Analysis of Women Participation in Cassava Production and Processing in Imo State, Nigeria

Analysis of Women Participation in Cassava Production and  Processing in Imo State, Southeast Nigeria

INTRODUCTION
Background to the study

An understanding of gender contributions to food output in rural households in Nigeria is important. This will ensure effective allocation of production resources within the rural households. The attendant increase in agricultural production arising from this will increase the farm output of the households and improve their standard of living. Numerous studies indicate that rural development policies directed at the household may not have their intended effects or produce unintended negative outcomes, unless the role and position of gender in rural households are explicitly taken into account (Odii, 1996). Women in Nigeria form an active and reserve labour force but they rarely own the means of productions (Rahman, 2004). However, the position of women in meeting challenges of agricultural development cannot be over emphasized. Women make a significant contribution to food production; they provide 60-80% of agricultural labour and are responsible for 80% of food production (Mgbada, 2002; Rahman, 2004). Socio-economic and political obstacles have for long been intensifying gender inequality and exacerbating poverty among women (Rahman and Haruna, 1999).

Statement of the Problem

Under male-dominated social structures and political systems, women do not derive equal access to land, technology, education and resources (Tanko, 1994). The problem of food shortages in Nigeria has been attributed to an acute dearth of male labour and a shift of farm responsibilities to the women (Igben, 1988; Okigbo, 1989; Uwadie, 1993). There has also been a great disparity
between women and men in the size of land holdings as well as any overall trend of increasing landlessness pressure (Quisumbing, 1994).
Cassava and cassava-based products are the most important food for the people of southeastern Nigeria. Cassava is almost a daily menu in households especially in southeastern Nigeria. A study on the consumption pattern of cassava in southeastern Nigeria shows that 53.3% and 34% of people ate cassava in various forms daily and every other day, respectively (Okolo, 1986).
Intensifying efforts to improve the cultivation and processing of cassava will improve the lives of many households in Imo State. In view of the above, the need to analyse the involvement of women in cassava production and processing in Imo State becomes imperative.

The objectives of this study are

(i) to describe the socio- economic characteristics of women that participate in cassava production and processing in the area,
(ii) determine the level of women participation in cassava production and processing,
(iii) identify the factors that affect women participation in cassava production and processing and,
(iv) identify the constraints faced by women in cassava production and processing in the area.

Download Full Material-N5000

One Reply to “Analysis of Women Participation in Cassava Production and Processing in Imo State, Nigeria”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

ECONOMIC STUDY OF CASSAVA PRODUCTION IN NIGERIA

ECONOMIC STUDY OF CASSAVA PRODUCTION IN NIGERIA

 

 

.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE                                                                                                                         i

CERTIFICATION                                                                                                     ii

ABSTRACT                                                                                                               iii

DEDICATION                                                                                                           iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT                                                                                         v

TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                           vii

LIST OF TABLES                                                                                                     xi

LIST OF FIGURES                                                                                                   xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES                                                                                           xiv

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION                                                                                   1

  • Background Information of the Study 1
  • Problem Statement 4
  • Objectives of the Study 8
  • Research Hypothesis 9
  • Justification of the Study 9
  • Limitations of the Study 12
  • Plan of the Report 13

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW                                                                        15

  • Morphological Description of Cassava 16
  • Cassava Production in the World 17
  • Advances in Root and Tuber Crop Production Technology 19
  • The Potential Economic Importance of Cassava 23
  • Farming Systems Adopted in Cassava Production 28
  • Farming Conditions of the Small-Holder Farmer 30
  • Efficiency of Resource Use by Cassava Farmers 31
  • Economics of Cassava Production and Marketing 36
  • Conceptual and Empirical Framework 38

2.10 Theoretical and Analytical Framework                                                               42

2.10.1 Tobit Model                                                                                         47

  • Efficiency Measures 49
    • Allocative Efficiency 50
    • Economic Efficiency 50
    • Profit Frontiers 51
    • Stochastic Frontier Production Function 51

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY                                           54

  • Description of the Study Area 54
  • Sampling Procedure 58
  • Data Collection 59
  • Data Analysis 59
  • Model Specification 60
  1. Technical Efficiency             60
  2. Inefficiency Model                                                                         61
  3. Tobit Model 63
  4. Normalized Profit Function 66

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION                                                           68

  • Socio-Economic Characteristics of Respondents 68
    • Age of the Farmers 68
    • Gender Participation 70
    • Household Size 71
    • Farming Experience 73
    • Level of Educational Attainment of Respondents 74
    • Occupational Distribution of the Respondents                                 75
  • Farming Systems and Cassava Production in Abia state 77
    • Cropping System 77
    • Calendar of Farm Operations 78
    • Household Farm Holdings 81
    • Livestock Production in Abia state 82
    • Size of Cassava Farm 83
  • Cost Implications and Returns to Cassava Enterprise 84
    • Analysis of Costs and Returns ( Profitability Index ) 87
  • Estimation of Technical Efficiency 89
    • Determinants of Technical Efficiency 94
    • Elasticity of Production and Returns to Scale 97
    • Technical Efficiency Estimate of Cassava Farmers in Abia-State 98
  • Estimation of Economic Efficiency 99
    • Determinants of Economic Efficiency (Profitability) for Cassava

