population of Port Harcourt is projected to be 900,176 persons.

The integral components of urbanisation (spatial growth) over the years have included: Laying out, by February, 1916 of the European town and also the native town there was such segregation from the onset; Establishment of the Port Harcourt Planning Authority by December 1946 with an area of jurisdiction of some 25 square miles (about 6,475 ha).

Introduction by the Planning Authority, between 1947 and 1955, of over a dozen planning schemes for the development of the areas occupied by the southern half of the Port Harcourt peninsula, the Diobu villages and the southern suburb, known as Mile 2 Diobu (Anyanwu, 1979) and Earmarking of land for the Trans-Amadi Industrial Estate (1,000 ha) in (Israeli) Professor Elon’s 1959 Master Plan for the city. The full list of layouts pertinent to the municipality between 1946 and 1963 is given as:

List of residential layouts by the port harcourt planning authority (1947-1963)

Effects of urbanisation in Port Harcourt previous research: Various academics and professionals have examined the effects of urbanisation in Port Harcourt, including Eke (1979), who researched on environmental pollution (noise, air, water and land), problems of the residential environment (dwelling unit density, housing quality, transportation, public utilities and general land use planning aspects (Nwala et al., 1979; Izeogu, 1989). Such research mirrored similarresearch in other Less Developed Countries (LDCs), for example in India: CSE (1989); Bogota (Colombia): Castaneda (1989); Alexandria (Egypt): Hamza (1989); Bangkok (Thailand): Phantumvanit and Liengeharensit (1989); Mexico City (Mexico): Schteingart (1980); Manila (Philippines): Jimenez and Velasquez (1989) and Montevideo (Uruguay): Queijo et al. (1989). One omission in the researchs on Port Harcourt so far is the failure to examine the effects of urbanisation on socio-cultural and socio-economic aspects of life of the original inhabitants of the area we now know as Port Harcourt. Worika (1979) has stated that:

He further ruefully noted that regarding the urbanisation process, the new settlement welcomed all and sundry within its gates and took no cognisance of the culture of the local inhabitants who were now surrounded, absorbed or displaced by the new settlers.

Focus of this investigation: This study intends to remedy, to some extent, the observed deficiency in the past works on Port Harcourt. It focuses, therefore, on the socio-cultural and socio-economic impacts of urbanisation on the indigenous enclaves that are being gradually but inexorably absorbed into the urban fabric. Such impacts have been assessed objectively (i.e., by experts) and subjectively (i.e., by the indigenes themselves) with a view to recommending appropriate policy measures to ameliorate serious (moderate and major) adverse impacts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In order to obtain a socio-economic profile of the indigenous enclaves, this study utilised both secondary and primary data sources. The former comprised published and unpublished research including government policy documents and records, the Master Plan of Port Harcourt and two highly informative books on Port Harcourt: The City of Port Harcourt and A Social Survey of Port Harcourt (Ogionwo, 1979a, b). Primary data collection entailed direct observation (e.g., of housing conditions); direct measurement (e.g., of distances between houses) and the use of a largely pre-coded questionnaire administered face-to-face to a probability (stratified) sample of households. Sampling took certain factors into account. For instance there are 22 indigenous communities (enclaves) in Port Harcourt, distributed among the twenty (20) political wards of the city. There are 10 and 12 differently sized indigenous enclaves, which are predominantly Ikwerre-speaking and Okrika-speaking, respectively (Table 2).

Table 2:	The Political wards of port harcourt and their component communities/indigenous enclaves

These two linguistic groups; Ikwerre and Okrika-accounted for 59 and 22%, respectively of the 1991 population of Port Harcourt (440, 399 persons). Linguistic grouping provided the basis for stratification in the study. The multi-stage, stratified, cluster, probability sampling approach, diagrammed in Fig. 3 was adopted to select a combined sample of 351 households (out of a total of 774 in the selected political wards). It is to be noted that non lkwerre or Okrikaa speaking indigenes residing in each ward were not included in the study, as the target study group comprised the original or indigenous households resident in the area now known as Port Harcourt, prior to the advent of the British.

Analytical techniques largely consisted of univariate (single-variable) and bivariate (two-variable) statistical methods. The former comprised standard summary univariate statistics such as measures of central tendency (mean, median, mode) and measures of dispersion (standard deviation, variance, range), proportions, percentages and ratios. The principal bivariate method employed was the Chi-square test of independence, while the measure of association reported was Cramer’s V, whose values that range from 0-1, indicate the strength of any established relationship (Blalock, 1979).

