Vol 2 - Cont. J. Agric. Econs.

Continental J.
Agricultural Economics 2: 1 - 5, 2008

© Wilolud Online Journals, 2008.
ASSESSMENT OF FADAMA FARMERS’ ACCESS TO CREDIT IN ONDO STATE
1
Bifarin J.O. and 2Moyinjesu E.I.
1
Department of Agricultural Extension and Management and 2 Department of Agronomy, Federal College of
Agriculture, Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria
ABSTRACT
This study attempts to evaluate the access of fadama farmers to credit in Ondo State, Nigeria.
Multistage sampling technique was used to select the respondents. Five (5) Local government
areas (LGAs) were purposively selected and from each LGAs twenty respondents were
randomly picked making a total of one hundred (100) respondents.
Structured questionnaire was used to elicit information from the respondents. The data so
collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as frequency distribution and
percentages. Regression analysis was run to determine the effect of the various socio-
economic variables on respondents’ access to credit.
The result showed that 64% of the respondents were between 40-49 years old while 88% of
them were married. 71% of the respondent had either primary and secondary and tertiary
education. While 69% of them had 4-6 years of fadama farming experience. 81% of the
respondent obtained their credit facilities from co-operatives society and NACRDB.
The R2 value was 0105 signifying that 10.5% of total variations of access to credit by
independent factors were mainly from farming experience and the level of education.
Therefore, policy measures should be put in place to liberalise access to credit and education to
the respondents.
KEYWORDS: Fadama development, access to credit, family labour, socio- economic, Ondo State
INTRODUCTION
In any tropical lowlands, rivers seasonally flood extensive areas, which may be used for grazing livestock, or
growing crops after the water recedes, there are considerable areas of seasonal wetland in Africa that is under
cultivation. Small seasonal swamps are usually cultivated and they are important to the subsistence farmers (Borrow
1980). Fadama is a Hausa word meaning low area that is susceptible to seasonal flooding. Fadama development
therefore implies the development of the flood plains for agricultural purposes (Mabogunje 1980).
Adewale and Olusola (1980) stated that as flood pass over the surface of the land, water is absorbed by the soil and
stored for subsequent use by plants. In some cases agricultural production is entirely dependent on floodwater,
which encourages pleasant farmers to practice irrigation agriculture along the banks of river during the dry season.
The development of fadama agriculture will not only provide income for the farmers but will also make a significant
impact on the drive towards self-sufficiency in crop production. The land can be cropped extensively drying raining
season as well as the dry season.
Efficient fadama agriculture ensures that seasonal farm commodities are available throughout the year with little
variation in prices. The advantage in this is that the producer will be sure of selling almost all he produce, and the
consumer too is sure of getting what he want throughout the year. FAO (1976) submitted that in the South Western,
Nigeria, crops and vegetable such as rice maize, amanrantus species, tomatoes and pepper are very popular and
these are also grown in dry season to make more profit. The principal motive to grow crops and vegetable in the
fadama is to make gain during the dry season.
Adegeye and Dittoh (1985) define agricultural credit as the processes of obtaining control over the use of money,
good and services in the present, in exchange for a promise to repay at a future date. An efficient credit system is a
1
Bifarin J.O. and Moyinjesu E.I: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 1 - 5, 2008
Table 1: Total Distribution of respondents’ socio-economic characteristics.
Demographic Frequency Percentage
Gender
Male 78 78.0
Female 22 22.0
100 100.0
Age
20-29 years 14 14.0
30-39 years 22 22.0
40-49 years 64 64.0
100 100.0
Marital status
Single 12 12.0
Married 88 88.0
100 100.0
Family size
1-4 31 31.0
5-8 57 57.0
9-12 12 12.0
100 100.0
Level of Education
No formal education 5 5.0
Adult education 24 24.0
Primary school education 19 19.0
Secondary School education 18 18.0
Tertiary education 34 34.0
100 100.0
Source: Field Survey, 2007.
pre-condition for effective fulfillment of agricultural roles of generating internal capital through savings, production
of sufficient and high quality food for the growing population, providing raw material for industries and generation
of foreign exchange earnings through export.
Most innovation in agriculture inevitably increases the credit requirement of the farmers. Small-scale farmers like
“fadama” farm holders in Nigeria are poor hence there is low level of savings and hence low level of investment.
Jekayinfa (1981) submitted that agricultural credit is very important not only for fostering agricultural development
but also in improving farmers’ efficiency. This will motivate increased productivity in the agricultural sector.
Eswaram and Kolwal(1990) submitted that access to credit affects household’s risk bearing ability by altering its
risk coping strategy.
Over the years in Nigeria, the government had put in placed policy measures to liberalise access to agricultural
credit, hence this study assess the fadama farmers” access to credit in Ondo State.
METHODOLOGY
The study was carried out in Ondo State, Nigeria. The state shares boundaries with Osun and Ogun States in the
west, Ekiti and Kogi States in the North, Edo and Delta states in the east and Atlantic Ocean in the south.The total
population of the state was put at 2,249,348 with a total land area of 14,793,189 square kilometers (1991 census).
The State lies entirely in the tropics and she generally enjoys luxuriant vegetation. Majority of the inhabitants are
farmers.
2
Table 2. Distribution of respondents” farming characteristics
Socioeconomic Frequency Percentage

Characteristics
Farming experience
1-3 29 29.0
4-6 69 69.0
7 and above 2 2.0
100 100.0
Land ownership
Inheritance 46 46.0
On lease 25 25.0
Bought 22 22.0
Gift 2 2.0
Share tenancy 5 5.0
100 100.0
Farm size
1-2 ha 76 76.0
3-4 ha 23 23.0
5-6 ha 1 1.0
100 100.0
Source of credit
Private money lenders 8 8.0
Cooperatives society 71 71.0
NACRDB 10 10.0
Others 11 11.0
100 100.0
Multi-Stage sampling technique was used to select the respondents. Five Local Government Areas (Ondo west,
Ondo East, Ile-Oluji-okeigbo, Odigbo and Ifedore) were purposely selected based on the intensity of fadama
farming operations and twenty (20) farmers each were subsequently randomly picked from each local government
area, making a total of one hundred (100) respondents. Structured questionnaire was used to elicit information on
demographic and socio-economic from the respondents. Descriptive statistics such as frequency tables and
percentages were to analyse the data so collected. Regression analysis was used to determine the effect of various
socio-economic variables on the respondents’ access to credit.
The regression equation is specified as
Y = f (x1+x2+x3+x4+x5+Ei)
Where
Y= access to credit and was defined as
Access to credit= Credit used
Credit required
x1 = farm size
x2 = age
x3 = years of experience
3
Table 3: Result of the Regression Analysis
Function Constant B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 Fraction R2 2

B0 R
Semi Log 0.537 -0.08208 0.161 0.05587* -0.003893 0.238 - * -0.028441 1.548 0.105 0.15
(0.464) (0.88) (0.125) (0.017) (0.81) (0.115) 0.0626 (0.61)
(0.038)
Double 0.876 -0.104 0.240 0.03099 -0.05298 0.363 -0.178 -0.06337 1.318 0.091 0.31
Log (0.274) (0.174) (0.180) (0.276) (0.138) (0.173) (0.109) (0.114)
Figure in parentheses are standard error
*significant at 5%
x4 = family size
x5 = income
x6 = education level
x7 = source of credit
Ei = error term
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Some socio economic characteristics of the respondents were as analyzed in Table1. It shows that 78% of the
respondents were males. This may imply that fadama farming involves energy exertion that could only be provided
by males. Though the women were also involved to some extent. The age bracket of the respondents shows that
majority (64%) are in the age range of 40-49 years while all respondents were below 50 years. The ability to put in
physical effort into farming depends largely on the age of the farmer and this may conform with earlier assertion that
fadama farming involved energy exertion.
Finding further showed that 88% were married. The married Fadama farmers are likely to be assisted with family
labour in their operations. This is coupled with the fact that majority (69.6%) had a minimum family size of 6. The
result in Table1 further showed that 95% of the respondents had some basic education. Education been an avenue
through which knowledge and technology is impacted significantly in every human endeavor. It is highly important
in the adoption of innovation and the overall performance of the farm. Literacy is a vital asset in securing and
utilizing information that are relevant to fadama farming. This therefore implies that the respondents would seek for
assistance that could enhance their productivity.
According to Table 2, 71.0 percent of the respondents have been in fadama farming for over four (4) years. This is
an indication that fadama farming is becoming attractive as a source of income for the farmers in the state. The long
years of experience would enable the respondents have enough and adequate knowledge of fadama farming and this
could translate into higher productivity. Also, the findings showed that 70.0 per cent of the respondents either,
bought and have access to their land through gift. These categories are more likely to adopt improved production
technologies than those on lease or share tenancy. In addition Table 2 showed that 76.0 per cent of the Fadama
farmers had farm size between 1-2 hectares. This conforms to the attributes of peasant farming having small size
farms. It could be inferred that lacks of access to credit may also act as a hindrance to expansion of farms. Majority
71.0 per cent of the respondents obtain funding through the cooperative society while 8.0 per cent used private
moneylenders. This could imply that the respondents do not have access to institutional source of credit.
4
INFLUENCE OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS ON ACCESS TO CREDIT BY FADAMA

FARMERS
Ordinary square regression was used for the estimation of the influence of socio- economic variables on access to
credit by fadama farmers. The lead equation is as written below:
Log Y= 0.537 – 0.08208X1+0.161X2+0.05587X3*-0.003898X4 + 0.238X5 - 0.06276X6 *- 0.02844X7

(0.86) (0.125) (0.0107) (0.81) (0.115) (0.038) (0.61)
Figure in parentheses are standard error

*Significant at 5%
R2 = 10.5%
R 2 = 15%
F = 1.548
It revealed a coefficient of variability (R2) of 0.105 (Table 3), which implied that the model explains only 10.5 per
cent of total variations’. This is contrary to the earlier report by Bifarin and Folayan (2006) in their study of the
determinant of access to credit by small holder farmers in Ondo State with coefficient of variability (R2) of 97.1%.
Farming experience (X3) and education level (X6) were the only significant independent variables at 5 per cent level
of significance. All the explanatory variables except age (X2), family size (X4), educational level (X6) and source of
credit (X7) had positive signs meaning that an increase in each of the variables will lead to decrease in access to
credit by the respondents. Farming experience had positive sign implying that the higher the variable, the higher the
access to credit.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The regression result shows that the significant factor that affects the access of Fadama farmer’s to credit are
farming experience and the level of education. The government should therefore liberalize assess to credit and both
education ( formal or informal) for the respondents
REFERENCES
Adewale, O.A. and Olusola A. (1980): Irrigation Principle and Practices. John Nilley and Sins. Inc. UK Third
Edition P7.
Adeyeye A.J. and Dittoh J.S. (1985): Essential of Agricultural Economics. Impact Publisher Nigeria Limited Ibadan
Bifarin J.O and J.A Folayan(2006): Determinants to Credit by small scale farm holders in Ondo State, Nigeria
Science focus Vol 11(2) Pp 65-67
Borrow C (1985): Water Resources and Agricultural Development in the Tropics. Longman Publishers.
Eswaran M and A. Kotwal (1990): Implications of credit constraints for risk behaviour in less developed economies.
Oxford Economic papers N. S. 42 (2) 473-482.
Jekayinfa (1981): Agricultural Credit in South East Asia. Development Pp 55-66.
Mabogunje,A.L. (1980): The Development Process. A spatial perspective. Longman Publishers

.
Received for Publication: 19/02/2008
Accepted for Publication: 04/04/2008
Corresponding Author:
Bifarin J.O.
Department of Agricultural Extension and Management, Federal College of Agriculture, Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria
E-mail: toks_titi@yahoo.com
5
Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 6 - 13, 2008
NIGERIA’S AGRICULTURE AND THE WORLD FOOD SUMMIT 1996
R.A. Isiorhovoja
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension,
Delta State University, Asaba Campus.
straakpo@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
Nigeria has food security as one of its agricultural policy thrust and she is a participating
member of the World Food Summit (WFS). The WFS has set 2015 as the target year for
reducing by 50% the number of the hungry as at 1990 – 1992 baseline figures. Against this
background, this paper, using the methodology of Aggregate Measure of Support (AMS) and
Nutritional Target, and taking into consideration food supplies from domestic sources alone,
assessed Nigeria’s contribution towards the WFS goal, in particular the domestic food security
situation for period 1992 to 2005. Some of the findings were that: Nigeria has recorded
remarkable improvement in her food security situation; the incidence of the hungry has
declined from 13.02% in 1990 – 1992 base year to 2.41% in 2005; the number of the
malnourished declined from 11.51 million persons in 1990 – 1992 to 3.16 million persons in
2005; although the absolute annual budgetary provisions for agriculture were on the increase,
its percentage share of the FGN total annual budget fluctuated widely with a general negative
trend. The paper recommended amongst others, the shaping up of existing institutions in
agriculture with a view to reducing superfluous federal and state offices and maintaining only
functional state offices; taking practical steps to forestall the effects of HIV/AIDS and other
pandemics by way of promoting re-investment and recapitalizing smallholder farmers who,
generally speaking, are the worst hit and, enhancing policy implementation ability and
sustainability of relevant government agencies.
KEYWORDS: Food security, World Food Summit, Nutritional Target, HIV/AIDS,

Government agencies
INTRODUCTION
The World Food Summit (WFS) held its first meeting in Rome in November 1996 and a second one in 2006. The
initial meeting was consequent upon the observed deteriorating downward trend in global food production and
consumption problem at the World Food Conference in 1974 (USDA, 2005) and the subsequent solemn
proclamation that “every man, woman and child has the inalienable right to be free from hunger and malnutrition in
order to develop their physical and mental facilities“. It was a meeting of World leaders at the highest level- men
and women who have the capacity to direct the resources of their respective nation towards desired goals. The
failure of past conferences on food has been traced to lack of commitment on the part of participating nations. For
this reason, the Summit has as its primary objective the elicitation of the commitment of World leaders to implement
policies, strategies and plan that were to be formulated at the meeting. The Summit never intended to make members
to pledge fund or create a new financial mechanism, institution or bureaucracy to facilitate the achievement of goals.
This approach may have been buttressed by the concept of Food Sovereignty of nation which was adopted at the
WFS. The Food Sovereignty of nation was to the effect that nations and governments have the right to define their
own agricultural and food policies whilst avoiding dumping products in any country (SWAC, 2007). The 186
nations that participated at this Summit agreed to reduce the number of the malnourished as at 1990 – 1992 base
years by 50% in 2015. This commitment of these 186 countries at the WFS is today of great interest to the world.
USDA (2005) reported that there was a growing concern about the slow progress towards meeting the goal. The
world is half way to the target year of 2015 by which time the number of the undernourished globally was expected
to have been reduced to half of the 1990 – 1992 baseline figure. Nigeria is a participating nation at the WFS.
6
R.A. Isiorhovoja: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 6 - 13, 2008
Objectives of the Study

The overall question that this paper addressed at this mid-term review of the Rome Declaration on World Food
Security was to what extent has Nigeria achieved the target of halving the number of the undernourished? More
specifically the paper aims:
To assess Nigeria’s effort towards achieving the 2015 target year for reducing the number of the undernourished by
50% and, to determine the trend in the number and prevalence of the undernourished in Nigeria since 1990 – 1992
with a view to ascertaining Nigeria’s effort towards target.
In formulating these objectives, this paper recognizes the fact that the WFS goal was not at country level or regional
level but at global level. The objectives were only intended to determine Nigeria’s own contribution towards
achieving the WFS goal. This approach was informed by the belief that in the final analysis, how well the Summit
achieved the set target in 2015 will depend on the sum performance of the individual participating nations by way of
food production and supply from domestic sources and not necessarily by the ability to import and or attract food
aids. Hence this self-review was in part intended to, in the words of Jacques Diouf the then Director-General of
FAO, enable us scale up proven models and strategies while at the same time sharpening the focus on problem areas
(FAO, 2006).
Literature Review
Policies and Objectives of the WFS
The result of the first WFS is today popularly referred to as Rome Declaration on World Food Security. At this
meeting, it was the consensus that “Food security exists when all people at all times, have physical and economic
access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and
healthy life”. Towards the achievement of the essence of this definition, the “world” during the summit pledge itself
to 7 commitments with 27 objectives. The 7 commitments were as follows:
To ensure an enabling political, social and economic environment designed to create the best conditions for the
eradication of poverty and for durable peace, base on equal participation of women and men, which is most
conducive achieving sustainable food security for all.
To implement policies aimed at eradicating poverty and inequality and improving physical and economic access by
all, at all times, to sufficient, nutritionally adequate and safe food and its effective utilization.
To pursue participatory and sustainable food, agriculture, fisheries, forestry, and rural development policies and
practices in high and low areas, which are essential to adequate and reliable food supplies at the household, national,
regional and global levels, and combat pests, drought and deforestation, considering the multifunctional character of
agriculture
To strive to ensure that food, agricultural trade and overall trade policies are conducive to fostering food security for
all through a fair and market oriented world trade system.
To endeavour to prevent and be prepared for natural disaster and man-made emergencies and to meet transitory and
emergency food requirements in ways that encourages recovery, rehabilitation, development and a capacity to
supply future needs.
To promote optimal allocation and use of public and private investments to foster human resources, sustainable
food, agriculture, fisheries and forestry systems, and rural development, in high and low areas.
To implement, monitor, and follow-up this plan of Action at all levels in cooperation with the international
community.
Strategies/Modality of Operation
The WFS was only expected to lead to the adoption of appropriate policies, strategies and action plan and to elicit
the commitment of participating nations to the operation of the plan. The individual participating nations were
however free to consider independently how and what it might wish to contribute to the implementation of these
policies, strategies and plan of action adopted. Apparently, shallow and non-binding as this strategy may seem, trust
was at the bottom and the integrity of the individual participating nations was at stake. The onus was therefore on
7
them to prove their faithfulness to the global goal. What is left for the body therefore is the monitoring and follow-
up of Action plan at all levels in cooperation with international community and to conduct periodic review of efforts
and strategies to ensure the logical success of the Summit. One of such review meeting was held in June 2006.
Nigeria’s Food Security situation in the Eyes of the World

Few international agencies conduct periodic review of the global food security situation on country basis. Two
notable ones are the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and the United States Development Agencies
(USDA). The Economic Research Services (ERS) of the USDA defines hungry people as those who consume less
than 2,100 calories a day. In its Food Security Assessment Report 2005, the USDA, using 1992 as the starting
period, reported a 7% decline in the number of hungry people from 688 million in 1992-1994 to 639 in 2002 – 2004.
The story is however not the same for all regional blocks let alone individual countries. While Asia, the
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) experienced varying
percentage fall in the number of hungry people, Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) experienced deteriorating food security
status. The food security projection by this same report indicated a deteriorating picture for the SSA by the year
2015. Every other regional block, except Asia, which was to remain virtually on the level already attained, were
projected to have varying levels of improvement in their food security position. This same view was shared by FAO
(2006) which reported that the prevalence of hunger will decline but not the number of the hungry.
FAO (2006) reported that between 1990 and 1992, the number of the undernourished in Nigeria was about 11.3
million persons. This figure fell to about 10 million persons in 1995 – 1997. This decline was however not sustained
as the number of the undernourished rose to about 12 million between 2001 and 2003. The prevalence of the
undernourished followed a similar trend. From about 12% in the 1990 – 1992 periods, the prevalence of the
undernourished fell to about 9% in 1995 – 1997 period but rose slightly in the succeeding 2001 – 2003 period.
In terms of progress towards halving the number of the undernourished by the year 2015, many African countries
like Angola, Benin, Chad, Malawi and Mozambique, were said to have made varying levels of progress. Ghana was
reported to have attained the target. And Nigeria was said to have achieved only marginal reduction in the number of
undernourished. The prevalence of the hungry was, however, said to have declined appreciably in that projection.
MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nigeria’s effort towards achieving the Rome Declaration on World Food Security was measured using
internationally recognized yardsticks of Aggregate Measure of Support (AMS) and Nutritional target.
The AMS to agriculture is an index that measures the monetary value of government support to the sector (USAD,
2001). For Nigeria, the federal government budgetary estimates from 1992 to 2005 were used. They were derived by
summing the recurrent and capital budgetary estimates for the respective years. The figures were expressed as a
percentage of their respective year federal government total budgetary estimates. This result was used as a proxy
index for federal government commitment to agriculture.
The nutritional target approach seeks to determine the calorie intake/capita/day in comparison to the minimum
calorie requirement specified by the FAO for an individual to live a healthy and productive life. This minimum was
2,100 cal/capita/day for refugees and about 2,700cal/capita/day for people who work for their livelihood. There is a
food gap/deficit if the nutritional target exceeds the estimated level of calorie intake/capita/day. In the same way,
there is a surplus if the estimated calorie intake/capita/day is greater than the minimum specified. It is in this sense
that contribution would have been made towards achieving WFS goal.
The items of food and volume of output of the respective items of food used in this analysis were obtained from the
Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Statistical Bulletin (2005). The crops used were maize, millet, sorghum, rice, wheat,
acha, beans and soya for grains; cassava, potato, yams, cocoyam, and plantain for roots and tubers; and groundnut
oil and palm oil for vegetable oil. These crops were about all the stable food crops in Nigeria. The annual output of
the respective crops were converted into calorie equivalent using 3.5calorie per gram for grain crops, 1calorie per
gram for root and tuber crops and 8 calorie per gram for vegetable oil following USDA (2005). The population
figures were extrapolated from the 1991 census figure using 2.8% growth rate (CBN, 2004).
There was, however, a point of departure of this paper from some earlier studies. Food security estimates of most
international agencies like the USDA and FAO consider supplies from domestic production, food aid and
8
commercial imports. Hence a country can be food secure f by combining supplies from one or more sources. The
key question, of course, was if every nation were to be a net importer of food where will the “net” come from? It
was for this reason that this paper was of the strong view that the commitment elicited from the 186 countries that
participated at the WFS was not to repackage themselves to attract food aid or concessionary terms in food import
but to, in the words of Jacques Diouf, the then Director General of FAO, “dispel any complacency that may be
engendered by the abundance of the world food supplies” and to put in place machinery-policies, programmes,
projects and institutions that will ensure a sustainable increase in food supplies per capita from domestic sources. It
is therefore to the extent that a country succeeds in attaining food security from internal sources and has extra to
send to the “world food pool” or is able to maintain food reserve from domestic sources alone that it can be said to
be contributing meaningfully towards the WFS goal. It was for this reason that this paper assessed Nigeria’s
commitment to the Rome declaration using strictly food supplies from domestic sources.

Nigeria’s Agricultural Policies and the Rome Declaration
Nigeria’s agricultural policy evolution has been remarkable since the first national development Plan 1962 – 1968.
As against what happened in the early years after independence when national plans were truly speaking regional
plans fused into one unwholesome plan, agricultural policy have become centralized since, especially, 1988.
Agricultural plans of the states are now extension of that of the federal government (Ayoola, 2001). This, by
extension, pre-prepared the federal government to carry all the states along with it in the drive towards achieving the
goal of the WFS. By this, the commitment of the federal government to the WFS Action plan invariably becomes
binding on all the states of federation.
Fertilizer is a key input in agricultural production. Nigeria’s fertilizer policy has been changing over the years in an
attempt to find answers to the problems of availability, leakage and arbitrage of the product. Before 1996, the FGN
had monopoly in importing the product. At that time, subsidy was up to 75% of the price. In an attempt to privatize
the supply of this input, the federal government initiated the liberalization process on 1997 but failed to follow
through to the logical conclusion due to the poor response of the private sector to stimuli to invest in agriculture
through procurement and distribution of fertilizer. This led to a fall in fertilizer usage of up to 50% in the post- 1996
as compared to pre – 1996 period (Nagy-2002). Some of the reasons adduced for the fall in fertilizer consumption
were high prices, low quality and non-availability of the product. In addition, the Federal Government owned
fertilizer producing company, National Fertilizer Company of Nigeria (NAFCON), which started operation in 1988
discontinued production in 1999, eleven years after commencing production.
The Federal government of Nigeria has in place adequate policies and programmes for poverty alleviation.
Examples of these are the National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP), National Directorate of Employment
(NDE) and the National Opportunity Actualization Agency (NOAA). NAPEP, under its Farmers Empowerment
programme disbursed a total of N240 million to 7,200 farm families to enable them expand their activities and
improve productivity. These farmers were also introduced to new and improved farming techniques (CBN, 2004).
In addition to the above, there are the Presidential initiatives on cassava, rice, Vegetable oil, sugar, cereals, tree
crops and livestock.
The issue of gender equality and women empowerment has taken a central stage in the nations development efforts
since the Beijing Convention of 1996. There is now the ministry of Women Affairs at the Federal and State levels.
The present dispensation of President Umar Yar dua has earmarked 30% of his political appointments for women.
Concerning food security, such strategy as the maintenance of zero tariff regimes on imported agricultural
machinery, liberalization of agricultural loan terms to enable smallholder farmers obtain more substantial amount of
loan without tangible collateral have been put in place. Furthermore, the Nigerian Agricultural Cooperative and
Rural Development Bank (NACRDB) has been strengthened to enable it reach the farmers more effectively. There
were policies on improving the quality of the farm environment in order to increase crop yield. In addition, there
were provision for taking advantage of the various concessionary arrangements provided by the World Trade
Organization (WTO) and other bilateral and multilateral relationship with other countries and international bodies
(NEEDS, 2004). Today, Nigeria has an agreement with China in the export of cassava and its derivatives. This was
expected to boost output, increase farmers’ income and therefore their access to other means of sustenance. These
measures tie up with the objectives and action plan the WFS.
9
Aggregate Measure of Nigeria’s Support to Agriculture Since 1992

Table 1 shows the FGN total budget estimates for the period 1992 - 2005. In columns 2 and 3 respectively are the
FGN total budget estimates for agriculture. In columns 4 and 5 are indexes of FGN budget estimates for agriculture
with 1997 as the base year and percent of FGN budgetary for agriculture to FGN total budgetary estimates.
Table 1 shows that FGN budget for agriculture have been on the upward trend in absolute terms except in especially
2000 and 2003 when the amount fell. The percentage share of agriculture in FGN total budget estimate has been
negligible. It ranged from 1.30% to 6.38% except in 1999 when the percentage share was 10.68%. The absolute
figures also indicate a wide variation with a coefficient of variation of 109.88%. Thus with regard to AMS,
Nigerians commitment may be said to be substantial in absolute terms but not as a percentage of FGN total budget.
Care should however be exercised in attaching much importance to monetary figure for even though some quantum
of money is a essential for effective project implementation, beyond that, its importance may assume a dip in trend,
especially where inefficiency and misappropriation are not uncommon. Column 7 reveals that 100% of budgeted
amount was not appropriated in any year. It was in only years 2000 (73.61%) and 2003 (66.06%) that appropriation
to the sector exceeded 50% of amount budgeted. This under appropriation coupled with the emerging trend of under
spending in ministries with selfish ulterior motives will certainly make unsustainable any gain towards food security
that unsustainable.
Table 1. Federal Government budget estimates 1992 - 2005

