Journals / Akademik Ziraat Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2

Cost benefit analysis of soil conservation practices: A case study for Nigeria

Toprak koruma uygulamalarının maliyet fayda analizi: Nijerya için bir vaka çalışması

Pages
345–352
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

The results show that they had amean age of 41 years and most of them wereeducated.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The study examined profitability analysis of soilconservation practices and its determinants byarable crop farmers in Delta North Agricultural Zone,Delta State.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A sample size of 332respondents was used for the study and data werecollected from them with the use of structuredquestionnaires.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results show that they had amean age of 41 years and most of them wereeducated.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The study examined profitability analysis of soilconservation practices and its determinants byarable crop farmers in Delta North Agricultural Zone,Delta State. A multistage selection procedure wasapplied for this study. A sample size of 332respondents was used for the study and data werecollected from them with the use of structuredquestionnaires. Data collected were analyzed usingdescriptive statistics, budgetary and multipleregression analyses. The results show that they had amean age of 41 years and most of them wereeducated. They had a mean household size of 7persons and average farm size of 1.69ha withfarming experience of 13 years. Their mean farmincome was $ 251.53. The finding revealed that themajor soil conservation practices adopted by therespondents were irrigation, planting of differentcrop, planting of trees, use of fertilizer and croprotation. Budgetary analysis revealed that a totalcost (TC) of $9423.54 was incurred by therespondents per farming season while total revenue(TR) of $22746.08 was realized with a returninggross margin (GM) of $13322.54 and returns onevery naira invested of $0.0062 were obtained fromthe use of soil conservation practices. This is anindication that soil conservation practices areprofitable in the study area. The regression showedthat education, farm size, farming experience,income, labour supply, access to credit, farmersperception and awareness contributed positively toprofitability of soil conservation practices. The majorchallenges encountered by the farmers areinaccessibility to information, limited income, highcost of improved varieties, inadequate storagefacilities, high cost of labour and unavailability ofcredit facilities. It is recommended that thegovernment should create awareness on soilconservation practices.

Özet

Çalışma, Delta State'in Delta North Tarım Bölgesi'ndeki ekilebilir çiftçiler tarafından toprak koruma uygulamalarının ve belirleyicilerinin karlılık analizini incelemiştir. Bu çalışma için çok aşamalı bir seçim prosedürü uygulanmıştır. Çalışma için 332 katılımcıdan oluşan örneklem büyüklüğü kullanılmış ve yapılandırılmış anketler kullanılarak bu verilerden veri toplanmıştır. Toplanan veriler tanımlayıcı istatistikler, bütçe ve çoklu regresyon analizleri kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Sonuçlar ortalama yaşlarının 41 olduğunu ve çoğunun eğitildiğini göstermektedir. Ortalama hane halkı sayısı 7, ortalama çiftlik büyüklüğü 1.69 hektardı ve 13 yıllık tarım tecrübesi vardı. Ortalama çiftlik gelirleri 251.53 dolardı. Bulgu, katılımcıların benimsedikleri başlıca toprak koruma uygulamalarının sulama, farklı mahsul ekimi, ağaç dikimi, gübre kullanımı ve mahsul rotasyonu olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Bütçe analizi, tarım sezonu başına katılımcılar tarafından toplam 9423.54 dolarlık bir maliyetin (TC) gerçekleştiğini, 22746.08 dolarlık toplam gelirin (TR) 13322.54 dolarlık bir brüt kar marjı (GM) ile gerçekleştiğini ve 0,0062 dolarlık yatırım yapılan her nairadan elde edildiğini ortaya koydu. toprak koruma uygulamalarınınkullanımından Bu, toprak koruma uygulamalarının çalışma alanında karlı olduğunun bir göstergesidir. Regresyon, eğitim, çiftlik büyüklüğü, tarım deneyimi, gelir, işgücü arzı, krediye erişim, çiftçilerin algı ve farkındalığının toprak koruma uygulamalarının karlılığına olumlu katkıda bulunduğunu göstermiştir. Çiftçilerin karşılaştığı en büyük zorluklar bilgiye erişilememesi, sınırlı gelir, iyileştirilmiş çeşitlerin yüksek maliyeti, yetersiz depolama tesisleri, yüksek işçilik maliyeti ve kredi imkanlarının bulunmamasıdır. Hükümetin toprak koruma uygulamaları konusunda farkındalık yaratması tavsiye edilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

GBİGBİ, T. M. (2022). Cost benefit analysis of soil conservation practices: A case study for Nigeria. Akademik Ziraat Dergisi, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2, 345–352. https://ajindex.com/articles/433007

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Aberha, E.T. (2008). Erosion and soil and water conservation group and environmental Policy group. Continue use of soil and water conservation practices. A Case Study in Tulla District, Ethiopia. Dissertation for Award of MSc Degree at Wagenigen University, The Nertherlands, 57pp. Asfaw, S. (2010). Estimating welfare effect of modern agricultural technologies: A micro-perspective from Tanzania and Ethiopia. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Paper Presented at the Meeting, 27 May 2010 in Nairobi, Kenya. pp. 16 – 18. Bayard, B., Jolly, C.M., & Dennis, A.S. (2006). The adoption and management of soil conservation practices in Haiti: The Case of Rock Walls. Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, 7(2), 35-36.
  2. Blanco, H.C., & Lal, R. (2010). Principles of soil conservation and management. [Htt://www.bokus.com/ bok/9789048179626/principles-of-soil conservation-and management/] site visited on 10/09/2012.
  3. Chomba, G.N. (2004). Factors affecting smallholder farmers adoption of soil and water conservation practices in Zambia. Dissertation for Award of MSc Degree at Michigan State University, 118pp. Claassen, R., Breneman, Bucholtz,Cattaneo, A., Johansson, R.C., & Morehart M.J. (2004). Environmental Compliance in US Agricultural Policy: Past Performance and Future Potential. Agricultural Economic Report AER-832, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC. Eswaran, H.R., Lal, P., & Reich, F. (2001). Land Degradation: An Overview. In E. M. Bridges, I. D. Hannam, L. R. Oldeman, F. W. T. Pening de Vries, S. J. Scherr, and S. Sompatpanit, eds., Responses to Land Degradation. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Land Degradation and Desertification, Khon Kaen, Thailand, New Delhi, India: Oxford University Press.
  4. Honlonkou, A.N. (2004). Modelling Adoption of Natural Resources Management Technologies: The Case of Fallow Systems. Environment and Development Economics, 9, 289–314.
  5. Jara-Rojas R, Bravo-Ureta B.E., & Díaz J. (2012). Adoption of water conservation practices: A socioeconomic analysis of small-scale farmers in Central Chile. Agricultural System, 110, 54-62.
  6. Jie C, Jing-Zhang C, Man-Zhi T., & Zi-Tong G. (2002). Soil degradation: a global problem endangering sustainable development. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 12, 243-252.
  7. Lal R. (2015). Restoring soil quality to mitigate soil degradation. Sustainability, 7, 5875-5895.
  8. Lal, R. (2009).Challenges and Opportunities in Soil Organic Mat