Fig. 3:	The multi-stage sampling process

Subjective impact assessment: In order to obtain a subjective assessment of the impacts of the urbanisation process, household respondents were asked to state how pleased or displeased they were with the process on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from Very displeased to very pleased. Furthermore, respondents were asked to freely express their opinions as to the impacts of urbanisation on selected social environmental aspects or sensitivities (Shell, 2005), such as social cohesion, local economy, rent, culture, recreation, traditional governance, building types, building density, total population, land use pattern and privacy. The results were content analysed, coded, converted to machine readable form and subjected to computer analysis, using the routines of the microcomputer-adapted Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).

Table 3:	Interaction matrix-sources of effects (hazards) and social sensitivities

Objective impact assessment: Objective impact assessment was carried out by adapting the Hazards and Effects Management Process (HEMP) (Shell, 2005) which followed the following steps:

Specifying hazards and sensitivities: A hazard (source of effect) has been defined as an aspect of the activities or facilities of a project during all of its phases that has the potential to cause harm to the environment, while a sensitivity is a specific characteristic of the (social) environment, which once disturbed, leads to the disturbance of the stability or integrity of the environment (Shell, 2005). In this study, the components of urbanisation were treated as hazards or sources of effects (Table 3).

The sensitivities were the same as those given above that were also utilised for subjective impact assessment.

Identifying impacts: To identify impacts, an interaction matrix of hazards (on the y-axis) and sensitivities (on the x-axis) was utilized (Table 3). The numbers in the matrix identify interaction points, each of which yielded one or more impacts.

Qualifying impacts: Each impact was qualified with reference to the following attributes: (a) positive or negative; (b) direct or indirect; (c) short term/temporary or long-term/permanent; (d) reversible or irreversible; (e) local and/or regional and/or national and/or global) and (f) incremental/non-incremental.

Rating impacts: carried out with reference to the probability/likelihood of their occurrence and their consequence.

Table 4:	Interaction matrix of receptor sensitivity and magnitude of change, showing resultant effects
Shell, 2005

Table 5:	Levels of effect and potential consequences
Shell, 2005

Estimation of probability (likelihood) of occurrence is a qualitative issue high probability (80-100%) refers to a very likely or very frequent impact (e.g., continuous/hourly); medium high probability (60-79%) refers to a likely or frequent impact (e.g., daily/weekly) medium probability (40-59%) refers to possible or occasional impact (e.g., monthly); medium low probability (20-39%) refers to an unlikely impact (e.g., one that occurs in 1-10 years) and low probability (1-19%) refers to a very unlikely or rare impact (e.g., one that will take over 10 years to occur).

The potential consequence of an impact depends on two things: The magnitude of the potential change to the (social) environment caused by a hazard and the level of sensitivity of the receiving (social) environment. The interaction between the magnitude of change and receptor sensitivity will yield a level of effect as shown in Table 4. Levels of effect translate to potential consequences as shown in Table 5.

The potential consequences of social impacts can be described in the following manner:

Hardly any: A trivial effect on the social environment, i.e., one which causes almost no nuisance or damage in the community; the local culture and lifestyle as well as the social infrastructure are somewhat negatively affected but the effect is only temporary.

Table 6:	Qualitative impact assessment matrix
(Shell, 2005)

Little: A slight effect on the social environment, which causes temporary changes in the way of life of the community; the local culture and societal structure are negatively affected.

Great: A big effect on the social environment is that there is permanent disruption to communal lifestyle; the local culture and the societal structure suffer greatly.

Extreme: A massive effect on the social environment is that there is sustained large disruption of and changes to the lifestyle of a community leading to a reduction in quality of life. The rating or risk assessment of impacts may be done numerically or qualitatively. Table 6 shows a qualitative impact assessment matrix, which was used in this study. In this matrix, likelihood is plotted on the y-axis and consequence on the x-axis. The cells of this matrix, representing possible combinations of likelihood and consequence give the levels of impact significance as judged by experts. For instance, an impact adjudged to have a low likelihood of occurrence but of great potential consequence will have a minor significance rating.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Socio-economic profile of residents of indigenous enclaves: In the 1991 census result published by the Nigerian National Population Commission, there was proper disaggregation that revealed that the predominantly Ikwerre-speaking indigenous enclaves accounted for 59% of the city’s population of 440, 399, while the Okrika speaking area contributed 22%. The rest of the population of the city comprised other Ijaw speaking groups, other nationals and non-nationals. If we assume that the Ikwerre-speaking and the Okrika speaking areas still constitute the foregoing proportions then their 2008 populations were 480, 695 and 179, 242 persons based on the projected 2008 population of Port Harcourt (814,738 persons), assuming linear growth and an average annual growth rate of 5%).