Production in Abia-State                                                                    103

  • Economic Efficiency Estimate of Cassava Farmers in Abia-State                                                                                                             105
  • Test of Hypothesis for Technical and Economic Efficiency of Cassava

Farmers in Abia-State using Generalized Likelihood Ratio (LR)          106

 

  • Estimation of the Factors that Influence Technology Adoption Rate and Use

Intensity                                                                                                          107

  • Constraints to Increased Cassava Production in the Study Area 110

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS  113

  • Summary 113
  • Conclusion 115
  • Recommendations 117
  • Suggestions for Further Research 119

REFERENCES                                                                                                          121

APPENDICES                                                                                                           133

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table:                                                                                                                                      Page

4.1   Frequency Distribution of Respondents According to Age                                           68

4.2   Frequency Distribution of Respondents According to Gender                                      70

4.3   Frequency Distribution of Respondents According to Household Size                                    72

4.4   Frequency Distribution of Respondents According to Farming Experience                  73

4.5   Frequency Distribution of Respondents According to Level of Formal

Education Attained                                                                                                         74

4.6   Frequency Distribution of Respondents According to their Primary Occupation         76

4.7   Frequency Distribution of Respondents According to their Total Farm Holding          82

4.8   Frequency Distribution of Respondents According to their Cassava Farm Size           83

4.9   Results of Budgetary Analysis per Hectare of Cassava Enterprise                                86

4.10 Maximum Likelihood Estimates of the Cobb-Douglas Stochastic Production

Function   (Technical)                                                                                                     91

4.11 Maximum Likelihood Estimate of the Translog Stochastic Production Function

(Technical)                                                                                                                      92

4.12 Elasticity and Returns to Scale for Cassava Production (Technical)                              97

4.13 Frequency Distribution of Technical Efficiency Indices                                                98

4.14 Maximum Likelihood Estimate of the Stochastic Cobb-Douglas Cost function for

Cassava Farmers                                                                                                             100

4.15 Maximum Likelihood Estimate of the Translog Stochastic Cost Function for

Cassava Farmers                                                                                                             101

4.16 Frequency Distribution of Economic Efficiency Indices                                               105

4.17 Test of Hypothesis that Cassava Farmers in Abia-State are Fully Technically and

Economically Efficient                                                                                                  106

4.18 Tobit Model Estimates of Factors Affecting Adoption Rate and Use Intensity of

Cassava Production Technologies                                                                                 107

4.19 Frequency Distribution of the Respondents According to the Constraints they faced

in the Survey Year                                                                                                          111

 

 

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure:                                                                                                                       Page

  • Location of Abia State in Nigeria                                                                     56

3.2     Map of Abia State showing all the 17 Local Government Areas                     57

4.1     Calendar of Farm Operations for Cassava Enterprise in Abia-State                78

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix:                                                                                                                              Page

  1. Letter to the Sampled Farmers / Respondents            133
  2. Questionnaire Design for the Cassava Farmers 134
  • Computer print-out of Output from the Program Frontier 4.1c (Technical)             148
  1. Computer print-out of Output from the Program Frontier 4.1c (Economic)             161
  2. Computer print-out of Tobit Estimate with Stata 8.2 (Statistics/Data Analysis) 173

 

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

  • Background Information of the Study

Cassava, (Manihot esculentum crantz), belongs to the family of euphorbiaceae. It is believed that the crop originated from Brazil and was introduced to West Africa by the Portuguese traders. It exists in many cultivars which can be distinguished by size, colour, shape of the leaf, branching habit, plant height, colour of the stem, root shape, size and colour, maturity time of the root and level of hydrocyanic content (Anyanwu, 2006). Cassava is Africa’s food insurance crop with stable yield, even with low rainfall, low fertility and low inputs (FAO, 2008). Cassava is becoming an important industrial raw material and a foreign exchange earner. Cassava’s role as food security crop as well as a cash crop is receiving high attention for poverty alleviation by the developing world and partners (FAO, 2008).

Cassava is ranked the 6th most important crop in the world in terms of area planted and production (FAO, 1986). Africa is the highest cassava producer in the world, and more than 100 million people in tropical Africa depend on it as their dietary staple (FAO, 2008). Globally, among the world’s producing regions, West Africa is known to have the greatest share of the world’s production of cassava (FAO, 2008). Interestingly, Nigeria is the largest world producer of cassava with yearly production of fresh tubers estimated at 10-13 million tons on a land area of 1.2-1.4 million hectares (NAQAS, 2002). Nigeria’s lead on cassava production in the world has been achieved through expansion of land areas devoted to cassava cultivation (Ano, 2003). Of Africa’s 72.7 million tons of cassava output in 1990, 26 million tons were produced in Nigeria (Ezedinma, 2003). Cassava is widely grown in Nigeria. For decades, cassava has been cultivated as a subsistence crop in Nigeria. Currently, cassava cultivation has become an income generating activity. This “enhanced” status is as a result of increased demand for cassava and cassava products outside the rural communities (Ikpi et al 1986), as well as the realization of the potentials it has for contributing to the attainment of self-sufficiency in food production (Kwatia, 1980).