Year FGN total FGN budget Appropri Index of % of total % Budget
budget estimate for ation by FGN total budget performanc
(N'million) agriculture National budget estimate for e column
(N'mn) Assembly estimate agriculture to (4/3)×100.
(N'mn. for FGN total
agriculture budget
(1997 =
100)
1992 52035.90 924.50 11.66 1.78 NA
1993 112100.50 2835.30 35.76 2.53 NA
1994 110201.00 3719.10 46.90 3.37 NA
1995 153495.60 6927.70 87.37 4.51 NA
1996 189000.00 5574.00 70.29 2.95 NA
1997 276723.20 7929.60 100.00 2.87 NA
1998 367917.10 11840.40 149.32 3.22 NA
1999 358103.50 38259.80 5000.00 482.49 10.68 13.07
2000 664735.30 10596.40 7800.00 133.63 1.59 73.61
2001 1018025.60 64943.90 10000.00 819.01 6.38 15.40
2002 1188734.60 44803.80 12600.00 565.02 3.77 28.12
2003 1225956.60 16045.20 10600.00 202.35 1.31 66.06
2004 1302231.50 59773.40 10550.00 753.80 4.59 17.65
2005 1799938.20 90798.20 9600.00 1145.05 5.04 10.57
Source: CBN (2005) Statistical Bulletin *Federal Ministry of Agriculture
Table 2 shows the total calorie supplied from the selected crops for the period under review. The percentage column
reveals that calorie supply/capita /day as a percentage of the minimum target from domestic sources increases over
the years from 80.62% in 1990 to 102.53% in 2000 and thereafter dropped to 89.78%. It, however, took an upward
turn in 2002 and has continued to be so up to the end of 2005 when it was 97.59%.
If, however, a nutritional target of 2700 cal/capita/day (which Nigeria was said to have attained) was used, the
calorie supply/capita/day ranged from 48.77% in 1990 to 62.03% in 2000. The two levels of nutritional target
therefore indicate that there has always been a food deficit problem in Nigeria. The methodology adopted in the
10
study report of the USDA (2005) which has it that Nigeria has zero nutritional target in 2005 failed to identify this
gap.
Nigeria has hardly been able to feed herself adequately from domestic food sources only. To say, therefore, that
Nigeria has surpassed 2,700 cal/capita/day (USDA, 2005) goes to indicate the enormity of food import that Nigeria
was into.
Table 3 shows the estimated number and percentage (prevalence) of the population that was undernourished if the
refugee cal intake/capita/day was used. About 19.38% of the population (16.81 million persons) could be said to be
malnourished in 1990. By 1996, the year of the WFS, the prevalence of undernourishment was 4.61% (4.72 million
persons). This was a remarkable fall in both the incidence and number of the malnourished.
Table 2. Calorie supply from major staple food crops 1990 – 2005
Year Population Total cal. Cal./capita/d % Cal./capita/d %
(million) Produced(millions) ay SS at cal/capita/da ay SS at cal/capita/
2100 y of 2700 day of
min.reqt 2100cal. min.reqt 2700cal.
Minimum Min.reqt.
1990 86710000 112518000000.00 1692.94 80.62 1316.73 48.77

1991 89137880 125937000000.00 1843.23 87.77 1433.62 53.1
1992 91633740.64 136497000000.00 1943.37 92.54 1511.51 55.98
1993 94199485.38 140799000000.00 1950.02 92.86 1516.68 56.17
1994 96837070.97 144505000000.00 1946.83 92.71 1514.2 56.08
1995 99548508.96 152218000000.00 1994.89 94.99 1551.58 57.47
1996 102335867.2 157132000000.00 2003.2 95.39 1558.05 57.71
1997 105201271.5 161990000000.00 2008.88 95.66 1562.47 57.87
1998 108146907.1 167790000000.00 2024.14 96.39 1574.33 58.31
1999 111175020.5 172375000000.00 2022.81 96.32 1573.3 58.27
2000 114287921.1 188626000000.00 2153.22 102.53 1674.73 62.03
2001 117487982.9 169789000000.00 1885.4 89.78 1466.42 54.31
2002 120777646.4 176184000000.00 1903.13 90.63 1480.21 54.82
2003 124159420.5 188985000000.00 1985.8 94.56 1544.51 57.2
2004 127635884.2 197877000000.00 2022.6 96.31 1573.13 58.26
2005 131209689 206119000000.00 2049.46 97.59 1594.03 59.04
Source: Computed from CBN (2005) Statistical Bulletin
This remarkable achievement got to a peak in 2000 when Nigeria could feed an extra 2.90 million persons. In 2001,
however, the number of the malnourished rose to a high of 12 million persons and the incidence was10.22%. There
has been a downward trend since then such that in 2005 the incidence of the undernourished was 2.41% and the
number was 3.16 million persons. This number was lower than 5.80 persons (half of the 11.59 million
undernourished person’s average of 1990, 1991 and 1992) that were expected to be halved by the year 2015.
The Future of Nigeria in Rome Declaration Goal

Countries are not equally endowed with agricultural resources. This fact has implications for domestic food security.
For countries not so well endowed it may imply disproportionate resource allocation to agriculture, assuming
effective utilization, to attain domestic food security if they must. And for those generously endowed, it imposes the
responsibility to look beyond ensuring domestic food security to ensuring regional to global food security. Nigeria
belongs to this category of countries. While these countries may need some concession/support from international
11
agencies like FAO, USDA etc in strategic areas to enhance the achievement of the WFS goal, they on their own
need to appreciate their role in the emerging world order and the full implication for effective and efficient resources
allocation and utilization. It is for this reason that Nigeria needs to take a second look at areas as follows if it is to
sustain the trend observed in this study:
Putting in a place the right policies and shaping up the existing institutions in agriculture and related ministries with
a view to reducing superfluous Federal and State offices and maintaining functional offices.
Ensure effective monitoring of sectoral fund appropriation and utilization.
Table 3. Estimated number and incidence of the undernourished
Year No. of the % of
Undernourished Population of
Undernourished
1990 16807847 19.38
1991 10899132 12.23
1993 6834561 7.46
1994 7062896 7.29

1995 4982610 5.01
1996 4717130 4.61
1997 4564487 4.34
1998 3901885 3.61
1999 4086523 3.68
2000 -2896560 -2.53
2001 12006046 10.22
2002 11322796 9.37
2003 6751910 5.44
2004 4704191 3.69
2005 3157628 2.41
Source: Derived from CBN (2005) Statistical Bulletin
iii. Pragmatic effort to forestall the effects or perceived risk of pandemic diseases like HIV/AIDS and malaria etc
by way of Policy implementation ability and sustainability of relevant government agencies which are likely to be
attenuated due to attrition and loss of human capital in the relevant public sector.
iv. Ensuring the adequacy and functioning of relevant infrastructure to minimize postharvest losses
CONCLUSION
Nigeria may have met the WFS target of reducing by 50% the number of the undernourished purely from domestic
food sources and there are potentials for improvement but there remains some level of undernourishment. In spite of
the presence of apparently creditable policies and programmes, the budgetary estimates for agriculture were not only
a small proportion of the FGN total budget and fluctuated widely but were not fully approprited. This can undermine
government commitment to programmes and projects.
REFERENCES
AusAID (2004) Food Security Strategy. www.ausaid.gov.au/publications. Assessed 18/06/07
12
Ayoola, G.B. (2001) Essays on the Agricultural Economy1. Ibadan. T.M.A. Publishers.
Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) (2004) Annual Report and Statement of Accounts. P74
Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) (2005) Statistical Bulletin. Vol.16
Ekong, E.E. (2003) An Introduction to Rural Sociology. Dove Educational Publishers, Uyo, Nigeria.
Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) (1975) Third National Development Plan 1975-1980. Federal Ministry of
Economic Planning, Lagos
Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) (2006) The State of Food Insecurity in the World. FAO. Rome.
International Policy Council (IPC) (1996) Attaining Food and Global Security by 2025. IPC Position paper No. 3
p1-32.
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) (2002) Achieving Sustainable Food Security for All by 2020:
Priorities and Responsibilities. Washington DC.
National Planning Commission (2004) National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS)
NPC. Abuja.
Sahel and West Africa Club (SWAC) (2007) Food Sovereignty in West Africa: From Principle to Reality.
Shapouri, S. And Rosen, S. (1999) Food Security Assessment: Why Countries are at Risk. Economic Research
Services (ERS)/USDA. Agricultural Information Bulletin No. 754. Washinton DC.
USDA(2001) The Road Ahead: Agricultural Policy Reform in the WTO – Summary Report. Washinton DC.
USDA (2005) World Food Summit: Basic Information. http:/www.fas.usda.gov/icd/summit/basic.html. Assessed

13/09/07

13
ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY AMONG SMALL HOLDER ARABLE CROP FARMERS IN KEBBI STATE
NIGERIA
Tanko L. and Jirgi, A. J.

Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension Technology, SAAT, Federal University of Technology,
P.M.B 65, Minna, Niger State.
ABSTRACT
The economic efficiency, determinants of production and the sources of inefficiency in arable
crop production in Kebbi State are investigated using a stochastic frontier profit function
which incorporates a model for inefficiency effects. Data were generated using the cost route
approach from a sample of 96 farm households selected from the four agricultural zones of the
state during the 2004 cropping season using the multi-stage stratified random sampling
techniques. Results show that size of land holding (hectares) and capital inputs are the major
factors associated with changes in the output of arable crops. Of the farmer’s specific
socioeconomic variables, only three, namely: level of education, extension contact and co-
operativeness were found to be the significant factors accounting for the variation in efficiency
among small holder arable crop farmers. It recommends policies that would encourage land
consolidation, attainment of basic formal education by the farmers and strengthening the
existing extension services in the state.
KEY WORDS: Economic efficiency, Technical efficiency, Stochastic frontier, Arable crops,
Farmer.
INTRODUCTION
The current concern of stakeholders in agricultural development in Nigeria is the onerous task of feeding over
hundred million people in the nation. The continual increase in the nation’s population without a corresponding
increase in food production rather signals a scenario of widespread hunger, malnutrition and poverty.
The contribution of Gross Domestic Products (GDP) (CBN,1999) observed, progressively declined from 60% in
1974 to less than 10% in the 1990’s following the discovery of petroleum in the early seventies. This situation has
been attributed to the relative neglect of agriculture as policy makers shifted emphasis from the farms to the oil
wells. Yields are low owing to inefficient production techniques, shortage of capital for agricultural investment, use
of in-appropriate and labor- intensive agricultural technology, rapidly declining soil productivity and poor
extension services (Tanko,2004) among others. The obvious consequence is the slow growth and inadequate
capacity of the agricultural sector to provide sufficient food for the fast growing population. With the 3 per cent
per annum rapid growth rate of the national population (CBN,1999), there has been much more pressure on food
availability with concurrent effects of increased food importation and a deepening foreign debt status . For instance,
the Central Bank of Nigeria (1999) reported that the value of annual food imports in Nigeria increased from N441.7
million in 1976 to N7,595.6 million in 1996.
Quite a number of strategies that attempt to bring about significant increases in food production have been
advocated, one of which is the effective combination of measures aimed at increasing the level of farm resources,
making efficient use of the resources already committed to the food subsector and combining the enterprises in an
optimal manner ( Alam et al 1995, Tanko, 2004).
Increasing the level of efficiency in food crop production among smallholder farmers who operate optimally along
their production function/frontier while being much less successful in shifting from a production function to a higher
one could help in the resolution of the food crisis and improving the welfare of farmers. Lending credence to this,
Bagi (1982) affirms that it is ideal to lay emphasis on allocating and distributing adequate resource inputs,
investment in research and eliminating the bottle necks to efficient resource utilization at the farm level. This study
examined the economic factors that determine production efficiency and the sources of inefficiency of small holder
arable crop farmers in Kebbi State.
14
Tanko L. and Jirgi, A. J: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 14 - 22, 2008
a) Hypotheses:
H1: Arable crop farmers in Kebbi State are economically efficient in production.
H2 : The explanatory variables in the model for the inefficiency factors have zero coefficients ( i.e Ho: δ 1+ δ
2+--+ δ 9= 0)
b. Theoretical framework
Efficiency is the ability to produce a given level of output at lowest cost (Farrel, 1957). Economic
efficiency is the ability of a farm to achieve the highest possible profit, given the prices and levels of resources of
that farm (Bagi, 1982). The economic theory of production provides the analytical framework for most empirical
research on productivity and efficiency. As a result of the pioneering but independent works by Aiger et al (1977),
Bagi and Huang (1983) Kalirajan and Flinn (1983), Amaza and Olayemi (2001) consideration has been given to the
possibility of estimating the stochastic frontier production function. In most of the studies, it was found that the
Cobb-Douglas stochastic frontier does not provide an adequate representation for describing the data given the
specification of a translog model (Tanko, 2004).
Following Ajibefun (2002), considering a farmer using inputs X1 ,X2,…, Xn to produce output Y, efficient
transformation of inputs into output is characterized by the production function f (X), which shows the maximum
output obtainable from various input vectors. The stochastic frontier production is defined as
Yi = f (Xi, β) exp (Vi-Ui) ; = 1,2… n --- (1)
where,
Yi = production of the ith farm

Xi= vector of input quantities of the ith farm
β= vector of unknown parameters of the ith farm
Vi = random error associated with random factors not under the control of the farm
e.g weather.
Ui= inefficiency effects (one-sided error with U⊇0) i.e Uis are non-negative with
technical inefficiency in production.
(Vi-Ui) = composite error term
The symmetric component, V, account for factors outside the farmer’s control such as weather and diseases. It is
assumed to be independent and identically distributed as N ∼ (0, δ2V). A one- sided component V= O reflects
technical inefficiency relative to the stochastic frontier, f(Xi; β ) exp (Vi-Ui). Thus V=O for a farm output which
lies on the frontier and V<O for one whose output is below the frontier as N ∼ (O, δ2 U), i.e the distribution of V is
half-normal. Thus, the stochastic production frontier model can be used to analyze cross-sectional data. The model
simultaneously estimates the individual technical efficiency of the respondents as well as determinants of technical
efficiency (Battesse and Coelli 1995).
The estimation of stochastic frontier production makes it possible to find out whether the deviation in technical
efficiencies from the frontier output is due to firm specific factors or due to external random factors. It provides
estimates for the technical efficiency by specifying composite error formulations to the conventional production
functions (Khumbakar, 1990; Coelli, 1995; Battesse and Coelli, 1995).
Technical efficiency of an individual farmer is defined as the ratio of the observed output to the corresponding
frontier output, conditional on the levels of inputs used by the farmer. The technical efficiency of farmer (i) in the
context of the stochastic production function in equation (1) is
TE = Yi /Yi * --- (2)

= f (Xi;β) exp (Vi -Ui) /f (Xi ; β) exp Vi ---(3)
= exp (- Ui) ---(4)
15
where
Yi= observed value of output
Yi* = frontier output (or potential output).
Given the density function of Ui and Vi, the frontier production function can be estimated by the maximum
likelihood technique. The value of the technical efficiency lies between zero and one. The most efficient farmer
will have value one, whereas the least efficient farmer will have value lying between zero and one. The stochastic
frontier of the translog type was specified for this study. The maximum likelihood technique is used to estimate the
parameters of the stochastic frontier and the predicated technical efficiency/ inefficiency of the farmers.
Even though empirical estimation of the translog has come under theoretical criticism on the basis that estimates
obtained may be invalid because of violation of regularity conditions at extreme sample values to the inclusion of
the second-order term, especially in small samples (Amaza, 2000), however, the problem becomes partially solved
with large samples with better degree of freedom.
METHODOLOGY
a) The Data and Model
i. The Data
This study was conducted in Kebbi State. It is located in North Western part of Nigeria which lies between latitudes
100 and 130 N and longitudes 30 and 60W. The area falls within the dry Savanna agro ecological zone of Nigeria with
an average annual rainfall of between 650mm and 1100mm, with distinct wet (May- October) and dry (November-
April,) seasons. Over two thirds of the estimated population of about 2,051,831 people are engaged in agricultural
production, mainly on arable crops, alongside few cash crops with aspects of animal husbandry (Tanko, 2004).
There are four agricultural zones in the state, namely; Argungu, Bunza Yauri and Zuru. Kebbi State was chosen for
the study because the state is strategic in terms of food production in Nigeria.
A multi-stage stratified random sampling technique was used to select 96 representative arable crop farm
households. The agricultural development project zones formed the first-stage of sampling. The second stage
involved listing all the blocks in each of the zones to form separate sampling frames.The third stage was circle level.
Four circles each were chosen from selected blocks. From each circle, a village was purposively selected. Purposive
selection of villages was to ensure that only farming communities were chosen. The last stage was the farm
household level. A list of smallholder arable crop farmers was compiled by the resident extension agents with the
assistance of village heads. The sampled villages include Ribah, Amanawa, Fakai, Danko, Kaoje, Bagudo, Besse,
Aliero, Bunza, Ngaski, Agwara, Gungun Sarki, Yelwa, Arewa, Kangiwa, Gulma, and Gwandu from the four
agricultural zones. Data were collected from the farm households with a structured and validated questionnaire. Data
were collected on the socio-economic characteristics of the farmer, cropping patterns, production activities in terms
of inputs, outputs and their prices using the cost-route approach from July 2004 to January 2005 after all the crops
have been harvested. The yield plot method was used to obtain the yield of crops and conversions were later made
using the grain equivalent table.
ii) The Model

The stochastic frontier production function used by Parikh and Shah (1994) and Onus et al (2000) which in turn
derive from the pioneering work of the composed error model of Aigner, et al (1977) was used in analyzing the
data.The explicit form of the translog empirical stochastic frontier profit function model was used, which allows
analysis of interactions among variables is specified as follows:
In π* = βo + β1ln x1 + β2 ln x2 + β3 ln x3 +β4 ln x4 + β5 ln x5 + ½ β6 ln x12 + ½β7 ln x22 + ½ β8 ln x32 + ½ β9 ln

x4 + ½ β10 ln x5 + β11 ln x1 ln x2 + β12 ln x1ln x3 + β13 ln x1 ln x4 + β14 ln x1 ln x5 + β15 ln x2 ln x3 + β16lnx2 ln x4 + β17
2 2
ln x2 ln x5 + β18 ln x3 ln x4 + β19 ln x3 ln x5 + β20 ln x4 ln x5 + Vi- Ui

_ _ _ (6)
Where,
ln = logarithm to base e
16
π* = Normalized profit in Naira of the farm defined as gross revenue less variable cost normalized by price of crop
output per farmer
βo = intercept / constant term
β1- β20= parameters estimated
X1 = farm size measured in hectares
X2 = capital inputs measured in Naira. These include: depreciation charges
on machinery, equipment, implements, tools, repair and operating
expenses, interest charges on borrowed capital, rent on land, tractor
hiring costs and irrigation charges
X3 = Daily wage rate (N) normalized by price of crop output per farmer
X4 = Price of fertilizer (N) normalized by price of crop output per farmer
X5 = Price of planting material (N) normalized by price of crop output per
farmer.
Vi = Normal random errors which are assumed to be independent and
identically distributed having zero mean and constant variance.
Ui = Technical inefficiency effects, assumed to be independent of Vi’s and are non-negative random variables
associated with the economic efficiency of the enterprise involved. It is under the farmer’s control and
accounts for inefficiency.
The total number of interactions is fifteen.
It is assumed that the technical inefficiency effects are independently distributed and arise by truncation (at zero) of
the normal distribution with mean Ui and variance δ2, where Ui is specified as;
Ui = δ0 + δ1Z1i + δ2 Z2i + δ3Zi3 + δ4Z4i + δ5Z5i + δ6Z6i + δ7Z7i + δ8Z8i + δ9Z9i --- (7)
Where,
Ui = economic efficiency of the ith farmer

Z1 = Age of the farmer in years
Z2= Level of education in no. of years spent in school.
Z3= Farming experience in years
Z4= Household size
Z5= Farm size
Z6= Number of meetings with extension agents during the production
season
Z7 = Dummy variable for credit status (1 for access to credit, 0
otherwise)
Z8= Dummy variable for membership of co-operative (1 for
membership, 0 otherwise)
Z9= Sex, (1 for male, 0 otherwise)
δ1- δ9 = unknown parameters estimated.
The parameters of the stochastic frontier function are estimated by the method of maximum likelihood using the
computer program FRONTIER version 4.1 (Coelli, 1994).
The effect of technical inefficiency in the variation of output was determined following Jondrow et al (1982) by
drawing a relationship for the inefficiency index to that of general error as follows:
γ = (λ2/1 + λ2) --- (8)

(a). Socio-economic Profile of Respondent Farm Household Heads.
The average farm household surveyed had seven family members, headed by male, married and had attained at least
Quaranic level education. Farm size per household averaged 3.50 hectares of cultivated land in scattered locations.
17
Farm operations relied primarily on household labour and traditional farming practices. Mean years of farming
experience was 18. Operating capital averaged N14,200.
b) Stochastic Frontier Estimation

The frontier function was estimated using maximum likelihood estimation approach (MLE) through the
FRONTIER 4.1 programme developed and licensed by Coelli (1994). The results of MLE are given in Table 1.
Table 1: Maximum Likelihood Estimates of the Determinants of Economic Efficiency in Arable Crop Production in
Kebbi State,2004.
Variable Parameter Coefficient t-ratio
Production factors Β
Intercept Β0 2.474 0.956
Farm size (X1) Β1 1.457*** 3.203
Capital inputs(X2) Β2 1.432*** 3.551
Labour (X3) Β3 0.911 0173
Fertilizer (X4) Β4 0.294 0.563
Planting Material (X5) Β5 -0.180 -0.323
Squared Terms
Farm size X farm size Β6 -0.007 -0.893
Capital X Capital Β7 0.001 0.803
Labour X Labour Β8 -0.001 -0.631
Fertilizer X fertilizer Β9 0.002** 2.135
Material X Material Β 10 -0.002 -1.107
Interaction Among Inputs
Farm size X Capital Β 11 -0.073 -0.791
Farm size X Labour Β12 0.025 0.432
Farm size X Fertilizer Β 13 -0.029 -0.699
Farm size X Material Β 14 -0.096 -1.299
Capital X Labour Β 15 0.003 0.055
Capital X Fertilizer Β 16 0.124* 1.865
Capital X Material Β 17 -0.039 -0.619
Labour X fertilizer Β 18 0.004 0.079
Labour X Material Β 19 -0.018 -0.555
Fertilizer X Material Β 20 0.100** 2.126
Inefficiency Factors
Intercept Z0 0.710** 1.307
Age Z1 -0.016 -1.222
Level of Education Z2 0.040** 2.295
Farming Experience Z3 0.022 1.587
Household size Z4 -0.001 -0.002
Farm size Z5 -0.008 -0.329
Extension contact Z6 0.242** 1.987
Credit Z7 0.254 0.744
Co-operativeness Z8 0.869** 2.194
Sex Z9 0.145 0.406
Diagnostic Statistics
Likelihood ratio -62.60
LR test 33.00
Sigma-Squared (δ2) 0.507*** (5.997)
Gamma (γ ) 0.619*** (6.010)
Asterisks ***, ** and * imply significance at the 0.01, 0.05 and 0.10 levels respectively
Source: Computer printout of Frontier 4.1.
Table 1 shows the maximum likelihood parameter estimates of the translog stochastic frontier profit function for
arable crop farmers in the survey area. Results in the table show that the estimate of δ2 (0.507), that is sigma-squared
is relatively large, statistically significant and different from zero at 0.01 level. This indicates a good fit and the
18
correctness of the specified distributional assumption of the composite error term. Xu and Jeffrey (1995), Kebede
(2001) and Ajibefun and Aderinola (2003) in their various investigations obtained similar results.
More so, the variance ratio, defined as γ = δu2 / (δu2 + δv2) that is gamma, is estimated to be as high as 61.9%
percent, suggesting that systematic influences that are unexplained by the production function are the dominant
source of random errors. In other words, the presence of technical inefficiency among the sample farms explains
about 62 percent of the variation in the output level of the crops grown. This confirms that in the specified model,
there is the presence of one-sided error component. This also implies that the effect of technical inefficiency is
significant and that a classical regression model of production function based on ordinary least squares estimation
would be an inadequate representation of the data. The results of the diagnostic statistics therefore confirm the
relevance of stochastic parametric production frontier and maximum likelihood estimation.
The frontier function was estimated using maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) approach through the
FRONTIER. 4.1 Program developed by coelli (1994).
c) Production Elasticities
The results in Table 1 show that the coefficients of farm size and capital inputs carried the expected positive signs
and were significant at the one percent level. Their output elasticities indicated that an increase of 1 percent in farm
size (hectare) and capital inputs will lead to 1.457 and 1.432 per cent increase in output of arable crops respectively.
The sum of the elasticities indicated that the farmers were operating in the increasing returns to scale stage of
production in the short run. Increasing returns portray a case whereby an additional unit of input results in a larger
increase in production than the preceding unit. In this scenario, optimum efficiency of production or resource use
has not been attained and resources are mis-allocated or underutilized below the point of economic efficiency. Farm
size and capital inputs were thus found to be important factors in explaining output. However, Tanko (2004)
observed that in traditional agriculture, capital investment on fixed assets is negligible.
d) Interactions of physical inputs

