Neo-colonial Dependence and Dualistic Development Models: An Exploration of the Development Communication Trajectory in Nigeria

Communication has been identified as the underlying factor for human development whether at the socio-scientific, socio-economic or socio-political levels. Globally, development communication has increasingly become a critical component in the pursuit of scientific, economic, agricultural, social and political advancement of human societies. It is within this context that this study uses the historical-analytic, sociological and direct observation methods to appraise the neo-colonial and dualistic development models. In doing this, it highlights critical inferences on how development communication could be more beneficial to developing countries in Africa, specifically Nigeria, by way of communicating science and producing higher end products in the vital sectors of the economy. The conclusion reached is that through the dynamics of development communication the Nigerian populace can be mobilised and empowered to be productively creative in their contributions to Nigeria’s gross domestic product (GDP) and improve their living standard.


INTRODUCTION
This study is a theoretical exploration of neo-colonial and dualistic development models and how development communication could help to galvanise socio-economic and socio-political growth in Africa, with particular reference to the Nigerian situation. Communication has been identified as the underlying factor for human development whether at the socio-scientific, socioeconomic, or socio-political levels (Omoera 2010). This is inherent in the ability to, among other things (Anejionu, Ahiarammunnah, and Nri-ezedi 2016); connect individuals to the social and scientific spaces, thereby realizing the development agendas to meet the needs of society. Regrettably, achieving this has been perennially threatened by the inertia of contemporary African society to harness local potentialities for its development needs, and perpetual reliance on the global north. Although Nigeria has since attained independence, the minds of the people appear to be wilfully subjugated to the control of the hitherto colonial power (Licata et al. 2018). This is probably responsible for the ever-widening gap between the developed north and the developing south. Underpinned by the neocolonial dependence and dualistic development models, this conceptual paper, historicises the critical role of development communication in harnessing local resources for the overall growth of the Nigerian society.
Neo-colonialism has been conceptualised as the continuation of the economic model of colonialism after a colonized territory has achieved formal political independence (G P Atkins & Wilson 2008). This concept was applied most commonly to Africa in the latter half of the twentieth century (Daxecker 2014). European countries had colonized much of the continent in the late nineteen century, instituting a system of economic exploitation in which African raw materials, particularly cash crops and minerals, were explored and exported for the sole benefits of the colonizing powers. The idea of neo-colonialism, however, suggests that when European powers granted nominal political independence to colonies in the decades after World War II, they continued to control the economies of the new African countries (Calder 2013).  there are still many trade barriers and restrictions on foreign investment (Yıldırım and Gökalp 2016). These rich-poor power dynamics is illustrated with two circles, one representing the rich countries in the middle, with the poor, exploited countries on the outside. As the inner circle enlarges, because of the accumulated riches from the poorer countries representing the outer circle, the wage difference between rich and poor continually increases and cannot equalize (Coker 2008).

o m m u n i c a t i o n T r a j e c t o r y i n N i g e r i a
The characteristic of developing countries is the dualism between the traditional economy and industry. As this wealth disparity increases, the poorer countries become more financially and politically dependent on the rich countries and economic development in the poor countries is never fully realized because of these differences in power. are in privileged positions as landowners, government hierarchies (the military for example) and benefit from, or are "rewarded' by the existing relationships so have no desire for change. This situation has been perennially observed in many African countries such as Nigeria, South Africa, Ghana, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Mali, Congo, Kenya, among others.