Cassava plays a major role in Nigeria’s food security and 80% of the inhabitants in the rural areas eat cassava meal at least once a day (Ezedinma, 2003). The crop is also a good source of raw materials involved in the production of confectioneries, animal feed, alcohol, adhesives, flour starch, etc. The growth of cassava as a major economic and food security crop over the last two decades has generated significant research interest at both the National and International levels. For instance, the International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan and the National Root Crops Research Institute, (NRCRI), Umudike have developed the Tropical Manihot Selection (TMS) 30555, 30572, 30211, 50395, 60506 and Umudike (U) 41044 varieties in the early 1970’s and 1980’s. Most recently, new varieties of cassava were developed and they include, TMS 90257, 84537M, 82/00661, 30001, 81/00110, 91934, 4(2)1425, nr 41044, nr 8212, 8082, 8083, 8208, nr 83107, TMS 419, TMS 98/0581 and TMS 98/0510 (Ezulike et-al,2006). These varieties are not only high yielding, but also are resistant to pests and diseases such as Cassava Mosaic Disease, Cassava Bacteria Blight, Cassava Mealy Bug and Cassava Green Spider Mite (Ezedinma, 2003).

Cassava’s combined abilities to produce high yields under poor conditions and store its harvestable portion underground up to nine months make it a classic “food security crop. In recent years, this has proved of critical importance to many people in Africa caught up in civil conflicts and unable to cultivate the normal range of annual crops. Displaced groups of people in Mozambique during that country’s 16 years’ war often survived on abandoned cassava fields (Ezedinma, 2003). Because, it is a vegetative propagated crop, such plantings can also serve as a ready supply of planting materials during rehabilitations following conflict or drought.

Cassava is well-known for being able to grow and produce food even in very poor soils. For that reason, it is often grown at the margins of farms where the better land has been reserved for the production of grain crops. In addition, once established, cassava is relatively drought tolerant and when matured can survive up to six months without rains. Cassava’s productive capacity in low-input conditions comes at a certain cost in terms of carbohydrate quality and protein concentrations. Cassava’s ability to produce food under marginal conditions has made it a popular crop of Africa’s poor farmers who are unable to invest in fertilizer or pesticides to protect the crop against environmental stresses and biotic constraints (Ezedinma, 2006).

Although still a subject of some debate, the center of origin of cassava is generally believed to be the Southern border of the Amazon basin. Cassava was introduced in Africa in the Congo River Delta by the Portuguese in the 15th century and spread rapidly to many agro-ecologies of the continent; however, cassava is most important in farming systems of the humid forest regions where the productivity of grain crops is reduced by sunlight, foliar pests and diseases and grain storage is more difficult. Cassava has very high yield potential, making it a viable alternative to grain crops where population pressures have led to trade-off between good quality and quantity (NAQAS 2002).

Commercial cassava yields as high as 20 metric tons per hectare have been registered under experimental conditions. Nigeria is presently the largest cassava producing country in the world (FAO, 2008).

Presently, cassava production is in the hands of small-holder farmers who rely predominantly on simple tools like the hoe and cutlass powered by human effort. In 2002, the Government of Nigeria launched a presidential initiative on cassava. The aim of the initiative was to develop cassava as the engine of growth and diversify Nigeria’s economic base away from its principal export-crude oil. If investments in the downstream sector of the cassava industry are made more effective, cassava can be used to improve rural and urban income and employment in Nigeria (Ezedinma and Okechukwu, 2007). But the initiative will be threatened if no substantial effort is made to improve the current production systems. The requirements of consistent supply of large volumes of fresh roots by cassava-based industries cannot be supported by the current production systems. The critical constraints, however under such production systems is labour cost which lies between 70 and 90% of total variable cost of production (Ezedinma, 2000 and Okorji , 1985) in small holder farming.

  • Problem Statement

Cassava is one of the major root crops in Abia state and following the presidential initiative on cassava in 2002, there has been an increased awareness and demand for the crop in the state till date (ABSG, 2006). This pre-supposes that increased land area will be put into cultivation. Onyenweaku and Okoye (2005), noted that cassava production in Abia state no longer keep pace with demand, in spite of the high potential for increasing its production by expanding the area under cultivation. Ezebuiro et al (2008) observed that Abia cassava farmers are peasants and are poorly endowed in terms of resources; yet they account for the production of up to 95% or more of food produced for consumption in the state. The inadequate use of improved inputs consequent upon the low resource endowment of the Abia cassava peasant farmers has made Abia agriculture to remain at the rudimentary and traditional level. The implication is increased drudgery and reduction in output. This might not be unconnected with the level of cassava farmer’s efficiencies (technical, economic and allocative). A fundamental requirement for correcting this problem is only through improvement in productivity of cassava farmer’s. In this context, technical and economic efficiency in the production of the crop is of paramount importance.

