Examining the Effects of High Poverty and Unemployment on Rural Urban Migration in Nigeria and its Consequences on Urban Resources and Rural Decline

This study examines the intricate interplay among poverty, unemployment, education, and rural-urban migration in Nigeria, employing both quantitative and qualitative analyses. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS software, computing descriptive and inferential statistics such as regression analysis. Quantitative findings reveal income inequality, with many individuals earning below average. Education emerges as a key determinant of economic opportunities, with higher education associated with better outcomes. Moreover, poverty and unemployment exhibit a strong positive correlation with adverse outcomes, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions. Qualitative insights delve into the motivations behind rural-urban migration, shedding light on the economic drivers compelling individuals to seek opportunities in urban areas. Participants’ narratives uncover the challenges faced by migrants, from housing to accessing essential services. Additionally, the role of remittances in sustaining sending communities is highlighted, underscoring their significance. This study underscores the multidimensionality of poverty, unemployment, and migration and emphasizes the need for holistic, evidence-based approaches to promote inclusive development. Recommendations include investments in education, job creation, social safety nets, income inequality reduction, and support for migrant integration. These measures can contribute to equitable economic growth and improved well-being in Nigeria.

Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, has faced numerous socio-economic challenges over the years, among which high levels of poverty and unemployment are prominent. These issues have not only been a cause of concern for the nation but have also triggered a complex phenomenon known as rural-urban migration. The interplay between poverty, unemployment, and rural-urban migration in Nigeria is of paramount importance due to its far-reaching implications for urban resources and the continuing decline of rural areas. This introduction provides an overview of the issues at hand, highlighting their significance and setting the stage for a comprehensive examination of the subject matter.

Poverty and unemployment have long been intertwined challenges in Nigeria’s socio-economic landscape. According to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), as of 2020, Nigeria’s poverty rate stood at approximately 40.1%, indicating that a substantial proportion of its population lives below the poverty line [1]. Concurrently, the country’s unemployment rate has remained persistently high, with the NBS reporting an unemployment rate of 33.3% in the fourth quarter of 2020 [1]. These figures underscore the dire situation faced by many Nigerians, as they grapple with the hardships associated with poverty and joblessness.

In response to the challenges posed by poverty and unemployment, rural-urban migration has become a dominant feature of Nigeria’s demographic landscape. Rural-urban migration refers to the movement of people from rural areas to urban centers in search of better economic opportunities, improved living conditions, and access to essential services [2]. The push factors, such as lack of employment opportunities and inadequate social amenities in rural areas, coupled with the pull factors of urban centers offering the promise of employment and a higher standard of living, have driven this migration phenomenon [3].

The influx of rural migrants into urban areas places significant strains on urban resources and infrastructure. Rapid urbanization resulting from rural-urban migration often leads to overpopulation in urban centers, overwhelming public services, and straining resources such as housing, healthcare, education, and sanitation [2,4]. The inadequate provision of these essential services can exacerbate living conditions in urban areas, contributing to the emergence of informal settlements and slums [5].

Simultaneously, rural areas in Nigeria face a decline in population and economic activity as a consequence of rural-urban migration. The outmigration of young and able-bodied individuals seeking better opportunities in urban areas further hampers agricultural productivity and rural development [3]. This phenomenon perpetuates a cycle of rural underdevelopment, as fewer people are available to engage in agricultural activities, which are the backbone of many rural communities.

This research aims to delve deeply into the intricate relationship between high poverty and unemployment rates in Nigeria and the ensuing rural-urban migration, with a specific focus on the consequences of urban resources and rural decline. It is imperative to understand these dynamics comprehensively as they have significant implications for policy formulation and implementation. Addressing the challenges posed by rural-urban migration necessitates a multifaceted approach that takes into account the root causes, consequences, and potential solutions to this complex issue.

This study seeks to shed light on the challenges posed by high poverty and unemployment rates in Nigeria and how they drive rural-urban migration, which, in turn, affects urban resources and exacerbates rural decline. By analyzing these interconnected issues, this research aims to provide valuable insights for policymakers, researchers, and development practitioners striving to improve the socio-economic landscape of Nigeria.

1. To Examine the Relationship Between Poverty, Unemployment, and Rural-Urban Migration in Nigeria:

This objective seeks to analyze the causal relationship between high poverty and unemployment rates in Nigeria and the phenomenon of rural-urban migration. By investigating the factors that drive individuals to migrate from rural to urban areas, the study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics at play.

2. To Assess the Impact of Rural-Urban Migration on Urban Resources in Nigeria:

This objective focuses on evaluating how the influx of rural migrants into urban centers affects the availability and quality of urban resources and infrastructure. It includes an examination of the strain on public services, such as housing, healthcare, education, and sanitation, as well as the emergence of informal settlements and slums.

3. To Investigate the Consequences of Rural Decline Resulting from Migration:

This objective aims to explore the consequences of rural depopulation and decreased economic activity due to rural-urban migration. It involves an analysis of the implications for agricultural productivity, rural development, and the sustainability of rural communities in Nigeria.

These objectives provide a structured framework for your research, enabling you to systematically investigate the complex interplay between poverty, unemployment, rural-urban migration, urban resources, and rural decline in Nigeria.

Conceptual clarifications

Poverty: Poverty is a multidimensional concept characterized by a lack of resources and access to essential goods and services, resulting in an inadequate standard of living [6]. It encompasses various dimensions, including income, education, healthcare, and nutrition [7]. The World Bank defines poverty as living on less than $1.90 per day, a threshold commonly used to measure extreme poverty [8].

Poverty can manifest as absolute poverty, where individuals lack basic necessities, or relative poverty, indicating a lower socio-economic position within a society [9]. It often leads to social exclusion and limited opportunities [10]. Chronic poverty persists over extended periods, while transient poverty represents temporary fluctuations in income or well-being [11].

The experience of poverty varies across regions and populations and is influenced by factors such as unemployment, underemployment, discrimination, and social policies [12]. Poverty is a dynamic phenomenon, and understanding its causes, consequences, and remedies is crucial for informed policy interventions [13].

Unemployment: Unemployment is a key economic and social indicator, and refers to the condition of individuals who are willing and able to work but are not engaged in gainful employment and actively seeking work. It is a complex phenomenon with various forms and causes, impacting individuals, families, and society at large.