Capital and Fertilizer: This interaction term has a positive effect on output level and is significant at 10
percent level. It implies that a unit increase in capital with a corresponding unit increase in fertilizer would lead to
less than proportionate increase in output level by 0.124 margin.
Fertilizer and Material: The estimated coefficient of the joint effect of fertilizer and cost of planting material which
is 0.100 is statistically significant at 5 percent level and is positively related to output level attained. This also shows
a less than proportionate increase in the output level when fertilizer is increased by 1 unit, given a unit increase in
the cost of planting material.
e) Sources of Inefficiency
The sources of inefficiency are examined by using the estimated δ-coefficients in Table 1 associated with
the efficiency variables in equation 7. The coefficient of level of education variable is estimated to be positive as
expected and statistically significant at the 5 percent level. This finding is in consonance with previous findings by
Battesse et al (1996); Coelli and Battesse (1996); Seyoum et al (1998) and Amaza and Olayemi (2001). Farmers
with formal education tend to be more efficient in food crop production, due presumably to their enhanced technical
competence, which enables them to produce close to the frontier output. Also, farmers with education respond
readily to the use of improved technology and tend to cope more with complexities associated with improved
technology.
The coefficient of extension variable is estimated to be positive as expected and statistically significant at the 5
percent level. This implies that farmers who had more extension visits and teachings, tend to be more efficient in
arable crop production. Extension visits affords the farmer the opportunity to learn improved technologies and how
to acquire needed inputs and services.
The coefficient of membership of co-operative was found to be positive and significant as expected at the 5 percent
level.The result corroborates the findings of Effiong (2005), Tanko (2004) and Nwaru (2004). Farmers’ membership
of associations affords them the opportunity of interacting with others and thereby exchanging information on
improved technology in arable crop production.
The distribution of respondents according to levels of attainment of economic efficiency is presented in Table 2.
19
Results in Table 2 indicate that economic efficiency of arable crop farmers in the survey area ranged from 0.21 to
0.95, indicating that a wide gap exists between the efficiency of best economically efficient farmers and that of the
average farmers. The mean economic efficiency of the farmers is 0.59. The estimates reveal that for the average
arable crop farmer
Table 2. Frequency distribution of Economic Inefficiency of Arable crop farmers in Kebbi State, 2004.
Efficiency class No. of Farmers Percentage
0.21-0.30 12 12.50
0.31-0.40 15 15.62
0.41-0.50 10 10.42
0.51-0.60 10 10.42
>0.60 49 51.04
Total 96 100.00
Mean 0.59
Standard deviation 0.12
Minimum 0.21
Maximum 0.95
Source: Derived from output of computer Programme Frontier 4.1 by Coelli
(1994).
to attain the level of the most economically efficient in the sample, he/she would experience a cost saving of 39
percent [i.e. (1-59/96)]. The least economically efficient farmer will however, experience efficiency gain of about 79
percent that is [ (1-21/96) ] to be able to attain the level of the most economically efficient farmer in the sample.
This shows that farmers in the survey area are economically inefficient. Amaza (2000) observed that a wide
variation in farmer-specific efficiency level is a common phenomenon in developing countries. In the same vein,
Onu et al (2000) found that the economic efficiencies of Cotton farmers in Nigeria differ substantially, ranging
between 0.07 and 0.85 with a mean efficiency of 0.41.
f) Test of hypotheses.
Table 3 shows the tests of hypotheses for the parameters of the translog empirical stochastic frontier profit
function.
Table 3. Test of Hypotheses of the Parameters of the Translog Stochastic Frontier Profit Function for Arable Crop
Producers in Kebbi State, 2004.
Hypotheses Likelihood ratio Critical X2 0.05 Decision

1 33.00 11.91 Reject
2 -62.60 11.91 Reject
Source: MLE Diagnostic Statistics Critical X2 were obtained from Dey et al, (2000).
The results of the generalized likelihood ratio test indicate that hypothesis 1 which states that arable crop farmers are
fully economically efficient is hereby rejected. This implies that there is economic inefficiency in arable crop
production in the survey area. Hypothesis 2, which specifies that the explanatory variables in the model for the
inefficiency factors have zero coefficients is also hereby rejected. This implies that the explanatory variables in the
model contributed significantly in the explanation of efficiency in arable crop production in Kebbi State.
CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

The study has shown that arable crop farmers in the area were not economically efficient and economic efficientcy
in arable crop production could be increased. Farm resources were not optimally allocated suggesting a scope for
improvement. Size of land holding was positive and significantly influenced farmers’ efficiency. The need for
emphasizing the expansion of area under cultivation becomes imminent as there are advantages of having large
sized farms. There was apparent increasing returns to size in arable crop production and farmers with large farm
sizes have access to production inputs and extension services. Polices that would encourage land consolidation are
advocated. The Land Use Act of 1978 should be abolished and a policy that will allow for establishment of land
markets be introduced or reactivated to engender acquisition and expansion of cultivable land.
20
The coefficient for capital inputs is positive and significant at the 5 percent level. The amount of capital inputs per
farm determines the level of investment in such a farm and ultimately the level of output. Adequate supply of
modern inputs at terms and times convenient and at fairly competitive price should be targetted at practicing
farmers. Since education is an important variable that positively influenced efficiency, farmers should be
encouraged to acquire formal education. The Universal Basic Education (UBE) should be strengthened. Results also
reveal that extension contact and membership of farmer in organization were positive and significant. The role of
these variables in improving productivity vis-a-vis acquisition and use of information on modern arable crop
production techniques cannot be over emphasized. The Extension Department of the State Ministry of Agriculture
and the ADPs should be properly funded and strengthened to enhance their outreach to farmers.
REFERENCES
Aigner, D., Lovell, C.A.K. and P. Schmidt, (1977). “Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production
Models”. Journal of Economics, 6 21-37.
Ajibefun, J. A. (2002). “Analysis of Policy Issues in Technical Efficiency of Small Scale farmers Using the
Stochastic Fontier Production Function: With Application to Nigerian Farmers ” Paper presented at the International
Farm Management Association Congress, Wageningen, Netherlands, July, 12p
Ajibefun, I.A. and E. Aderinola (2003). “Determinants of technical Efficiency and Policy Implications in
Traditional Agricultural Production: Empirical Study of Nigerian Food Crop. Farmers’’, Report Presented at the Bi-
Annual Research Workshop of AERC, Nairobi, Kenya, May 24-29th.
Alam, M.S.; Elias, S.M. and M.M. Rahman (1995). ‘’ Optimum Land Use Pattern and Resource Allocation in a
Growing Economy:A Closed Model Approach’’. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Economics XV111 2; 15- 37.
Amaza, P.S.(2000). “ Resource Use Efficiency in Food Crop Production in Gombe State, Nigeria’’. Unpublished
PhD Thesis, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
Amaza, P.S. and J.K. Olayemi (2001) “The Influence of Education and Extension Contact on Food Crop Production
in Gombe State’’, Nigeria Journal of Agribusiness and Rural Development, 1(1); 80-90.
Bagi, F.S.(1982).’’ Economic Efficiency of Share Cropping; Reply And Some Further Results,’’ Malayan
Economic Review, 27(1); 86-95.
Bagi, F.S. and C.J. Huang (1983). “Estimating production Technical Efficiency for Individual Farms In Tennesse.”
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 31(1):249-256.
Battesse, G.E. ; Malik, S.J. and M.A. Gill (1996). “An Investigation of Technical Inefficiencies of production of
wheat Farmers in Four Districts of Pakistan” Journal of Agricultural Economics 47:37-49.
Battesse, G.E. and T. Coelli (1995). “A Model of Technical Inefficiency Effect in Stochastic Frontier Production
Function for Panel Data,” Journal of Empirical Economics, 20:325-332
Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).Statistical Bulletin,December, 1999.
Coelli, T.J. (1995). “Recent Developments in Frontier Modelling And Efficiency measurement.” Australian Journal
of Agric. Economics ,34(3):219-245
Coelli, T.J. (1994). “A Guide to frontier 4.1:A Computer Program for stochastic Frontier Production and Cost
Function Estimation .” Department of Econometrics, University of New England, Armidale.
_______ and G. Battesse (1996). “Identification of Factors Which Influence the Technical Inefficiency of Indian
Farmers.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics . 40(2):103-128.
Dey, M.M.; Paraguas, F.J.; Bimba, G.B. and P.B. Regaspi (2000). “ Technical Efficiency of Tilapia Growth
OutPond Operations in the Phillipines”. Aquaculture Economics and Management, 4(1/2) :33-46.
21
Effiong, E.O. (2005). “Efficiency of Production in selected Livestock Enterprises in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria.”
Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Department of Agric. Econs, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike,
p120.
Jondrow, J.; Lovell, C.A.K.; Materor, I. and P. Schmidt (1982). Estimation of Technical Efficiency in Stochastic
Frontier Production Model,” Journal of Econometrics 19(2/3) : 233-238
Kalirajan, K. and R.I. Shand (1986). “Estimating Location Specific Technical Efficiency”, Pakistan Journal of
Applied Economics, 2:167-180.
Kebede, T.A. (2001). “Farm Household Technical Efficiency: A stochastic Frontier Analysis: A study of Rice
Producers in Mardi-Watershed in The western Development Region of Nepal,” Unpublished M. Sc. Thesis,
Department of Economics and Social Science, Agricultural University of Norway, 56p.
Kumbhaka, S.C. (1990). “Production Frontiers, Panel Data and Time Varying Technical Inefficiency” Journal
of Econometrics, 46: 201-211.
Nwaru, J.C. (2004).” Rural Credit Markets and Arable Crop Production in Imo State, Nigeria,” Unpublished PhD
Dissertation, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike, Nigeria.
Onu, J.J.; Amaza, P.S. and F.Y. Okunmadewa (2000). “Determinants of Cotton Production.” Economic Efficiency
in Business and Economics Research, 1(2):35-40.
Parikh, A. and M. Shah (1994). “Measurement of Technical Efficiency in the North West Frontier Province of
Pakistan ,” Journal of Agricultural Economics,45(1):132-138.
Seyoum, E.T.; Battesse, G.E. and E.M. Fleming (1998) “Technical Efficiency and Productivity of Maize Producers
in Eastern Ethiopia: A Study of Farmers Within and Outside the Sasakawa Global 2000 Project,” Agricultural
Economics, 19:341- 348.
Tanko, L. (2004) . “ Optimum Combination of Farm Enterprises in Kebbi State, Nigeria: A Linear programming
Approach,” Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Department of Agricultural Economics, Michael Okpara University of
Agriculture Umudike, Nigeria.
Xu, X. and S. Jeffrey (1995). “Rural Efficiency, Technical Progress and Modern Economic Evidence from Rice
Production in China.” Staff Paper 95-02. Department of Rural Economy, Faculty of Agriculture, Forestry and Home
Economics, University of Edmonton, Canada, October.

Tanko L. and Jirgi, A. J.
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension Technology, SAAT, Federal University of Technology,
P.M.B 65, Minna, Niger State.
E-mail: unekmelikita@ yahoo.co.uk
22
ECONOMICS OF FISHING GEARS FOR SUSTAINABLE FISH PRODUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT IN

INLAND WATER BODIES IN NIGERIA
Abiodun, J. A. and Ayanda, J. O.

National Institute for Freshwater Fisheries Research, P. M. B. 6006, New Bussa, Niger State, Nigeria.
ABSTRACT
The economics of different types of fishing gears on lake Kainji had been analyzed. The result
has shown that, all types of fishing gears in use on the lake have net returns that represent
gains on the users investments, and on average, earned profits. Furthermore, the size of the net
returns –gain, depends on the amount of user’s investment and the profitability of each fishing
method positively correlates with amount of input. The operational costs, catch and revenues
did not only vary between different types of fishing gears in different localities but also in the
same type of unit for each trip in the same locality. This paper highlights briefly the economics
of different types of fishing gears operating on lake Kainji as an example of what may likely
happen in other inland fisheries in Nigeria.
KEYWORDS: Inland fisheries, aquaculture , management strategies, potential yield, Nigeria,
INTRODUCTION
Inland fisheries management has become a difficult task in Nigeria due to mounting competition among fishers to
catch as much as possible from the inland waters as a means of sustaining their livelihood. Resources management
for maintaining sustainable production in inland fisheries requires indepth economic analysis of different production
methods to ensure optimum exploitation, efficient marketing and development of alternative management strategies.
Inland fisheries in Nigeria are not accorded priority in the development plans due to lack of political will and over-
dependence on frozen fish importation. The potential yield from the capture fisheries and aquaculture is estimated to
be around 3.2 million t/yr as against the current production of about 200, 000 t/yr (Miller, 2004).
It is estimated that contribution from inland and marine sector amounts to 200,000 and 300,000 tons respectively of
the 500,000 tons of total Nigerian fish production (Abiodun et al, 2005). Even though the inland sector contributed
nearly one third of the total fish production, its share to the total domestic supply was 60% in contrast to marine
sector with 40% - high percent production is exported. Therefore, fish production from inland sector is of great
significance as it contributes the major share in the protein rich food for domestic consumption. Inland fisheries
management in Nigeria is very poor when compare with some of the developed inland waters in other countries.
Lack of enhanced fish production, fishing gears and inland waters management measures seems to be greater
impending factors in the development of a viable inland fishery in the country
A recent study of a typical inland fisheries at Lake Kainji in Nigeria shows, there are 4,100 fishers, 314 fishing
localities with about 1,224 fish landing sites located all along 874 km length of shoreline of the Lake and various
types of fishing gears are in operation on the lake (Abiodun and Niworu, 2004).
Surveys were conducted to collect data on cost of inputs, earnings and profits from six different types of fishing
gears available on lake Kainji. These included gillnet, longline, driftnet, beach seine, cast net and trap fishing gears.
The data collected on profits and costs were used for economic analysis of different boat- gear combinations. Old
and new fishing gears were in operation and the capital investments on them vary considerably. Hence, the initial
investments of different boat-gear combinations indicate the average resale value of the operating units during the
study period.
This paper highlights briefly the economics of different types of fishing gears operating on Kainji Lake as a model
for other inland water bodies.
23
Abiodun, J. A. and Ayanda, J. O: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 23 - 27, 2008
METHODOLOGY
Study Area
Lake Kainji (Fig. 1) is situated between latitudes 9o 50’ – 10o 57’ North and longitudes 4o 25’ – 4o 45’ East. The lake
was impounded in August, 1968 and it is 134 km in length and 24.1 km in width. Its surface area has been variously
quoted as approximately 1,270 km2 (du Feu and Abiodun, 1998). The number of fishing settlement was 19 before
the impoundment (Jenness, 1973) and rose to 314 in 2000 (Abiodun, 2001).
Currently, there are about 4,100 fisherfolk engaged in active fishing on the lake using different boat-gear
combinations of varying levels of investment. Also there are about 7,127 fishing boats, 585 motorized and 6,542
non-motorized with about 6,977 gill nets, 1,638 cast nets, 909 drift nets, 5,003 longlines, 19,106 fish traps and 325
beach seine. Gill net, cast net, drift net and beach seine are all measured in bundles (A bundle is 91 meters of
unmounted netting material) while one longline is 100 hooks. As against the estimated maximum sustainable yield
of 18,750 t of fish, the lake currently yields 13,351 t of fish with an average annual catch of 3.2 t per fisherman. The
fisheries of this lake are presently exploited at about 29% below its maximum sustainable yield (Abiodun, 2001).
Table 1: Estimated returns to gears in use in Naira.

1 2 3 4 5 6
Gill net N24,590.24 N 13,158 N 5,970 N 19,128 N 5,462.24
Longline N 16,267.45 N 1,456 N 1,893 N 3, 249 N 13,018.45
Drift net N 71,276.40 N 6,516 N 5,159 N 11,675 N 59,601.04
Beach seine N 423,297.77 N 22,664 N 12,053 N 34,717 N 388,580.77
Cast net N 62,246.79 N 2,160 N 2,186 N 4,346 N 57,900.79
Trap N 3,104.67 N 894 N 1,613 N 2,507 N 597.67
Note: 2 = Annual gross earnings

3 = Total fixed cost
4 = Total Variable cost
5 = Total cost of input
6 = Annual net returns
24
Table 2: Relative comparison of cost of operation and net returns to gross earnings of individual gears.
1 2 3 4 5 6
Gill net 129% 29% 78% 350% 22%
Longline 501% 401% 20% 25% 80%
Drift net 611% 511% 16% 20% 84%
Beach seine 1219% 1119% 8% 9% 92%
Cast net 1432% 1332% 7% 8% 93%
Trap 124% 24% 81% 419% 19%
Note: 2 = Annual gross earnings as a percentage of cost of input

3 = Annual net returns as a percentage of cost of input
4 = Cost of input as a percentage of gross earnings
5 = Cost of input as a percentage of net returns
6 = net returns as a percentage of gross earnings
A stratified random sampling procedure was used to select 60 out of 314 fishing localities where semi-structured
questionnaires were administered. The stratification is based on the similarity in the habitat characteristics (after Ita,
1982). This also reflects similarity of the type of fishing gears and canoes used in each stratum. A total of 650 out of
1020 fishermen were randomly selected from the 60 selected fishing localities and were interviewed by
enumerators. The operational costs and earnings of sampled fishing gears were observed continuously for a period
of one year, April 2006 to April 2007, covering both dry and rainy seasons. Data were collected on variables
considered for estimating the fixed and operating costs, the gross and net returns to each of the fishing gears. The
Nigerian-German Kainji Lake Fisheries Promotion Project (GTZ) also provided secondary data used in the study.

ECONOMICS OF VARIOUS FISHING GEARS
Cost of Operation
All types of fishing gear in use on Lake Kainji have been included in the economic aspect of the fishing operation.
In inland fishing, almost all types of fishing methods are sustained due to low level of investment requirement and
also due to the family- enterprise nature of operation. In terms of cost of operation, the following variables are
considered; age, purchase price, depreciation and present value of each gear and boat used to operate the gear as
well as the labour per man-day. From the cost of input, Beach seine has the highest cost of operation (N34,717),
followed by the Gillnet (N 19,128), the Driftnet (N 11,675), Cast net (N 4,346), Longline (N 3,249) and Trap (N
2,507) respectively. The cost of operating one Beach seine is, for instance about twice that of Gillnet, thrice that of
Driftnet and eight times that of Cast net (Table 1).
Net Returns and Gross Earnings

The net return on Gillnet represents a 29% gain on the users’ investment. This indicates that the gross earnings of an
individual Gillnet are more than the cost of operation. The gross earnings represented 129% of the cost of operation
while a comparative analysis of the cost of operation to gross earnings yielded a value of 78%. That is, the gross
earnings is 22% more than the cost of operation. The net return on Longline represents 401% gain on the users’
investment. The cost input in this gear is very low. However, the gear is selective and thereby associated with high
valued fish species that attract high price. This also indicates, the gross earnings of an individual Longline is more
than the cost of operation. The gross earnings represented 501% of the cost of operation while a comparative
analysis of the cost of operation to gross earnings yielded a value of 20% (i.e the gross earnings is 80% more than
cost of operation). Also the return of Beach seine net is approximately eleven times its cost of input, that is, 1119%
the cost of input. For Drift and cast net, they are 511% and 1232% respectively (Table 2).
From the comparative analysis of the cost of operation to gross earnings, Beach seine, Drift net, Cast net and Trap
yielded a value of 8%, 16%, 7% and 81% respectively. That means, the Beach seine (92%), Drift net (84%), Cast
net (93%) and Trap (19%) are more than the cost of their operations respectively (Table 2)
From this analysis, it can be inferred that all types of fishing gears on Kainji Lake, on average, earned profits. The
manifold increase in the price of most inland fish in very recent years is mainly responsible for better rates of
returns.
25
450000
400000
350000
Total cost of input
Earnings per annum in Naira
300000
250000
Total earnings
200000 net returns
150000
100000
50000
0
GN LL DN BS CN TR
Fishing Gear
GN = Gill net, LL = Longline, DN = Drifft net, BS = Beach seine, CN = Cast net and TR = Trap
Fig. 2. The cost and earnings of individual fishing gear on Lake Kainji
The noticeable trend from this economic analysis showed that the Beach seine net, which required the highest
investment, also yielded the highest return (Fig 2). For the Gillnet, Cast net and Drift net which require a lower
investment and yielded a return of about 129%, 409% and 467% respectively may earn much better returns if more
funds are put into them. These could fall within the reach of an average fisher involved in capture fisheries in
Nigeria. It is also observed that, the survival and sustenance of different harvesting methods of capture fisheries
depends largely on their profitability, which is interlinked with market demand and prices of different varieties of
fish.
SUSTAINING INLAND FISHERIES PRODUCTION

Economics of different types of fishing gears in use on Kainji Lake indicate that they earn profits as their nets
returns surpassed their cost of operations. However, the beach seine net, which yielded the highest return is the most
highly resource endangering gear on the lake due to its destructive effects on the fish juveniles. In order to sustain
fish production on this lake, the use of beach seine to crop fish on the lake had been banned and should not be
encouraged on any inland water body in Nigeria. Also gillnet, driftnet and cast net required low investment and
yielded high net returns. It is noticeable that most of these gears are undersized and due to open access of inland
fisheries they are largely used on the lake. An awareness campaign on the importance of the use of recommended
mesh size is therefore a requirement for responsible fisheries in inland water bodies in Nigeria.
CONCLUSION
Cost and earnings investigation of fishing gears and craft in use on Kainji Lake showed that the Beach seine net,
which required the highest investment, also yielded the highest return. This not withstanding, the use of beach seine
to crop fish on this lake had been banned and should not be encouraged on any inland water in Nigeria due to its
destructive effect on the fish juveniles. Also it has been shown that the size of the net- returns- gain, depends on the
amount of users investments and the profitability of each fishing method positively correlates with amount of input.
POLICY RECOMMENDATION
The traditional fishers involved in inland fishing are caught in a low income trap due to their low investments
capacities, which in turn bring low net returns from capture fisheries. Therefore, integration of small-scale
aquaculture with an improved investment in inland fisheries is a viable alternative to increase the present level of
production from capture fisheries. Also, awareness campaigns should be conducted at all fishing localities on the
importance of mesh size regulations and avoiding harvesting juvenile fish for sustainable fish production.
Finally, the fishers in each fishing locality require a comprehensive programme for their socio-economic
improvement and development so as to achieve increased fish production and sustainability of inland fisheries.
26
REFERENCES
Abiodun, J.A. (2001). Fisheries Statistical Bulletin Kainji Lake, Nigeria, 2000 Nigeria- German Kainji Lake
fisheries Promotion Project Technical Report Series 21. 25 pp.
Abiodun, J.A and Niworu, A. M. (2004). Fisheries Statistical Bulletin Kainji Lake, Nigeria, 2004 Kainji Lake
fisheries Management and Conservation Unit Technical Report Series 23. 24 pp.
Abiodun, J .A; Alamu, S. O; Miller, J. W. (2005). Assessment of inland waters fisheries in Nigeria with implications
for freshwater fish production, poverty alleviation and food security. In proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference
of Fisheries Society of Nigeria. Lagos: FISON. Pp. 304 – 311.
du Feu, T. A. and Abiodun, J. A.(1998). Predictions of fish yields and the status of the Kainji Lake fishery, KLFPP
Technical Report Series No. 17. ISBN 978-037-015-3. 56 pp.
Ita, E. O. (1982). Biological Indices of overfishing in Kaiinji Lake and the management Proposal for the Lake
fishery. Kainji Lake Research Institute. Technical Report Series No 8. 31pp.
Jenness, J. (1973). Fishing and the Fishermen of the Kainji Lake basin. In Mabogunje, L. (ed.) Kainji, a Nigerian
man made lake. Vol. II pp 49-69.
Miller, J. W. (2004). Farming Nigeria’s Waters; Newsletter of the Aquaculture and Inland fisheries Project of the
National Special Programme for Food Security in Nigeria. Technical Note Number 5, (April), 4pp.