Available statistics show that despite increases in awareness and demand for cassava in Abia state consequent upon the presidential initiative, the objectives of sustainability has remained a mirage as its production has not kept pace with demand (Onyenweaku and Okoye, 2005). Given that cassava is an important staple food in Abia state, any attempt to increase its production and the farmers’ productivity would be a right step towards the resolution of the food crisis. Considering the recent increasing trend of demand for cassava cuttings (Onyenweaku and Okoye, 2005) it is envisaged that farmers may have adopted improved varieties and other technologies to strengthen their economic base. Furthermore, their adoption could depend on the yields realized by the farmers. Actually, farmers place a high value on maximum food security, psychological and/or cultural satisfaction. It is a known fact that it is primarily because of the poor resource base that the small-scale farmers are slower in adoption than the large-scale farmers.

Again, most studies on adoption of cassava technologies in Abia-state are based on potential adopter’s decision about whether or not to adopt an innovation and where the adoption variable is specified in binary form; 1, if he or she adopts, O, otherwise (Akinola and Young, 1991). The implication is that the chosen methodology provided no information on the intensity of use after adoption. It is therefore imperative to specify a model that permits a discrete and continuous dependent variable which will capture the simultaneous nature of the decision making process of potential adopters using the Tobit model instead of the usual probit and/or Logit models.

Most studies also show that aggregate food production in Nigeria has been growing at about 2.5% per annum in recent years. But the annual rate of population has been as high as 2.9% (Olayemi, 1998). The reality is that Nigeria has not been able to attain self-sufficiency in food production; more especially with regards to cassava production despite increasing land area put into food production annually. With recent presidential initiative on increased cassava production with a view to exporting garri and the realization that cassava could be used in bread production, Abia-state has witnessed an increase in hectares of land devoted to cassava cultivation (Abia brief, 2006).

Global cassava production reached over 160 million tons in 1991 and FAO (2003) forecast that production will rise to nearly 210 million tons by 2005. On average, farmers produce less than 10 tons of cassava per hectare in Nigeria; but high yielding varieties, improved pest and disease control and better processing methods could increase production by 150% (FAO, 2006). Traditionally, cassava has been a crop of the poor and expanding its production and market can bring direct economic benefits to farmers. It has been observed that peasant farmers in Africa usually control fewer productive resources compared with their counterparts in Europe and North America, with attendant low output of cassava (Johnson, 1982).

McNamara (1990), reported that although Sub-Saharan Africa’s food production has grown over the last three decades by about 2% a year, it has not actually kept pace with a population growth rate of about 2.8%. According to him, the current population which is estimated at 540 million is expanding at a rate of about 3.1% per year and that the region’s population could reach 1.6 billion by the year 2020. More still, as the region’s population has grown, the amount of arable land available per person has declined from an average of 0.5ha in 1965 to 0.3ha in 1987, he concluded. Ugboaja (2008), reported also that available land for cassava production in Abia state has consistently declined as a result of increased population growth. The implication is reduction in output. This low output, in spite of increasing trend of demand for cassava and availability of resources, improved varieties and technologies could be related to the profitability of cassava enterprise.

It is essential to understand the socio-economic and demographic factors that play leading role in the production process of cassava in order to achieve maximum outputs in Abia state. Generation of such information is critical in focusing programmes, in developing long term research policies and in understanding the subsistence farming situation. Therefore based on the aforementioned, this study would examine the economics of cassava production in Abia state. This would be with a view to identifying and quantifying social and economic factors affecting production; evaluating how resources could be deployed to increase resource efficiency, productivity, profitability of the enterprise and increased adoption of the innovations available in the multi-cropping system of subsistence producers in the humid rainforest ecology of South-Eastern Nigeria, with particular reference to Abia state.

  • Objectives of the Study

The broad objective of this research is to study the economics of cassava production in Abia state, Nigeria.

The specific objectives are to;

  • describe socio-economic characteristics of the cassava farmers and the farming systems adopted in cassava production in Abia state,
  • estimate the cost implications and returns to cassava enterprise in Abia state,
  • estimate technical and economic efficiencies of cassava farmers’ in Abia state,
  • identify and estimate the determinants of farmers technical and economic efficiencies,
  • identify and analyze the factors that influence the rate of technology adoption and the intensity of use after adoption by the farmers in Abia state and,
  • identify the constraints to increased cassava production Abia state.