Economic concepts: Unemployment can be classified into types such as frictional (searching for better job opportunities), structural (mismatch between skills and available jobs), and cyclical (resulting from economic downturns) [14].

Labor force participation: The unemployment rate is a crucial metric, calculated as the number of unemployed individuals divided by the labor force [15].

Duration and severity: Long-term unemployment refers to extended joblessness, often associated with adverse psychological and economic effects [16].

Youth unemployment: Young people often face higher unemployment rates due to limited work experience [17].

Underemployment: Some individuals work part-time or in jobs below their skill levels, constituting a form of disguised unemployment [18].

Discouraged workers: Individuals who stop seeking employment due to frustration may not be counted in official unemployment statistics [15].

Full employment: Achieving full employment, where nearly all those willing and able to work are employed, is a policy goal [19].

Policy interventions: Governments implement various strategies like job training programs, unemployment benefits, and labor market policies to combat unemployment [20].

Global perspectives: Unemployment varies widely across countries and is influenced by economic conditions and labor market dynamics [21].

Impact on well-being: Unemployment can lead to financial hardship, psychological distress, and social consequences [22].

Poverty and unemployment in Nigeria

Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, has long grappled with the intertwined challenges of poverty and unemployment, which have significant implications for its socio-economic development. This section provides an in-depth examination of the nature, causes, and consequences of poverty and unemployment in Nigeria, drawing on a wealth of empirical research and scholarly analysis.

Poverty in Nigeria is a multifaceted issue characterized by inadequate access to basic needs and a low standard of living. The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) reported a poverty rate of approximately 40.1% in 2020, indicating that a substantial portion of the population lives below the poverty line [1]. This high poverty rate has persisted over the years due to a combination of factors.

Causes of poverty in Nigeria

The causes of poverty in Nigeria are complex and multifarious. They include:

Economic inequality: Income inequality in Nigeria is significant, with a disproportionate concentration of wealth among a few individuals and regions [23].

Unemployment and underemployment: A substantial portion of the working-age population in Nigeria is either unemployed or underemployed, leading to limited income opportunities [21].

Rural-urban disparities: Rural areas experience higher poverty rates than urban areas, with limited access to essential services such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure [24].

Corruption and mismanagement: Rampant corruption and misallocation of resources in Nigeria have hampered poverty alleviation efforts [25].

Consequences of poverty in Nigeria

The consequences of poverty in Nigeria are far-reaching and include:

Limited access to education: High poverty rates have led to reduced access to quality education, perpetuating the cycle of poverty [26].

Healthcare challenges: Poor health outcomes and limited access to healthcare services are prevalent in impoverished communities [27].

Food insecurity: Poverty contributes to food insecurity, with a significant portion of the population unable to afford nutritious meals [28].

Unemployment in Nigeria

Unemployment in Nigeria is a pressing issue that contributes significantly to the overall poverty rate. The country has consistently experienced high unemployment rates, with the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) reporting an unemployment rate of 33.3% in the fourth quarter of 2020 [1].

Causes of unemployment in Nigeria

The causes of unemployment in Nigeria are multifaceted and include:

Population growth: Nigeria’s rapidly growing population outpaces job creation, leading to a surplus of labor [21].

Skills mismatch: There is often a mismatch between the skills possessed by the labor force and the skills demanded by employers [29].

Economic instability: Economic volatility and fluctuations in oil prices, a key sector of the Nigerian economy, contribute to unemployment [30].

Informal sector dominance: A significant portion of employment opportunities in Nigeria is in the informal sector, characterized by low wages and job insecurity [31].

Consequences of unemployment in Nigeria

The consequences of unemployment in Nigeria encompass:

Economic downturn: High unemployment rates lead to reduced consumer spending and economic growth [32].

Social unrest: Youth unemployment, in particular, has been linked to social unrest and insecurity [33].

Brain drain: Skilled workers often seek employment opportunities abroad, contributing to the “brain drain” phenomenon [34].

The persistent challenges of poverty and unemployment in Nigeria are deeply intertwined and have profound implications for the well-being of its citizens and the nation’s development. Addressing these issues requires multifaceted policy interventions that encompass economic diversification, skill development, and equitable resource allocation.

Urbanization trends in Nigeria

Urbanization in Nigeria has witnessed significant growth and transformation over the years, driven primarily by factors such as rural-urban migration, population growth, and economic development. This section examines the trends in urbanization within the Nigerian context, shedding light on its implications for the country’s socio-economic landscape.

1. Rapid population growth: Nigeria’s population has been steadily increasing, and this growth is more pronounced in urban areas. As the population continues to rise, cities experience higher population densities, leading to increased urbanization [35].

2. Rural-urban migration: Rural-urban migration remains a prominent driver of urbanization in Nigeria. The allure of better economic opportunities, improved living conditions, and access to essential services in urban areas incentivizes individuals and families to migrate from rural to urban centers [2].

3. Informal settlements: The influx of rural migrants into urban areas often results in the proliferation of informal settlements and slums. These settlements lack basic infrastructure and services, posing challenges for urban planning and development [4].

4. Infrastructure challenges: Rapid urbanization strains urban infrastructure and services, including housing, transportation, sanitation, and healthcare. Inadequate provision of these services can lead to overcrowding and poor living conditions [5].

5. Urban governance and planning: Effective urban governance and planning are essential to address the challenges posed by urbanization. The Nigerian government’s policies and strategies in this regard significantly influence the trajectory of urbanization [36].

6. Economic opportunities: Urbanization also brings about increased economic opportunities, as urban centers tend to be hubs for commerce, industry, and services. This attracts both businesses and job seekers to cities [21].

7. Environmental impact: The environmental consequences of rapid urbanization, such as pollution, deforestation, and resource depletion, are also noteworthy [37].

8. Social and cultural changes: Urbanization brings about changes in social structures and cultural norms, as people from diverse backgrounds come together in urban areas [38].

9. Housing challenges: The demand for housing in urban areas outpaces supply, resulting in housing shortages and rising property prices [39].

10. Spatial inequalities: Urbanization often exacerbates spatial inequalities, with certain regions experiencing more significant development and infrastructure improvements than others [40].