Abiodun, J. A.
National Institute for Freshwater Fisheries Research, P. M. B. 6006, New Bussa, Niger State, Nigeria.
E-mail: jaabbiodun1@yahoo.com
27
ANALYSIS OF THE DEMAND FOR CERTIFIED MAIZE SEEDS IN EKITI AND ONDO STATES, NIGERIA:
IMPLICATIONS FOR FOOD SECURITY
F.O Osundare and E.A Aderinola

Department of Agricultural Extension and Management, Federal College of Agriculture, Akure, Department of
Agricultural Economics and Extension, Federal University of Technology, Akure
ABSTRACT
This study analyzed and discussed the demand for certified maize Seeds and its implication on
food security in Ekiti and Ondo States. Specifically, the determinants of certified maize seeds
were identified and estimated. Primary data were collected using structured questionnaire
administered on 196 maize farmers randomly selected in the study area. Descriptive statistics
and multiple regression were used for data analysis. Regression results showed that yield/ha;
own price of certified maize Seeds; distance travelled to purchase maize seeds; size of farm
land put into Maize production and price/kg of certified rice seeds as substitute explained 67%
of the variations in the quantity of certified maize seed demanded at 5% level of significance.
The demand was inelastic and will promote maize production in a deregulated economy.
KEYWORDS: Food production, Ondo State, Ekiti State, Food security, Food shortage
INTR0DUCTION
Nigeria's inability to feed her teeming population has remained an intractable problem for almost three decades.
Although, there has been no major famine, the Country has failed to produce food in adequate quantity and quality
to feed her populace. According to FAO (1986), Nigeria's population and food production growth rates (between
1980 and 1986) were approximately 3.4% and 3.0% per annum respectively. Daramola (2004) claimed that the rate
of domestic food production had fallen below population growth rate, thereby creating a situation of food shortages
and scarcity.
One important aspect of the wealth of a nation is the availability of food for the populace. It is in this connection
that food security becomes an important factor in any consideration for sustaining the wealth of the nation. Attempts
to achieve food security in Nigeria consist of two approaches namely, importation of essential food commodities as
a short term measure and increased domestic food crops' production as a long term measure. The latter measure
includes the National Accelerated Food Production Project (NAFPP), Operation Feed the Nation (OFN),
Agricultural Development Project (ADP) and National Seed Multiplication Scheme (NSMS).
It is true that there cannot be a revolution in agricultural productivity without a break-through in agricultural
innovation (Preferably endogenous). Such a break through may be biological, chemical or mechanical or a
combination of two or all of these innovations (Aderinola, 1983). For instance, the increases in Japan's agricultural
productivity was due to a combination of biological and chemical innovations, which resulted in substantial
increases in crop output per unit of land thereby loosening the constraints imposed by land scarcity and high land
prices (Essan, 1975). On the other hand, the dramatic increases in the United States of America's (U.S.A's)
Agricultural Productivity resulted from the production of mechanical power, which being labour-saving, loosened
the constraints imposed by labour scarcity and high wages.
Biological innovations as a means of raising land and labour productivities are as a result of certain attributes of
seeds which are certified with the issuance of certificates guaranteeing the attributes by a third party. These
attributes include improved genetic performances which may include resistance and early maturity, all of which lead
to higher potential crop yield per unit of land. Although, all certified seeds have improved attributes, not all
improved seed varieties are certified.
Certified seeds are the most Important input for boosting crop production. Usman (1994) posited that the position of
certified seeds does not only improve the economy of local seed growers, it is one of the best means of transferring
technology. He added that certified seeds was not only the cheapest and basic means of increasing crop yield, it was
also fundamental to raising the efficiency of other agricultural inputs.
28
F.O Osundare and E.A Aderinola: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 28 - 31, 2008
Available information show that considerable achievements have been made in developing, testing and certifying
High-yield varieties (HYVs) of seeds for many of our major food crops by various Research Institutes, Universities
and Colleges of Agriculture as presented in Table 1. The table shows that there are certified seeds, the potential
yields \ha of which are much higher than the 'actual yields \ha ceteris paribus. For example, the table shows that the
potential output\ha of the cereals ranged from 166.7% and 385.7% of the actual yield \ha with those of maize and
upland rice being approximately 386.0% and 200% respectively.
TABLE 1: Actual and Potential Yields ofCereaJs and Tuber Crop. in Nigeria.
Actual Potential Yield

Yield Potential as %
Crops (t/ha)
(t/ha) of Actual
Yield..
Range *Mean Range Mean.
200.0
Upland rice 0.080-120 1.00 1.50-2.50 2.00
350.0
LowIand rice 1.00-2.00 1.50 2.50-8.00 5.25
385.7
Maize 1.50-2.00 1.75 3.50-10.00 6.75
180.0
Sorghum 0.50-2.00 1.25 2.00-2.50 2.25
166.7
Millet 0.50-1.00 0.75 1.00-1-50 1.25
200.0
Wheat 0.50-1.00 0.75 1.00-2.00 . 1.50 282.6
Cassava 11.00-12.00 11.50 25.00-40.00 32.50
131.8
Irish Potato 10.00-12.00 11.50 14.00-15.00 14.50
131.8
Sweet Potato 10.00-12.00 11.00 14.00-15.00 14.50
146.2
Yam 12.00-14.00 13.00 18.00-20.00 19.00
Note: .lndicates crops (seeds of interest to this study.
Source: Usman, TA Maini, N.S. Joshua, A and Falusi, AO. (1992):
For tuberous crops, cassava has the highest potential yield/ha which almost quadruples its actual yield\ha. The
implication of the above is that, there are available in the Country, varieties of cereal crops, the seeds of which are
capable of doubling or tripling the outputs\ha obtained at present, all other factors remaining unchanged.
Although; a number of HYVs of seeds have been developed and tested in Nigeria by various Research Institutes,
Universities and Colleges of Agriculture as a means of ensuring food security in Nigeria, many of the seeds are
either not available to farmers or are not adopted because they do not conform with 'the socio-cultural background of
the farming communities to which they are introduced. Even, when they are adopted, supplementary inputs such as
fertilizers, irrigation water; credit and, pesticides needed to obtain optimum output from the certified seeds are not
available. Despite the importance of HYV’s as a means of increasing food crop output in different parts of the
world, little is known about the nature of demand for them. Nigerians National Seed Service (NSS) has once
lamented that there is no reliable information on actual demand for improved seeds in the Country. This implies that
the projection for high quality seeds in Nigeria has not been based on reliable data.
In view of the above, this paper identifies, quantifies and estimates the factors influencing the demand for certified
maize seeds in 'the States and their implications for food security.
METHOLOGY
Primary data were collected from 196 farmers through the use of questionnaire which was administered on farmers
buying certified maize seeds in Ondo and Ekiti States. The respondents were selected using multistage random
sampling: two out of the four - agricultural zones of Ondo and Ekiti States were first picked, followed by two local
governments, from each zone and three towns/villages from each LGA. Ten percent of farmers growing certified
seeds was randomly selected from the list made with the assistance of the staff of Agricultural Input Supply
Company (AlSC) and Agricultural Development Project (ADP). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and
multiple regression analysis involving the use of ordinary least square (OLS) method, to estimate the functional
relationship between the dependent variable and set of explanatory variables for certified seeds of maize. Informed
29
partly by past studies on input demand (Idachaba, 1980, Ladipo and Adeyemo 1981, Osundare, 1998) etc, a linear
function was specified as in e quation (1)
QMij = a0 + a1PMij + a2PRij +a3FMij +a4DMij +a5YMij + EMij ……….. (1)

QMij = Quantity of certified maize seed purchased by the ith grower in the jth year (kg);
PMij = Price/kg of maize seed bought by the ith grower in the jth year (N)
PR;j = Price/kg of rice seeds bought by the ith grower in the jth year (N)
DMij = Distance traveled by the ith grower to buy certified maize seeds in the jth year (km)
FMij = Size of the maize plot of the ith grower in the jth year (ha)
YMij = Quantity of maize produced (kg) by ith grower in the jth year (kg)
EMij = Error term associated 'with collecting information from the ith maize grower in the jth year.
TABLE 2: Estmated Demand Model for Certified Maize Seeds in Ondo and Ekiti States Nigeria, (Logarithmic
Functions Dependent Variable=Log of Certified Maize seeds Demanded )
Logarithm of Independent variables

Constant PMij PRij DMij FMij YMij R-2 DW
40.674 0.719* -0.525* 0.275* 0.158* 0.119*
(0.300) (0.135) (0.230) (0.135) (0.034) (0.029) 0.67 1.63
Notes: Indicates that estimated coefficients were significant at the 5.% level.

Regression results showed that own-price of certified maize seeds, price of close substitutes, farm size, distance
traveled and expected output explained 66.6% of the variation in the quantities of certified maize seeds purchased .
The F - test indicated that the models were significant at the 5% level. With the exception of the positive sign on the
coefficients of log PMij the signs on the coefficients of other variables conformed with the postulates of economic
theory.
The positive signs on the coefficients of Log PMij suggested that an increase in the price of certified maize seeds
leads to an increase in the quantity of maize seeds demanded. This could be attributed to the following reasons:(1)
the rise in price of certified seeds caused the buyers to purchase more quantity in anticipation of future rise in price
probably due to irregular supply and scarcity of certified maize seeds; (2) farmers got their seeds from government
sources at subsidized price; (3) the priority given to certified seeds of maize because of its central position among all
other inputs and (4) the fact that farmers were more aware and convinced about the attributes of certified maize
seeds year in –year-out.
The positive signs on the coefficient of each of the other variables in equations (1) suggested that an increase in each
of the variables would cause the quantity of certified maize seed demanded to increase all other factors remaining
unchanged. For instance, the positive sign on the coefficient of Log FMij suggested that the larger the farm size, the
greater the quantity of certified maize seeds purchased. Similarly the positive sign on the coefficient of Log DMij
implied that the farther the distance traveled by buyers, the greater the quantity of certified maize seeds demanded.
This is contrary to expectation. The possible explanation could be that farmers pooled their resources together for
collective purchase or farmers bought in large quantities and stored to reduce the frequency of visiting the source of
supply.
Results also showed that all the estimated coefficient were significantly different from zero at the 5.0% while the
Durbin - Waston test indicated absence of serially correlated residuals.
CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND FOOD SECURITY

The evidence that the demand for certified seeds was price inelastic (Table 2) implies that farmers were mindful of
the quality of the seeds rather than their prices. It suggests that maize farmers in the State appreciate the use of
certified seeds as a means of increasing food crop output and would purchase improved seeds of this food crop
provided they are sure of their qualities all other things being equal. These findings can be manipulated and
exploited to a great advantage for food security under the present cost recovery principle of the Nigerian Seed
30
Industry. For instance, subsidizing the price of certified seed as a policy measure to increase the demand for certified
seeds may be misplaced in that farmers may not make judicious use of the seeds. Secondly farmers may miss
control the low price to mean low seed quality thus reducing the quantity demanded of the seeds
Considering the significance of Farm size (Table 2) positive relationship existing between farm size and quantity of
certified maize seeds demanded (Log QMij), and the experience gathered from past studies on input demand, the
small farm size of less than 2 hectares implies that farm size is the most limiting factor among the variables
specified. Therefore for farmers to increase their maize output to meet family food need and income, the area of land
under cultivation must be increased. The tractor hiring, services for land preparation and planting operations should
be revived, subsidized and made to operate more efficiently. Government should also sustain the interest of farmers
in the use of certified seeds through regular and adequate supply of HYV seeds and supplementary inputs as a way
of ensuring food security in Nigeria.
REFERENCES
Aderino!a, E. A. (1983): Food Import Demand Model for the Nigerian Economy, 1951-1979:
Unpublished M.Sc, Thesis, Department of Agricultura1 Economies, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
133pp.
Cbromaty, W.A (1959) "The Farm Demand for Tractors, Machinery and Trucks” Journal of Farm Economic 41:309
- 322
F.A.O (1986): The State of food and Agriculture, World and Regional Reviews, Financing Agricultural
Development. .
Idachaba. F.S. (1980): Agricultural Research Policy in Nigeria Internal Food Policy Research, Washinton D.C.
Daramola, (A.G)(2004):Competitiveness of Nigerian Agriculture in a Global Economy :Any Dividend of

Democracy ? Inaugural Lecture Series36, Federal University of Technology Akure.
Ladipo, O.O and Adeyemo, A.A (1981): “Demand for Mechanization Service in Food Crop Production in Oyo
State, Nigeria”. Ife Journal of Agriculture Vol. 3.
Usman, TA Maini, N.S. Joshua, A and Falusi, AO. (1992): Strategies for the National Seed Sub-sector Development
Plan. National Seed and Quarantine Project Report. National Seed Service, Federal Department of Agriculture.

F.O Osundare
Department of Agricultural Extension and Management, Federal College of Agriculture, Akure
31
TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY OF COWPEA PRODUCTION IN OSUN STATE NIGERIA
A.O. Egbetokun and S. Ajijola

Institute of Agricultural Research and Training, Obafemi Awolowo, Moor Plantation, P.M.B 5029, Ibadan, Oyo
State, Nigeria.
ABSTRACT
This paper presents the analysis of technical efficiency of cowpea farmers in Osun State
Southwest Nigeria, using the stochastic production frontier. The farmers’ average technical
efficiency is 87%, which suggest an appreciable use of inputs in productivity. Analysis of
technical efficient and some socio-economic variables using tobit regression model is found to
be significantly different from zero at 1% for cooperative membership and farming experience.
These are farm size, seed, hired labour, family labour, fertilizer and pesticides. It is suggested
that farmers should be encouraged to join cooperative society and extension services agents
should intensify their efforts in training and mobilizing farmers for improved production of
cowpea. The variables- farm size, seed, hired labour, family labour, fertilizer and pesticides.
KEYWORDS: Scale Efficiency, Technical Efficiency, Cowpea Production, Stochastic

Frontier, Tobit Model and Marginal Products.
INTRODUCTION
The crucial role of efficiency in increasing agricultural output has been widely recognized by researchers and policy
makers alike. It is no surprise therefore, that considerable effort has been devoted to the analysis of farm level
efficiency in developing countries, Nigeria inclusive. An underlying premise behind much of this work is that if
farmers were not making efficient use of existing technology, then efforts designed to improve efficiency would be
more cost effective than introducing new technologies as a means of increasing agricultural output. (Belbase and
Grabowski, 1985). The efficiency of a farm/firm refers to its success in producing as large amount of output as
possible given a set of inputs. To determine the efficiency of a particular firm, there need for efficiency
measurement through the production factor inputs and processes. This (efficiency measurement) has received
considerable attention from both theoretical and applied economists. From a theoretical point of view, there has been
a spirited exchange about their relative importance of the various components of firm efficiency (Leibenstein 1966,
1978; Comanor and Leibenstein, 1969). From an applied perspective, measuring efficiency is important because this
is the first step in a process that might lead to substantial resource savings these resource savings have important
implications for both policy formulations and firm management (Bravo-Ureta and Rieger,1991).
M.J Farrell originated the current interest in efficiency measurements. Farrell (1957) proposed an approach that
distinguishes between technical and allocative efficiency. Technical efficiency refers to the ability of producing a
given level of output with a minimum quantity of inputs under a given technology. Allocative efficiency refers to the
choice of the optimal input proportions given relative prices. Economic or total efficiency is the product of technical
and allocative efficiency. Farrell’s model, which is known as a deterministic nonparametric frontier (Forsund, et al,
1980), attributes any deviation from the frontier to inefficiency and imposes no functional form on the data. Several
extensions of Farrell deterministic model have been made by economists such as Aigner and Chu, (1968) Afriat,
(1972) Richmond, (1974) Schmidt, (1980) and Greene, (1980) among others.
A deficiency characterizing all deterministic frontier models is their sensitivity to extreme observations. A more
recent approach for measuring efficiency, which seeks to ameliorate the extreme observation problem, is the
stochastic frontier model developed by Aigner, et al, (1977) and by Meeusen and van deu Broeck, (1977).
The stochastic frontier model assumes an error term with two additive components- a symmetric component that
accounts for pure random factors, and a one-sided component which captures the effects of inefficiency relative to
the stochastic frontier.
In general, a firm is technically efficient if its observed production outlay (yo, Xo) exactly satisfies the Cobb-Douglas
production equation given as yo= f (Xo), where f is the production frontier, yo is the output and Xo is a vector of input
for the firm. The firm is technically inefficient if yo < f(Xo) that is, the firm operates inside the production frontier.
32
A.O. Egbetokun and S. Ajijola: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 28 - 37, 2008
The firm is allocatively efficient if the ratio of the marginal products MP(x) between all input equal to the ratio of the
input prices MPi/MPi = Pi/Pi
TABLE 1: MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD PARAMETER ESTIMATES OF STOCHASTIC PRODUCTION

FRONTIER
PARAMETER
VARIABLE STANDARD ERROR T-STATISTICS
ESTIMATE
Intercept 0.8952 0.0232 38.55
Farm size 0.0282 0.0246 1.44
Age -0.0004402 0.000366 -1.20
Sex 0.012 0.0075 1.60
Extension awareness 0.00624 0.009313 0.67
Education 0.008405 0.010263 0.795
Cooperative membership 0.0219*** 0.007449 2.94
Farming experience 0.00167*** 0.0005529 3.02
Log likelihood function 211.35
Chi-square 41.12, N= 120
*** Statistically significant at 1%
Scale efficiency is achieved if the firm produces at a marginal cost that is the same as the price of the output.
Allocative and scale efficiency is the conditions for profit maximization and is labeled price efficiency.
This paper contributes to the efficiency literature in developing country agriculture by quantifying the level of
technical efficiency for a sample of cowpea farmers in Osun State, Southwest Nigeria.
ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK
In the analysis of the data for cowpea producing farmers, stochastic production frontier was employed- using the
variant of the stochastic production analysis adopted by Coelli and Battese, (1996), Bravo Ureta and Rieger, (1991)
and Dawson et al, (1991).
It is assumed that the farm frontier production function can be written as:
Q = f ( X i ; β )............................. .............................. .............................. .......(1)
Where Q is the quantity of cowpea output, X i is a vector of input quantities, and β is a vector parameter.
The empirical model of the stochastic production function frontier applied in the analysis of efficiency of the
production system of the cowpea production is specified as:
ln Yij = ln β o + β 1 ln X 1ij + β 2 ln X 2 ij + β 3 X 3 ij + β 4 X 4 ij + β 5 X 5 ij + β 6 X 6 ij + ∈ ...........(2) Where

Y=total output (kg)
X1=Farm size (ha)
X2=quantity of seed (kg)
X3=amount spent on hired labour (N)
X4=family labour (maydays)
X5=fertilizer (kg)
X6=pesticides (litres)
Subscript i and j refer to the ith cowpea produce and the jth input respectively and ∈= Vij − U ij is the composed
error term (Aiger et al, (1977); Meeiisen and Van deu Broeck, 1977). The two components v and u are assumed to
be independent of each other, where v is the symmetric (two-sided) component, normally distributed random error
33
(V∼N (0,σ2v) which capture variations in output due to factors outside the control of the farmer like fluctuations in
input/prices and u is the one-sided efficiency component with a half-normal distribution (U∼ N (0,σ2u ) which is
non –negative random variable called technical inefficiency effect associated with the technical efficiency of
cowpea production and it capture the variation in output due to family size, age, educational status, cooperative
membership, farmers experience(yrs) and other socio-economic characteristics. U ij equal zero for any output lying
on the frontier while U ij > 0 for any output lying below the frontier. Hence,
σ 2 = σ 2 v + σ 2 u .................................( 4)
TABLE 2: STOCHASTIC PRODUCTION FRONTIER FOR DETERMINANTS OF COWPEA OUTPUT OF

FARMERS IN OSUN STATE
ML PRODUCTION FRONTIER
VARIABLE STANDARD ERROR
ESTIMATES
Intercept 4.4126 0.0000251
Farm size 0.6593*** 0.0000178
Seed 0.0540*** 0.0000199
Hired labour 0.0843*** 0.00000140
Family labour 0.1801*** 0.00000633
Fertilizer 0.1087*** 0.00000673
Pesticide 0.0367*** 0.00000417
Log likelihood 48.7948
Wald Chi-square 8.056e +10, N= 120
***Statistically significant at 1%.
However, the output variable in the stochastic frontier production function is output in kg, the measures of technical
efficiencies obtained will, of course, be measures of the overall technical efficiencies of the cowpea farmers. It is
assumed that the inefficiency effects are independently distributed and U ij arises by truncation (at zero) of the
normal distribution with mean U ij and variance.
The linear tobit regression model was used to analyze the effect of certain socio-economic factors on the technical
efficiency of the farmer. The model was used because the dependent variable technical efficiency scores are
censored having values ranging between 0 and 1 (Llewenlyn and Williams (1996); Amara et al (1999). The model
specification is given as:
TE = f ( X 1 , X 7 , X 8 , X 9 , X 10 , X 11 , X 12 , et )................... ..(5)
Where TE is the technical efficiency index for farmer i

X1 = Farm size (ha)
X7 = Age of the farmers (yrs)
X8 = Gender grouping; male=1, otherwise=0
X9 = Extension awareness/visitation; awareness=1, otherwise=0
X10= Level of education; Dummy variable; if educated= 1, otherwise =0
X11= Cooperative membership; membership =1, otherwise =0
X12= Farmers’ farming experience (yrs)
et = The error term
DATA AND EMPERICAL PROCEDURES

The data used in this paper come from a random sample of 120 cowpea farmers in Osun State, southwest Nigeria,
for the 2004/2005 agricultural growing seasons. The sample comprised of a random sample of six farm-villages with
34
an average of 20 cowpea farmers within each sample village. The data were collected using structured
questionnaires tailored to obtain information on input – output production activity of each farm-firm.
The Cobb-Douglas functional form was used to estimate the technical efficiency in the stochastic production
frontier. The specific model estimated is the following:
ln Y = ln β o + β 1 ln X 1 + β 2 ln X 2 + β 3 ln X 3 + β 4 ln X 4 + β 5 ln X 5 + β 6 ln X 6 + ∈ .............................. (6)
Where Y , β s and X i ( i = 1,2,3.......... 6) are as defined earlier (eq. 2)

TABLE 3: AVERAGE TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY (TE) INDICES AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC
CHARACTERISTICS FOR COWPEA FARMERS
TECHNICAL
PERCENTAGE
VARIABLE N EFFICIENCY MEAN TE
(%)
(TE)
SIZE (ha)
≤0.10 25 20.8 0.93
>0.10≤0.30 50 41.7 0.98 0.94
>0.30≤0.50 30 25.0 0.93
>0.50 15 12.5 0.92
AGE (years)
≤40 20 16.7 0.94
>40≤50 34 28.3 0.94 0.93
>50≤60 35 29.2 0.91
>60 31 25.8 0.92
GENDER
0 18 15.0 0.82 0.87
1 102 85.0 0.92
EXTENTION
0 98 81.6 0.75 0.90
1 22 18.4 0.96
EDUCATION
0 29 24.2 0.85 0.90
1 91 75.8 0.95
COOPERATIVE
0 75 62.5 0.40 0.66
1 45 37.5 0.93
EXPERIENCE
(YEARS)
≤10 67 55.8 0.92
>10≤20 24 20.0 0.73 0.86
>20≤30 17 14.2 0.83
>30 12 10.0 0.98
Mean Technical Efficiency =0.87
The Tobit regression model was used in the analysis for the socio-economic attribute(s), which affects the technical
efficiency in the stochastic production frontier. The Tobit model is given as the following:
TE = f ( X 1 , X 7 , X 8 , X 9 , X 10 , X 11 , X 12 , et )................... ....................(7)
Where TE , X i ( i = 1,7,8.......... .12) and et are as stated in the previous section (eq. 5).
Descriptive statistics for the variables used in the analysis are given in table 3.
35
EMPIRICAL RESULTS
Tobit regression model estimates of equation 5 are presented in Table3.
Maximum likelihood estimates of the stochastic production frontier are represented in Table 1.
All parameter estimates were statistically insignificant at the 1% significance level except for cooperative
membership and years of farming experience. The coefficient of cooperative membership has the higher value
(elasticity). This suggests that productivity would be higher when farmers belong to cooperative societies. This
agrees with the findings of Onyenwaku and Fabiyi (1991). The farming experience gathered over the years of
practices was found to significantly enhance the level of cowpea production. Age of farmers have a negative
relationship with the technical efficiency. However, the important factor is the number of years the farmer has being
cultivating cowpea regardless of other crops. This implies that a unit increase in farming experiences leads to a
better assessment of the important and complexities of good farming decision-making including efficient use of
input.
The stochastic production regression analysis (Table 2) revealed that 10 percent increase in farmland area cultivated
given the set of inputs-seed, hired labour, family labour, fertilizer and pesticide will correspond to an increase in
output of cowpea with 6.593, 0.54, 0.84, 1.8, 1.1, and 0.37 percent respectively. This shows that the output of
cowpea is inelastic to the inputs used in the area. Furthermore, the scale co-efficient is 1.12 signifying increasing
returns to scale of cowpea production. Based on this, the null hypothesis of constant returns to scale can be rejected.
The farmland area cultivated contributed the highest value, 94%, to the overall technical efficiency in cowpea
production (Table 3). However, the age of the farmers has 93% input to the efficiency but reduces to an average of
90%, as the farmer grows old. 53% of the male cowpea farmers were technically efficient out of the total 87% of the
gender contribution to production efficiency. Awareness on the latest technology in cowpea production through
extension services was 56% out of 90% efficiency level in the mode of production. The level of education is a 56%
educated farmer contributing 90% efficiency in the production of cowpea. Farmers, belonging to a cooperative
society were 46% efficient and non-cooperative members were just 20% efficient. Farmers experience in cowpea
production amounts to 86% efficiency level of the overall technical efficiency of cowpea production. Average
technical efficiency in the study area is estimated as 87%.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
This study estimates stochastic frontier production for cowpea farmers in Osun State, southwest Nigeria. This
analysis shows that farm size (land), cooperative membership and farming experience are the major contributing
factors to the efficient production of cowpea in the state. Other variables such as seed (kg), hired labour (naira),
family labour (maydays), fertilizer (kg), and pesticides (litres) were found to exact positive effect on the production
of cowpea.
The result of the study suggests that if farmers should join cooperative society and the plot of the land used for
cowpea should increase with adequate farming experience, these would enhance the productivity level of the
farmers.
REFERENCES
Afriat, S.N. (1972): ‘Efficiency Estimation of Production Functions’, International Economic Review, 13, pp568-98.
Aigner, D.J. and S. Chu (1968): ‘On Estimating the Industry Production Function’, American Economic Review, 58,
pp826-39.
Aigner, D.J., C.A.K Lovell and P. Schmidt (1977): ‘Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production
Function Models’, Journal of Econometrics, 6, pp21-31.
Belbase, K., and R. Grabowski (1985): ‘Technical Efficiency in Nepalese Agriculture’, Journal of Development
Areas, 19: pp 515-25.
Bravo-Ureta, B.E and Laszlo Rieger (1991): ‘Dairy Farm Efficiency Measurement Using Stochastic Frontiers and
Neoclassical Duality’, American Agricultural Economics Association 5, pp 421-427.
Coelli, T.J. and G.E. Battese (1996), ‘Identification of Factors which Influence the Technical Inefficiency of Indian
36
Farmers’, Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics 40, pp 103-128.
Comanor, W.S. and H. Leibenstein (1969 ): ‘Allocative Efficiency, X-Efficiency and the Measurement of Welfare
Losses’,Economical 36, pp304-9.
Dawson, J., Lingrad, P. and Woodford, C.H. (1991 ): ‘Generalized Measured of Farm Specific Technical
Efficiency’. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73,,pp 1098-1104.
Farrell, M.J (1957): ‘The Measurement of Production Efficiency’, Journal of Royal Statistics Society, Series A, 120,
pp 253-81.
Forsund, F.R., C.A.K. Lovell and P. Schmidt (1980): ‘A Survey of Frontier Production Functions and of their
Relationship to Efficiency Measurement’, Journal of Econometrics 13, pp5-25.
Greene, W.H.( 1980): ‘Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Econometric Frontier Functions’, Journal of
Econometrics, 13, pp 27-56.
Leibenstein, H. (1996): ‘Allocative Efficiency vs. X-Efficiency’. American Economy Review, 56, pp 392-415
.
Leibenstein, H. (1978): ‘X-Inefficiency Xist-Reply to a Xorcist’, American Economic Review 68, pp 203-11.
Meeusen, W. and J. Van den Broeck (1977),‘Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with
Composed Error’, International Economic Review18, pp435-44.
Onyenwaku C.E. and Y.L. Fabiyi (1991) ‘A Comparative Analysis of Cooperative and Non-Cooperative Farmers in
Food Production in Imo State’. Ife Journal of Agriculture, 13, pp 90-96.
Richmond, J. (1974): ‘Estimating the Efficiency of Production’, International Economic Review 15, pp515-21.
Schmidt, P (1976): ‘Frontier Production Functions’. Econometric Reviews 4 pp289-328.