METHODS
The neo-colonial dependence model is an indirect outgrowth of Marxist thinking. It attributes the existence and continuance of development primarily to the historical evolution of a highly unequal international capitalist system of rich country-poor country relationship. Whether because rich nations are intentionally exploitative or unintentionally neglectful, the coexistence of rich and poor nations in an international system dominated by such unequal power relationships between the centre (the developed countries such as Britain, China, US, etc) and the periphery (the less developed countries such as Nigeria, South Africa, Sudan, etc) renders attempt by poor nations to be self-reliant and independent difficult and sometimes impossible (Diamond 2005). Indeed, Omoera and Ibagere (2010) eloquently captured the point being made with respect to the unbalanced relationship between African media and its first world counterparts using the Nigerian television experience.
The neo-colonial dependence model is fairly structural which means that individual actions are largely ignored and collective actions such as actions of the state are examined. While this may be a better approach when looking at the influence a democratized (Lemon 2007), developed country has over a less developed country since the people, generally speaking, govern democracy and, therefore, looking at the institution's influence may be more productive. However, one also needs to consider the actions of a dictator and dependency theory does not always make room for that sort of analysis. Another critique of dependency theory is that it has Marxist tendencies, which may be valid as it has distant roots in Marxist teachings (Osunbor 2011).
Certain groups in the developing countries (including landlords, entrepreneurs, military rulers, merchants, salaried public officials and trade union leaders) who enjoy high incomes social status, and political power constitute a small elite ruling class whose principal interest, is in the perpetuation of the According to the tenets of the neo-colonial dependency theory, underdevelopment is thus seen as an extremely induced phenomenon, aided by the few international oligarchies. Revolutionary struggles or at least major restructuring of the world capitalist system are therefore required to free dependent developing nations from the direct and indirect economic control of their developed world and domestic oppressors. In Nigeria, the implications of this model has led to the impoverishment of the people, such that it has promoted corruption, lack of transparency, poverty and hunger, high illiteracy level and restiveness among the various social groups (Shin and Webber 2014). The politicians have taken advantage of these social problems to cause extreme hatred among the citizen's such hat the right of the people are trampled upon, while the hegemonic few, mount their will on the populace.
Neo-colonial dependence model has two major weaknesses. First, although it offers an appealing explanation of why many poor countries remain underdeveloped, it offers little formal or informal explanations of how countries initiate and sustain development (Oshodi 2009). By this limitation, it only brings out the problems faced by these countries without proffering solutions to these existing problems (Jaramillo, L. &Sancak 2007). For instance, development

184| T h e J o u r n a l o f S o c i e t y and M e d i a 3(2 )
agenda in Nigeria cannot be achieved by mere raising the issues at stake, but by suggesting concrete ways to scale up the socio-economic and socio-scientific lives of the populace.
Second, the actual economic experience of less developed countries that have pursued revolutionary campaigns of industrial nationalization and state-run production has been mostly negative. If neo-colonial dependency model is taken at its face value, one would conclude that the best course for developing countries is to become entangled as little as possible, with the developed countries and  (Kapoor 2002).
Critics of neo-colonial dependency theory claim that it takes into account too much of the Western world and, therefore, the idea and needs of the third world are pushed away. Some even say that dependency incorporates certain orientations that it does not recognize (Kapoor 2002). This, in turn, overshadows the already disenfranchised Third World even more. Also, the fact that the theory focuses on more socially oriented issues, being positive, it also can hinder economic development work. The lack of economically and strategically based research within this framework can be a hindrance when trying to determine why a certain country has not developed. Although close to the metropolitan countries during the colonial period apparently produced lastingly damaging outcomes, for  Dualism is a concept that is widely discussed in development economics.
It represents the existence and persistence of increasing divergences between rich and poor nations and rich and poor people on various levels. One of the elements of dualism is that there is a coexistence of wealthy, highly educated elite with masses of illiterate poor people within the same country or city.In developing countries, growth shows very low (Chaudhuri, Schneider, and Chattopadhyay 2006). Frantz Fanon, in a slightly different context, aptly refers to such a situation as "reciprocal exclusivity" (Fanon, 1963). Accordingly, there is a coexistence of powerful and wealthy industrialized nations with weak, impoverished peasant societies in the international economy.
This coexistence is chronic and not merely transitional. It is not due to a temporary phenomenon, in which with the capacity of time, the discrepancy between superior and inferior elements would be eliminated. The continuation of the disparity between the rich and the poor countries is perpetuated through a rich elite class that lives within the poor country. The fact that poor countries never properly economically develop, according to the theory, traces its root back to the historical development of the international capitalist economic system (Lall 2012).
Dualistic development model takes the view that within all countries, there is inequality that is not temporary. The divergence between superior and inferior is increasing and that relationship does not necessarily pull up the inferior and in fact, may well push it down further.