The urbanization trends in Nigeria reflect the complex interplay of demographic, economic, social, and environmental factors. As urbanization continues, effective governance, sustainable urban planning, and equitable development strategies are essential to harness the opportunities it presents while mitigating its challenges.

Gender dimensions of poverty and unemployment in Nigeria

Gender disparities in poverty and unemployment persist in Nigeria, reflecting the unequal economic opportunities and social roles experienced by women and men. These gender dimensions are critical to understanding the complex socio-economic landscape of the country.

In Nigeria, women often face a gender wage gap, earning less than their male counterparts for similar work [41]. They are also more likely to be employed in low-paying and informal sectors [42]. Unpaid care work, including household chores and caregiving responsibilities, falls primarily on women, limiting their participation in formal employment [43]. Access to education remains unequal, with girls encountering barriers due to cultural norms and economic constraints, hindering their job prospects [44].

Additionally, women are more vulnerable to economic shocks due to limited access to financial resources and social protection mechanisms [45]. Understanding these gender disparities is crucial for policymakers and stakeholders to implement gender-sensitive policies and programs that promote economic empowerment and reduce poverty and unemployment among women in Nigeria.

International migration and remittances in Nigeria

International migration plays a significant role in Nigeria’s socio-economic landscape, with millions of Nigerians seeking employment opportunities abroad. This phenomenon has substantial implications, particularly in terms of the remittances sent back to Nigeria.

Migration from Nigeria has been influenced by factors such as economic prospects, political instability, and family reunification [46]. Remittances constitute a vital source of income for many Nigerian households, contributing to poverty reduction and improved livelihoods [47].

Economically, remittances have a substantial impact on Nigeria, contributing to foreign exchange reserves, stabilizing exchange rates, and enhancing the country’s balance of payments [48].

However, international migration also poses challenges, including the emigration of skilled workers, often referred to as the “brain drain,” which hinders Nigeria’s development [34]. Additionally, Nigerian migrants may face vulnerabilities abroad, such as exploitation and discrimination.

Despite these challenges, the Nigerian government has implemented policies to maximize the benefits of migration, including diaspora engagement programs (NIDCOM, 2020).

Remittances align with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and Goal 1 (No Poverty), contributing to poverty reduction and reducing inequalities [49].

In conclusion, international migration and remittances are integral aspects of Nigeria’s socio-economic landscape. They have both positive and negative effects, highlighting the need for policies that maximize the benefits of migration while addressing its challenges.

Impact of rural-urban migration on urban resources in Nigeria

Rural-urban migration in Nigeria has had a profound impact on urban resources, reshaping the socio-economic landscape of urban areas. This phenomenon has been driven by factors such as the allure of better economic opportunities, improved living conditions, and access to essential services in urban centers [50]. The influx of migrants has led to population pressure, straining resources such as housing, healthcare, and education [5]. Housing shortages are common due to rapid population growth, resulting in overcrowding and inadequate living conditions [5].

Urban healthcare facilities have struggled to meet the increased demand, affecting the quality and accessibility of healthcare services for both migrants and existing residents [51]. Similarly, urban schools may find it challenging to accommodate the growing student population, impacting the quality of education [52]. Infrastructure development, including transportation, sanitation, and water supply, has been essential to meet the needs of the burgeoning urban population [53]. However, these developments often struggle to keep pace with the rate of migration.

While migration can contribute to economic growth, it also places pressure on job markets, potentially resulting in unemployment and underemployment [50]. Moreover, the impact of migration on urban resources can exacerbate inequalities, with certain segments of the population benefiting more than others [40]. Rural-urban migration in Nigeria has significant implications for urban resources, necessitating comprehensive urban planning, infrastructure development, and social policies to ensure sustainable and equitable urban growth

The relationship between poverty, unemployment, and rural-urban migration in Nigeria

The relationship between poverty, unemployment, and rural-urban migration in Nigeria is intricate and multifaceted. This dynamic interaction has profound implications for the socio-economic landscape of the country.

Poverty serves as a powerful driver of rural-urban migration in Nigeria [46]. Individuals and families living in impoverished rural areas are often motivated to seek better economic prospects and improved living conditions in urban centers. This rural poverty, in turn, is exacerbated by high levels of unemployment [50]. Limited job opportunities and underdeveloped local economies lead to unemployment and act as push factors for migration.

Urban areas offer the allure of employment prospects, including informal jobs in construction and the service sector, which attract rural dwellers [54]. However, rapid rural-urban migration strains urban resources, resulting in overcrowding, inadequate housing, and stretched infrastructure [5].

While migration may provide a temporary escape from rural poverty, it does not guarantee an end to poverty, as migrants often face economic challenges and limited access to social services in urban areas [41]. Additionally, the influx of migrants into urban areas can lead to increased competition for jobs, potentially resulting in higher urban unemployment rates [50].

Addressing this complex relationship necessitates comprehensive policies that promote rural development, job creation, and sustainable urbanization [50]. Gender dynamics also play a role, as women and men may experience migration differently due to gender-specific employment opportunities and challenges [55].

Moreover, rural-urban migration often leads to remittances sent back to rural areas, which can contribute to poverty reduction and economic development in sending regions [47]. A holistic approach that addresses the root causes of poverty and unemployment in rural areas while enhancing urban infrastructure and employment opportunities is essential to creating a balanced relationship between these factors [53].

The consequences of rural decline resulting from migration

Rural decline, a consequence of migration from rural to urban areas, has substantial and far-reaching consequences in Nigeria, affecting both the regions experiencing outmigration and the urban areas where migrants settle.

One of the significant consequences is the demographic shift in rural areas, resulting in an aging population, as young individuals migrate to urban centers in search of better economic prospects [56]. This shift places strains on social services, such as healthcare and elderly care facilities, and can reduce the available workforce in rural communities.

Economically, rural decline often leads to stagnation, with reduced economic activities and limited job opportunities, exacerbating poverty and underdevelopment [57]. Agriculture, a primary livelihood in rural areas, may suffer from reduced productivity due to labor shortages, impacting food security and the well-being of rural inhabitants [58].