A.Egbetokun
Institute of Agricultural Research and Training, Obafemi Awolowo, Moor Plantation, P.M.B 5029, Ibadan, Oyo
State, Nigeria.
E-mail Address: greatjoge@yahoo.com
37
CHEMICAL CONTROL IN VEGETABLE PRODUCTION IN KADUNA STATE, NIGERIA
O.B. Adeniji
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension Technology, Federal University of Technology, Minna,
Niger State, Nigeria
ABSTRACT
The study examines chemical use in vegetable production among farmers in Shika And Giwa
Local Government area of Kaduna State with a view of highlighting the Side effects of these
chemicals if not properly handled. Data were collected through interview schedule on 100
randomly selected vegetables farmers and analyzed using descriptive statistics. The findings
revealed that majority of the farmers spray their crops with different chemicals to control
insect and pest infestation. It was found that most of the farmers were oblivious of the harmful
effect of pesticides/herbicides if not properly applied on crops, human and environment. It was
found that some of the chemicals contain ingredients that is harmful to health .The study
among other things recommended that extension services should intensify efforts in training
farmers on handling of chemicals both during and after application. The use of integrated Pest
Management Practices is advocated to enhance safety of environment and the populace
KEYWORDS: chemical control, vegetable production, pest infection, pest management,

supporting services
INTRODUCTION
The importance of giving priority to agriculture have in recent years being recognized by policy makers in many
developing countries realising that it is and will continue to be dominant sector of their economies , being the major
employer of labour, source of food for fast growing population and raw materials for the growing agro-allied
industries, savings and tax revenue to support the development of other sector of the economy and to earn more
foreign exchange and/or save foreign exchange.
In Nigeria, the provision of subsidized farm inputs ( such as fertilizer, improved planting material, agro-chemicals.
etc) and supporting services (like tractor hire, extension services, guaranteed minimum prices for farm products etc)
to farmers have been some of the publicized strategies of government at improving agricultural productivity and
achieving rural development.
However, studies have shown that emphasis have been placed by successive government on boosting staple food
production like yam, cassava, rice, maize, millet etc. with little emphasis on vegetables.
A crucial role of vegetable production especially, tomatoes, okra and amaranthus play in the economies of
developing countries including Nigeria can be looked at in terms of rural employment, sources of raw materials for
the industries and source of food for people (Tindal, 1996) In view of the importance of vegetables, various agencies
engaged in the production., hence policies and programmes were embarked upon by government through provision
of farm inputs such fertilizers, insecticides credit and extension services.
Vegetables are major component of Nigerian diet as in other part of the world. Hence, vegetables production is a
vital area of agriculture. It plays a vital role in nutrition and most vegetables are valuable source of vitamins ,
mineral and dietry fibre and are low in fat and calories ( Microsoft Encarta,2007) They are cheap and available.
Apart from this, farmers socio-economic status have been positively affected through its production, in that it has
helped in reduction of poverty in farm households.
There are no practical reasons why Nigeria should not be self sufficient in vegetable production to meet her local
food demand. However, the incidence of insects and diseases pests poses serious threat to vegetable production and
these two problems have been the major impediments to the goal of our realization of self-sufficiency in vegetable
production.
38
O.B. Adeniji: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 38 - 43, 2008
Pests are insects, birds, rodents, monkeys, weeds, fungi, bacteria and fungi that feed on growing plants, injure them
and kill them, and introduce diseases (Kolawole et al, 1979, Agrios, 2005). Chemicals that are used for pest control
are known as pesticides. The word pesticides means “pest killer”.
A lot of extension activities have been on for many years on the need for farmers to adopt chemical pest control in
vegetable production in Nigeria. Few of the many advantages of cchemical pest control in tomato production
includes among others : enhances plant vigour and healthy growth, lead to higher plant yields and consequently
increased productivity, and leads to improved quality of the harvested yields (Agrios, 2005).
Table 1: Distribution of Respondents according to their socio-economic factors (n=100)

Variables Frequency Percentage
Age(in Years)
Less than 30 20 20
30-40 40 40
41-50 25 35
51 above 5 5
Marital status
Married 90 90
Single 10 10
Household size
Less than 5 33 33
6-10 52 52
11 above 15 15
Farm size (in ha)

0.1-5 92 92
5ha-above 8 8
Educational level
Ouranic education 60 70
Primary 25
Secondary school 15
Farming experience
1-5 30 30
6-10 60 60
11 above 10 10
However not all farmers are presently adopting this all-important agronomic practice. This paper examines the
factors influencing the adoption of chemical pest control in vegetable (tomatoes, okra and amaranthus) crop in
Shika and Giwa Local Government Area of Kaduna State, Nigeria . its impact on yield increase and the effect of
chemicals on environment, human (consumers) and soil.
Economic importance of tomatoes, okra and amaranthus

Tomatoes( lycopersicu esculentum) which are grown both in home garden and commercial quantity. It can be eaten
raw as fruit as salad or be processed into paste or puree which can be cooked to form accomplishment in meat
savory dishes, stew or as a soup. (Smith, 2006) Fresh tomatoes make a significant contribution to human nutrition
due to concentration and availability of nutrient. Tomatoes in Nigeria are commonly grown as a small scale or
garden vegetable crop until recently. The establishment of River Basins Development Authority in 1980s triggered
extensive under irrigation. Tomatoes can grow in a wide range of climatic conditions. It requires abundant sunshine
and cool weather of 20o-27oC day temperature and 15o-21oC night temperature (Alamu, 1996). Okra (hibiscus
esculentus, abelmoschus esculentus) is also a popular vegetable crop of major importance in the northern region .It
39
can be cooked, eaten raw, sliced and dried for future use and for oil extraction. It is presently being exported though
in small quantities to some countries to meet needs of African residents in such countries.
Okra seed germinate in warm soil temperature above 16oC. A wide range of soil types gives economic yields but
well drained soil cultivers are sensitive to excessive moisture. An average temperature of 20o-30oC is appropriate for
growth, flowering and pod development. Okra is tolerant to wide variation in rainfall.
Amaranthus is a genus of the family Amaranthaceae. Amaranthus species are the most commonly grown leafy
vegetable of the lowland tropics in Asia and Africa (Schipper 2000). Cultivation of the various Amaranthus species
are acquiring increasing importance in Nigeria and other part of American continent, due to among other reasons its
double potential as a vegetable and grain and also its vigorousness of growth (David, 1977). Vegetable Amaranthus,
species are good sources of vitamins, minerals and flavors (Jonathan 1977). All African Amaranthus species are
grown for their leaves. According to Becker and Saunders (1984) animals eat more of those with thorns (A
spinosus). Amaranthus species can grow up to 100cm high with colour ranging from green to purplish or pinkish.
Amaranthus requires a fertile soil well supplied with organic matter for good productivity. According to
Schippers (2000) there are no exact data on yields for the various African species of Amaranthus.Good productivity
in Amaranthus however require optimum conditions which include judicious use of inputs such as fertilizers and
pesticides..
Table 2.Distribution of respondents according to their awareness and adoption level of chemical control n=100
Chemical control Aware Adopted
Frequency % Frequency %
Pest control 100 100 90 90
Weed control 90 90 30 30
This study examines chemical control in vegetables and addresses these objectives:
1. determine the socio-economic characteristics of farmers
2. determine the appropriateness of chemical control measure adopted by farmers
3. determine farmers awareness and attitude towards safety measures of chemical application
METHODOLOGY
The study was carried out in Shika and Giwa Local Government Areas of Kaduna State, Nigeria. The selection of
the state and the Local Government was purposeful based on the existing knowledge of vegetable production
potentials in the area. Preliminary field visits were made to identify the villages to be surveyed. Data were collected
through interview schedule administered on 100 vegetable farmers. The farmers were randomly selected from the
list provided by the Giwa Local Government Area agricultural department. . Data were analyzed using descriptive
statistics.
Secondary data were sourced from Kaduna State Agricultural Development Authority and Horticultural Crops
Research Programme of the Institute for Agricultural Research, Samaru, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria Nigeria.
Shika and Giwa are situated in the northern Guinea Savannah, ecology with rainfall ranging from 700- 1000mm per
annum. The rainfall is fairly distributed over a period of 3-5 months in the year, each has two sections. (i) The rainy
season which start around May and ends in September ,and (ii)the dry season that last about seven months, that is
from October to April .Agriculture constitute the economic activity of the people and the ecological factors enable
farmers to cultivate variety of vegetables.

Socio-economic characteristics of farmers in the study area
Table 1 shows the socio-economic characteristics of farmers that adopted Chemical pest/weed control in the study
area. The variables examined are age of household head, family size, educational qualification of household head,
and extension contact of the households. From the results, the mean age of farmers is 46 years, 70 % of the
respondents belong to this category.This implies that there is predominance of youth and middle aged people among
the farmers . The respondent’s level of education ranged from non formal education to secondary education. The
findings shows that over 60% of the respondents went to Quranic School, while 25% posses primary leaving
certificate and 15 % secondary education. : A typical household was characterized by the presence of the male head,
40
the wife/wives, the children, and some members of the extended family. The average family size was five (5)
members per household The table also shows that 33% had a household size of less than 5, While 52% had
household of ranging from 6-10, and 15% have more than 10 people in their household. The result shows that
almost all the categories of household were participating in some aspect of vegetable production. The total farm size
by 92% of respondents range from 0.5-1 hectare, only 8% have more than 2 hectares for vegetable production. The
table also shows 60 % of the respondents have between 6-10 years experience in vegetables production. The table
shows that majority of the respondent (90%) were married while 10 % were single. The indication is that married
person predominate in vegetables production, this is not unconnected with the culture and religious belief of the
study area which encourage early marriage
Table 2 shows the level of awareness and adoption of chemical pest/weed control by respondents. The result
indicates that all respondents were aware while 90% of the farmers adopted the chemical control measures but 70 %
of the farmers did not adopt the weed measures. Information on improved practices can be obtained from various
sources.
Information on improved practices can be obtained by farmers from various sources Table 3 shows that the major
source of information for farmers in the study area was extension services. It was observed that, 70% of the
respondents received extension visit regularly, this is not unconnected with the proximity of the villages to IAR and
the activities of KADP and NAERLS extension outfit. The findings is in conformity with Adeniji( 2002) that
extension agents are the most preferred source of farm information to farmers
Table 3. Respondents’ information sources for vegetable production

Information sources Frequency Percentage
Extension Agents 70 70
Radio 20 20
Village heads/friends 10 10
Total 100 100
Constraints
With the introduction of innovations goes the responsibility of identification of user’s constraints in the adoption and
innovations and feedback to research. It is a critical factor that would help in demand driven technologies .Majority
of the sampled farmers were faced with a number of problems which militated against their production during the
period of survey. These problems are presented in table 4.The table shows that fertilizer scarcity was the most
serious problem identified by 55% of the farmers. Next was lack of credit identified by 20%, of the farmers who
experienced difficulties in obtaining loan for production.Capital is necessary for the purchase of equipment which is
normally associated with improved technologies as recognized by Petrick (2004) De Castro and Teixer (2006)
While 10% of the farmers complained of storage facilities. Other constrain was the efficacy of the chemicals used
for control of pest and weed. It was found that most of the chemical that were available in the market are fake so the
farmers end up applying so much or so little as the case may be, thereby damaging the environment and the soil.
Table 4. Respondents’ constraints in vegetables production n=100

Constraints Frequency Percentage Rank
Fertilizer 55 65 1
Lack of credit 20 20 2
Storage facilities 10 10 3
Fake chemicals 15 15 4
Total 100 100
Table 5 shows that majority of the farmers were not aware of safety measure in handling and using chemical either
for pest or weed control. Most of the chemical can/or plastics containers were not properly disposed, while some
even use the containers to fetch water for house hold use. Also not all the farmers have protective clothing like hand
gloves, nose mask and booth which they are suppose to put on while spraying. Farmers attitude was measured on a 5
point scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree 5-1, and 1-5 for positive and negative statement. Results show
that majority, about 70% attitude were unfavourable towards proper handling of chemicals.
41
According to Spore No 122 of April 2006, the level of exposure to pesticides and other chemicals poses danger to
the health of the farmers. Pesticides containers are kept in open space where container deteriorate and leak their
contents which contaminate soil, surface water and ground water. Many of the chemicals are so toxic that a few
grammes could poison thousand of people or contaminate large area e.g. DDT Attrazine, Dieldrin, Diazinon,
Captain and malathion. Knapsack sprayers are the commonly used equipment for pesticides application to crops in
developing countries. Applicators usually spray the area head of themselves which means that they then walk into
the spray mist and treated foliage exposing themselves to the pesticides.
Table 5. Respondents’ awareness of safety measure

Safety Measure Aware% Not aware% Total
Dispose container 30 70 100
after use
Protective clothing 20 80 100
Nose/mouth mask 10 90 100
CONCLUSION.
Based on the finding of this study one can conclude that farmer’s adoption of improved safe use of chemical is low
and that major factor responsible for this may not be unconnected with the low level of education, inadequate
finance and ignorance. Farmers should be encouraged to form cooperatives union so that information will easily be
disseminated and access to genuine input will be made available to them
Safe and proper use of pesticides is essential. The product label is the best source for information concerning
handling and application of the product. The warning danger or caution statement , depending on the product
involved provide information on proper use and protective equipment needed , effect on wild life and environment,
how to empty or dispose the containers after use and what to do when poisoned. Most of the respondent said they
rarely read the leaflets hence, they are not aware of some of the dangers.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Following the problems identified in the study, the following recommendations are made:
There is the need for increase awareness for vegetables farmers on proper usage of chemical and all measures
safeguarding the use of pesticides must be strictly adhered to and production recommendation followed..
There should be adequate supply of inputs as at when due and there is the need for financial assistance by
government or NGOs through micro credit scheme to help farmers expand their production.
Farmers should be educated on proper disposal of residue and pesticides container to prevent environmental
pollution and health hazard.
Most importantly emphasis should be placed on the adoption of integrated pest management techniques in the
control of pest with the use of synthetic being the last resort.
REFERENCES
Adeniji, O.B .(2002) Adoption of improved practices for cotton production in katsina State Nigeria . An
unpublished PhD Thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Ahmadu Bello University
Zaria
Agrios, G. N (2005). Plant Pathology, fifth Edition. Academic Press; New York
Alamu,J.F. (1996) Marketing of Fadama Tomatoes, Pepper and Onions. A case study of Kano and Jigawa States of
Nigeria. An Unpublished PhD Thesis. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Ahmadu Bello
University, Zaria
.Becker, R. and R. M. Saunder (1984). Amaranth grain; its morphology, composition and food (feed uses).
Archivos Latinamericanos de nutricion, Guatemala, Amaranth Newsletter 5:7-10.
42
David, K. E. (1977). Cultivation and uses of Amaranthus in contemporary Mexico. Proceedings of first
Amaranthus Seminar, Rodale Press, 13 pp.
De Castro, E.R. and Teixera, B.C. (2006) Agricultural credit interestequalization policy: A growth subsidy? Paper
presented at the international Associatio of Agricultural Economist Conference, Gold Cost, Australia, August 12-18
Jonathan, D. S. (1977). History of grain Amaranthus and their uses and cultivation around the world. Proceedings
of first Amaranthus Seminar. University of California, Rodale Press.
Kolawole, M. F; Adegbola, A.A; Are, L. A; and Ashaye. T. I. (1979). Agricultural Sciences for West African School
and Colleges. University Press Limited, Ibadan.
Microsoft Encarta 2007.
Petrick, M (2004) Farm investment, credit rationing and governmentally promoted credit access in Poland: A cross
sectional analysis. Institute for Agricultural Development in Cental and Eastern Europe)Theoitor Lieser-strasse 2,
06120 Halle, (Sale) Germany
Schippers, R. R. (2000). African Indigenous vegetables: An overview of the cultivated species. Chayham, U. K:
Natural Resources Institute/ACP – EU Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation, 214 pp.
Smith, B. (2006) The farming handbook. Published by CTA
Spore Magazine No 122 April 2007. A publication of CTA, The Netherlands

Tindall, H.D. (1986) Vegetables in the Tropics. ELBS Edition. First Published by Macmillan, Bassingstoke,
Hamphire. Pp. 533.

E-mail: bolajiadeniji@yahoo.com
43
DETERMINING COSTS-RETURNS PROFITABILITY IN HONEY MARKETING IN CROSS RIVER STATE,

NIGERIA
Adinya, I.B1, Ayuk, E.A2, Akpet, S.O2. And Agiopu, B.F2.

1
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, 2Department of Animal Science, Cross River University of
Technology (Crutech) Obubra Campus
ABSTRACT
This study examined costs-returns profitability in honey marketing in Cross River State.
Honey contains 29 percent of protein, 19 percent of amino acid, vitamins and minerals for
bodybuilding. Honey mixed with aloe vera gel is use for cure of dandruff and rapid hair
growth. This mixture could also help to prevent hair breakage. Honey pollen enhances vitality
and brings about a longer life span. Data were obtained from a random sample of 120 honey
marketers in the study area by means of structured questionnaire. The first stage involved
random selection of three (Obudu, Obubra and Odukpani) local government areas from
eighteen local government areas in Cross River State, Nigeria. This was followed by random
selection of three villages (Utugwang in Obudu Local Government Area, Ofudua in Obubra
Local Government Area and Adiabo in Odukpani Local Government Area) in Cross River
State. The respondents were randomly selected from each of the villages, 40 respondents were
selected each from three villages, making a total number of 120 respondents. Data collected
were analyzed using descriptive statistics and costs-returns analysis. Results from the analysis
revealed that a net return of N1, 250.00 was realized with N0.22 made on every naira invested.
Honey marketing is a profitable business, with attractive net return on investment. This study
shows that honey marketers are faced with several problems in their marketing activities.
These problems or constraints positively affect the efficiency of honey marketing in the study
area. Notable among them are high cost of transportation, lack of capital, inaccessibility of
formal credit source because lack of collaterals, lack of extension agents, lack of price
information, poor market infrastructures and lack of roads maintenance/bad roads occupied
15%, 14.17%,11.67%,10%,9.17%,9.17% and 8.33% respectively. Hence, for efficient
marketing of honey in the study area, these constraints must be drastically reduced to the barest
minimum. This can be done through efficient policy formulation and implementation, proper
supervision of honey marketing programme, effective extension services and proper
agricultural financing. The constraints associated with the business as highlighted in this paper
if tackled could pave a way to increase profit and this will alleviate poverty in Cross River
State. However, based on the findings of the study it is recommended that honey marketers in
the study area should form cooperative group(s) in order to obtain loans from bank(s) to
increase their capital base for higher output.
KEYWORDS: Honey, Marketing, Profitability, Costs-Returns
INTRODUCTION
Honey-bee belongs to the order of insects called hymenoptera. A typical bee colony is made up of three types of
bees: queen, workers and the male is referred to as the drone. The bee is said to be social insect because it exists
together in large numbers within a colony. Ahmed et al (2004) revealed that it takes 3-4 months for honey to be
ready for harvesting from the day the bees located the hive. They further stated that honey is ready or ripe for
harvesting when the combs are capped with honey. A ripe honey should contain at least three quarters of cells
capped with honey. Harvesting should not be done at an early stage until when it is ripe to avoid the harvesting of
watery and low quality honey.
Onabe (2005) revealed that honey contains 29 percent of protein, 19 percent of amino acid, vitamins and minerals
for bodybuilding. Honey mixed with aloe vera gel is use for cure of dandruff and rapid hair growth. This mixture
could also help to prevent hair breakage. Honey pollen enhances vitality and brings about a longer life span. The
most commercial product of bee is honey, which is sold at markets or hawked in the streets (Pinstrup et al, 1976;
Oniah et al, 2005). Little is known about the profitability of this business engaged by marketers. It is against this
background that this study attempt to explore, answers to the following fundamental questions; do marketers
44
ADINYA, I.B et al: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 44 - 51, 2008
engaged in honey marketing make profit? And what are the constraints they face in the business. To examine the
aforementioned questions the objectives of the study were set as to:
(i) determine the cost-return of honey businesses in the study area.
(ii) identify the constraints faced by marketers in the study area.
Theoretical framework: Farm Budget Model: The farm budget as a tool of analysis is one of the oldest and simplest,
used in farm management and production studies. It has been used in number of economic studies for analyzing the
profitability of farm production practice. This method of analysis was used to achieve objective of the study.
Different methods of budgeting exist. However, these methods can be subdivided into two major categories: (a) total
or complete budgeting and (b) partial budgeting. A total budgeting is used when contemplating a complete re-
organization of the entire farm business, while partial farm budget is used when the action intend to be implemented
does not affect the whole farm, for example, introducing a new business or purchasing new equipment for the farm.
The choice of any type of budgeting tool depends on the circumstance under which the farm business is taking
place, goal achievement objective and convenience. This study used partial budget as an analytical tool. Basically, it
involves operations leading to estimates of gross revenue and total cost for the same production period. The
differences between two parameters are measure of profit or loss or net farm income for that period (Oluwole, 1970;
Osifo and Anthonio, 1970; Olayemi and Oni, 1971). The purpose of the model is to identify the costs, returns,
profitability or loss per hectare. The total revenue represents the value of the output from the farm (i.e. physical
quantity of honey multiplied by the unit price). The total cost on the other hand, is made up of the variables and
fixed components. Variables costs also called specific costs vary directly with the level of production and include
expenditure on labour and transportation cost etc. Fixed cost known as overhead costs do not vary with the level of
output and consists of cash expenses ( on repairs and maintenance, interest on loan) etc and non-cash adjustment like
depreciation of farm tools, equipment and machineries. The computed returns and costs would be used to derive
various measures of profitability including net return and return on capital invested in honey enterprise. The cost and
return analyses used for the study were expressed as: NR=TR-TC.......equation (1)
TR=Q x P…….equation (2)
RI=NR...…….. equation (3)
TC
where NR=Net Return on honey (naira)

TR=Total Revenue from honey (naira)
TC= Total Cost of honey (naira)
Q= Quantity of honey produced in (liters)
P= Price of honey per liter
Ri=Return on capital invested in honey (naira)
45
METHODOLOGY
The research study was conducted for a period of one year from 1st January to 31st December, 2007 in Cross River
State, Nigeria. The state occupies an area of about 22,342.176 square kilometers (Quarterly News Letter of the
Ministry of Local Government Affairs, Cross River State, 2006). It is located at Latitude 5o 25’N and longitude 25o
00’E (Figure 1).
The soils of Cross River State are utisol and alifisol but predominantly utisol (USDA) or (FAO/UNESCO, 1974).
Cross River State is producing milk and honey for the nation and it has the largest rainforest covering about 7,290
square kilometers described as one of Africa’s largest remaining virgin forest harbouring as many as five million
species of animals, insects(bees, butterfly, mosquitoes, locust, etc) and plants (MOFINES,2004). Cross River State
is located within the evergreen rainforest zone. There are two distinct climate seasons in the area, rainy season from
March to October and dry season from November to February. The annual rainfall varies from 2,000mm to 3,
424mm. The average temperature is around 28oc (CRADP, 1992a; CRADP, 1992b). Cross River State is
characterized by presence of numerous ecological and zoo-geographically important high gradient streams, rapids
and waterfalls. About 2,888,966 people inhabit the area of which the Efiks, Ejaghams and Bekwarras, are the major
ethnic groups (The 20006 Population Census Spread state by state, In: MOFINEWS January-February, 2007).
Fishing and subsistence agriculture are the main occupations of the people. Crops and animals are grown in the
locality. Population depends largely on natural water sources for all their water-related activities as piped water
supply is limited and grossly inadequate. Health services in the area require a lot of improvement. Level of hygiene
in the rural communities is generally poor (Arene et al, 1991). Both primary and secondary sources of data were
used. The secondary sources of data include Review of Annual Reports, books, census data, journals and statistical
documents whereas the primary source of data was mainly from field survey. Data were obtained through
administration of structured and semi-structured questionnaire to 120 randomly selected respondents for the study.
This served as population for the study. The first stage involved random selection of three (Obudu, Obubra and
Odukpani) local government areas from eighteen local government areas in Cross River State. This was followed by
random selection of three villages (Utugwang in Obudu Local Government Area in the Northern senatorial district,
Ofudua in Obubra Local Government Area in the Central senatorial district and Adiabo in Odukpani Local
Government Area in the Southern senatorial district) in Cross River State. The respondents were randomly selected
from each of the villages, 40 respondents were selected each from three villages, making a total number of 120
respondents all together. The types of data collected for the study include information on cost of honey,
transportation and return from the sales of product. Also data were collected on constraints faced by honey
marketers in the study area.
Cost-return analysis as described by Olukosi and Erhabor (1988) was used to estimate net returns, total cost of
product and profitability of the business. Descriptive statistics (Mubyarto, 1965; Mc Clave and Sincich, 2000;
Hamidu et al, 2006 and Adinya et al, 2007) were used to analyze the constraints. The cost and return analyses used
for the study were expressed as:
: NR=TR-TC.......equation (1) TR=Q x P…….equation (2)
RI=NR...…….. equation (3)
TC
where NR=Net Return on honey (naira)

TR=Total Revenue from honey (naira)
TC= Total Cost of honey (naira)
Q= Quantity of honey produced in (liters)
P= Price of honey per liter
Ri=Return on capital invested in honey (naira)

The socio economic characteristics of respondents presented in Table1 shows that honey sellers were all (100%)
adults from above 21years, however, 35.83 percent of the respondents were age between 41-50 years. This is
closely followed by age between 31-40 years, which constitutes 34.17 percent. However, 13.33percent of them were
aged between 21-30 years. Only 16.67percent of the respondents were aged between 51years and above. The
implication of the result is that most of the respondents were within the economically active age. These findings are
synonymous with Asa (2003) that people in age groups of 41-60 are more economically active and independent than
those in the age group of less than 21 years and above 60 years. The standard deviation of 70.71 from the mean 60
46
was obtained. Statistically, the coefficient of variation (CV) of 117.85 was also obtained. The result implies that age
has positive influence in honey marketing in the study area. Data in Table 1 also reveals that 73.33 percent of the
respondents were married while 14.17 percent were single. Only 12.50 percent of the respondents were widowed.
The table also shows that the participation of married men and women in honey marketing is higher than single men
and women. In addition, it was observed that the standard deviation of the factor from the mean of 40 was 41.50.
Statistically, this factor was observed to have a coefficient of variation (CV) of103.75. Further analysis of Table 1
Table 1: Socio-economic characteristics of respondents (honey sellers) in Cross River State

Age group Frequency Frequenc Frequenc Total Percentag Mean Standard Coefficient of
(years) of y of y of frequenc e deviation variation
respondents responde responde y (SD)
in Utugwang nts in nts in
in Obudu Ofudua Adiabo
L.G.A. in in
Obubra Odukpan
L.G.A. i L.G.A.
21-30 5 4 7 16 13.33 30 13.98 46.6
31-40 12 14 15 41 34.17 30 13.98
41-50 13 16 14 43 35.83 30 13.98
51- above 10 6 4 20 16.67 30 13.98
Total 40 40 40 120 100
Gender
Male 5 2 3 10 8.33 60 70.71 117.85
Female 35 38 37 110 91.67 60 70.71
Total 40 40 40 120 100
Marital
status
Married 33 28 27 88 73.33 40 41.50 103.75
Widowed 3 7 5 15 12.50 40 41.50
Single 4 5 8 17 14.17 40 41.50
Total 40 40 40 120 100
Education
al
attainment
OND/HN 1 2 1 4 3.33 30 33.40 111.33
D/BSC/M
SC/Ph.D
JSSC/SSS 8 5 4 17 14.17 30 33.40
C
FSLC 22 27 30 79 65.83 30 33.40
No 9 6 5 20 16.67 30 33.40
education
Total 40 40 40 120 100
Source: Field survey, 2007
47
Table2: Average costs and returns of honey marketing in Cross River State
Cost/Return component Value(Naira)
Cost of Honey at farm gate price 5,000.00(for 12.5 liter at N 400.00 per liter of honey )from 1st
(N 400.00 per liter of honey) January to 31st December, 2007
Labour inputs(man-days) 100.00
Transportation cost(naira) 250.00
Total fixed cost-depreciation(TFC) 75.00
Total Variable Cost(TVC) 185.00
Total Cost(TC=TFC+TVC) 5,600.00
Total Revenue(TR) 6,850.00
Net Return(Profit)TR-TC 1,250.00
Source: Field survey, 2007 Foot note:* Net Return per marketer
Table 2 revealed that the total cost of honey was N5, 600.00. While the total revenue was
N6, 850.00 the table also revealed that transportation cost was highest than other costs.
Table 3: Average profitability analysis of honey marketing in Cross River State

