Public project abandonment remains one of the most persistent obstacles to sustainable development in oil-producing regions of Nigeria, yet much of the existing literature treats successive government transition as an undifferentiated cause of discontinuity without decomposing the specific political, economic, and institutional mechanisms through which abandonment occurs. This study addressed that gap by examining the joint and relative contribution of political, economic, and institutional factors to the discontinuity of Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) projects across administrations in Ondo State, Nigeria. A descriptive correlational survey design was adopted, and data were obtained from 360 respondents drawn from NDDC beneficiary communities through a multistage sampling procedure. A three-step hierarchical multiple regression analysis was employed to test the combined and incremental predictive power of the three factor domains. The results showed that political factors accounted for 39 percent of the variance in project discontinuity, economic factors added a further 19 percent, and institutional factors contributed an additional 8 percent, with the full model explaining 64 percent of the variance, F(15, 344) = 43.60, p < .05. Political favoritism and campaign manifesto fulfilment emerged as the strongest individual predictors. The findings are interpreted through institutional theory and public choice theory, and the paper concludes with policy recommendations for insulating public projects from the incentives that drive politically motivated discontinuation.

Background: Parent–adolescent communication, peer relationships, autonomy, identity, and future-related thinking are often studied separately, despite their potential relevance to emotional adjustment during the transition to adulthood. Age-specific evidence for late adolescence and Saudi/Gulf settings remains limited. Objective: To critically synthesize evidence on these relational and developmental domains, distinguish association from temporal evidence, and identify a bounded Saudi/Gulf research and clinical agenda. Methods: This targeted narrative review retained a structured PubMed/MEDLINE search audit, final source-level eligibility re-screening, and purposive, citation-tracked source assembly. Three prespecified searches returned 9,443 records before deduplication. The first 20 records in PubMed’s default most-recent ESearch order were retained from each query as a 60-record search audit, not as a relevance-ranked inclusion screen. Twenty-two source records initially informed the synthesis; one out-of-scope source was excluded, leaving 21 original scholarly sources. A separately documented focused age-specific search then added two source-verified records, yielding 23 scholarly sources overall. Findings: Adolescent-rated parent–child communication quality and broader family relationship quality are consistently associated with mental-health outcomes, but much evidence is cross-sectional or based on one informant. Direct 15–19 evidence is narrow: one age-specific prospective synthesis addressed future-related thinking, one 15–19 relationship-profile study was cross-sectional, and one age-18 exposure study measured outcomes at age 21. Mixed-age samples must not be interpreted as age-specific evidence. Saudi and Gulf evidence provides important contextual and service-use information but does not yet provide a direct age-specific test of an integrated parent–peer–autonomy model. Conclusion: The review offers a hypothesis-generating framework and a transparent research agenda. Family-inclusive prevention may be useful when it is acceptable and safe, but the reviewed evidence does not support causal claims, diagnosis from appearance or friendship changes, or a stand-alone family intervention as treatment for mental disorders.