186| T h e J o u r n a l o f S o c i e t y and M e d i a 3(2 )
Assumptions of the dualistic development model.Dualistic theories assume a split of economic and social structures of different sectors so that they differ in an organization, level of development and goal structures.
i. Different sets of conditionssuperior and inferior can coexist in a given space. An example is Lewis' notion of the coexistence of modern and traditional methods of production in urban and rural sectors.
ii. The coexistence is chronic. In other words, the international coexistence of wealth and poverty is simply not a historical phenomenon that can be rectified in time.
iii. The degree of superiority or inferiority not only fails to show any signs of diminishing but even has an inherent tendency to increase. iv.
The interrelations between superior and inferior elements are such that the existence of the superior elements rather may actually serve to push it down, i.e., to develop its underdevelopment.
A number of scholars stress the dualism of specific factors. Studies explain regional dualism as a lack of communications and exchange between regions, the capital sometimes begins an island which in geographical terms, belong to the developing country, in economic terms, however, to the industrialized country.
Economic, technological and regional dualism is often a consequence of a social dualism, the absence of a relationship between people of different race, religion and language, which in many cases, is a legacy of colonialism (Ruvalcaba, M. & Efren 2013).
Implications of dualistic development model on developing countries (Nell, Puck, and Heidenreich 2015). Dualistic development model argues that the world's present state can be most validly seen as the outcome of domination by the "have" nations over the "have not." And, within nations, by the domination of "have" over "haves not" classes and interests. This is surely not a new idea. What is, perhaps, new is acceptance by an increasing number of comparatives that this dichotomy between super-ordinates and subordinates amounts to a powerful, globally applicable, explanatory model. Growth is driven by productivity (Di Comparative implications of neo-colonial dependence and dualism models.Both are known as dependency models. The neo-colonial dependency model has four main points that try to help explain the relationship between the developed countries and the developed countries. These points also are applicable to the dependency models in a given country.
1. There is a centre-periphery relationship due to the political and economic power held by the developed countries over the underdeveloped countries.
2. Many thoughts held by the classical theorists cannot apply to the countries in the periphery.
3. The countries at the centre know they can gain from the countries in the periphery and do in fact gain regardless of the cruelty as a result. The second claim made by dependency theorists is that classical theories do not apply to development in the periphery and depends on the claim of classical theorists that the underdeveloped countries are having trouble developing due to the lack of advancement in technology and capital.
Furthermore, dependency theorists argue that lack of development is caused by the power held over the less developed countries by the developed countries whereas the classical theorists say that taking a laissez-faire approach and the use of free-market will help spur economic development. Classical theorists also believe that economic development and becoming a middle class society will eventually distribute wealth while dependency theorists argue that becoming more developed actually increases the gap between the rich and poor since the newly created jobs are mainly for skilled workers rather than the abundant unskilled labourers that usually lived in less developed countries (Tansey, R. & Hyman 1994). This may not be the strongest argument for neocolonial dependency theory as the gap between the rich and poor is growing even in developed countries. The third claim made by dependency theory is linked to the first claim of the relationship between the centre and the periphery. The idea that the developed countries make exchanges that benefit themselves with no regard to the less developed countries" needs stem from the historical colonization of the periphery. In the past, colonized countries were only considered valuable because of the resources they held and the slave labour they could supply.