Profitability indicator Honey(Naira)
*Net Return(TR-TC) 1,250.00
Return on investment 0.22
(Ri) =NR 1,250
TC 5,600
Source: Field survey, 2007 Foot note:* Net Return per marketer
The result in Table 3 indicated that the net returns on honey is N1, 250.00 with return on every naira invested of N
0.22 is also positive indicating a profit from the business. The result of the study corroborate/ agree with the earlier
contentious of Ahmed et al (2004) and Onabe (2005)which stressed honey marketing is a profitable business.
Table 4: Constraints against the efficiency of honey marketing in Cross River State
Constraints Utugwang Ofudua Adiabo in Total Percentage
in Obudu in Odukpani frequency
Obubra
High cost of transportation 7 5 6 18 15
Lack of extension agents 4 3 5 12 10
Lack of roads maintenance/bad 5 2 3 10 8.33
roads
Lack of price information 2 5 4 11 9.17
Lack of capital 10 4 3 17 14.17

Inaccessibility of formal credit 3 6 5 14 11.67
source because lack of collaterals
source because high interest rate
source because of short
repayment period
Poor market infrastructures 2 4 5 11 9.17
Lack of storage facilities 1 3 4 8 6.66
Total 40 40 40 120 100
revealed that 65.83 percent of the respondents had First School Leaving Certificate (FSLC), 14.17 percent of the
respondents attended Junior Secondary School Certificate (JSSC)/Senior Secondary School Certificate (SSSC).
48
However, 3.33 percent of the respondents revealed that they attended high education; while 16.67 percent of the
respondents had no formal education. Table 1 also disclosed that some of the respondents (16.67%) saw lack of
educational training as a factor militating against efficiency of honey marketing. The standard deviation of 33.40
from the mean of 30 was obtained. The result implies that education was one of the most serious constraints against
the efficiency of honey marketing in the study area. Of course this goes to confirm the earlier deduction by
(Steward, 1975); he maintained that education acquired by farmers/ agricultural products marketers has a positive
influence on farmers’ /marketers’ labour and income. Robin (1974) observed that, the large differential between the
wages received by an unskilled farmer/marketer and the salary enjoyed by skilled high level manpower in
agricultural production and marketing is attributed to skill differentials acquired through education. Adekunle
(1978) stated that, technical and commercial education broaden the farmers/marketers intelligence and lay the basis
for vocational training. In addition, it enables the farmers/marketers to perform the marketing activities/ tasks
intelligently and with a full appreciation of their contribution to the final product.
The study revealed several constraints militating against the efficient marketing of honey in Cross River State. These
constraints are presented on Table 4. From the table, the constrain of high cost of transportation, lack of capital,
inaccessibility of formal credit source because lack of collaterals , lack of extension agents, lack of price
information, poor market infrastructures and lack of roads maintenance/bad roads occupied 15%,
14.17%,11.67%,10%,9.17%,9.17% and 8.33% respectively. The result of the study agrees with the findings of
Pinstrup et al, 1976; Ahmed et al ,2004; Oniah et al, 2005 revealed that some constraints militating against the
efficient marketing of honey in Cross River State.
CONCLUSION
Honey marketing is a profitable business, with attractive net return on investment. This study shows that honey
marketers are faced with several problems in their marketing activities. These problems or constraints positively
affect the efficiency of honey marketing in the study area. Notable among them are high cost of transportation, lack
of capital, inaccessibility of formal credit source because lack of collaterals , lack of extension agents, lack of price
information, poor market infrastructures and lack of roads maintenance/bad roads occupied 15%,
14.17%,11.67%,10%,9.17%,9.17% and 8.33% respectively. Hence, for efficient marketing of honey in the study
area, these constraints must be drastically reduced to the barest minimum. This can be done through efficient policy
formulation and implementation, proper supervision of honey marketing programme, effective extension services
and proper agricultural financing. The constraints associated with the business as highlighted in this paper if tackled
could pave a way to increase profit and this will alleviate poverty in Cross River State. However, based on the
findings of the study it is recommended that honey marketers in the study area should form cooperative group(s) in
order to obtain loans from bank(s) to increase their capital base for higher output.
REFERENCES
Adekunle, A. (1978). Modern Analysis Economics. Aromolaran Publishing Company Limited, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Pp12-13.
Adinya, I.B., V.E. Enya and O.O. Kuye (2007). Structure of Ofatura Goat Market Obubra Local Government Area
of Cross River State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Agricultural Sciences 6(1):55-59.
Ahmed, F.,P.J.S. and M.B. Grung (2004) .Indigenous Honey Bee Allies for Mountain Farmers. LEISA
Magazine 20(4):1-12.
Arene, F.O.I.,E.S.Ibanga and J.E.Asor(1990). Fresh Water Snail and Crab Intermediate Hosts of Paragonimus
Species in Two Rural Communities in Cross River Basin, Nigeria. Global Journal of Pure and
Applied Sciences 5(2):184-187.
Asa U.A. (2003).Effect of Akwa Rubber Estates Limited on the Livelihood of Rural People in Akwa Ibom State
Unpublished Ms.sc. Thesis Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension University of Uyo , Akwa Ibom
State,Nigeria. Pp1-20.
Cross River Agricultural Development Project (CRADP)(1992a). Crop Production Guide Pp 1-10.
49
Cross River Agricultural Development Project (CRADP)(1992b). Report on Wetlands of Cross River State,
Nigeria.115p.
FAO/UNESCO (1974). Soil Map of the World FAO (1994) Paris.
Hamidu, H.M., S.G.Kuli and I. Mohammed (2006). Profitability Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis Hypogae L)
Processing Among Women Enterprenuers in Bauchi Metropolis. A Paper Presented at the Farm Management
Association of Nigeria Proceedings of 20th Annual National Conference. Pp387-391.
Mc Clave, J.T. and T. Sincich(2004). Statistics. Eighth Edition Pranice-Hall New Jersey Pp1-848.
MOFINEWS(2004). Why Agriculture? Cross River State: Producing Milk and Honey for the Nation . A Bi-
Monthly Journal of Finance Incorporated, Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria. July-August 2004.3(6): 4-5.
MOFINEWS(2007).Population Growth and Economic Development . January- February 2007. Cross River State
Privatization Exercise, Journey So Far. A Bi- Monthly Journal of Finance Incorporated, Calabar, Cross River State,
Nigeria. January- February 2007.6(3): 7-8.
Mubyarto, T.(1965). The Elasticity of Marketable Surplus of Rice in Indonesia: A Study of Java- Madura , Ph.D
Thesis , Iowa State University, USA. Pp1-15.
Olayemi, J.K. and S.A. Oni(1971: Costs and Returns in Coca Production : A case Study of Western Nigeria.
Bulletin of Rural Economics and Sociology 6(2):1-10.
Oluwole, O.O.(1970). The Economics of Fluid Cured Tobaco Production Under Peasant Agricultural Conditions in
Western State of Nigeria. Unpublished M.sc. Thesis University of Ibadan Pp1-29.
Onabe, M.B. (2005). Handbook on bee Keeping: How to Start Bee Farming. Heroes Team Publishers 08055664280,
08055664281. Pp 1-10.
Oniah, M.O., O.O Kuye, I.B.Adinya, S.A.Ayabie and V.E. Enya (2005). Promoting Indigenous Knowledge and
Food Security in Nigeria: Concepts and Strategies. A Paper Presented at the 2nd National Conference of Indigenous
Knowledge and Development held at Cross River University of Technology Obubra campus between 9th-12th
November, 2005 Pp 112-116.
Osifo, D.E. and Q.B.O. Anthonio(1970). Costs and Returns, A Case Study of upland Paddy Production Under
Traditional Farming Conditions in Wasimi and Ilaro Areas of the Western State of Nigeria. The Nigeria Journal of
Economics and Social Studies 12(13):1-12.
Pinstrup A.P., R.D.L. Norha and H. Edward (1976). The Impact of increasing Food Supply on Human Nutrition:
Implications for Commodity Priorities in Agricultural Research and Policy. American Journal of Agricultural
Economics 58(1):42-43.
Population Census (2006). Spread , State by State , In: MOFINEWS(2007).Population Growth and Economic
Development . January- February 2007. Cross River State Privatization Exercise, Journey So Far.
A Bi- Monthly Journal of Finance Incorporated, Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria. January-February
2007.6(3): 7-8.
Quarterly News Letter of the Ministry of Local Government Affairs, Cross River State, 2006Pp4-8.
Robin, C. (1974). Labour and Politics in Nigeria 1945-1971 Heinemann Education Books Limited 48 Charles Street,
London on WIX8aH Pp78-185.
Stewart ,F. (1975). Employment , Income Distribution and Development Frankcass and Company Limited Pp1-157.
50

ADINYA, I.B.
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Cross River University of Technology (Crutech) Obubra
Campus
e-mail address bon 4 all_2006 yahoo.com
51
ANALYSIS OF SELECTED VARIABLES AFFECTING SMALL-SCALE PIG PRODUCTION IN CROSS

RIVER STATE, NIGERIA
1
ADINYA, I.B, 2IBOM, L.A,, 2AYUK,E.A.,. 2AGIOPU B.F. 1UMOH, E.E., AND 3UMEH, G. N
1
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, 2Department of Animal Science, Cross River University of
Technology (CRUTECH) Obubra Campus, 3Department of Agricultural Economics , Extension and Management,
Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria
ABSTRACT
This study was carried out to determine variables affecting pig production in Cross River State.
A stratified random sampling method was used to collect data from three hundred (300)
respondents in the study area. Data collected was analyzed by using descriptive statistics. The
findings of the study indicates that majority of pig farmers in the study area were men.
Analysis of result also revealed that most pig farmers in the study area own farm sizes less
than one hectare and 57.33% of the respondents earned less than N15, 000.00 as monthly
income while 3.33% earned more than N21,000.00. Analysis of results revealed that sickness
and pains (80%), lack of supplementary feeds (90%), lack of vaccines/ vaccination (91%), lack
of good farm management practices (86.69%), lack of extension visitation /contact (86.67%),
lack of trained veterinary doctors (100%) in rural areas where pigs farms are located
/established are among some of the variables that very serious affected pig production in Cross
River State. Extension agents should visit farmers and advice them to form cooperative groups
to enable them obtain loans from banks to increase their capital base for higher output. . The
result suggests that most people practicing pig farming can increase their capital base by
forming cooperative groups to enable them obtain loans from banks for expansion of their
farms. Government should train more veterinary doctors and post them to rural areas where pig
farms were establishedand government should also provide mobile veterinary services in the
study area.
KEYWORDS: Pig, Variables, Production,Policy, CrossRiver

State
INTRODUCTION
Population growth and poverty, which pervade Sub-Saharan Africa, continues to emphasize the need to increase
livestock production in sub-region with emphasis on pig production. Successive government had embarked on
policies and programmes aimed at boosting sustainable livestock production in Nigeria. These policies mostly
centered on production of pigs, cattle, poultry and small-ruminants (Effiong and Onyenweaku, 2006).
Most Nigerian populace are involved in livestock production either on part-time or full-time but unfortunately, the
sector remains undeveloped as a result of low technology and lack of implementation of agricultural policies by
government and its agents (Effiong and Onyenweaku, 2006). Fabiyi (1996), revealed that the output of livestock
production in Nigeria have a very low growth rate. He revealed that the growth rate for pork meat production for
1980-1992 was only 13.43 (Table3). According to the 1990 national estimates of livestock in Nigeria (RIM, 1992),
pig population stood at about 53.41 million. Pork constitutes 0.46kg on per capita basis meat supply in Nigeria
(Federal Ministry of Agriculture, FMA, 1974). Holness (1991) indicated that pig farming has a lot of financial
rewards. Capital investments in pig production can bring huge returns in a relatively short period because of high
fecundity and prolificacy of pigs. According Akomas, et al (2006) revealed that in many sub-urban areas pigs are
raised either in a backyard with 2 to 3 heads per family or on a medium production scale of an average of 20 to 50
heads per family. They further stated that the reproductive performance of sows depends on the ability of thepig
farmer to manage his farm well. Farmers in Nigeria need to improve the efficiency in livestock production so that
output could be raised to meet the growing demand (Effiong and Onyenweaku,2006). There is need to increase meat
supply to meet market demand by consumers.
Effort by Livestock Research Institutes, have increased yield. However, this increase potential has not been
translated into sustained increases in field output and income for small- scale farmers. Bahrman (1976) reported that
small holders respond more to current prices in the short run than large- scale operators, particularly those own by
52
Table1: Socio-Economic Characteristics of pig farmers in Cross River

State
S/N Characteristics Frequency Percentage
1 Sex
Male 294.00 98
Female 6.00 2
Total 300 100
2 Marital status
Married 189.00 63
Single 111.00 37
Total 3000 100
3 Age (years)
<30 32 10.67
31-60 166 55.33
>60 102 34.00
Total 300 100
4 Highest Education
attainment
Primary education 122 40.67
Secondary education 160 53.33
Tertiary education 9 3.00
No education 9 3.00
Total 300 100
5 Number of children
1-5 158 52.67
6-10 125 41.67
11-15 3 1.00
16-20 1 0.33
No children 13 4.33
Total 300 100
6 Employment status
Government employed 117 39
Self employed 183 61
Total 300 100
7 Experience in farming
<5 21 7
6-10 168 56
>10 111 37
Total 300 100
8 Farm size (hectares)
<1.0 178 59.33
1.0-1.5 118 39.33
>1.5 4 1.33
Total 300 100
9 Off-farm income naira per
month
<15,000 172 57.33
16,000-20,000 118 39.33
>21,000 10 3.33
Total 300 100
10 Part-time/full-time farming
Part-time farming 90 30
Full-time farming 210 70
Total 300 100
Source: Field survey, 2007.
53
government. He maintained that the situation is due to the fact that small holders predominate in production in most
countries.
Chukuigwe and Onyegbule (2006) revealed that farmers have not been able to take advantage of increases in market
prices because of some variables or constraints they face. This study is designed to examine critically variables that
affect pig production in the study area. Ultimately, it is hope, that the study will help to recommend solutions to
constraints or variables militating against increase pig production.
Table2: Distribution of respondents by variables that affects pig production in Cross River
State, Nigeria.
S/N Variables Affecting pig production Agree Undecided Disagree Rank

in Cross River State
1 Sickness and pains 80.00 20.00 - VIII
2 Lack of medical treatment 98.00 1.00 1.00 II
3 Heat stress 40.00 53.33 6.67 IX
4 Lack of supplementary feeds 90.00 8.00 2.00 V
5 Lack of vaccines/vaccination 91.00 6.67 2.33 IV
6 Poor sanitation /lack good farm 86.69 10.00 3.31 VI
management practices
7 Lack of capital 93.33 5.00 1.67 III
8 Lack of pens to keep pigs 20.00 73.33 6.67 X
9 Lack of extension visitation/ 86.67 10.00 3.33 VII
contact
10 Lack of veterinary doctors 100 - - I
Source: Field Survey, 2007
METHODOLOGY
STUDY AREA: The research study was conducted in Cross River State. The state occupies an area of about 22,
342.176 Square Kilometers (Quarterly News Letter of the Ministry of Local Government Affairs, C.R.S 2006 Pp 4-
8). It is located at Latitude 5o 25’N and longitude 25o 00’E . The soils of Cross River State are utisols andalifisol but
predominantly utisol (USDA) or (FAO/UNESCO, 1974).
Cross River State has the largest rainforest covering about 7,290 square kilometers described as one of Africa’s
largest remaining virgin forest harbouring as many as five million species of animals, insects and plants
(MOFINEWS, 2004). Cross River State is located within the evergreen rainforest zone. There are two distinct
climate seasons in the area, rainy season from March to October and dry season from November to February. The
annual rainfall varies from 2,942mm to 3,424mm. The average temperature is around 28oC (CRADP, 1992). Cross
River State is characterized by presence of numerous ecological and zoo-geographically important high gradient
streams, rapids and waterfalls. About 2.8 million people inhabit the area of which the Efiks, Ejaghams and
Bekwarras, are the major ethnic groups. Fishing and subsistence agriculture are the main occupations of the people.
Crops and animals are grown in the locality. Population depends largely on natural water sources for all their water-
related activities, as piped water supply is limited and grossly inadequate. Health services in the area require a lot of
improvement. Level of hygiene in the communities is generally poor (Arene , et al, 1999).
Stratified random sampling technique was used to select the respondents. This procedure recognized the delineation
of the study area into zones. The Cross River Agricultural Development Project (CRADP) divided this agricultural
zone into Northern Zone (Ogoja Zone), Central Zone (Ikom Zone) and Southern Zone (Calabar Zone) of the state.
There are 18 Local Government Areas in Cross River State. The agricultural zone consists of 17 blocks, 8 circles
and 136 cells with 5,200 contact farmers. At the first stage seventeen (17) local government areas will be selected
from eighteen (18) local government areas, ten (10) farming communities will be randomly chosen from each of the
three agricultural zones of the state. For better coverage in the study area, one village will be randomly chosen from
each of the communities (thirty villages will be taken from the three agricultural zones). Ten respondents were
randomly selected from each of the selected farming communities. In all, 300 farmers (respondents) were randomly
selected from a list compiled by the extension agents of Cross River Agricultural Development Programme .
54
Table3: Estimated Output of livestock production in Nigeria 1980-1992( ’000tonnes)
Class of 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Growth
Livestock Rate
Poultry 53 59 59 58 62 64 67 56 54 58 57 52 50 -0.86
Goat 140 169 175 172 177 186 192 206 216 190 179 182 185 1.17
Lamb/mutton 50 53 59 57 65 66 68 75 16 62 84 85 86 8.79
Beef 116 158 194 177 199 212 223 232 266 279 279 280 281 2.66
Pork 34 20 25 24 28 31 33 34 100 91 125 130 142 13.43
Milk 101 138 169 154 164 172 180 182 231 243 243 244 247 1.57
Eggs 314 353 352 346 380 390 399 332 260 343 337 311 301 -
Fish - - 502 518 343 240 281 392 313 329 290 295 232 -11.17
Class of 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Growth
Livestock Rate
Poultry 53 59 59 58 62 64 67 56 54 58 57 52 50 -0.86
Goat 140 169 175 172 177 186 192 206 216 190 179 182 185 1.17
Lamb/mutton 50 53 59 57 65 66 68 75 16 62 84 85 86 8.79
Beef 116 158 194 177 199 212 223 232 266 279 279 280 281 2.66
Pork 34 20 25 24 28 31 33 34 100 91 125 130 142 13.43
Milk 101 138 169 154 164 172 180 182 231 243 243 244 247 1.57
Eggs 314 353 352 346 380 390 399 332 260 343 337 311 301 -
Fish - - 502 518 343 240 281 392 313 329 290 295 232 -11.17
Source: Central Bank of Nigeria: Annual Reports1980-1992 (In: Fabiyi,1996)p41.

Table1 revealed that most of the pig farmers in the study area (98%) were male. Sixty three percent of pig farmers
were married while 37 percent were still single. Majority of the pig farmers (55.33 percent) were between the age of
31-60 years, 34 percent were more than 60 years of age whereas only 10.67 percent of pig farmers were less than 30
years. The result implies that most of the respondents were within the economically active age. These findings are
synonymous with Asa (2003), that people in the age groups of 41-60 are more economically active and independent
than those in the age group of ‘less than 21 years’ and above 60 years. Most of the respondents ( 53.33 percent) had
post primary qualifications. Only 3percent had tertiary qualification, 3 percent of them did not have any form of
educational training. Table 1 also revealed that 52.67 percent of the respondents had 1 - 5 children, 41.57 percent
had 6-10 children , whereas 1 percent had 11-15 children, 0.33 percent of them had 16-20 children whereas 4.33
percent had no children. Majority of the respondents (61 percent) were self- employed whereas 39 percent were
government employed. Most of the respondents (56percent) had 6 - 10 years experience in farming whereas 7 percent farmed for
less than 5 years .The results imply that majority of the respondents have been in pig farming for a long time. Most of the
respondents (59.33percent) had farm sizes less than one hectare, whereas only 1.35 percent of the respondents had farm size more
than 1.5 hectares. Majority of the respondents ( 57.33 percent) earned less than N 15,000.00 as their monthly farm income while(
3.33 percent) earned more than N 21,000.00. The result suggests that most people practicing pig farming are mostly in the low-
income class. The result confirms similar findings by Etim, et al (2006) that farmers who had plot size 1.5 hectares are mostly in
the low- income class who farm mainly to augment family income and nutrition supply.
Analysis of Table 2 revealed that sickness and pains (80%), lack of medical treatment (100%), heat stress (40%), lack of
supplementary feed (90%), lack of vaccine/ vaccination ( 91.00%), poor sanitation / lack of good farm management practices
(86.69%), lack of capital(93.33%), lack of pens to keep pigs ( 20.00%) lack of extension visitation to farmers ( 86.67%) and
lack of veterinary doctors in rural areas where pigs are produced ( 100%) are among the variables that very seriously affect pig
production in CrossRiver State, Nigeria.
55
CONCLUSION
The major focus of the study was to identify variables that affect pig production in Cross River State. The socio-
economic characteristics as well as the factors that affect pig production were analyzed. The findings of the study
indicate that majority of pig farmers were men. Analysis of results revealed that sickness and pains (80%), lack of
medical treatment (100%), heat stress (40%), lack of supplementary feed(90%), lack of vaccine/ vaccination (
91.00%), poor sanitation / lack of good farm management practices ( 86.69%), lack of capital ( 93.33%) , lack of
pens to keep pigs ( 20.00%) lack of extension visitation to farmers ( 86.67%) and lack of veterinary doctors in rural
areas where pigs are produced ( 100%) are among the variables that very seriously affect pig production in Cross
River State, Nigeria. Results also revealed that most pig farmers own farm sizes less than one hectare. The results
also indicated that majority of the respondents (57.33percent earned less than N15,000. 00 as monthly farm
incomewhile 3.33 percent earned more than N21,000.00. The result suggests that most people practicing pig farming
can increase their capital base by forming cooperative groups to enable them obtain loan from banks for expansion
of their farms.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Having noted some of the variables that affect pig production in Cross River State, this paper makes the following
recommendations:-
(1) Extension agents should visit farmers and advice farmers to form cooperative groups to enable them obtain
loans from banks.
(2) Farmers should increase their farm size for pig production.
(3) Government should train more veterinary doctors and post them to rural areas where pig farms are
established.
(4) Government should provide mobile veterinary services in rural areas.
REFERENCES
Akomas,S.C., Oguike, M.A. and Amadi L.C.(2006). Morphometric Changes Following Pregancy in Large White
Sows. Animal Production Research Advance 2.(.3):189-193.
Arene, F.I.O.,Ibanga, E.S. and Asur, J.E(1999). Freshwater Snail Crab Intermediate Host of Paragonimus Species in
Two Rural Communities in Cross River Basin, Nigeria. Global Journal of Pure Sciences 5 (.2):184-187.
Asa, U.A.(2003). Effect of Akwa Rubber Estates Limited on the Livelihood of Rural People in Akwa Ibom State.
Unpublished M.SC. Thesis. Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, University of
Ibadan.pp 1-20
Bahrman, J.R.(1976). Supply Response in underdeveloped Agriculture. Amsterdan:North Holland, Publication

Company pp132-149.
Chukuigwe, E.C. and Onyebule F.I. (2001). Socio-Economic Constraints of Small Holder Cassava Productions in
Imo State, Nigeria. Journal of Agro- Technology and Extension 1(2):38-42.
Cross River Agricultural Development Project (1992a). Crop Production Guide , pp 1 – 10.
Cross River Agricultural Development Project (1992b). Report on Wetlands of Cross River State, Nigeria. 115pp.
CRADP (2001). Annual Report of Cross River Development Project, Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria.pp1-5
Effiong, E.O. and C.E.Onyenweaku (2006). Profit Efficiency in Broiler Production in Akwa Ibom State , Nigeria.
Global Journal of Agricultural Sciences 5(.1):43-47.
Etim, N.A., Azeez, A.A. Asa U.A.(2006).Determinants of Urban and Peri – Urban Farming in Akwa Ibom State,
Nigeria, Global Journal of Agricultural Sciences .5.(.1):13-16.
56
Fabiyi, Y. L., (1996). Mass mobilization for adequate livestock production in Nigeria: issues and perspectives.
Delivered at the 21st Conference of the Nigerian Society for Animal Production, University of Uyo, Nigeria,
March 24th – 28th. Pp 1 – 5.
FAO/UNESCO(1974). Soil Map of the World Report.pp1-10
FMA(1974).Federal Ministry of Agriculture Report.pp1-4.
Holness, D.H.(1991). The Tropical Agricultural List CTA/ Macmillan , London pp1-15
MOFINEWS (2004). Why Agriculture? Cross River State: Producing Milk and Honey for the Nation. A Bi-
monthly Journal of Finance Incorporated, Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria. July- August 2004 3 (6):4 – 5.
Quarterly New Letter of The Ministry of Local Government Affairs Cross River State(2006).pp4-8.
RIM(1992). Resource Inventory and Management Limited, Nigeria Livestock Department, Abuja,Nigeria.pp1-12.