 

  • Research Hypotheses
Download Full Material-N5000

ECONOMICS OF CATFISH (Clarias gariepinus) PRODUCTION IN BAYELSA STATE, NIGERIA

ECONOMICS OF CATFISH (Clarias gariepinus) PRODUCTION IN BAYELSA STATE, NIGERIA

 

ABSTRACT

The study investigated the economics of catfish (Clarias gariepinus) production in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. The broad objective of the study was to examine the economics of Catfish production in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. The specific objectives were to: (i) describe the socio-economic characteristics of catfish farming; (ii) determine the technical efficiency of catfish farming; (iii) identify factors that influence technical efficiency of catfish farming; (iv) analyze the costs and returns associated with catfish farming; and (v) examine the problems associated with catfish farming. A multi-stage sampling technique was used to select three (3) Local Government Areas (Yenagoa, Ogbia and Kolokuma-Opokuma) purposively based on their predominance in commercial catfish farming and randomly five (5) communities each from the 3 LGAs. Furthermore nine (9) catfish farmers in each community were randomly selected making a total number of one hundred and thirty five (135) catfish farmers. One hundred and twenty (120) copies questionnaires were retrieved out of one hundred and thirty five (135) copies and used for the analysis. Structured questionnaire was used to elicit the required information from the selected respondents. The result indicates that 75.0% of the respondents fall between age ranged of 31-50 with the mean age of 42 years. Majority of the catfish farmers were married (79.2%), males (83.3%) dominated catfish production in the study area, 91.7% had family size of 1-10 people in their households with the mean of 7 people, 92.5% had one form of education or the other. The result further shows that 87.5% had 1-10 years of farming experience, 83.3% were part-time farmers, 43.4% had farm size of 1-1.5 hectares, 66.7% used family labour while 58.3% had one month contact with extension agent. Feeds, capital, labour and pond size have significant relationship with catfish production at various probability levels. The mean technical efficiency was 0.92 with minimum and maximum efficiencies of 0.68 and 0.99. The inefficiency model revealed that farming experience, sex, pond type and number of ponds were the variables that increased the technical efficiency of the respondents. Total Fixed Cost (TFC) was ₦881,500.00 while Total Variable Cost (TVC) was ₦3,956,025.01with Net Farm Income (NFI) of ₦3,113,183.32 during production period of six months. Return on investment was ₦0.64 which implies profitability of catfish production in the study area. The study also identified high cost of feed, inadequate finance, inadequate seed supply, lack of land, lack of organized market, high cost of transportation, lack of modern technologies, and high cost of labour were the major problems faced by catfish farmers. It is therefore recommended that farmers need for government and non –government support in terms of improves feed research that will help to reduce the cost of catfish feeds without reducing the efficacy of the feeds.Furthermore, there is need to be given proper orientation and/or basic training in major farm management techniques most especially participation in programmes that address efficient allocation of production resources. This will help increase their level of profitability, hence, be more efficient.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pages

Title page                                                                                                                                i

Certification                                                                                                                            ii

Dedication                                                                                                                              iii

Acknowledgement                                                                                                                  iv

Abstract                                                                                                                                  vi

Table of content                                                                                                                      vii

List of table                                                                                                                             x

List of figure                                                                                                                           xi

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

  • Background of the study 1

1.2       Problem of the statement                                                                                            4

1.3       Objectives of the study                                                                                               6

1.4       Hypotheses of the study                                                                                             6

  • Justification of the study 6

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1       Concept of fish farming                                                                                              8

2.2       General background of Nigerian fisheries                                                                  9

  • Productive efficiencies and their determinants                                                          12

2.4       Efficiency                                                                                                                   14

2.4.1    Technical efficiency                                                                                                    15

2.4.2    Profit efficiency                                                                                                          15

2.4.3    Cost efficiency                                                                                                            16

2.5       Production system of catfish in Nigeria                                                                     17

2.5.1    Pond construction methods                                                                                        17

2.6       The production cycle of catfish                                                                                  20

2.6.1   Seed supply, hatchery production and nursery                                                           20

2.6.2    Feed supply                                                                                                                 21

2.6.3    Harvesting techniques                                                                                                 22

2.6.4    Handling and processing                                                                                            23

2.6.5    Markets                                                                                                                       23

2.6.6    Production costs                                                                                                         24

2.6.7    Diseases and control measures                                                                                    24

2.6.8    Basic fish disease treatment                                                                                        25

2.7       Role of fisheries in national economy                                                             26

2.8       Economic importance of fish                                                                                      26

2.9       Problems of fish farming                                                                                            29

2.10     Prospect of fish farming                                                                                             30

2.11     Theoretical framework                                                                                                31

2.12     Concept of profitability                                                                                              31

2.13     Theory of production                                                                                                  34

2.13.1  Production function                                                                                                    35

2.14     Analytical framework                                                                                                 36

2.14.1  Translog stochastic frontier production model (SEPM)                                             36

2.14.2  Budgetary model                                                                                                        39

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

3.1       The study area                                                                                                             41

3.2       Sampling procedure                                                                                                    41

3.3       Validity and reliability of instrument                                                                         42

3.4       Data collection                                                                                                            42

3.5       Data analysis                                                                                                               42

3.5.1    The stochastic frontier production function                                                               42

3.5.2    Inefficiency model                                                                                                      43

3.5.3    Budgetary model                                                                                                        43

 

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1       Socio-economic characteristics of catfish farmers                                          45

4.2       Technical efficiency of catfish farmers                                               51

4.3       Factors that influence technical efficiency of catfish farmers                                    52

4.4       Costs and returns of catfish farmers                                                               55

4.5       Problems associated with catfish farmers                                          56

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1       Summary                                                                                                                     58

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                      59

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                                      59

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

CHAPTER ONE/ INTRODUCTION

  • Background of the Study

Fish farming is the sub-set of aquaculture that focuses on rearing of fish under controlled or semi-controlled conditions for economic and social benefits. Aquaculture is the rearing of aquatic organisms under controlled or semi-controlled conditions for economic and social benefits. Aquatic organisms include fishes, molluscs, crustaceans and aquatic plants. Culture implies some forms of intervention in the rearing process to enhance production such as regular stocking, feeding, protection from predators etc Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2006).