o m m u n i c a t i o n T r a j e c t o r y i n N i g e r i a | 189
In today's world, multinational corporations use factories in less developed countries for their cheap labour and developed countries exploit resources as well as take advantage of exchange rate and the buying power associated with uneven exchange rates. The fourth point asserted by dependency theory is quite true, however, as the second point; it is true for developed countries as well (Tansey, R. & Hyman 1994). The disbursement of wealth in unequal; the rich seems to just get richer and the poor, poorer buying big, fancy houses, expensive cars, brand name clothing and purses and now even personal jets shows off the wealth accumulated by the rich in both developed and underdeveloped countries. While there are relevant points included in the theory's main ideas as well as some that do not hold, there are other positive aspects to examining neo-colonial dependency theory. Whatever their ideological differences, the advocates of neocolonial dependence and dualism models reject the exclusive emphasis on traditional neo-colonial economic theories designed to accelerate the growth of gross national product as the principal index of development.
According to Marx and the believers of neo-colonial dependency theory, the only way for poor countries to overcome this oppressively parasitic rich-poor relationship is for the people to unite through revolution to resist the status quo and throw off their oppressors thus gaining their freedom and ability to dictate their own more effective economic policies (Chirot, 1977). In Nigeria, while many people live below the poverty line, the activities of the few rich tend to undermine the many poor so that their efforts at self-empowerment are trampled to the advantage of the few rich. The bourgeoisie tends to create opportunities for the poor through self-presumed modalities, for employment, provision of infrastructure, poverty alleviation, educational advancement and other otherwise to any nation are largely determined by the administrative, socioeconomic, socio-scientific and socio-political environments. Essentially, these environments are situated within a historical context. These contexts also influence the content of its public policies. Nigeria has a dependent neo-colonial political economy. This is aptly demonstrated, not only in its socio-administrative character but also in its policy context, content and impact.  which we as a country (Nigeria) and continent (Africa) are unproductively exposed to currently.
In fact, as things stand, what takes place at the international market has a preponderant impact on the Nigerian state. The domestic policies are exogenously oriented and largely converge with the interests of both the foreign and indigenous ruling classes. Policy outputs reflect nothing other than the desires and aspirations of the indigenous policy elites and their foreign counterparts (Logan 2008). The above assumptions become clearer as we realize the nature of the Nigerian state and its implications for policy inputs and outputs. Nigeria is a creation of the British. Precisely, its neo-colonial foundation explains its situation, even independence as "business" outfits: an international investment by the British, whose main purpose was to invest as little as possible, but reap as much as possible "profits". John Beecroft, who was appointed her majesty consul for the Bight of Benin and Biafra in 1849, began the colonial enterprise in earnest (Oshodi 2009 policies as a condition for the needed financial assistance. This implies that rather than being self-reliant scientifically, economically and otherwise, Nigeria has become a beggar nation, in spite of its vast and enormous physical and natural resources. Nigeria has become more dependent on foreign inputs in order to sustain its socio-economic and socio-scientific development programmes. This, in a sense, is what has been called "arrested development" (Omoera 2008). This modus operandi must first change theoretically and then practice through a concerted effort at recalibrating and communicating African indigenous knowledge systems (AIKSs) and science, which can be accessed across Nigeria.

CONCLUSION
The endowment of countries with natural resources is unequal. While some countries benefit from fertile agricultural soils, others put a lot of effort into artificial soil amelioration. Some countries such as Nigeria, Brazil, Iraq, Indonesia, United Arab Emirates, and Iran have rich oil and gas deposits within their territories, while others have to import fossil fuels. However, a wealth of natural resources is not the most important determinant of development. Rather, the efficiency with which countries use their productive resources: physical capital, human capital, and natural capital is widely recognized as the main indicator of their level of socio-economic and socio-scientific development. This study, suggests a revolutionary struggle or, at least, a major restructuring of the world"s capitalist system so as to free the dependent developing nations from the direct and indirect economic control of their developed world and domestic oppressors. Hence, for a country such as Nigeria to move forward in an increasingly competitive world, those at the helm of affairs must set up developmental platforms and strategically pursue the country"s socio-economic growth through human capital development, communication of science and research, self-reliance, good governance and employment generation. This panoply of efforts is aimed at empowering the populace to live abovepoverty and develop the required competencies to navigate productively the developmental vortexes of the twenty-first century.