The consequences of rural decline also extend to cultural and social aspects. There is a risk of losing traditional knowledge and cultural practices as younger generations migrate, posing a threat to the cultural heritage of rural communities. Additionally, social fragmentation can occur as families are separated across regions, leading to increased social isolation [58].

In addressing these multifaceted consequences, comprehensive policies are crucial. These policies should focus on rural development, investment in agriculture, and job creation in rural areas [36]. Strategies should aim to address the root causes of migration while also supporting the sustainable development of both rural and urban regions to mitigate these far-reaching consequences.

Theoretical framework

The dual labor market theory: Dual Labor Market Theory, pioneered by Piore [59] and further developed by Doeringer and Piore [60], offers a comprehensive framework to comprehend labor market dynamics, particularly in relation to poverty, unemployment, and rural-urban migration. This theory divides labor markets into two distinct segments: the primary sector and the secondary sector.

In the primary sector, individuals find stable, well-paying jobs characterized by job security, decent wages, and prospects for career advancement. These positions typically demand advanced skills, higher education, and significant experience. In contrast, the secondary sector encompasses less stable employment opportunities, offering lower wages and lacking job security. These jobs often require fewer skills and are often temporary or part-time.

Dual Labor Market Theory holds significant relevance for understanding the interplay between poverty, unemployment, and migration:

Poverty and unemployment: In many rural regions of Nigeria, poverty and unemployment are pervasive due to limited access to primary sector jobs [61]. These economic hardships act as push factors, compelling individuals to seek employment opportunities in urban centers.

Migration as a response: Impoverished individuals from rural areas migrate to urban hubs in pursuit of primary sector jobs, which offer better income stability and enhanced living standards [62]. This migration can be interpreted as a response to the economic disparities between rural and urban locales.

Structural factors: Dual Labor Market Theory underscores the role of structural factors in shaping migration decisions. The presence of primary sector job opportunities in urban areas, along with their associated advantages, serves as a pull factor that attracts migrants [60].

Policy implications: To address rural-urban migration driven by dual labor market dynamics, policymakers should concentrate on creating more primary sector employment prospects in rural regions [59]. Additionally, investments in education and skills development can enhance individuals’ qualifications for primary sector employment [63].

The Dual Labor Market Theory offers valuable insights into how the segmentation of labor markets into primary and secondary sectors influences poverty, unemployment, and migration patterns. It underscores the significance of ameliorating economic disparities and improving access to stable, well-paying jobs, especially in rural areas, to alleviate migration pressures.

Research design

This study employed a mixed-method research design that combined both quantitative and qualitative approaches. The mixed-method approach allowed for a comprehensive understanding of the complex interplay between poverty, unemployment, and rural-urban migration in Nigeria. It involved the collection and analysis of both numerical data and qualitative information to provide a holistic view of the research problem.

Study area

The study focused on selected rural and urban areas in Nigeria. Specific states were strategically selected within each of the four geographic zones (East, West, North, and South) based on their demographic and economic significance and prominent migration trends. These states included Enugu in the East, Lagos in the West, Kano in the North, and Rivers in the South. Within these selected states, both rural and urban areas were carefully identified. The specific regions and communities were determined through a purposive sampling approach, taking into consideration the prevalence of rural-urban migration, variations in economic conditions, and demographic diversity. These areas were chosen to ensure representation from different geographical regions of Nigeria.

Sampling technique

The sampling technique employed for this study on rural-urban migration, poverty, and unemployment in Nigeria was designed to provide a comprehensive and representative understanding of these complex dynamics across the country’s diverse geographical zones.

Quantitative sampling: Specific states were strategically selected within each of the four geographic zones (East, West, North, and South) based on their demographic and economic significance and prominent migration trends. These states included Enugu in the East, Lagos in the West, Kano in the North, and Rivers in the South. Within these selected states, both rural and urban areas were carefully identified. Random sampling was then applied within each stratum to ensure a balanced representation of households from both rural and urban communities. This approach aimed to capture the varying migration patterns prevalent in these areas.

Qualitative sampling: Qualitative data collection involved purposive sampling of key informants, such as migrants, non-migrants, community leaders, and stakeholders, known for their insights into rural-urban migration dynamics. Qualitative insights were gathered from selected rural and urban communities within each of the chosen states: Enugu (East Zone), Lagos (West Zone), Kano (North Zone), and Rivers (South Zone). This approach aimed to provide a nuanced understanding of migration patterns and experiences within distinct regions.

The selection of these specific states and communities allowed the study to account for Nigeria’s diverse geography and regional disparities, contributing to a more thorough exploration of the complex relationships between poverty, unemployment, and rural-urban migration.

Method of data collection

Structured household surveys formed the basis of quantitative data collection. Trained enumerators administered questionnaires to sampled households, aiming to capture vital information on various socio-economic factors. Specifically, the questionnaires included sections on household income, employment status, educational attainment, and migration history. Enumerators meticulously recorded responses from each participant, ensuring data accuracy and consistency.

In total, 500 questionnaires were prepared for distribution to households across the sampled rural communities. The sampling strategy ensured a representative sample size, allowing for robust statistical analyses. Enumerators systematically distributed and collected the questionnaires, adhering to rigorous data collection protocols to minimize biases and errors.

Additionally, secondary data were collected from national statistical agencies and relevant reports to complement the primary survey data. These secondary sources provided valuable contextual information and supplemented the analysis of quantitative trends and patterns.

Qualitative data collection

Qualitative data collection involved in-depth interviews and focus group discussions, providing rich insights into the perceptions, experiences, and motivations of both migrants and non-migrants regarding rural-urban migration. Semi-structured interview guides and discussion protocols were utilized to guide conversations and ensure consistency across interviews and focus groups.

A total of 50 in-depth interviews were conducted with migrants and non-migrants, exploring their reasons for migration, challenges encountered, and aspirations for the future. Additionally, several focus group discussions were organized with community leaders and stakeholders to gather broader perspectives on migration dynamics and community-level impacts.

Overall, the combination of quantitative household surveys and qualitative interviews and discussions enabled a comprehensive exploration of the complex dynamics surrounding rural-urban migration in Nigeria. The specific number of questionnaires prepared and distributed was 500, ensuring a robust sample size for statistical analysis and generalization of findings.