Figure 4 shows the age-sex distribution (for all indigenous enclaves derived from the combined sample). It is immediately evident that the typical pyramidal structure (bottom-heavy distribution) that is found in developing countries and for Nigeria-as-a-whole is absent. Table 7 brings out the contrast between Nigeria as a whole and the indigenous enclaves of Port Harcourt. Thus, although the population was predominantly young for both entities (with those aged 44 years or less accounting for 87.9 and 82.7% for Nigeria as-a-whole and Port Harcourt indigenes, respectively), the population of the very young (0-19 years) was much higher for Nigeria as a whole (55.4%) than for Port Harcourt indigenes (39.9%). However, the population of the young productive age group (20-44 years) was higher among the indigenes of Port Harcourt (42.8%) than for Nigeria as a whole (32.5%).

Sex and Dependency Ratios stood at 91:100 and 67:100, respectively. The corresponding figures for Nigeria as a whole were 100:100 and 143:100. These figures suggest that while there was a 50:50 split between males and females in the national population (according to the 1991 national population census), there were only 91 males for every 100 females in the Port Harcourt indigenous population and the dependency burden for Nigeria as a whole was much higher than for the indigenous enclaves of Port Harcourt as at 2008.

The study found that among males, 81.5, 12.5 and 6% were employed, unemployed and retired, respectively. The corresponding figures among females were 44.4, 8.5 and 0.3, 46.8% were full-time housewives. Among males over one half (57%) were in paid employment but a significant proportion (34.7%) reported themselves to be farmers. The principal crops grown for subsistence were cassava, maize and yams. Among females the modal occupation was paid employment (34.9%) but a sizeable proportion (25.6%) was engaged in trading.

Fig. 4:	Percentage age-sex distribution in the indigenous enclaves of port harcourt (Field Survey, 2008)

Table 7:	Comparison of age distributions for Nigeria as a Whole and the indigenes of port harcourt
*(National population commission: population census of Nigeria, 1991)

Male and female literacy levels were found to be relatively high 90.3 and 76.4% for males and females, respectively (cf. corresponding 2005 national averages of 77.8 and 63.5% (UNESCO, 2005). Average monthly income stood at N33, 995.00 (the equivalent of about US$ 8.00 per day at current exchange rate). No household in the sample earned less than the national monthly minimum wage of N7, 500.

The modal house type in the enclaves was the rooming, wagon or stretched-out type of house, accounting for 48% of all house types. The modal walling, roofing material and foundation type were cement blocks, corrugated iron sheets and strip, respectively. About 55.2% of the households shared the kitchen, while 55.4% shared the bathroom. There was total dependence on boreholes for potable water supply and 100% use of the water closet or pour-flush toilets for human waste disposal; all residents reported that they tipped their household wastes on the streets.

Respondents were asked to rate their neighbourhoods (enclaves) by agreeing or disagreeing with statements characterizing their neighbourhoods. For the purpose of rating, a 5-point Likert Agreement Scale was utilized as follows: 1. Disagree Strongly; 2. Disagree Somewhat; 3. Neither Agree nor Disagree; 4. Agree Somewhat; 5. Agree Strongly. The results are shown in Fig. 5. In Fig. 5 the question was “Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with statements (coded A-H), while

It is evident that in general, people did not rate the quality of their neighbourhood highly for example, only 2.8, 7.9, 11.6 and 9.8% strongly agreed that their neighbourhood was quiet that the neighbourhood was friendly that the neighbourhood was safe (i.e., crime rate was low) and that the neighbourhood was attractive, respectively. Similarly, only 5.8, 0, 0 and 7% strongly disagreed that there was a lot of road traffic that the neighbourhood was crowded that there were too many strangers and that there was influx of commercial sex workers.