ADINYA, I.B.
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Cross River University of Technology (CRUTECH) Obubra
Campus
e-mail address bon 4 all_2006 yahoo.com

57
ASSESSMENT OF POVERTY LEVEL AMONG THE RURAL FARMING HOUSEHOLDS IN BOSSO LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AREA OF NIGER STATE, NIGERIA
Ajayi, O.J, Adebayo, A.H. and Ndatsu, J.A

Federal University of Technology, Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension Technology, PMB
65,Minna,Niger State, Nigeria.
.
ABSTRACT
The study examined the assessment of poverty level among the rural farming households in
Bosso Local Government Area of Niger State, Nigeria. The specific objectives were to
examine the socio-economic profile of the farmers, evaluate access of the farmers to certain
social infrastructures and determine the expenditure pattern of the people. Descriptive statistics
and multiple regression analysis were used. Personal income of household head and household
size were the major determinants of household expenditure. Information was elicited from 100
farmers with the aid of structured questionnaire. 79.6% of the total variation in household
expenditure was explained by the regression model, while the remaining 20.4% of the
variation was accounted for by the exogenous factors. The World Bank reference lines: $1.08
and $2.15 in 1993 PPP (purchasing power parity) per capital consumption per day was as the
bench mark for poverty line. Major problems faced by the rural household include inadequate
capital, lack of good road network, marketing of farm produce and insufficient/excessive
rainfall. Formulation and implementation of appropriate pricing policy of farm produce should
be encouraged. Social infrastructures should be provided and farmers should be given
concession in disbursement of loans from financial institutions.
KEYWORDS: poverty level, purchasing power party and income.
INTRODUCTION
Poverty implies a condition in which individuals have little to eat, limited to wear and very rudimentary shelter to
live in and there is corollary that the poor person has little or no means of recreation and tourism (Akinbode, 1991).
As a financial risk, the poor cannot pay loans in cash which are rarely obtained from financial institutions. Akinbode
further explained that rural poverty is manifested clearly in the inadequacies of rural resident requirements such as
food, Housing, Medical Care, Education, consumer goods and environmental sanitation. Poverty in Africa is
pervasive and predominantly rural. The evidence, however, is that forty percent of the population live below the
international poverty line of $ 1.08 per day (in 1985 purchasing power parity dollars), De Haan and Yaqub 1998).
This figure is comparable to south Asia, but is rising in sub-Saharan African and falling elsewhere (allowing for the
short term effects of the East Asian crisis).
The character of poverty in Africa is changing over time. Worldwide, there have been increases in urban areas, war-
affected regions and among women, the landless and the elderly; these tendencies are evident in Africa (Maxwell,
1998). Poverty is one of the most serious problems in Nigeria-today, despite various efforts of the Government from
independence to date, poverty among the people of Nigeria has been on the increase. Statistical data available
indicate that in 1960, the poverty level in Nigeria covers about 15% of the population and by 1980 it grew to 28%.
In 1985, the poverty level was 46% and it dropped to 43% by 1992. By 1996, the federal office of statistics
estimated the poverty level in Nigeria at alarming rate of 66% and there are a number of real indications to show that
the current poverty level has gone higher. Federal Office of statistics, 1996. Determinants in measuring poverty level
include economic, social, cultural and political factors that interact to maintain long term structural disparities in
opportunities and resources (Barbara and Valerie, 1999).
The main occupation of rural dwellers is Agriculture. According to Olayemi (1980), he said over Ninety percent of
Nigeria total food comes from the rural areas. Some of the characteristics of rural farming area: small and
fragmented holdings, low output, the use of crude tools, the practice of shifting cultivation and bush fallowing
labour intensive and lack of specialization. In essence, rural farmers engage in subsistence production and their goal
is satisfying family foods requirement. Poverty is also defined as a “state of one who lacks a usual or socially
acceptable amount of money or material possessions” (Merriam – Webster Collegiate Dictionary, 1995).
Ajayi, O.J et al: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 58 - 64, 2008
58
The poor also described their interaction with government employees and institutions, revealing another aspect of
life in poverty, lack of political power or lack of voice and political rights. Alayande (2003) carried out a
vulnerability assessment of Nigeria. The study identified rural Nigerians as the most vulnerable to poverty.
Vulnerability has two sides, the external exposure to shocks, stress, and risk, and the internal defenselessness,
meaning a lack of mean to cope without damaging loss. Outside sources of risk range from irregular rainfall and
epidermis to crime and violence as well as structural and vulnerability of homes and civil conflicts. Thus, the poor
powered peace and securely as the highest priority, even over better food and shelter.
Problems encounter by these rural farming household include dangerous working conditions, poor nutrition, lack of
preventive heath care and exposure to environmental contaminants. The Specific objectives include to:
- Examine the socio economic profile the people in the study area;
- Determine the expenditure pattern of the people.
- Evaluate access of the people to certain infrastructures;
- Draw policy implications regarding the issue of poverty and vulnerability among the rural farming
household from the findings.
METHODOLOGY
The study was carried out between February and August, 2007. Villages were randomly selected in the study, which
are area Beji (30), Garatu (15), Gidan Kwano (15), Maikunkele (30), Kodo (10), sample size was 100. Descriptive
statistics, regression analysis was used.
Regression analysis = Implicit form Y

Y = F (X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6, U)
Where Y = Household expenditure, (Education, Health. Transportation, clothing.

X1 – X6 = explanatory variables
X1 – Age of household head (m years)
X2 – Sex of household head
X3 – Education status of household head
X4 – Personal income of household head
X5 – Marital Status
X6 – Household size
U – Residual error
Explicit Form
Linear regression
Y = b0 + b1 X1 + b2 X2 + b3 X3 + b4 X4 + b5 X5 + b6 X6 + U

Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Respondents.
It is important to know the demographic characteristics of the rural farming household. Thus will enable us to
deduce reasons for the observed facts and the level of influence these factors have on the poverty level among the
rural farming households.
59
Table 1.0: Socio-Economic Characteristics of the respondents’ social feature
Age (years) Frequency Percentage (%)

Less than or equal to 30 16 16.0
31 – 40 34 34.0
41 – 50 30 30.0
51 - 60 10 10.0
Above 61 10 10.0
Total 100.0 100.00
Marital status
Single 11 11.0
Married 89 89.0
Divorced - -
Widow - -
Total 100.0 100.0
Educational level
No formal education 25 25.0
Primary level 35 35.0
Secondary level 20 20.0
Post secondary level 9 9.0
Quranic education 11 11.0
Total 100.0 100.0
Household size
01 11 11.0
2–5 20 20.0
6 – 10 50 50.0
11 – 15 19 19.0
Total 100.0 100.0
Occupation
Farming and trading 80 80.0
Farming and transportation 12 12.0
Farming and civil service 8 8.0
Total 100.0
Land Acquisition
By inheritance 98 98.0
By lease 2 2.0
By purchase - -
By rent - -
Total 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Survey, 2007
Age:
From Table 1.0, respondents whose age range is between 31 – 40 years accounted for 34.0% of the rural farming
household whereas between 41 – 50 years accounted for 30.0%. The active group here is between the age of 31 – 40
years which indicates that able bodied men were the active labour force engaged in food production activity. With
this, abundant harvest and a profitable enterprise was most probable.
Marital Status
The Table revealed that 89.0% of the rural farming household is married while 11.0% are single. There were no
cases of divorced or widowed in the study area. The implication of this is that family labour would be the bulk
source of labour for farming activities.
Level of Education
Data in Table 1.0 show the distribution of the rural farming household according to their level of education. 35.0%
of the respondents had primary education. 25.0% with no formal education while 20.0% with secondary level
60
education. So, the literacy level is still very low in the farming communities. According to the World Bank report
(1999), Nigeria’s Human Development Index was only 0.416. Cited by (NAPEP 2001).
Household Size
Table 1.0 show that 50.0% of the respondents have an household size of 6 – 10. This implies that family labour is a
vital source for farming operations.
Occupation
In almost all the rural areas in Nigeria, people engage in different economic activities to earn a living. 80.0% of the
respondents were engaged in farming and trading; 12.0% involve in farming and transportation while 8.0% engaged
in civil service with farming. This corroborates the findings of Olayemi (1980) that rural areas are the food basket of
the nation.
Land Acquisition
Land is a major factor of production 98.0% of the respondent acquired land by inheritance while 2.0% by lease. The
implication is that for agriculture to be fully mechanized and commercialized method of land acquisition has to be
liberalized.
Standard of living indicators

The indicators of standard of living are potable water supply, electricity, health facilities and good road network
among others. The ability of the government to provide the populace with these social amenities is important.
Public poverty refers to the inability of the state to adequately meet the costs that are usually borne by government
respect of social amenities provision.
Source of water
Water is the source of life. It is both a domestic and industrial input. Table 2.0 shows the source of water of the
respondents.
Table2. 0: Source of water distribution of the respondents.

Source Frequency Percentage (%)
Well 45 45.0
Borehole 25 25.0
Stream 20 20.0
River 7 7.0
Tap water 3 3.0
Total 100 100.0
From the Table, 45.0% of the respondents obtained their drinking water from well, 25.0% from borehole, stream
20.0%, river 7.0% while tap water accounts for only. The implication is that safe drinking water is scarce in rural
areas. This confirms the findings of Adeyeye (2006) that 52 percent of Nigerians drink “dirty” water.
Source of light
This is how people in different localities obtain their light.
Table 3.0: Source of light usage distribution of respondents

Kerosene 88 88.0
Electricity 12 12.0
Total 100 100.0
The Table 3.0 indicates that 88.0% of the respondents made use of kerosene lantern while 12.0% used electricity.
Electricity is an essential production input and a factor that influences rural – urban migration and a drain of labour
force. Akinbode (1991) confirmed the inadequacy of electrical power supply in the rural areas.
61
Presence of health facilities
Rural areas like the urban counterpart need functional health facilities.
Table 4.0: Presence of health facilities in the respondents’ localities.

Yes 58 58.0
No 42 42.0
Total 100 100.0
Table 4.0 indicates that 58.0% of the study areas have health facilities while 42.0% do not have. The implication of
this is that most rural dwellers are forced to travel to the nearest town or city in order to get health treatment. Lives
might be lost in the course of transportation.
Road Network
A good road network is an important economic facility. It provides a link between food production areas and the
consumption centers.
Table 5.0: Presence of good road network distribution

Yes 46 46.0
No 54 54.0
Total 100 100.0
The Table 5 indicates that 54.0% of the respondents affirmed the bad state of road network within villages, to farms
and from one locality to another. The consequence of this to the farmers among others include difficulty in
transporting goods from the farms to the nearest markets, high transportation cost and a general disincentive to large
scale farming.
Table 6.0: Regression Result

Variable Coefficient t – Ratio Decision
- Bo 5.075
X1 B1 - .089 -.926 Not significant
X2 B2 - .021 -.441 Not significant
X3 B3 - .042 .738 Not significant
X4 B4 - .221 3.254 P<.05
X5 B5 - .100 1.645 Not significant
X6 B6 - .754 6.335 P<.05
Table 7.0: Model Summary
Standard Error
Model R R square Adjusted R space of the estimate
1 .892 .796 .783 2692.01398
a. Predictors: Constant, household size, sex of household head, educational status,

Marital status, personal income, age of household head.
b. Dependent variable: household expenditure.
The Age of household (X1), sex of household head (X2), educational status of household head (X3) and the marital
status of the respondents are not significant at 5% level. The personal income of household head (X4) has a positive
coefficient and positive t ratio values. It also has a probability level of P<.05. This shows a linear township between
personal income level and the household expenditure. According to Keynesian consumption function “the
62
fundamental psychological law is that men (women) are disposed, as a rule and on average to increase their
consumption as their income increase, but not as much as the increase in their income” (Damodar, 1995).
The household size (X6) has a positive coefficient value. The t ratio is also positive and significant at 5%. This
shows that there is a positive relationship between household size and the household expenditure. Thus, an increase
in the household size irrespective of living standard would lead to an increase in the household expenditure, all
things being equal. Usually, people with small family size could afford a better standard of living compared with a
large family size.
The coefficient of determination (r2) has a value of 0.796. This implies that 79.6% of the total variation in household
expenditure is explained by the regression model (explanatory variables). Hence, the regression model is 79.6%
fitted. The remaining 20.4% of the variation in household expenditure is explained by the exogenous factors.
The adjusted R square (R2) has a value of 0.783. It confirms the accuracy of coefficient of determination (0.796).
The closer the values of the two, the better fitted the model.
The F value was significant at 5% level. F calculated value (60.488) and F table value (2.96); hence, there is a
significant relationship between household expenditure and the explanatory variables.
Expenditure per capita = Total household expenditure

Household size
With the formula, taking N279.50k as the minimum consumption level, about 80% of the respondents fell below the
poverty line.
Vulnerability is defined as the likelihood of being adversely affected by a block that usually causes consumption
levels or other factors that affect well being to drop (World Bank, 2001). Low output of farmers leads to low income
level which also leads to low savings and investment and a lack of social security thereby increasing the
vulnerability of farmers to poverty. Rural Nigerians has been identified as the most vulnerable to poverty (Alayande,
2003).
PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY RURAL FARMING HOUSEHOLD

The major problems encountered by these rural farming household include the following with their various
percentages.
Problems Frequency Percentage Ranking
Lack of capital 85 60.7 1
Marketing of farm produce 40 28.6 2
Lack of road network 5 3.6 4
Insufficient/excessive train fall 10 7 3
Total 140* 100.0
Field Survey, 2007
*Multiple responses
Lack of capital is the biggest problem encountered by the rural farming with 60.7% while marketing of their produce
which is 28.6% followed by insufficient or excessive rainfall and finally lack of good road network. All these affect
their household living.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Conclusion
Based on the findings of study, assessment of poverty level among the rural farming household, the study identified
some constraints which if overcome would ameliorate conditions of the people, improve the general standard of the
rural dwellers and boast agricultural production.
Recommendations
Stakeholders at various levels should embark on investing in social infrastructures development of the rural areas.
63
Government should provide good road network for the disposition of agricultural produce of these rural household.
Encouragement in the area of capital through agricultural banks.
Impacting the ideas and knowledge about cooperatives societies in their various groups (Awareness).
REFERENCES
Adeyeye J.52 percent of Nigeria drinks dirty water. Daily Punch, October 2, 2006,56,3.
Akinbode A. (1991): Process, problems and prospects of Rural Developments in Nigeria”. A paper presented at the
seminar of the centre for food and agricultural strategy, university of Agriculture, Makurdi, January, pp.20.
Alayande, B.A. (2003) Vulnerability Assessment: Some evidence from Nigeria. A World Bank Commissioned
Study, pp. 15 -50.
Barbara, D. and Valerie, J. (World Bank 1999). Understanding poverty and Vulnerability in India’s Ultar Pradesh
and Bishar pp. 21.
Damodar, N.G.(1995). Basic Econometrics, McGraw-Hill Company Incorporated, New York pp4
DeHaan, A. and Yaqub, S. (1998). What is know about identifying the poor in Africa and the Middle East? Paper
presented at work shop on Building and sustaining the capacity for social policy reform; Morocco, Mineo, Poverty
Research Unit, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom. pp. 14
Merriam – Webster, Collegiate Dictionary, 1995.
Maxwell, S (1998), Agricultural Development and poverty Africa. CIA Annual Report Special
Paper pp. 12.
Olayemi, J. K (1980). Food Crop production by small scale farmers in Nigeria: problems and Prospects in integrated
rural development. pp. 1- 4
Yemi, K. and Michael, F.: Poverty Eradication: Nigeria still has a long way to go. Daily Punch, October, 23, 2006,
56, 22.
World Bank (1996). “Nigeria : poverty in the midst of plenty. The challenge of growth with inclusion. A World
Bank poverty assessment: report No. 1433, UNT, May 31, population and Human Resources Division Western
Africa Department, Africa Region.
World Bank (2001). A World Bank poverty assessment: Report No. 14733 UNI. May 31, population and Human
Resources Division West Africa Department, Africa Region.
National Poverty Eradication Programme (NAPEP, 2001) Conception, Implementation, Coordination and
Monitoring April Edition pp. 1 – 5.

Ndatsu, J.A
Federal University of Technology, Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension Technology, PMB 65,
Minna,Niger State, Nigeria

64
TECHNOLOGICAL DUALISM, AGRICULTURE AND THE UNEMPLOYMENT PROBLEM OF
DEVELOPING ECONOMIES
Egbe B. E 1, Ogar A. M 2, Ibrahim M.K 3 and Albert, A. T4

1,2,3
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, 4Department of Political Science, Federal
Polytechnic, Kaduna
ABSTRACT
Developing countries are likely to be subjected to greater and greater technological dualism
and the importation of modern efficient and large scale technologies is expected to exacerbate
the dualistic problem, create unemployment, and lead to greater inequality in income
distribution”. This paper provides hypothetical analyses of the preceding assertion. After an
introduction highlighting the dualistic problem, the paper provides theoretical and analytical
views of technological dualism. Using hypothetical scenario, critical analyses of the effects of
technological dualism on agricultural productivity and employment generation were given.
Conclusion and recommendations were made for development planning.
KEYWORDS: Technology, unemployment, productivity, importation, inequality, income.
INTRODUCTION
One important feature of technology is its use for creating wealth in an economy. This very important feature of
technology may be visible in the industrial or urban sector but relatively not seen in the agricultural or rural sectors
of developing countries. There exists significant difference in the level of technology used in the industrial and the
agricultural sectors. The industries employ modern technology known for high efficiency of production and large
outputs per time. On the contrary, developing economies agriculture (predominantly subsistence) is dominated by
traditional technology characterized by high labour intensity and low productivity in terms of input – output
relationships. The differentiation in the industrial and agricultural sectors in terms of technology generates what
Wolgin (1978) called the “dualistic problem”. He stated that “developing countries are likely to be subjected to
greater and greater technological dualism and the importation of modern efficient and large scale technologies is
expected to exacerbate the dualistic problem, create unemployment, and lead to greater inequality in income
distribution”. This paper provides hypothetical analyses of the situation in Wolgin’s assertion.
TECHNOLOGICAL DUALISM: THEORETICAL/ANALYTICAL INTERPRETATION

Technological dualism is a subset of a broader economic concept, dualism. In general, technological dualism is
defined as coexistence of two differentiated sectors within an economy, the differentiation being in the technology
used. The two sectors may be viewed as the industrial and agricultural sectors, commercial and subsistence sectors
or urban and rural sectors. Several analytical views to technological dualism exist in literature. Ghandour and Muller
(1977) identified two approaches, and they developed a new approach included here as the third approach.
i) The surplus labour/agricultural surplus absorption approach. This approach is centered on the fact that the
process of development involves the extraction and disposition of surplus labour and/or agricultural surplus from the
agricultural sector. The dualistic structure is seen by an asymmetry in the production function. That is, the industrial
sector uses reproducible capital and labour to produce its products, and the agricultural sector does not utilize any
reproducible capital. This is due to the different capital intensities of the production process for each of the two
commodities and the relative expensiveness of capital and cheapness of labour. This approach is associated with
economists such as L.A. Lewis, J.C. Fei, G. Ranis, Richard D. Jorgenson, and C. Wharton.
ii) Factor Market Imperfection Approach: Technological dualism is viewed as the utilization of two different
techniques in producing the same commodity, which must be due to the distortions in the factor markets such that
different entrepreneurs face the same production function. This approach was first used by M. Myint.
iii) Two Production Functions Approach: Technological dualism viewed here as the existence of two
production functions for the same commodity facing the respective sectoral entrepreneurs (Meier, 1995). The two
entrepreneurs are assumed to face differing endowments of non conventional inputs such as
Egbe B. E et al: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 65 - 68, 2008
65
Table 1: The Different Non Conventional Inputs available to the Subsistent and Commercial Sectors Entrepreneurs.
Endowments of Subsistent Sector Entrepreneur (or Farmer) Endowments of Commercial Sector Entrepreneur (or Farmer)
Low level of technological sophistication A level of technological sophistication involving familiarity
with the ability to work with modern inputs and methods
Possess adequate managerial skills and aptitude, capable of

Possess inadequate managerial skills and aptitude. working in a complex economic system with relatively high
level of specialization.
Possess socio-economic attitudes towards risks, profit

Possess social values of pre-industrial societies. maximization and types of labour relationship.
Cultural pattern are influenced by exposure to advanced

Cultural patterns are archaic and do not respond rapidly to societies.
change.
Adopted from Ghandour and Muller (1977).
Different endowments of non conventional inputs avail different levels of technology (Table 2) to the different sectoral
entrepreneurs.
Table 2. The Different Technologies adopted in Subsistent and Commercial Sectors.

Description Technology used in Subsistent Sector Technology used in Commercial
Sector
Tools Simple: fire hoe, axe, digging sticks, Complex: tractors and implements,
machetes threshers
Crops Many species (5-80) landraces, no genetic Few species (1-3) improved genetic
improvements, wide genetic base base
Several species
Animals Usually 1 or 2 species
Manual, human energy or animal power
Labour Mechanical, petroleum fuels,
Fallows, ash, organic manures electrical energy
Soil fertility maintenance Inorganic fertilizers, sometimes

manures, soil amendments e.g. lime,
Manual etc
Crop management Growth regulators for defoliation,

Physical and cultural control of flowering and fruit drop,
etc
Pest and disease control
Mainly Mechanicals and chemicals
(insecticides, fungicides, etc)
Manual or with simple tools
Mechanical: tractor and implements
Harvesting including threshers and combine
harvesters.
Simple sun – drying or over fire. Mechanical forced air, artificial

drying using petroleum fuels and
Post harvest handling and drying sometimes refrigeration.
Adopted from Okigbo (1988) in: Asoegwu and Asoegwu (2007).
66
managerial/organizational skills, levels of technological know-how, information and social attitudes (Ghandour and
Muller, 1977).
TECHNOLOGICAL DUALISM AND AGRICULTURE

As in most dualistic structure, if the agricultural sector production processes are characterized by labour intensive
techniques and variable technical coefficients of production, while the production processes in the industrial sector
are capital intensive and posses relatively fixed technical coefficients, the technology of the industrial sector may
impede growth in the agricultural sector (Thirlwall, 2003). Relatively fixed technical coefficients (i.e. low elasticity
of factor – factor substitution) means that labour can be absorbed into the industrial sector only as fast as capital
growth. Secondly, high capital intensity will restrict employment opportunities in the industrial sector. Agriculture
will have to absorb more labour, while land remains relatively fixed. Hence, agricultural productivity will be slowed
down because at the long run all available land becomes cultivated by highly labour intensive techniques. Marginal
productivity of labour falls to a low level (Meier, 1995). It is argued that in the long run, technological progress in
the industrial sector will not ease the situation. It will favour more capital intensive techniques, so that it will all the
more be difficult to employ more labour as investments and outputs expand.
From the perspective of two production functions approach, technological dualism gives no better implication for
agriculture. Two entrepreneurs gave their different endowments of non conventional inputs (Table 1) produce the
same farm produce at different production functions.
Adoption of different level of technologies makes the commercial sector entrepreneur to produce same commodity
at a higher production function than the subsistent sector entrepreneur. Improvement in the subsistent farmer’s
technology will only cause his output to increase along his prevailing production function. He can only produce at
the same level as his commercial counterpart in the long run when his endowments of non conventional inputs must
have changed positively, which requires a very piecewise process. The short term implication is that aggregate
agricultural outputs remain low (at lower production function than those of commercial sector entrepreneur) since
majority of farmers in developing economies are in the subsistent sector. If not checked the low productivity is
sustained in the long term.
Technological Dualism and Unemployment Problem

Several development economists have suggested that the unemployment problem of developing economies is due to
the existence of technological dualism. They observed that technological dualism is associated with structural or
technological unemployment (Thirlwall, 2003), a situation in which employment is limited, not due to lack of
effective demand, but due to resource and technological constraints in two sectors. Using the graphical illustration
(fig. 1) of Meier (1995) the unemployment situation caused by these technological constraints can be explained.
Points a, b, c, etc represent the fixed combination of factors; capital (k) and labour (L) that would be needed to
produce the outputs Q1, Q2, Q3, etc, irrespective of what the relative factor prices were. The line OE, joining the
points a, b, c, etc represents the expansion path of this sector (industrial sector), and its slope is equal to a fixed
value (relative capital intensive factor ratio). Only when capital and labour are actually available in the proportions
equal to the fixed capital labour ratio is it possible that both factors can be fully utilized simultaneously. If the actual
factor endowments is to the right of the line OE say, at point F, there must be some employment of labour in this
sector. To produce an output of Q1 the sector will use OK1 units of capital and OL1 units of labour, even though
OL2 units of labour are available. The excess supply of labour will have no effect on production techniques, L1L2
units of labour will remain in excess supply, regardless of the relative factor prices of capital and labour. The excess
labour will be employed only if capital stock were to increase in the amount indicated by the line FF1. Where
technological dualism is due to foreign enclave, a large proportion of industrial savings which would have been
invested in capital expansion are remitted to their home country, leading to insufficient accumulation of capital. This
causes the excess labour to remain unemployed or seek employment in the agricultural sector.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Although technological dualism is an inevitable attribute of development process, it impedes agricultural growth
rates and the employment prospects in developing economies. For a sustained economic growth these challenges
must be checked through proper development planning. The checks must be two sector based just as technological
dualism itself. First, in the industrial sector, the economic planners would need to find out what and how benefits
67
will be shared between the sectors before an industrial development plan is adopted. They should maximize
reinvestment potential of any industry, economize on scarce foreign exchange, maximize the backward and forward
linkages of any industry and emphasize employment generation. Second, in the agricultural sector, a piecewise
process of transformation is required. Early in the process, appropriate – intermediate technology (in factors and
methods) that can be easily adopted by the agricultural sector (subsistent sector) should be introduced. This
technology is employment generating rather than underemployment or unemployment stimulating (Olayide, 1980).
Moreover, the agricultural sector entrepreneurs should be provided access to extension services as well as credit
facilities. This will facilitate the adoption of appropriate – intermediate technology and thereby boost agricultural
productivity.
REFERENCES
Asoegwu, S. and Asoegwu, A. (2007). An Overview of Agricultural Mechanisation and its Environmental
Management in Nigeria. Agricultural Engineering International: the CIGR E Journal Invited Overview. 6
(8).
Ghandour, M. and Muller, J. (1977). A New Approach to Technological Dualism. Economic Development and
Cultural Change. University of Chicago Press. 25(4): 629 – 637.
Meier, G.M. (1995). Leading Issues in Economic Development (6th Ed). Oxford University Press, New York.
Olayide, S.O. (1980). Agricultural Technology and the Nigerian Small Farmers. The Nigerian Small Farmers:
Problems and Prospects in Integrated Rural Development. Centre for Agriculture and Rural Development
(CARD), Ibadan, Nigeria. Pp.52 – 65.
Thirlwall, A.P. (2003). Growth and Development: With Special Reference to Developing Countries. Palgrave
Macmillan, New York, U.S.A.
Wolgin, J.M. (1978). Manufacturing Industry in Nigeria’s Third Development Plan. Journal of Modern African
Studies. Cambridge University Press. 16 (4): 687 – 693.