In Nigeria, the production of food has not increased at the rate that can meet the increasing population. While food production increases at a rate of 2.5%, food demand increases at a rate of more than 3.5% due to high rate of population growth of 2.83% (Ojo & Fagbenro, 2010). The apparent disparity between the rate of food production and demand for food in Nigeria has led to a food demand supply gap thus leading to a widening gap between domestic food production and total requirement, an increase resort to food importation and high rates of increase in food prices and as a result, wide spread hunger and malnutrition are evident in the country (Ugwumba & Chukwuji, 2010).

1

The growth of a country’s population is usually accompanied by increase in the demand for the basic necessities of life including water, food and shelter. This is the case with the unrestricted increase in the demand for protein rich food items of animal origin especially. FAO(1991), recommended that an individual takes 35 grams per caput of animal protein per day for sustainable growth and development. However, the animal protein consumption in Nigeria is less than 10 grams per person per day, which is a far cry from the FAO minimum recommendation (Onoja & Achike, 2011). The major animal protein sources in the country include cattle, goat, sheep, poultry and fish. Out of these sources fish and fish products provide more than 60% of the total protein intake in adults especially in the rural areas (Adekoya, 2004). Therefore, the importance of the fishing industry to the sustainability of animal protein supply in the country cannot be over-emphasized (Ugwumba & Chukwuji, 2010). Regrettably, the supply of food fish has been on the decline. This is due to consistent declines from the country’s major source of food fish, the artisanal fisheries, from 90% in 1990 (Tobor, 1990) down to 40% in 2006 resulting to about 300,000 metric tonnes Global Agriculture Information Network (GAIN, 2007). Because aquaculture is capital intensive and financing is generally needed to feeds and labour in the production of catfish and other aquatic species, thus available resources needed to be efficiently utilized to maximize profit. According to (Eyoh & Igben, 2002), knowledge of efficiency of resource use is vital to farmers in agricultural productivity. That, the utilization of land resources is closely guided by the concept of highest and best use for maximum agricultural productivity. Furthermore, profitability analysis could guide investors and would attract investors in committing available funds into catfish production due to its high rate of profitability shown in recent studies such as (Kainga & Adeyemo, 2013; Onoja & Achike, 2011; Ugwumba & Chukwuji, 2010; Esu, Asa & Iniedu, 2009). Currently, domestic fish production is put at 551,700 metric tonnes as against the present national demand of about 1.5 million metric tonnes estimated for 2007 (Osawe, 2007; Nwosu, & Onyeneke, 2013). An underlying premise behind most of the work of efficiency is that if farmers are not  making efficient use of existing technologies, then efforts designed to improve efficiency would be more cost effective than introducing new technologies as a means of increasing agricultural output (Effiong, 2005; Ike,  2008).

The shortfall is said to be bridged by the importation of 680,000 metric tonnes annually consuming about N50 billion in foreign exchange (Odukwe, 2007). It has been asserted by (Amaefula, Onyekweaku & Asumugha, 2010; Ugwumba & Chukwuji, 2010) that the only way of boosting fish production and thereby move the country towards self- sufficiency in fish production is by embarking on fish farming (aquaculture) especially catfish farming. Fisheries occupy a unique position in the agricultural sector of the Nigerian economy. In terms of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the fishery sub-sector has recorded the fastest growth rate in agriculture to the GDP. The contribution of the fishery sub-sector to GDP at 2001 current factor cost rose from N76.76 billion to N162.61 billion in 2005 Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN, 2005). Fish is an important source of protein to large teaming population of Nigeria and fish contributes about 40 – 50% of protein intake of average Nigerian from animal sources (Adeniji, 1987; Ugwumba & Ugwumba, 2003). According to Adekoya (2004), fish and fish products constitute more than 60% of the total protein intake in adults especially in rural areas. Hence, the role of the fishing industries in sustaining animal protein supply in Nigeria cannot be overemphasized (Ugwumba & Chukwuji, 2010). Amiengheme (2005) enumerated the importance of fish in Human Nutrition as follows:

  1. Food fish has a nutrient profile superior to all terrestrial meats (beef, pork and chicken, etc) source of high quality animal protein and highly digestible energy.
  2. Fish is a good source of sulphur and essential amino acids such as lysine, leucine, valine and arginine. It is therefore suitable for supplementing diets of high carbohydrate contents.
  • Fish is also a good source of thiamine as well as an extremely rich source of Omega iii poly-saturated fatty acids, fat soluble vitamins (A, D and E) and water soluble vitamins (B complex) and minerals (Calcium, Phosphorus, Iron, Iodine and Selenium).
  1. It has a high content of Polyunsaturated (Omega iii) fatty acids which are important in lowering blood cholesterol level and high blood pressure. It is able to mitigate to alleviate platelet of (cholesterol) aggregation and various arteriosclerosis conditions in adult populations.
  2. It reduces the risk of sudden death from heart attacks and reduces rheumatoid arthritis.
  3. Omega iii fatty acids also lower the risk of age related muscular degeneration and vision impairment.
  • It decreases the risk of bowel cancer: and reduces insulin resistance in skeletal muscles.