Respondents were also requested to rate the liveability of their neighbourhoods. The question was: on the whole would you say that this community is a good place to live in? Most respondents (67.2%) thought that their neighbourhoods were good places to live in, however a sizeable proportion (32.8%) thought otherwise. Asked to state three items (in order of importance) that they desired in order to improve their neighbourhoods, modal first, second and third mentioned items mentioned by respondents were were police post, market and regular electricity, respectively.

Fig. 5:	Evaluation of neighbourhood attributes in the indigenous

Fig. 6:	Feelings of household respondents about urbanisation (Field Survey, October, 2008)

Residents feelings about urbanisation: Respondents’ feelings about urbanisation are shown in Fig. 6. It was found that while about one half (51%) of them were either very pleased or somewhat pleased, a sizeable proportion (39%) were either somewhat displeased or very displeased with the urbanisation process.

It was hypothesized that various personality attributes were important in determining the way people felt about urbanization i.e., that these attributes were related to the feeling about urbanization. In different cross-tabulations, the observed Chi-square values indicated significant relationships (p<0.01) between marital status, age, income, employment status and feeling about urbanisation. For marital status and age, the relationships were reasonably strong, Cramer’s V being 0.429 and 0.428, respectively. The relationships were weaker for income and employment status with Cramer’s V being 0.253 and 0.271, respectively.

Regarding marital status:

With respect to age:

Concerning income:

Table 8:	Reasons for displeasure with urbanization (percentage distribution of 1st, 2nd and 3rd mentions)
The question was: If you are displeased, tell me in order of importance, three major reasons for your displeasure (Field survey, october, 2008)

Table 9:	Reasons for pleasure with urbanization (percentage distribution of first, second and third mentions)
The question was: If you are pleased, tell me in order of importance, three major reasons for your pleasure; (Field survey, october, 2008)

Table 10:	Perceived impacts of urbanization by port harcourt indigenes
(Ffield survey, october, 2008)

Considering employment status:

Respondents were further probed to ascertain the reasons for displeasure or pleasure. Results are shown in Table 8 and 9, respectively.

Amongst first mentioned items, the modal reason for displeasure (excluding the other category) was high cost of living (19.2). For second and third mentions, the modal items were eradication of cultural values (22. 1%) and increase in crime rate (23.0%), respectively.

Regarding reasons for pleasure, the modal item among first mentions was development of the area (56.7%). For second and third mentions, the modal item was great improvement in infrastructure, 33.3 and 35.0%, respectively.

Respondents’ perceptions of the impacts of urbanization: Respondents were asked to freely express their opinions as to the impacts of urbanization on a number of social environmental sensitivities such as social cohesion, local economy, rent, culture, recreation, traditional governance, building types, building density, total population, land use pattern and privacy. The results are shown in Table 10. The figures show the modal items mentioned with respect to the various social environment sensitivities examined.

Objective assessment of the impacts of urbanization: Table 3 shows the matrix of interactions between social environmental sensitivities relating to the indigenous enclaves and the sources effects (hazards) which are associated with urbanisation. The shaded squares (also numbered from 1-32) are interaction points that yielded one or more actual or potential impacts. Table 11 presents a description, qualification and rating of the identified impacts.

Table 11:	Associated and potential impacts of urbanisation in port harcourt

The results show that, regarding indigenes feelings about urbanization, only small proportions of the respondents lie at the extremities of the pleasure displeasure Likert scale (3% being very pleased and 3% very displeased). More people (48%) were somewhat pleased than somewhat displeased (36%). It is not surprising that a higher proportion of respondents answered in the affirmative because urbanization in Port Harcourt in many ways, translates to modernization and improvement in socio-economic conditions. However, the process may be construed as a rose that has its thorns. Dissatisfaction stems from those thorns: high cost of living; increase in crime rate; loss of recreational space; destruction of the local/indigenous economy and erosion of’ cultural values (in that order of importance, with reference to first-mentioned causes of dissatisfaction (Table 8).

