CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
The co-operative movement in Nigeria dates back to the 1920s in the South West of the country; it emerged in the cocoa producing areas in an informal form such as labour pooling. By the mid-1930s, co-operatives had assumed a formal institutional shape and were supported by the then colonial government. The co-operative society spread quickly across the country, and by 1947, about 692 co-operative organizations were operating across the length and breadth of the country (Falola & Heaton, 2008). The story of the co-operative movement in Edo State is similar to that of the entire country in birth and transformation. The Ministry of Commerce and Industry is statutorily charged with the administrative responsibilities for the registration, development, inspection, auditing, amalgamation, and settlement of all types of disputes arising from primary, secondary and apex co-operative societies in Enugu State in accordance with the provisions of Cap. 45 of the Bendel State of Nigeria Co-operative Societies law of 1976, that is also applicable in Edo State.
There basic principles upon which the establishment of co-operative societies is pinned include:
1. Voluntary and open membership
2. Democratic member control
3. Member economic participation
4. Autonomy and independence
5. Education, training and information
6. Co-operation among co-operatives
7. Concern for Community
Over time, different types of co-operative societies have evolved to include but are not limited to:
1. Producer’s co-operative societies
2. Consumer’s co-operative societies
3. Marketing co-operative societies
4. Credit co-operative societies
5. Farming co-operative societies (Kareem, Arigbabu, Akintaro & Badmus, 2012).
In Enugu State, there are agricultural co-operatives that deal with specific agricultural produce and multi-purpose co-operatives that integrate various functions such as production, marketing and credit for the benefit of their members. Enugu State rural areas are disadvantaged compared to urban areas in terms of infrastructure, services provision, employment opportunities, access to investment, and high dependency ratios. All these have limited the ability of the rural populace to rise up above the poverty trap that has held them down for decades (Liverpool-Tasie, Kuku & Ajibola, 2011). Successive governments have