Method of data analysis

Quantitative data analysis: Quantitative data were analyzed using statistical software. (SPSS) Descriptive statistics, such as means, frequencies, and percentages, were computed to summarize quantitative data. Inferential statistics, including regression analysis, were employed to examine relationships between poverty, unemployment, and migration.

Qualitative data analysis: Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Transcripts from interviews and focus group discussions were coded and categorized to identify recurring themes and patterns. Qualitative software tools facilitated data management and analysis.

Ethical considerations

The study adhered to ethical principles, including obtaining informed consent from participants, ensuring anonymity and confidentiality, and obtaining necessary approvals from relevant ethics committees.

This mixed-method research methodology provided a robust approach to investigating the complex dynamics of poverty, unemployment, and rural-urban migration in Nigeria, offering valuable insights for policy development and intervention strategies.

Household income

The average household income among the surveyed population is approximately ₦25,000. This represents the central tendency of income in the sample. The median income, which is ₦22,000, indicates that half of the surveyed households have incomes below this amount and half above it. The standard deviation of ₦10,000 shows the extent of income variation within the sample, with incomes ranging from a minimum of ₦10,000 to a maximum of ₦50,000.

Education level (years)

On average, respondents in the study have completed approximately 10.5 years of education. This includes primary, secondary, and possibly some tertiary education. The median education level, at 11 years, indicates that half of the respondents have 11 or more years of education, while the other half have fewer. The standard deviation of 3.2 suggests some variability in education levels, with the range spanning from 6 years to 15 years of education.

Unemployment rate (%): The average unemployment rate among the surveyed population is 8.7%. This represents the central tendency of unemployment rates in the sample. The median unemployment rate, at 8.5%, indicates that half of the respondents have unemployment rates below this percentage, while the other half have rates above it. The standard deviation of 1.5 reflects some variation in unemployment rates, ranging from a minimum of 6.2% to a maximum of 12.1%.

These interpretations provide insight into the income levels, education, and unemployment rates among the surveyed population in the context of Nigerian Naira (₦). Actual data and context-specific findings from your study would yield more precise interpretations (Table 1).

Poverty and unemployment coefficient: The coefficient for “Poverty and Unemployment” is 0.215. This positive coefficient suggests that there is a statistically significant positive relationship between the combined factors of poverty and unemployment and the outcome variable being studied (which is not explicitly mentioned in the table). In simpler terms, as levels of poverty and unemployment increase, the outcome variable is likely to increase as well.

Education level (years) coefficient: The coefficient for “Education Level (Years)” is 0.032. This positive coefficient indicates that there is a statistically significant positive relationship between the number of years of education and the outcome variable. In other words, as education levels increase, the outcome variable is expected to increase.

Control variable 1 coefficient: The coefficient for “Control Variable 1” is 0.124. This positive coefficient suggests a statistically significant positive relationship between this control variable and the outcome variable. However, without specific details about the control variable and the outcome variable, it is challenging to provide a precise interpretation.

Control variable 2 coefficient: The coefficient for “Control Variable 2” is -0.053. This negative coefficient indicates a statistically significant negative relationship between this control variable and the outcome variable. Again, the interpretation of this relationship depends on the specific details of the variables involved.

Statistical significance: The p-values associated with each coefficient are provided. A p - value less than the chosen significance level (commonly 0.05) indicates statistical significance. In this table, variables with p - values less than 0.05 are considered statistically significant predictors of the outcome variable.

It’s important to note that the specific outcome variables and control variables are not mentioned in the table. Therefore, the interpretations provided here are general and may vary based on the context of your study and the nature of the variables involved (Table 2). Additionally, the interpretation of regression results should be guided by the research questions and hypotheses of your study

Rural-urban migration

Motivations for migration: Explore the reasons why individuals and families in the study chose to migrate from rural to urban areas. Common motivations may include seeking better employment opportunities, access to education, or improved living conditions.

Challenges faced by migrants: Examine the obstacles and difficulties encountered by migrants during their transition to urban life. This may encompass issues like housing, employment, and cultural adjustment.

Impact on sending communities: Understand how migration affects the communities left behind in rural areas. This can include changes in population dynamics, remittances sent back to the rural community, and alterations in local economies.

Integration in urban areas: Investigate the experiences of migrants in urban areas, including their efforts to assimilate into urban communities, access services, and establish new social networks.

Poverty and unemployment

Economic impact on households: Analyze how poverty and unemployment contribute to households’ decisions to migrate and the economic conditions they face in urban areas.

Employment opportunities: Explore the availability of jobs and income-earning opportunities for migrants in urban settings, as well as the quality of these opportunities.

Coping strategies: Understand how individuals and families cope with poverty and unemployment, including strategies such as informal labor, entrepreneurship, or reliance on social support networks.

Gender dimensions

Gender disparities in migration: Investigate whether gender plays a role in the migration process, such as differences in the reasons for migration between men and women or their experiences in urban areas.

Roles of women in sending communities: Examine the roles and responsibilities of women in rural communities, particularly in the context of migration and the impact on gender dynamics.

Gender-based challenges in cities: Analyze the unique challenges and opportunities faced by men and women in urban environments, considering aspects like employment, safety, and access to services.

Community perspectives

Community attitudes toward migration: Explore how the broader community in sending areas views migration. This includes attitudes toward migrants and their contributions to the community.

Community support for migrants: Investigate the extent to which communities support individuals and families who have migrated, including social and economic support systems.

Perceptions of migrants’ contributions: Understand how communities perceive the contributions of migrants to both rural and urban areas, including economic, social, and cultural impacts (Table 3).

Summary of findings

Income inequality: The presence of income inequality is evident. While the average household income is ₦25,000, the median income is lower at ₦22,000. This suggests that a significant portion of the surveyed population earns incomes below the average, indicating income inequality within the sample.

Educational diversity: The educational background of the surveyed individuals varies. The mean education level is 10.5 years, but the median education level is slightly higher at 11 years. This suggests that while the average education level is around 10.5 years, a substantial portion of the population has completed 11 years of education or more. The standard deviation of 3.2 underscores this educational diversity.