It is known that economics is an important concept which is the main focus of this study, because it relates to the financial feasibility of expansion, or indeed starting up of an enterprise and contains information of the efficiency of the technical and managerial process. Profitability in common usage means the ability to earn profit. The profitability of any enterprise is measured in relation to the size of the business (Kainga & Seiyabo, 2012). Different forms of business produce goods and services for sale in other to earn income. If the income earned does not exceed cost of production in turn, the firm cannot stay in business for a long time therefore the aim of any enterprise is to minimize cost and maximize output in other to maximize net revenue.

The term efficiency can be described as the use of the lowest amount of inputs to produce greatest amount of output. Thus efficiency simply means reducing the amount of wasted inputs. The modern theory of efficiency dates back to the pioneering work of  Farell (1977)  who proposed that the efficiency of a farm consists of technical and allocative component and the combination of these two components provide a measure of total economic efficiency (overall efficiency). The crucial role of efficiency in increasing agricultural output has been widely recognized by researchers and policy makers like (Nwaru, 2005; Onoja & Achike, 2011). Indeed, considerable efforts have been devoted to the analysis of farm level efficiency in developing countries.

Therefore, greater improvement in catfish production can be achieved with a proper analysis that will lead to knowledge of the level of profitability of catfish farming and technical efficiency to production which constitute the basis for this study.

  • Problem of the Statement

Nigerians are large consumers of fish with demand estimated at 1.4 million metric tons. However, a demand supply gap of at least 0.7 million metric tons exist nationally with import making up the short fall at a cost of almost 0.5 billion US dollar per year. While domestic fish production of about 500,000 metric tons is supplied by artisan fisher – folk (85%), despite over fishing in many water bodies across the country (Adekoya, 2004 . Moreover, fish supply from artisanal fisheries has been consistently on the decline (Tobor, 1990; GAIN, 2007). Therefore, the industry needs further investment such as improving aquaculture development in order to meet the demand-supply gap with proper farm management skills demonstrating its profitability and efficient use of resources.

Nigeria has a vast network of inland waters like rivers, flood plains, natural and man-made lakes and reservoirs (Shimang, 2005). The inland water mass was estimated to be about 12.5 million hectares of inland waters capable of producing 512,000 metric tons of fish annually (Ita, 1984; Shimang, 2005). Bayelsa State has a fair share of the vast fishery resources with 180km coastline that holds a lot of potentials for investors in fisheries. These include rivers, lake and ponds where many fishing activities take place. Yet local fish production in Bayelsa State remains around 30,000 tonnes per year,Bayelsa State Investment Promotion Agency(BIPA, 2013). This is insufficient for local consumption with significant unmet demand in Bayelsa and neighboring states. The findings of Kainga and Adeyemo (2013) stated that 77.8% were part-time farmers while 22.2% were full-time which implies that they augment the business with other sources of fund, in the most parts of Bayelsa State. This could not be out of place due to discovery of crude oil which may have in no little way occasioned production drift of fish production as well as to bridge the gap between the daily per caput animal protein intake which is estimated at less than 10 grams compared to the FAO recommended minimum requirement of 35 grams (Onoja & Achike, 2011). Hence, protein obtained from catfish is needed for the growth and development of the entire populace, thus increases the standard of living and income of the fish farmers.

Presently, two major constraints to the establishment of fish culture enterprises in Nigeria are lack of initial capital input and the acquisition and ownership of land (Onoja & Achike, 2011; Afolabi & Fagbenro, 1998), including Bayelsa State.  Most importantly, the value of rental price of land that satisfies the technical requirements of modern and conventional pond fish culture varies with its quality and alternative uses. It becomes prohibitive and unaffordable especially in urban centres where competing and uses with earthen pond fish culture exists.Also lack of proper management and information to efficiently utilize their limited fisheries resources for profit maximization. This has partly hampered aquaculture development in the country, especially, Bayelsa State leading to ‘potential’ farmers avoiding going into fish farming and others becoming ‘inactive’ because aquaculture profitability has not been demonstrated to them in the study area. Likewise financing institutions and banks are not keen to lend money to farmers whose enterprises cannot be feasibly appraised.

Despite these considerably high potentials, local fish production has failed to meet the county’s domestic demand (FAO, 1995). The fish industry remains the most virgin investment in Nigeria compared with the importation of frozen fish in the domestic market (Ndu, 2006). A sure means of substantially solving the demand – supply gap is by embarking on widespread homestead and small scale fish and through proper analysis that will lead to knowledge of efficient utilization of fish farmer’s limited resources for maximum production.