Ibrahim M.K
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka
email: kebitex@yahoo.co.uk

68
ASSESSMENT OF FARMERS’ PARTICIPATION LEVEL IN NATIONAL SPECIAL PROGRMME FOR FOOD
SECURITY: A CASE STUDY OF WARAWA LOCAL GVERNMENT AREA OF KANO STATE.
I. Tafida, 1 and H.A. Danwanka, 2

1
Department of Agricultural Economics & Extension, Bayero University, Kano
2
Department of Agricultural Economics & Extension, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi State-
Nigeria.
ABSTRACT
The study focused on the assessment of farmers’ participation in National Special Programme
for Food Security (NSPFS) in Warawa Local Government Area of Kano State. Data were
collected from 100 randomly selected farmers’ through the use of interview schedule, while
the information collected was analyzed using descriptive statistics, regression (logit) and
ranking. The result indicated that, the age of the farmers range from 15 to 72 with a mean of 37
years. They also have a mean household size of 13 members with an average farm size of
3.42ha as well as a mean farming experience of 22years. Similarly, majority of the
respondents (46%) have medium level of participation in NSPFS. Also farmers’ age, years of
awareness and farming experience were statistically significant (P<0.05; 0.0164, 0.0533 and
P<0.01; 0.0054) to participation. Nevertheless, local leadership problems, inadequate quantity
and quality inputs, diversion of inputs meant for the Programme and inadequate Extension
agents constitute the major constraints to the respondents’ active participation in the
Programme. It is hereby recommended that training and development of local leadership,
provision of adequate inputs as well as Extension personnel will go a long way in improving
farmers’ participation in the Programme.
KEYWORDS: Farmers, participation level, NSPFS, Warawa in Kano State-Nigeria.
INTRODUCTION
The importance of agriculture in accelerating the social, economic and political growth in developing Countries
such as Nigeria has been well recognized (Igben, 1988). Agriculture is an integral part of our lives as large
percentage of working hours are taken up by efforts to provide food for ourselves. Despite the fact that
agriculture employed about 80% of Nigeria population, yet the production yield from the sector is very poor or
low couple with rapid growth in population which far exceeds growth in food production (Daneji, et al. 2006).
This is posing a threat to National Food Security, and food security exists when all people, at all times, have
access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary requirement for an active and healthy life.
Therefore in an attempt to cope with increasing food demand by the country’s teeming population, the
government of Nigeria decides to look inwards for ways of improving agricultural production in the country,
which was in line with world food summit held in Rome, Italy in November, 1996. through strengthening the
innovative approach to food security in low-income food-deficit Countries, which lead to concerted effort being
made of bringing together the basic elements and key players necessary to increase staple food production in a
sustainable manner (FAO,2006). However, this could only be achieved by ensuring an enabling political, social
and economic environment as well as encouraging effective grassroots participation of rural people to be
involve in the planning of Programmes as the originators, planners, controllers and executors of their own
Programme designed to create the best conditions for the eradication of poverty and for durable peace, based on
full and equal participation of men and women, which is most conducive to achieving sustainable food security
for all (FAO, 1996).
Hence the need to involve the farmers to determine agricultural extension Programme in order to make the
services more responsive to local conditions, more accountable, more effective and more sustainable can not be
overemphasized owing to the fact that successful management of resources by and large rest on the support,
understanding and cooperation of rural people, local, state, federal governments as well as the private sector.
The broad objective of this study is to assess farmers’ participation level in NSPFS Programme in Warawa local
government area, Kano State. Specifically the study aimed at the following;
I. Tafida, and H.A. Danwanka: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 69 - 73, 2008
69
a. determine the socio-economic characteristics of farmers’ in NSPFS
b. examine the farmers level of participation in NSPFS recommended practices
c. determine the relationship between farmers’ socio-economic variables and their
level of participation in NSPFS
d. investigate the constraints to farmers’ active participation in NSPFS
Table 1: Summary of Socio-economic Characteristics of the Farmers

Characteristics Minimum Maximum Mean Standard Percentage
Error
Age 15 72 36.97 1.236683 -

Household size 4 27 13.3 0.433799 -
Farming experience 4 64 22.19 1.258241 -
Farm size 0.5 8 3.42 0.204954 -
Educated (formal) - - - - 40
Gender (male) - - - - 97
M/status (married) - - - - 89
Occupation (major) - - - - 95
Table 2: Respondents level of participation in NSPFS recommended practices

Number of Practices Frequency Percentage
Low participation 42 42.00
Medium participation 46 46.00
High participation 12 12.00
Total 100 100.00
Mean= 3.96
*1 – 3 practices low participation
*4 – 6 practices medium participation
*7 – 9 practices high participation
METHODOLOGY
The study area
Warawa Local Government Area, (LGA) lies within the Sudan Savannah ecological zone of Nigeria. The local
government is located in the north-central part of Kano State, bounded to the north by Gezawa and Gabasawa
L.G.A.s, in the south by Dawakin Kudu L.G.A., in the west by Kumbotso L.G.A. and by Wudil L.G.A. in the
east. The local government area covers a total land size of 3,671 square km and lies between latitude 11o 52’
and 12 o 00’N and longitude 8o 43’ and 8o 56’E. The climatic condition and vegetation cover of the area
consist of two distinct seasons: the wet and dry seasons.
The main land use pattern in Warawa L.G.A. involved the production of rain fed crops; irrigated crops;
economic tree crops and rearing of animals. Among the rain fed crops produced include maize, sorghum, millet,
cowpea and groundnut. Also irrigated crops include rice, wheat, water melon and vegetable crops (tomatoes,
onion, pepper and cabbage). Mango, guava, cashew and pawpaw are the commonly grown economic trees.
Data collection
Simple random sampling technique was used in selecting the respondents for this study. Farmers participating
in NSPFS activities and programmes in the local government area constituted the target population of this
study. A total of 100 respondents were chosen and data were collected through the use of questionnaire, which
was administered to respondents.
70
Data analysis
The data collected was analyzed using descriptive statistics such as percentages, minimum, maximum, mean,
ranking and inferential statistics such as logit regression. These were employed to analyze socio-economic
information of farmers’ and participation level in NSPFS in the study area. The tools are considered adequate in
the study of demographics variables as adopted by Daneji (2006), Rahman and Alamu (2003) and Fakoya
(2004).
Table 3: Estimated logit regression analysis of socio-economic

characteristics and participation variables of NSPFS programme
Variable Coefficient Standard Z-value Probability
error level
Constant -2.553374 1.647799 -1.549566 0.1212ns
Age (X1) -17.11095 7.131779 -2.399254 0.0164*
Household size(X2) 0.577976 3.262074 0.177180 0.8594ns
Educational status(X3 ) 1.242882 1.371774 0.906040 0.3649ns
Farming experience(X4) 20.76477 7.465776 2.781328 0.0054**
Farm size(X5) -1.101585 3.115001 -0.353639 0.7236 ns
Awareness level(X6) 2.330976 1.206167 1.932549 0.0533*

** = Significant at P< 0.01
*= Significant at P< 0.05
ns= Not significant
Socio-economic characteristics of the respondents
In Table 1 the socio-economic characteristic of farmers were presented. The result showed that the vast majority
of the respondents (54%) were between 20 and 39 years bracket and the mean age of respondents was 37years.
This implies that majority of the respondents were still in their prime or active age who are likely to participate
more in NSPFS Programme. Majority (97%) of the respondents were male while 89% of them were married. As
for mean household size, farm size and farming experience of the respondents were presented their as13.3, 3.42
and 22.19 respectively. While 99% of them had either western or non western education which implies that
their educational background was adequate to comprehend the different components of the Programme.
Respondents’ level of participation in NSPFS recommended practices

Table 2 showed that majority (46%) of the respondents were having medium participation by participating in
only 4-6 practices out of nine practices recommended by NSPFS Programme with a mean (average) practices
per respondent of four practices. It could therefore be deduced from the study that there was a medium level of
participation in the study area. It is only when farmers participate in more practices that will lead to a better
standard of living.
Relationship between respondent’s socio-economic variables and their participation in NSPFS Programme
activities
Table 3 shows the results of logit regression analysis of socio-economic variables influencing the respondents’
participation in the Programme. It revealed a good fit with −2log likelihood of −63.38362 and 100% of
respondents’ correctly classified after 6 iterations. It showed that three variables (age, farming experience and
awareness level) were statistically significant (P<0.05 and P<0.01) in determining the respondents’ participation
in the Programme. It can be seen that age was significant (P<0.05) with negative coefficient of -17.11095. This
means an inverse relationship between age of respondents and their participation. The inverse relationship could
be attributed to the fact that older farmers often tend to be more conservative (traditional) and afraid of taking
risk, which adoption of new practices or technologies entails. It was said that younger farmers are more
71
dynamic and more willing to take risk connected with the adoption of new agricultural practices (Hamidu et. al.
2006). Also farming experience has influence (P<0.01) over the respondents ability to participate in the
Programme. This implies that, the more years of experience of the farmer, the more he/she tries to explore new
practice. Also, Igben (1988) pointed out that, agricultural extension services are ineffective principally because
the agents hardly transfer sizeable number of new technologies. This goes to show that a long farming
experience is an advantage rather than a disadvantage for increased farm productivity. Similarly, awareness
level was also significant (P<0.05) with a coefficient of 2.330976, meaning that respondents knowledge of the
Programme (years of awareness) was statistically significant in determining participation in the Programme.
The implication of this finding could be that awareness of the existence of a Programme does not necessarily
lead to participation and hence increased capability; one should interpret this observation with care, even though
it is only when an individual is aware about a Programme that he/she may decide to get involved in it. The
finding of this study conforms to previous findings (Auta, et. al. 1992; Daneji, et. al. 2006) who reported
significant relationship between age, farming experience and awareness level.
Table 4: Distribution of respondents according to constraints to their

active participation in NSPFS Programme
Constraints Frequency* Ranking
Local leadership problems 78 (78%) 1st
Inadequate quantity and quality inputs 75 (75%) 2nd
Diversion of inputs meant for the programme 72 (72%) 3rd
Inadequate extension agents 70 (70%) 4th
Delay encountered in obtaining inputs 42 (42%) 5th
Delay involved in securing agricultural
Loan from Banks 24 (24%) 6th Source:
Field survey, 2006
Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentages
*Percentage not hundred because of multiple responses
Major constraints affecting respondents’ active participation in NSPFS Programme
These served as bottleneck being encountered towards the active participation in NSPFS Programme in the
study area. Table 4 revealed that the major constraints faced in the area were local leadership problem,
inadequate quantity and quality inputs, diversion of inputs meant for the Programme, inadequacy of extension
agents, delay encountered in obtaining inputs and securing agricultural loan from Banks accounting for 78%,
75%, 72%, 70%, 42% and 24% respectively. The implication of this findings is that, as farmers find it difficult
to trust their local leaders due to their perception of them as been selfish, bias and involved in diverting inputs
meant for the generality of the farmers, its may hinder their active participation and adoption rate, hence they
ranked as first and third most important constraints.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

From the findings of this study one can conclude that even though the respondents are willing to participate
actively in NSPFS Programme activities, the respondents’ participation level was moderate which a reflection
of their interest in the Programme is. It is therefore recommended that training and development of local
leadership, provision of adequate quantity and quality inputs at the right time as well as deploying more
extension agents to the Programme will go a long way in improving farmers’ participation.
REFERENCES
Auta, S. J., Ariyo, Y. A. and Akpoko, J. E. (1992): Socio-Spatial Variation in Selected Villages in Futua and Jema’a
Local Government Areas. Nigerian Journal of Agricultural Extension. 7 (2): 86 – 89.
Daneji, M. I. (2006): Multivariate Analysis of Women Participation in Agricultural Activities in Bauchi State.
Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University Bauchi, Nigeria. 41 – 98pp.
72
Daneji, M. I., Tafida, I. and Ali, B. U. (2006): Socio-Economic Determinants of Technology Adoption by Farmers
of Maigana Zone of the Kaduna state Agricultural Development Programme. In: I.R. Muhammad, B.F. Muhammad,
F. Bibi-Farouk, Y. Shehu (eds)Application of Appropriate Technology in Overcoming Environmental Barriers in
Animal Agriculture in Nigeria. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of Nigerian Society for
AnimalProduction Held at Bayero University Kano, Nigeria from 12th – 15th March, 2006. Pp 188 – 190.
Fakoya, E. O. (2004): Selection and Use of Statistical Tools in Agricultural and Extension Rural Sociology
Research. Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development Lecture Series II, University of Agriculture
Abeokuta, Nigeria. Pp 3 – 18.
FAO (1996): Rome Declaration on World Food Summit Held on 13th – 17th November, 1996, Rome Italy. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.2pp.
FAO (2006): Helping to Build a World Without Hunger. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,
Technical Cooperation Department, Rome.1p
Hamidu, B. M., Murtala, N., Illiyasu, A. Y. and Adamu, I. P. (2006): Assessment of the Adoption of Afforestation
Innovations in Dambatta Local Government Area of Kano state. Nigerian Journal of Agricultural Extension 9: 51 –
55.
Igben, M. S. (1988): The Nigerian Farmer and Agricultural Institutions: An Assessment of Nigerian Institute of
Social and Economic Research (NISER) Ibadan, Nigeria. Pp 12 – 47
Rahman, . A. and Alamu, J. F. (2003): Estimating the level of Women Interest in Agriculture: An Application of
Logit Regression Model. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Ahmadu Bello University,
Zaria. Pp 45 -49.

I. Tafida
Department of Agricultural Economics & Extension, Bayero University, Kano
Corresponing Author: ityaks@yahoo.com

73
ANALYSIS OF FACTORS AFFECTING THE SUPPLY OF COMMERCIAL BANKS CREDIT TO THE
AGRICULTURAL SECTOR IN NIGERIA (1986-2005)
1
Enya, Vincent Ekpe and 2Alimba, J. O
1
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Cross River University of Technology, Obubra Campus,
2
Department of Agricultural Economics, Extension and Management, Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki.
ABSTRACT
This paper is on the supply of commercial banks credit to the agricultural sector in Nigeria
from 1986 to 2005. Time series published data collected include agricultural GDP, commercial
banks agricultural credit, cash reserve ratio and commercial banks lending rate. A multiple
regression analysis approach involving the use of ordinary least (OLS) estimation techniques
was adopted. Repayment ability of agricultural sector has a positive and significant effect on
commercial banks credit supply to agriculture while lending rate has a positive and
insignificant effect on banks agricultural credit supply. Cash reserve ratio has a negative and
significant effect on commercial banks agricultural credit supply. Commercial bank
agricultural credit supply is inelastic with respect to all the explanatory variables. Productivity
in agricultural sector should be increased to attract commercial banks credit. Cash reserve ratio
should be reduced to empower commercial banks to lend to agriculture.
KEYWORDS: Commercial Banks, Agricultural Credit supply, Repayment

ability, Lending Rate,
INTRODUCTION
The Nigerian agricultural economy is a sub-sector of the national economy, which is engaged in the production of
food and raw materials for the export sector of the economy. To facilitate its development, policies are made by
government to achieve agricultural economy development goals (Segun 1996). Banks agricultural credit policies
constitute an important source of stimulating agricultural development.
The commercial bank agricultural credit supply has always fallen short of its demand despite of all the enabling
environment government has put in place to bridge the gap. This has made most farmers to turn to their second best
alternatives, ie, loans from money lenders for their credit needs. These money lender charge as high as between 50%
and 100% interest rate on their capital which in turn affects resource use in the farm. From 1977, government
designed and implemented various programs aimed at increasing banks credit supply to agriculture. These include
the agricultural credit guaranteed scheme fund (ACGSF), which act as surety for every farmer that received credit
from commercial banks to the tune of 75%, cooperative bank, rural banking, agricultural insurance scheme, among
others. Some studies have shown that monetary base, cash reserve ratio, liquidity ratio, the price of credit
significantly influenced banks credit supply (Ojo 1978, Balogun and Otu 1991; Odufalu 1994). Of these studies only
Balogun and Otu’s study was related to the agricultural sector. Little do people know that the factors which affect
the general economy can also affect a sector of the economy. Thus the combined effect of repayment ability of
farmers, lending rate and cash reserve ratio as explanatory variables in commercial banks’ credit supply to
agriculture is still unknown. It is on this basis that this analysis on commercial banks agricultural credit supply is
undertaken to investigate the nature of interrelationship to guide policy formulation and implementation.
METHODOLOGY
Published time series data from 1986 to 2005 was used in this study. Specific data of interest include commercial
banks credit to agriculture, agricultural sector income (GDP of agriculture), commercial banks lending rate and cash
reserve ratio. These data were collected from Annual Report and Statement of Account of CBN (1997) and CBN
Statistical Bulletins (2005).
Commercial banks agricultural credit supply model was specified to analyze the data. It might therefore be expected
that the higher the repayment ability of agricultural sector represented by the GDP of agricultural sector the higher
would be the supply level of credit other things being equal. Commercial banks credit supply to agriculture may
increase if lending rate increased.
Enya, Vincent Ekpe and Alimba, J. O: Continental J. Agricultural Economics 2: 74 - 77, 2008
74
A multiple linear, power, semi log and exponential regression analysis approach involving the use of OLS
estimation techniques was used to estimate the model. The model took the form as specified below.
Yt = f(X1t, X2t , X3t )

LnYt = ao + a1lnX1t + a2lnX2t + a3lnX3t ……..power function
LnYt = ao + a1X1t + a2X2t + a3X3t …..exponential function
Yt = ao + a1X1t + a2X2t + a3X3t …………….linear function
Yt = ao + a1lnX1t + a2lnX2t + a3lnX3t ……..semi log
Yt = amount of commercial banks agricultural credit supply.
X1t = agricultural sector repayment ability represented by agricultural GDP in millions of naira
X2t = cash reserve ratio in %
X3t = lending rate in %
The coefficient of a1 and a3 are expected to have positive signs while the coefficient of a2 is expected to have
negative signs. ao is the y intercept.
The elasticity of credit supply (ECS) from the semi log model is given by the ratio of coefficients of the variables to
credit supply, that is
ECS1 = a1/Y, ECS2 = a2/Y, ECS3 = a3/Y

Table 1: Regression Results of the Linear, Exponential, Double and Semi Log functional forms
Models constant Repayment Lending Cash reserve R2 F-ratio
Ability(X1) Rate(X2) Ratio(X3)
Linear -323776 2.870 -622.173 -3762.632 0.876 37.634
(-5.116) (5.816) (-0.391) (-0.705)
Exponential 4.722 2.448E-05 -5.66E-03 0.269 0.975 209.021
(9.505) (6.318) (-0.453) (6.460)
Double log -52.746 5.251 -0.370 0.827 0.957 119.347
(-4.833) (5.640) (-1.028) (2.517)
Semi log -7293026 631318.3 2281.355 -92910.8 0.90 42.637
(7.268) (7.383) (0.069) (-3.077)_
Note t- values are in parenthesis
Table 2: Estimated Elasticity of Commercial Banks Agricultural Credit

Supply
_________________________________________________________
Variables Elasticity
Repayment ability (X1) 0.4
Lending rate (X2) 0.0014
Cash reserve ratio (X3) 0.06
__________________________________________________________
Source: Estimated from semi log model and published time series (1986 to 2005) data used.
The regression result was presented in table 1. The semi log model gave the best fit in terms of signs and statistical
significance and is used in the discussion.
From the estimated lead equation (semi log), the coefficient of repayment ability of agricultural sector, lending rate,
and cash reserve ratio carry the expected signs, showing that an increase in agricultural sector repayment ability and
lending rate caused commercial banks agricultural credit supply to increase, while an increase in cash reserve ratio
decreased commercial banks credit to agriculture. The result in table 2 shows a supply elasticity value of 0.4, 0.06
and 0.0014 for repayment ability, cash reserve ratio and lending rate respectively. It means that a % increase in
75
repayment ability and lending rate caused commercial banks agricultural credit supply to increased by 0.4% and
0.0014 % while a % increase in cash reserve ratio caused commercial agricultural credit supply to decrease by
0.06% during the study period. It indicated that credit supply is inelastic with respect to all the variables, though
repayment ability is less inelastic than other variables. The result shows an R2 of 0.90 indicating that 90% of
variability in commercial banks credit supply to agriculture was explained by the explanatory variables while the
remaining 10% was explained by the error term. All the variables except lending rate were statistically significant at
1% level. The F- value of 42.6 shows the overall significant of the model
CONCLUSION
The study has shown that repayment ability has a positive and significant influence while cash reserve ratio has a
negative and significant influence on commercial banks credit supply to agriculture. Equally lending rate shows a
positive insignificant influence on commercial banks credit supply to agriculture. Based on the above findings the
study recommends that repayment ability should be increased by improving the productivity of agriculture. The cash
reserve ratio should be decreased to empower commercial banks to supply credit to agriculture. Commercial banks
should apply the concept of flexibility, receptivity, optimism, courage and social responsibility in lending to
agricultural sector.
Recommendations
Based on the findings of this study, the study recommends that the repayment ability of agricultural sector should be
increased by increasing the productivity of the sector, cash reserve ratio should be decreased to empower
commercial banks to increase credit to the sector and lending rate should be increased to stimulate commercial
banks to lend more to the sector.
In agriculture there are still many profitable projects. Therefore, there is need to discern and identify those projects,
nurse them to bankable stages and then provide sustainable credit flow to the sector at optimal levels. Banks should
understand that agricultural finance is a more complex commodity and that after sales service is a necessary
accomplishment of the sales of complex commodities.
Agricultural credit being a more complex commodity requires the banker to be an expert in agriculture to be able to
offer after sale services in the form of financial and technical advice (extension service). If this is done, the less
profitable and highly risky agricultural sector will become highly profitable and less risky and ultimately turn to be
credit worthy to banks. This requires banking management, which will strive constantly to apply the concept of
flexibility, receptivity, optimism, courage and social responsibility. Although profit is a very vital requirement of a
business it is not the first and central purpose because it is possible to run a business without profit in the short run
but it is not possible for a business to survive without costumers. The operators of the Nigerian agricultural sector
are big costumers for banks because they form about 75% of the Nigerian business enterprise system.
It is therefore erroneous for banks to regard profit as the first and central thing, thereby putting off farmers. In
business, the costumer is the first and central theme. Profit is secondary because without costumers, you can not
make profit, but with costumers, you can make profit in the long run. In this dispensation of competition in the
banking system, the need to identify, manage and effect profitable credit supply to agriculture becomes a sine-qua-
non.
For effective lending banks should analyze the agricultural economic environment, resource flows and the potentials
in the sector, as well as the agricultural economic development and policy objectives of government and then take
advantage to lend sustainably. Lending is a highly subjective phenomenon. Banks should thoroughly consider the
quantum of agricultural lending and interest rate appropriate for the occasion. This quantum should be the optimal
volume of credit and interest rate on terms and conditions that will satisfy the banking objective of the lender and
the agricultural economic objective of the government. All these put together could enhance the free flow of
commercial banks credit to agriculture
REFERENCES
Balogun, E.D and Otu, M.F (1991): Credit policy and Agricultural development in Nigeria. Central Bank of Nigeria.
Economic and Financial Review 29(2), 138 -155
76
Odufalu, O (1994): An Econometric Analysis of the Demand and Supply of Banks Credit to the Nigeria Economy.
First Bank Bi-annual Review 2 (5), 50-65
CBN Statistical Bulletin 2005
Annual Report and Statement Account of CBN 1997
Ojo, O (1978) the Demand and Supply for commercial Banks Loan in Nigeria (1962-1978), in Terriba and V.P
Diejomat (eds, Money Finance and Economic Development; Essay in honour of Obasanmi, Olakanpo, Ibadan
University Press.
Segun, O. (1996). An appraisal of credit administrative practices in the banking sector. First Bank Bi-annual
Review 4(9), 30-41

Enya, Vincent Ekpe
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Cross River University of Technology, Obubra Campus
77

Vol 2 - Cont. J. Agric. Econs.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vol 2 - Cont. J. Agric. Econs.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Continental J.

Agricultural Economics 2: 1 - 5, 2008

ASSESSMENT OF FADAMA FARMERS’ ACCESS TO CREDIT IN ONDO STATE

Table 1: Total Distribution of respondents’ socio-economic characteristics.

Demographic Frequency Percentage

Table 2. Distribution of respondents” farming characteristics

Socioeconomic Frequency Percentage

Source: Field Survey, 2007.

The regression equation is specified as

Table 3: Result of the Regression Analysis

Function Constant B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 Fraction R2 2

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

INFLUENCE OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS ON ACCESS TO CREDIT BY FADAMA

Log Y= 0.537 – 0.08208X1+0.161X2+0.05587X3*-0.003898X4 + 0.238X5 - 0.06276X6 *- 0.02844X7

Figure in parentheses are standard error

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Jekayinfa (1981): Agricultural Credit in South East Asia. Development Pp 55-66.

Mabogunje,A.L. (1980): The Development Process. A spatial perspective. Longman Publishers

NIGERIA’S AGRICULTURE AND THE WORLD FOOD SUMMIT 1996

KEYWORDS: Food security, World Food Summit, Nutritional Target, HIV/AIDS,

Objectives of the Study

Nigeria’s Food Security situation in the Eyes of the World

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Aggregate Measure of Nigeria’s Support to Agriculture Since 1992

Table 1. Federal Government budget estimates 1992 - 2005

Source: CBN (2005) Statistical Bulletin *Federal Ministry of Agriculture

1990 86710000 112518000000.00 1692.94 80.62 1316.73 48.77

Source: Computed from CBN (2005) Statistical Bulletin

The Future of Nigeria in Rome Declaration Goal

Table 3. Estimated number and incidence of the undernourished

Year No. of the % of

1990 16807847 19.38

1991 10899132 12.23

1993 6834561 7.46

1994 7062896 7.29

Source: Derived from CBN (2005) Statistical Bulletin

Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) (2005) Statistical Bulletin. Vol.16

USDA (2005) World Food Summit: Basic Information. http:/www.fas.usda.gov/icd/summit/basic.html. Assessed

Received for Publication: 19/02/2008

Tanko L. and Jirgi, A. J.

Yi = f (Xi, β) exp (Vi-Ui) ; = 1,2… n --- (1)

Yi = production of the ith farm

TE = Yi /Yi * --- (2)

= exp (- Ui) ---(4)

ii) The Model

In π* = βo + β1ln x1 + β2 ln x2 + β3 ln x3 +β4 ln x4 + β5 ln x5 + ½ β6 ln x12 + ½β7 ln x22 + ½ β8 ln x32 + ½ β9 ln

ln x2 ln x5 + β18 ln x3 ln x4 + β19 ln x3 ln x5 + β20 ln x4 ln x5 + Vi- Ui

The total number of interactions is fifteen.

Ui = economic efficiency of the ith farmer

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

b) Stochastic Frontier Estimation

d) Interactions of physical inputs

Hypotheses Likelihood ratio Critical X2 0.05 Decision

CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).Statistical Bulletin,December, 1999.

Received for Publication: 19/02/2008

ECONOMICS OF FISHING GEARS FOR SUSTAINABLE FISH PRODUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT IN

Abiodun, J. A. and Ayanda, J. O.

KEYWORDS: Inland fisheries, aquaculture , management strategies, potential yield, Nigeria,

Table 1: Estimated returns to gears in use in Naira.

Note: 2 = Annual gross earnings

Note: 2 = Annual gross earnings as a percentage of cost of input

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Log Y= 0.537 – 0.08208X1+0.161X2+0.05587X3-0.003898X4 + 0.238X5 - 0.06276X6 - 0.02844X7