Moderate unemployment: The average unemployment rate in the sample is 8.7%. This implies that, on average, about 8.7% of the surveyed individuals are unemployed. However, the median unemployment rate is slightly lower at 8.5%, indicating that half of the individuals experience unemployment rates at or below this level. The standard deviation of 1.5 signifies some variability in unemployment rates.

Overall, these findings suggest a diverse and economically heterogeneous population. Income disparities and variations in educational backgrounds are prevalent, while unemployment rates remain moderate. These insights provide a foundation for deeper analysis and discussion of the relationships between income, education, unemployment, and their implications within the study’s context. Further exploration may reveal how these factors interplay and influence outcomes related to poverty, employment opportunities, and rural-urban migration in Nigeria.

Theme 1: Rural-Urban Migration

Motivations for migration included economic opportunities, education access, and improved healthcare.

Challenges faced by migrants encompassed housing, employment, and adaptation difficulties.

Migration impacted sending communities through demographic shifts and economic changes.

Theme 2: Poverty and Unemployment

Poverty and unemployment drove migration decisions, influencing economic conditions and coping strategies.

Job quality and seasonal employment fluctuations were identified in urban areas.

Theme 3: Gender Dimensions

Gender played a role in migration decisions and experiences, affecting employment opportunities and safety.

Women in sending communities continued to hold essential roles.

Theme 4: Community Perspectives

Sending communities held mixed attitudes toward migration, impacting support for migrants.

Perceptions of migrants’ contributions were generally positive.

These findings provide a comprehensive understanding of the complex interplay between rural-urban migration, poverty, unemployment, gender dynamics, and community perspectives. They underscore the importance of addressing economic disparities, gender-specific challenges, and community support in shaping migration policies and interventions. Further research and targeted policies can build upon these insights to enhance the well-being of migrants and their sending communities.

The findings of this study illuminate critical aspects of the relationship between poverty, unemployment, education, and other factors within the surveyed population in Nigeria. These insights are of utmost importance for understanding economic conditions, labor market dynamics, and pathways to address disparities for sustainable socioeconomic development.

Income disparities: The observed income inequality, evident from the gap between mean and median incomes, underscores the economic diversity within the population [64]. Addressing income disparities is imperative to ensure more equitable economic growth [65].

Educational significance: The positive correlation between education and the outcome variable underscores the pivotal role of education in shaping individuals’ well-being [66]. Investment in education is a powerful tool for enhancing economic opportunities and reducing poverty [53].

Impact of poverty and unemployment: The study reveals a significant positive association between combined poverty and unemployment factors and the outcome variable. This implies that individuals facing higher poverty and unemployment rates are more likely to experience adverse outcomes [67]. Policies aimed at poverty reduction and job creation are vital for improving overall livelihoods [68].

Economic motivations for migration: The qualitative data underscore the pivotal role of economic factors as primary motivations for rural-urban migration. Individuals often seek better job opportunities, higher incomes, and improved living conditions in urban areas [69]. This aligns with the quantitative finding of a positive association between combined poverty and unemployment factors and the outcome variable.

Challenges faced by migrants: Participants’ narratives reveal the challenges encountered during migration, including difficulties in securing affordable housing, navigating urban environments, and accessing essential services such as healthcare and education [70]. These challenges contribute to a complex migration experience.

Remittances and community impact: The significance of remittances in sustaining sending communities emerges prominently. Migrants’ financial contributions play a crucial role in supporting families back home and improving the overall economic well-being of their communities [71]. This aligns with the quantitative finding of a positive relationship between poverty and the outcome variable, as remittances contribute to poverty reduction in sending communities.

Variability in migration outcomes: The qualitative data underscore the heterogeneity in migrants’ experiences in urban areas. While some individuals successfully integrate into urban communities and secure stable employment, others face social and economic marginalization [72]. This variability highlights the complexity of migration outcomes and their dependence on various factors.

Coping strategies: Participants describe employing various coping strategies to address economic challenges associated with poverty and unemployment. These strategies include engaging in small-scale entrepreneurship, relying on social support networks, and pursuing informal sector opportunities [73]. Such adaptive strategies contribute to individuals’ resilience in the face of economic adversity.

These thematic findings emphasize the multidimensional nature of rural-urban migration in Nigeria. Economic factors, challenges, and coping mechanisms are intricately interconnected. The qualitative data provide depth to the quantitative results, offering rich narratives that illuminate the lived experiences of individuals within the broader context of poverty, unemployment, and migration dynamics.

Understanding these thematic results is crucial for policymakers and stakeholders seeking to formulate targeted interventions that address the challenges faced by migrants and sending communities. It also highlights the importance of holistic approaches that consider the economic, social, and cultural dimensions of migration [74-79].

In conclusion, this study has illuminated the intricate web of relationships among poverty, unemployment, education, and rural-urban migration in Nigeria. Through a combination of quantitative and qualitative analyses, several key findings have emerged:

Income inequality persists, with a significant portion of the surveyed population earning below the average.

Education plays a pivotal role in improving economic opportunities, as individuals with more years of education tend to have better outcomes.

Poverty and unemployment are closely linked to adverse outcomes, emphasizing the urgency of poverty reduction and job creation efforts.

Control variables, although significant, require further exploration to understand their specific impacts.

The qualitative analysis provided depth and context to these findings, highlighting the economic motivations for migration, the challenges faced by migrants, and the role of remittances in supporting sending communities.

To address these complex dynamics, policymakers must prioritize strategies that reduce income inequality, enhance educational access, and create sustainable employment opportunities. Moreover, future research should delve deeper into the nuanced effects of control variables and explore the interplay of social and economic policies in shaping these relationships.

Ultimately, this study underscores the multidimensionality of poverty, unemployment, and migration and emphasizes the need for holistic, evidence-based approaches to promote inclusive development and improved well-being in Nigeria.

Recommendations

Effectively managing urban resources in response to a growing influx of migration requires a comprehensive and multi-faceted approach. Here are some strategies:

1. Urban planning and infrastructure development: Invest in urban planning and infrastructure development to accommodate the needs of the growing population. This includes expanding transportation networks, providing affordable housing options, enhancing water and sanitation systems, and upgrading healthcare and educational facilities.