Although available literature shows that many studies have been done on catfish production, but the attention was more on either profitability (e.g. Ugwumba & Chukwuji 2010; Kainga & Adeyemo, 2013; Kudi, Bako & Atala, 2008; Esu, Asa & Iniedu, 2009; Ohen & Abang 2009; Anyanwu, Mkpado & Ohaka, 2009; John, 2012; Kassali & Mariama, 2011) or technical efficiency of catfish production (e.g. Onoja & Achike, 2011; Emokaro & Ekunwe, 2009).  Little or nothing has been done to look at profitability and technical efficiency of catfish production especially in Bayelsa State. This could be due to poor information dissemination on efficiency and profitability of catfish production.

Hence the study seeks to determine the technical efficiency of catfish farmers, identify factors that influence technical efficiency of catfish farmers,analyze the costs and returns associated with catfish and examine the problems associated with catfish farmers in Bayelsa State, Nigeria.

1.3       Objectives of the Study

The broad objective of the study is to examine the economics of Catfish production in Bayelsa State, Nigeria.

The specific objectives are to:

  1. describe the socio-economic characteristics of catfish farmers in Bayelsa State, Nigeria;
  2. determine the technical efficiency of catfish farming;
  • identify factors that influence technical efficiency of catfish farming;
  1. analyze the costs and returns associated with catfish farming;
  2. examine the problems associated with catfish farming; and
  3. make recommendations based on the findings.

1.4       Hypotheses of the Study

The following null hypotheses were tested in the course of the study:

  1. There is no significant influence of socio-economic characteristics on output of Catfish farmers in Bayelsa State.
  2. Catfish farmers are not technically efficient.

1.5       Justification of the Study

The study aimed at examining the economics of catfish farmers in Bayelsa State. The reason is because presently catfish farming activity is not run as a business in comparison with other agriculture or livestock based industries in the state. If catfish farming can be demonstrated to be profitable at the small scale level, entrepreneurs may take it up at the commercial level and produce for large scale markets and export.

The findings of the study will provide necessary and important information to various stakeholders in the fishing industry, these include – potential fish farmers, policy makers, researchers, extension agents etc. Since the study will enable the efficient utilization of limited resources to maximum profitability and pond management practice by the farmers.

It will also help the government on policy formulation as it affects fish farming, and to the researchers it can be a part of reference material and open areas for the extension agents and all these will lead to increase in fish production with its benefits of increasing the protein intake of Nigerians.

 

Download Full Material-N5000

ASSESSMENT OF THE PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL AND ORGANOLEPTIC CHARACTERISTICS OF WATERMELON (Citrullus lanatus [THUNB]) WAXED WITH DIFFERENT PLANT OILS

ASSESSMENT OF THE PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL AND ORGANOLEPTIC CHARACTERISTICS OF WATERMELON (Citrullus lanatus [THUNB]) WAXED WITH DIFFERENT PLANT OILS

CHAPTER ONE/INTRODUCTION

Background

Watermelon, (Citrullus lanatus [Thunb] Matsum. & Nakai), is a popular fruit crop grown in  Nigeria (Agbetiameh, 2006) and produced widely in many other countries (FAOSTAT, 2011).  Records available suggest that watermelon production accounts for nearly a 6.8% of the world  area reserved for the purposes of growing vegetables (Guner & Wehner, 2004; Goreta et al., 2005). In Ghana, the area under cultivation is typically around the southern belt however, other areas around the Upper Volta basin are also under cultivation (Agbetiameh, 2006; Lamptey,
2010).

Agriculture forms the backbone of most developing countries including Ghana. Until recently, agriculture accounted for 38% of its GDP, trade and industry accounted for 28.6% and services
accounted for 33.6% (ISSER, 2008). Over the years, non-traditional agricultural exports (NTE) have been a major foreign exchange earner with commodities such as orange, banana, papaya,
mango and pineapple topping the list as major NTE earners. Even though there is a potential for the development of watermelon into a major foreign exchange earner, significantly missing
among the list of non-traditional export is watermelon (ISSER, 2011). Watermelon will serve as a better option than most non-traditional export due to its high market value and potential in
ensuring food security; evidently due to its high nutritional content (Kwofie, Pers. Com.)

According to Gichimu et al., (2008), watermelon is one of the widely produced vegetable fruit crop and the global consumption of watermelon is speculated to be greater than any other crop of
the cucurbitacea family. In the meantime, the over 6 billion people in the world may have to depend on certain countries for their watermelon needs. In confronting this challenge, countries
within the tropics such as Ghana are at a comparatively advantageous position because both climatic and soil condition favour year round production. nigeria can therefore place itself
strategically for a take-off as one of the leading producers of watermelon in the world. However, this can only be achieved if an effective production and postharvest system is put in place.
Additionally, the whole pre and postharvest value chain must be assessed in order to enhance the knowledge base.

Download Full Material-N5000