FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://repository.ui.edu.ng/handle/123456789/261
Browse
10 results
Search Results
Item Technical efficiency and socioeconomic effects on poverty dynamics among cassava-based farming households in rural Nigeria(AgEcon search, 2021) Obayelu , O. A.; Obayelu, A. E.; Awoku, I.Despite the large scale public and government investment to improve the livelihoods of smallholder farmers, rural poverty remains widespread in Nigeria. However, efficiency effects on the transitory poverty has not received much attention in the poverty literature in Nigeria due to lack of nationally representative panel data that can track the poverty status of households over time. Using a two-wave panel data between 2010 and 2015, technical efficiency effects on poverty dynamics of cassava-based rural households in Nigeria was therefore investigated. Results showed that 14.9 % of the cassava farming households moved into poverty while 31.6 % exited from poverty. In the long run, the probability that rural cassava-based farmers would be non-poor (74 %) was higher than those remaining in poverty. Two out of five (42.2%) cassava-based farmers who were always poor exited technical inefficiency. A large number of farmers were actively involved in mono-cropping and mixed cropping but 29.7%, 26.0% and 16.6% of those involved in mono-cropping were always poor, entered and exited poverty, respectively. Tertiary education, marital status, access to extension farm size, membership of association, farming systems and technical efficiency were factors influencing poverty transitions in rural Nigeria.Item Livelihood diversification and welfare of rural households in Ondo State, Nigeria(academicJournal, 2013) Adepoju A. O.; Obayelu O. A.Agriculture, the main source of livelihood in Nigeria, especially in the rural areas, is plagued with various problems. As a result, most of the rural households are poor and are beginning to diversify their livelihoods into off and non-farm activities as a relevant source of income. This study examined the effect of livelihood diversification on the welfare of rural households in Ondo State. Primary data used in the study were obtained from 143 respondents selected employing a multistage sampling technique. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, multinomial logit and the logit regression models. The distribution of respondents by the type of livelihood strategy adopted revealed that almost three-quarters of the respondents adopted the combination of farm and nonfarm strategy. Econometric analysis showed that household size, total household income and primary education of the household head were the dominant factors influencing the choice of livelihood strategies adopted. Income from non-farm activities, as well as income from a combination of non-farm and farming activities, impacted welfare positively relative to income from farming activities. The study recommends the promotion of non-farm employment as a good strategy for supplementing the income of farmers as well as sustaining equitable rural growth.Item Nutritional Vulnerability Transitions among Rural Households in Nigeria(2023) Adepoju, A. O.Aims: It has long been considered that specific age/gender groups, such as women and children, are predisposed to nutritional vulnerability. Thus, nutritional vulnerability among agricultural households is neglected and understudied. This study aims at an empirical assessment of nutritional vulnerability dynamics among rural households in Nigeria. Study Design: Secondary data used for this study was waves 2 and 3 of the general household survey panel data. The sampling design consisted of two stages of sampling: the selection of enumeration areas based on probability proportionate to the size of the enumeration areas and the systematic random selection of ten households from each enumeration area. There were 3370 households selected in rural areas and 1630 households selected in urban areas. 2090 rural households with the required information for this study were included in the analysis. Methodology: Descriptive statistics, nutritional vulnerability score, logit regression model, Markov model, and multinomial logit regression models were used to analyse nutritional vulnerability transitions among rural households in Nigeria. Results: Nutritionally vulnerable households in rural Nigeria include those with aged heads, little or no formal education, limited assets, and no access to land or credit. Nutritional vulnerability in rural Nigeria is primarily transient, with around two-fifths of households experiencing transient nutritional vulnerability and nearly one-third experiencing chronic nutritional vulnerability. While the age of the household head, tertiary education, and access to credit all had a substantial impact on transient nutritional vulnerability, gender, tertiary education, asset value, and access to credit all had an impact on chronic nutritional vulnerability. Conclusion: Support mechanisms such as initiatives to promote access to healthy food, credit, land, and education are critical. To successfully address the issues affecting the nutrition and health of persons facing vulnerabilities, social welfare programs with interventions based on the characteristics of each vulnerable group and the predisposing factors should be adopted.Item Livelihood diversification and welfare of rural households in Ondo State, Nigeria(AcademicJournals, 2013) Adepoju, A. O.; Obayelu, O. A.Agriculture, the main source of livelihood in Nigeria, especially in the rural areas, is plagued with various problems. As a result, most of the rural households are poor and are beginning to diversify their livelihoods into off and non-farm activities as a relevant source of income. This study examined the effect of livelihood diversification on the welfare of rural households in Ondo State. Primary data used in the study were obtained from 143 respondents selected employing a multistage sampling technique. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, multinomial logit and the logit regression models. The distribution of respondents by the type of livelihood strategy adopted revealed that almost three-quarters of the respondents adopted the combination of farm and nonfarm strategy. Econometric analysis showed that household size, total household income and primary education of the household head were the dominant factors influencing the choice of livelihood strategies adopted. Income from non-farm activities, as well as income from a combination of non-farm and farming activities, impacted welfare positively relative to income from farming activities. The study recommends the promotion of non-farm employment as a good strategy for supplementing the income of farmers as well as sustaining equitable rural growth.Item Gender differentials in labour market participation of rural households in non-farm activities in oyo state, nigeria(Conscientia Beam, 2018) Adepoju, A. O.; Osunsanmi. O.Gender inequities in labour market opportunities is a particular concern since earnings from labour supplies are the most important source of income for the poor in the rural economies of developing countries. This study examined gender differentials in labour market participation of rural households in non-farm activities in Oyo state, Nigeria. A multistage random sampling technique was employed in selecting 120 rural households. Descriptive Statistics, Double- Hurdle regression model and Multinomial Logit regression models were the analytical tools employed. The mean farm size was relatively small as more than three-quarters of both male and female headed households respectively cultivated less than 1 hectare. Regression results indicated that male and female headed households participated and allocated more time to non-farm activities as their age and household size increased while farm size and remittances had negative effects. The decision on whether a household would hire or supply labour was largely influenced by the age of the household head, farm size, farming experience, household size and being a member of a cooperative group. However, female headed households’ participation was constrained mainly by inaccessibility to town as a result of the long distance between the homestead and the nearest town. The study recommends the establishment of small and medium enterprises in the rural areas to encourage the participation of both male and female headed households in non-farm income generating activities to cushion declining farm incomesItem Food Insecurity Status Of Rural Households During the Post Planting Season in Nigeria(2013) Adepoju, A.O.; Adejare, K.A.Despite various approaches addressing the challenges of food insecurity in Nigeria, the country is still characterized by chronic food shortages particularly in the rural areas. This is an indication that the problem of food insecurity has not been adequately and critically analyzed. This study examined the food insecurity status of rural households during the post planting season in Nigeria using the recent nationally representative survey data. Results showed that about half of the rural households (49.4%) in Nigeria were food insecure during the post-planting season. Also, econometric analysis confirms that household size, education of household head, access to credit and remittances were among the major factors influencing the food insecurity status of rural households during the period. Thus, intensification of enlightenment on birth control measures, improved access to credit facilities and provision of safety nets for food insecure households during this period is pertinent.Item Determinants of multidimensional poverty transitions among rural households in Nigeria(IAAE, 2018) A. Adepoju, A.Despite recent progress in poverty reduction globally, millions of people are either near or living in severe multidimensional poverty in Nigeria. This study examined multidimensional poverty transitions in rural Nigeria, employing the Alkire and Foster Measure of Multidimensional Poverty, Markov Model of Poverty Transitions and the Multinomial Logistic Regression Model for analysis. Results showed that multidimensional poverty among rural households in Nigeria is mainly chronic (46.5%) while education and assets dimensions contributed most to the incidence and severity of multidimensional poverty among the households. Educational status, household size, number of assets owned, ownership of land influenced transient poverty while marital status, household size, land ownership and number of assets owned influenced chronic poverty. The study recommends the enactment and implementation of relevant laws against marginalization of rural women in ownership of assets and intensification of efforts and incentives aimed at encouraging human capital development in the rural areasItem Economic Growth, Income Redistribution and Poverty Reduction in Rural Nigeria(2012) Adigun, G. T.The Nigerian economy over the past few years grew at one of the highest rates in Africa. Yet, this growth has not led to substantial reduction in inequality and poverty, particularly in the rural sector. This was partly attributed to redistributional problem of national wealth which has not been adequately investigated. Therefore, the study assessed the contribution of growth and wealth distribution to poverty reduction in rural Nigeria from 1996 to 2004. Data from the National Consumer Survey (NCS) of 1996 and National Living Standard Survey (NLSS) of 2004 sourced from the National Bureau of Statistics were used. The number of households sampled under the NCS and NLSS were 11,577 and 22,200 respectively. The rural household components of NCS and NLSS totaling 9377 and 14,515 respectively were used. Variables extracted for the study included demographic and socioeconomic characteristics as well as average household expenditure. The data were analysed using Gini, Foster-Greer-Thorbecke measures of poverty, the Shapley decomposition rule in co-operative game theory and Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition technique at p = 0.05. Rural household mean ages in 1996 and 2004 were 44.8 ±13.2 and 43.0 ±14.2 years respectively. Mean family size was 5.4 ± 3.7 in 1996 and 4.9 ± 2.9 in 2004. Gini coefficient and poverty incidence in 1996 were 48.0 and 69.2% compared to 46.0 and 65.1% in 2004 respectively. In 1996, the poverty gap and severity indices were 34.5 and 21.2% respectively while in 2004, the corresponding values were 27.6 and 14.9% respectively. Poverty