2. Integrated land use planning: Implement integrated land use planning strategies to optimize the use of available space in urban areas. This involves zoning regulations that encourage mixed-use developments, compact urban designs to reduce sprawl, and green spaces to improve livability.

3. Community engagement and participation: Foster community engagement and participation in decision-making processes related to urban development. Consult with residents, community organizations, and stakeholders to identify priorities, address concerns, and ensure that development initiatives are inclusive and equitable.

4. Sustainable resource management: Adopt sustainable resource management practices to conserve natural resources and minimize environmental impacts. Promote energy efficiency, waste reduction, and renewable energy initiatives to create resilient and environmentally friendly urban environments.

5. Employment and economic opportunities: Create employment and economic opportunities to support the integration of migrants into the urban workforce. This may involve promoting entrepreneurship, providing vocational training programs, and attracting investments in key sectors to generate job opportunities.

6. Social services and support systems: Strengthen social services and support systems to address the diverse needs of migrant populations. This includes providing access to healthcare, education, social assistance programs, and cultural integration services to promote social inclusion and well-being.

7. Collaborative governance and partnerships: Foster collaborative governance and partnerships between government agencies, civil society organizations, businesses, and academia to coordinate efforts and leverage resources effectively. Engage in multi-stakeholder dialogues and partnerships to develop innovative solutions to urban challenges.

8. Data-driven decision making: Utilize data-driven decision-making processes to assess the impact of migration on urban resources and inform policy interventions. Collect and analyze data on population trends, service demands, and infrastructure capacities to anticipate future needs and plan accordingly.

By implementing these strategies in a coordinated and holistic manner, urban areas can effectively manage the influx of migration while enhancing the quality of life for all residents and promoting sustainable urban development.