There is considerable agreement between residents perceived urbanization ills and negative impacts identified by experts. Furthermore, it would appear that urbanization is differentially impacting sub-groups of the indigenous population. For instance on the one hand, higher proportions of’ the single, middle-aged (40-64 years), medium income earners (x18,000-50,999 per month) to high income earners (x51,000 per month or more) and the employed were pleased with urbanization. The single are predominantly younger more mobile, optimistic and adventurous and therefore, possibly see urbanization as posing new challenges and creating new opportunities. In the same vein the employed and fairly well-to-do may see urbanization as creating avenues for wealth creation and achieving an improved quality of life, consistent with the rest of the civilized world. On the other hand, it is the elderly who are most displeased about the urbanization process. As one of the weakest and most vulnerable groups in the society, there is no doubt that they have had to bear the brunt of the worst impacts of urbanization. This group is probably still nostalgic about the past, when people were free to farm and fish where they desired; society was less complex, tradition controlled everyday life and cut-throat competition and crime were minimal. Retirees were rather indifferent about the merits and demerits of urbanization having been perhaps, equally affected by both the positive and negative aspects of urbanization.

CONCLUSION

Aged about 90 years, Port Harcourt is a young city by world standards. However, during its relatively short life span, urbanization has been rapid in the process engulfing and forcibly transforming the way of life of the indigenous communities that predate the British colonial administration that founded the city.

There is no doubt that urbanization has so far had both positive and negative impacts. The positive impacts include: overall development of the area; cosmopolitanisation, great improvements in infrastructure; creation of economic opportunities and improvements in aesthetics, while the negative impacts include: high cost of living; erosion of cultural values; increase in crime rate; destruction of the local (indigenous) economy; loss of farmland, fishing grounds and recreational space. There is considerable concordance between perceptions of indigenes and assessments by experts regarding positive and negative aspects of urbanization. Urbanization appears to be differentially impacting various segments of the indigenous population (the single, married, high, medium and low income earners, the young; old; the employed and unemployed with the elderly being the hardest hit.

RECOMMENDATIONS

A number of measures are put forward to mitigate some of the most serious (Moderate and Major) impacts of the urbanization process: Traditional indigenous economic pursuits such as farming and fishing have been largely extinguished; therefore, it is suggested that Government should institute an effective micro-credit loans scheme to aid the occupational readjustment of the indigenes (especially the young) and institute welfare programmes for the elderly in order to raise their presently depressed quality of life. Land take, one of the correlates of urbanization, has confined indigenes to rapidly diminishing space. Loss of traditional recreational space (e.g., village squares and playgrounds), means that government needs to re-plan some parts of the indigenous enclaves and designate open spaces and recreational grounds for the healthy development of indigenous children and adults.

Loss of traditional occupations leads to abject poverty which has therefore, eroded the ability of indigenes to improve their dilapidated housing stock. Government, especially at the local level should assist indigenous communities with improvement grants to upgrade the housing stock to bring it in line with the modern standards now specified by physical planning authorities.

Indigenous communities have had to sacrifice land for educational institutions and other forms of infrastructure (e.g., the large space being utilized by the Rivers State University of Science and Technology). In order to assuage the wounded feelings of indigenes for the loss of what they consider prime farmland, they should have fixed admission quotas at the university and other tertiary, secondary and primary institutions (i.e., should enjoy a sort of positive discrimination or affirmative action) to ensure that they receive the education required for them to compete favourably with the usually more aggressive in-migrants for scarce paid employment in both the private and public sectors.

Indigenes should be appointed/elected to key positions in the urban governance of Port Harcourt to guarantee that their interests are well-represented to remove the sense of alienation that will otherwise ensue. Although, indigenes occupy the 20 councillorship positions; 16 lkwerre and 4 Okrika for the 20 wards in the city’s municipal administration and the mayoral position has consistently gone to the dominant lkwerre, there is no tangible evidence that their actions are leading to improvements in the levels of living of their peoples. It is therefore suggested that local government should institute serious welfare programmes to improve the lot of the deprived ordinary indigenes.

Efforts ought to be made to preserve the way of life of the people through government encouragement of their cultural activities, e.g., use of indigenous languages in schools, promotion of traditional recreational activities (e.g., wrestling masquerading and dancing) and empowering the Council on Arts and Culture.

Government should undertake massive urban renewal schemes to bring indigenous enclaves (currently the most derelict parts of the city) at par with the rest of the growing municipality, thereby reducing overcrowding (high building densities and high room occupancy rates) and achieving overall infrastructure and sanitary improvement. Whenever government lays out land for residential development in the municipality, some proportion of it should be earmarked for indigenes. This will extinguish the perception that land is acquired from indigenes (using Land Use Act 1978 powers) after token compensation only to be transferred to aliens people of other ethnic/linguistic groups or oven nationalities who may thereby be exploiting the weakness of the indigenes.