SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Alınteri Zirai Bilimler Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2

Effect of IFAD-VCDP on Input-Output Commercialization of Rice Farmers in Niger State of Nigeria

M. SADIQ
I. SINGH
Pages
51–58
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition, to tackle poor extension contact, the farmers should effectively and efficiently use their social capital to introduce farmer to farmer extension approach by using private extension service as the technical support unit.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The present research empirically determined the effect of IFAD programme on output and input commercialization among rice farmers in Niger State of Nigeria using field survey data elicited from 111 participants and 185 non-participants (90 and 95 non-participants from exposed and control groups respectively) drawn via multi-stage sampling design.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The collected data were analyzed using Heckman’s model.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, to tackle poor extension contact, the farmers should effectively and efficiently use their social capital to introduce farmer to farmer extension approach by using private extension service as the technical support unit.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

The present research empirically determined the effect of IFAD programme on output and input commercialization among rice farmers in Niger State of Nigeria using field survey data elicited from 111 participants and 185 non-participants (90 and 95 non-participants from exposed and control groups respectively) drawn via multi-stage sampling design. The collected data were analyzed using Heckman’s model. The empirical finding showed that the programme has no effect on output commercialization due to the poor market outlet as a result of no provision of established off-takers. However, the input support aspect of the programme mandate exerts an effect on the input commercialization among the farmers in the studied area. Furthermore, the poor incentive for extension agents, non-productive large household dominated by weaker people and one-way income traffic affected output commercialization among the rice farmers in the study area. Therefore, based on these, the programme should link the farmers with off-takers so as to sustain the viability of the programme even after its life span. In addition, to tackle poor extension contact, the farmers should effectively and efficiently use their social capital to introduce farmer to farmer extension approach by using private extension service as the technical support unit.

🔖

Cite This Article

SADIQ, M., SINGH, I. (2020). Effect of IFAD-VCDP on Input-Output Commercialization of Rice Farmers in Niger State of Nigeria. Alınteri Zirai Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2, 51–58. https://ajindex.com/articles/356642

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. AfDB, OECD & UNDP. (2014). African Economic Outlook 2014: Global Value Chains and Africa’s Industrialization, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/aeo-2014- en. Barrett, C. (2007). Smallholder market participation: Concepts and evidence from Eastern and Southern Africa. Food Policy, 33(4): 299–317.
  2. Byerlee, D. & Haggblade, S. (2013). African food systems to 2030: Toward inclusive business models. Stanford Symposium Series on Global Food Policy and Food Security in the 21st Century, Centre on Food Security and the Environment. Pp 36 De Janvry, A. & Sadoulet, E. (2009). Agricultural growth and poverty reduction: Additional evidence. The World Bank Research Observer, 25(1): 1–20. Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (FMARD). (2016). Value Chain Development Programme Baseline Survey Report, Abuja. Pp. 40 International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). (2015). IFAD’s Internal Guidelines: economic and financial analysis of rural investment projects, Rome. Pp. 47 Irshad, M. Q., Ali, T., Shahbaz, B. & Maqsood, M. (2016). Impact assessment of the IPM-FFS program on agronomic practices adopted by cotton growers in Punjab Pakistan. Journal of Agricultural Research, 54(2): 321-330
  3. Jayne, T. S., Zulu, B. & Nijhoff, J. J. (2006). Stabilizing food markets in eastern and southern Africa. Food Policy, 31: 328‐341. Mellor, J. W. & Malik, S. J. (2017). The impact of growth in small commercial farm productivity on rural poverty reduction. World Development, 91: 1–10.
  4. Oikeh, S. O., Nwilene, F. E., Agunbiade, T. A., Oladimeji, O., Ajayi, O., Semon, M., Tsunematsu, H. & Samejima, H. (No date). Growing upland rice: A production handbookAfrica Rice Center (WARDA). Accessed from www.warda.org on 17/2/2019
  5. Ouedraogo, S. A. (2019). Smallholders’ agricultural commercialization, food crop yield and poverty reduction: Evidence from rural Burkina Faso. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 14(1): 28-41
  6. Papaioannou, K.J. & De Haas, M. (2017). Weather shocks and agricultural commercialization in colonial tropical Africa: Did cash crops alleviate social distress? World Development, 94(June): 346–65.
  7. Pingali, P. L. & Rosegrant, M. W. (1995). Agricultural commercialization and diversification: Processes and policies. Food Policy, 20(3): 171–85.
  8. Randolph, T. F. (1992). The impact of agricultural commercialization on child nutrition. A case study of smallholder household in Malawi. Being Ph.D Dissertation submitted to Cornell University, I