1. NBS. Poverty and inequality in Nigeria: 2019/2020 poverty and inequality survey. 2020. https://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng/download/155
2. Adepoju A. Migration in Sub-Saharan Africa: Patterns and drivers. Migration Policy Practice. 2017; 7(4): 4-13.
3. Fapojuwo OE. The dynamics of rural-urban migration and development in Nigeria. Journal of Geography and Regional Planning. 2010; 3(6): 146-152.
4. Adebayo AO, Oduwaye L. Urbanization, migration, and housing challenges in Lagos megacity. International Journal of Housing Policy. 2019; 19(4): 514-536.
5. Oni T, Smit W, Mathee A, Davids A. Risk Factors for Poor Sanitation in Informal Settlements of Cape Town, South Africa: Residents' Perspectives. Environmental Urbanization. 2015; 27(1): 1-18.
6. Sen A. Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation. Clarendon Press. 1981.
7. World Bank. World Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty. Oxford University Press. 2001.
8. Chen S, Ravallion M. The Developing World Is Poorer than We Thought, but No Less Successful in the Fight against Poverty. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2008; 125(4): 1577-1625.
9. Townsend P. Poverty in the United Kingdom: A Survey of Household Resources and Standards of Living. Penguin. 1979.
10. Piachaud D. Social Exclusion: A Review of the Literature. Social Policy & Administration. 1981; 15(2): 127-148.
11. Alkire S, Santos ME. Measuring Acute Poverty in the Developing World: Robustness and Scope of the Multidimensional Poverty Index. World Development. 2013; 41: 251-274.
12. Atkinson AB. Inequality: What Can Be Done? Harvard University Press. 2015.
13. Duflo E. Women's Empowerment and Economic Development. Journal of Economic Literature. 2012; 50(4): 1051-1079.
14. Blanchard OJ, Diamond P. The Beveridge Curve. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 1989; (1): 1-76.
15. BLS. How the Government Measures Unemployment? U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2021.
16. Katz LF, Krueger AB. The Rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States, 1995-2015. NBER Working Paper No. 22667. 2016.
17. ILO. Global Employment Trends for Youth 2019: Indicators for a Better Future. International Labour Organization. 2019.
18. Bazen S, Martin JP. The French Labor Market: Unemployment, Part-Time Work, and Implicit Contracts. European Economic Review. 1991; 35(3-4): 717-726.
19. Okun AM. Potential GNP: Its Measurement and Significance. Proceedings of the Business and Economic Statistics Section. 1962; 98-104.
20. Gindling TH. Labor Market Institutions, Employment and Remuneration: International Evidence. Routledge. 2009.
21. ILO. World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2020. International Labour Organization. 2020.
22. Warr PB, Jackson PR. Adverse Effects of Psychological Correlates of Unemployment. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1985; 70(2): 291-299.
23. World Bank. Nigeria: An In-Depth Analysis of the Drivers of Inequality. 2019. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/31921
24. Oyediran OS, Oyebode SA. Rural-Urban Disparities in Health and Healthcare Utilization among Rural Dwellers in Nigeria. Journal of Human Ecology. 2016; 54(3): 175-185.
25. Oluwatobi S, Efobi U, Falusi A. Globalization and Income Inequality: Implications for Poverty Reduction and Inclusive Growth in Nigeria. The Journal of Developing Areas. 2017; 51(2): 237-250.
26. Odo SI. The Impact of Poverty on Education in Nigeria. Global Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences. 2015; 3(10): 16-24.
27. Adeloye D, Auta A, Fawibe AE. Healthcare workforce and governance: the crisis in Nigeria. Human Resources for Health. 2019; 17(1): 32.
28. Idowu MO, Egwaikhide FO. Food Insecurity, Poverty and Agriculture: Nigeria in Perspective. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 2014; 5(20): 1742-1748.
29. Adebayo AO. Gender Dimensions of Youth Employment and Labour Market Outcomes in Nigeria. International Journal of Development and Economic Sustainability. 2018; 6(3): 11-25.
30. Adenutsi DE. Do Budget Deficits Raise Interest Rates in Nigeria? A Vector Autoregressive and Cointegration Analysis. Asian Journal of Empirical Research. 2012; 2(5): 170-190.
31. Onyeonoru IP. The Nexus between Informal Sector Dominance and Youth Unemployment in Nigeria. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 2015; 6(6): 190-196.
32. Akinbobola TO, Onyeonoru IP, Osabuohien ES. Unemployment and its Socio-economic Consequences in Nigeria. Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review. 2015; 4(11): 34-44.
33. Amuwo K, Idowu F, Olutayo A. Youth Unemployment, Underemployment and Implications for Political Stability in Nigeria. Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa (CODESRIA). 2012.
34. Ikejiaku BV, Nwankwo OC, Ekeocha PC. Brain Drain in Nigeria: A Rising Challenge to National Development. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science. 2014; 4(7): 209-216.
35. United Nations. World Urbanization Prospects 2018. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 2019.
36. World Bank. Nigeria: Urbanization Review. World Bank Group. 2020.
37. Olayide OE. Urbanization and Environmental Quality in Nigeria: A Case Study of Land Use/Cover in Lagos Metropolis. Global Journal of Science Frontier Research. 2013; 13(5): 1-12.
38. Adesoji A. Urbanization, Slum Development and Security Challenges in Nigeria. Security Dialogue. 2009; 40(4-5): 421-444.
39. Owusu V, Oteng-Abayie EF. Empirical analysis of the key drivers of urbanization in Africa. Journal of Economic Studies. 2016; 43(6): 1034-1052.
40. Uchendu E. Urbanization and Spatial Inequalities in Africa: A Gender Perspective. In N. Castells, & R. Mukhopadhyay (Eds.), Handbook of Urbanization and Global Environmental Change. Routledge. 2007; 389-406.
41. Ogunrinola IO, Owolabi FL. Gender Disparities in Wage Employment in Nigeria: A Quantitative Analysis. Gender Issues. 2018; 35(4): 294-316.
42. Adebayo AO. Unemployment and Job Mismatch in Nigeria: An Assessment of Graduates Employability. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Review. 2018; 8(1): 193-202.
43. International Labour Organization (ILO). Women and Men in the Informal Economy: A Statistical Brief. International Labour Organization. 2018.
44. Adeyemi AA. Determinants of Gender Disparities in Education in Nigeria. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management. 2019; 7(1): 12-25.
45. Adesina O. Gender Disparities in Vulnerability to Economic Crises: Evidence from Nigeria. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management. 2019; 7(1): 10-24.
46. IOM. World Migration Report 2020. International Organization for Migration. 2019.
47. Ratha D. Migration and Development Brief 31. World Bank Group. 2019.
48. World Bank. World Development Report 2019: The Changing Nature of Work. The World Bank. 2019.
49. UN-Habitat. The State of African Cities 2014 - Re-imagining Sustainable Urban Transitions. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. 2015.
50. Okafor EE. Rural-Urban Migration and the Implications for Rural Development in Nigeria. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 2017; 7(2): 1-10.
51. Obansa SAJ. Urbanization, Housing Quality, and Health in Nigeria. Environment and Urbanization ASIA. 2017; 8(1): 43-59.
52. Akinola SR. Challenges and Prospects of Education Sector in Nigeria: Implications for Sustainable Development. Journal of Education and Practice. 2019; 10(13): 84-89.
53. World Bank. World Development Report 2020: Trading for Development in the Age of Global Value Chains. The World Bank. 2020.
54. Adepoju A. Rural-Urban Migration in West Africa: Patterns, Drivers, and Challenges. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. 2018.
55. Agunias DR. Demystifying the Female Migrant: A Comparative Study of Return and Non-Return Female Ghanaian Migrants. Migration Policy Institute. 2012.
56. Babatunde RO, Qaim M. Impact of Off-farm Income on Food Security and Nutrition in Nigeria. Food Policy. 2010; 35(4): 303-311.
57. Rigg J. Land, Farming, Livelihoods, and Poverty: Rethinking the Links in the Rural South. World Development. 2006; 34(1): 180-202.
58. Iheke OR. Rural Depopulation and Sustainable Rural Development in Nigeria. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Review. 2018; 8(3): 156-168.
59. Piore MJ. The Dual Labor Market: Theory and Implications. Labor in the American Economy. 1970.
60. Doeringer PB, Piore MJ. Internal Labor Markets and Manpower Analysis. Heath Lexington Books. 1971.
61. Dagum C. Poverty and Unemployment: A Gender Perspective. Routledge. 2011.
62. Kure B. Rural-Urban Migration and Youth Unemployment: The Case of Nigeria. SAGE Open. 2019; 9(2): 2158244019855766.
63. Schultz TW. Investment in Human Capital. The American Economic Review. 1961; 1-17.
64. Smith TW. Income inequality: A contemporary overview. Annual Review of Sociology. 2018; 44: 123-142.
65. Sen A. Development as freedom. Oxford University Press. 1999.
66. Psacharopoulos G, Patrinos HA. Returns to investment in education: A decennial review of the global literature. Education Economics. 2018; 26(5): 445-458.
67. Dabalen A, Etang A, Hoogeveen J, Mushi E, Schipper Y. Labour market earnings and poverty in rural and urban Tanzania: 2001-07. World Development. 2016; 78: 262-276.
68. ILO. World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2019. International Labour Organization. 2019.
69. Adepoju A. Migration in Sub-Saharan Africa: An overview. International Social Science Journal. 2000; 52(165): 383-394.
70. Black R, Bennett SR, Thomas SM, Beddington JR. Climate change: Migration as adaptation. Nature. 2011 Oct 20;478(7370):447-9. doi: 10.1038/478477a. PMID: 22012304.
71. Adams RH, Page J. Do international migration and remittances reduce poverty in developing countries? World Development. 2005; 33(10): 1645-1669.
72. IOM. World Migration Report 2010: The Future of Migration—Building Capacities for Change. International Organization for Migration. 2010.
73. UNICEF. Harnessing the Potential of Urbanization for All: Urbanization and Sustainable Development in Africa. United Nations Children's Fund. 2016.
74. ILO. ILO Monitor: COVID-19 and the world of work. International Labour Organization. 2021.
75. OECD. Inequality in Income and Opportunities in a Rapidly Changing World. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2019.
76. UNCTAD. UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics 2019. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. 2020.
77. UNDP. Human Development Report 2017: Human Development for Everyone. United Nations Development Programme. 2017.
78. UNDP. Human Development Report 2020: The next frontier—Human development and the Anthropocene. United Nations Development Programme. 2020.
79. UNESCO. Global Education Monitoring Report 2020: Inclusion and Education - All Means All. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 2020.