severity was highest (61.8%) among Remittances Income Earners (RIE) and least (32.8%) among non – farm income earners in 2004. Highest variation (67.1%) in income was among RIE while the least (45.3%) was among agricultural income group. Both economic growth and income redistribution reduced poverty by 0.025 and 0.056% respectively. A 10% decrease in inequality resulted in 0.04 and 2.45% reduction in poverty in 1996 and 2004 respectively. Similarly, a 10% increase in growth in 1996 and 2004 reduced poverty in both periods by 0.02 and 0.23% respectively. Variations in income distribution within the two periods contributed 0.248 to total inequality compared with 0.362 between the two periods. Income distribution disparity within the two periods (0.245) contributed less to poverty than the variation between the two periods (2.934). A 10% increase in growth from 1996 to 2004 reduced poverty by 6.2% and decreased inequality by 3.4%. The respective key determinants of growth for both periods were age of household head (0.011, 0.199), housing (0.038, 0.032), education (0.129, 0.141) and hours worked (0.183×10-4, 0.002). Others were gender (- 0.117, -0.213) and household size (-0.044, -0.140). Economic growth and income redistribution generally ameliorated poverty between 1996 and 2004 in rural Nigeria and the growth facilitating factors comprised quality of housing, education, longer hours of work and being a middle aged household head. The effect of poverty was however more noticeable among remittances income earners.Item Effect of Social Capital on Rural Household Welfare in Southwestern Nigeria(2013) Adepoju, A. A.Rural household welfare remains low in Nigeria, as the traditional capital (physical, natural, human and financial) has not fully led to its improvement. There is increasing shift of attention to social capital as an element that explains household welfare. The nexus between social capital and rural household welfare in southwestern Nigeria has not been fully examined. The effect of social capital on rural household welfare in southwestern Nigeria was therefore investigated. Multistage sampling technique was used. Oyo and Ekiti states were selected from the six states in southwestern Nigeria based on their poverty profile (the least poor and the poorest). Six rural Local Government Areas and thirty-two communities were selected from the two states based on probability proportionate to size and sample size of 298 was used for the analysis. Data were collected on household demographic characteristics such as age, education and household size, expenditure profile and social capital dimensions: Membership Density (MD), Decision Making (DM), Meeting Attendance (MA), heterogeneity, Cash Contribution (CC) and Labour Contribution (LC). Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, ordered probit, ordinary least square, two-stage least square and control function regression models at p=0.05. Ninety three percent of the households were headed by male. Mean age, years of formal education and household size were 48.3 ± 11.7 years, 8.4 ± 6.3 years and 6.1 ± 2.6 respectively. Average MD and DM in association were 4.5 ± 2.1 and 24.7 ± 13.2. Households attended four out of every five meetings scheduled. Diversification of membership measured by heterogeneity index was 21.7 ± 16.4 while annual CC and LC to association were N7,412.95 ± N9,757.73 and 54.6 ± 18.4 mandays respectively. Membership in religious group accounted for the highest proportion (77.3 percent) while recreational club accounted for the lowest (4.67 percent). The highest Welfare Tercile (WT) had monthly mean per capita expenditure of N9,135.98 N4,014.35 which was four times the value for the lowest WT (N2,239.82 N958.33). The maximum CC to associations was recorded by the highest WT (N9,756.90 ± N12,358.25) while the lowest WT had the maximum LC of 24.7 ± 20.2 mandays. Majority of the households (78.0 percent) benefited from access to information on market outlets and share of risk/shocks while 55.5 percent had access to land. Low educational level reduced benefit derived from social group by 0.027, while being a farmer (0.404), LC (0.016) and DM increased benefit received from social group. Household welfare reduced with increase in age (-2.965), being married (-2.965), household size (-0.398), being a farmer (-1.676) and LC (-7.5x10-4). Conversely, age squared, education and DM index increased household welfare by 0.2 percent, 10.8 percent and 2.8 percent respectively. Aggregate social capital index increased household welfare by 9.5 percent, while controlling for non-linear interaction of social capital with unobservable variables further increased the effect of social capital by 13.1 percent. Decision making and aggregate social capital improved household welfare while labour contribution reduced it. A bi-causality relationship existed between social capital and household welfare.Item Income Diversification and Poverty Among Rural Farm Households in Southwest Nigeria(2011) Idowu, A. O.Rural development has been erroneously equated to agricultural development. The former works to diversify income through non-farm activities to complement proceeds of the latter. However, the actual role of non-farm income in poverty alleviation is not yet known among rural households. There is therefore the need to critically explore the roles of non-farm income diversification in rural poverty alleviation. The patterns and contributions of non-farm income diversification to poverty reduction among rural farm households in Southwest Nigeria were investigated. A multistage sampling technique was used to obtain data from rural farm households. Three states (Ekiti, Ogun and Osun) from the six south western states were randomly selected. Five agricultural zones were randomly selected from the three states based on probability proportionate to size. In each zone, four blocks and three cells per block were selected. Lastly, two farming communities per cell and four farming households per community were selected to make 480 farming households. Structured questionnaire was used to collect data on socio-economic characteristics, household assets, income generating activities, labour-use, income and expenditure. Descriptive statistics, Foster-Greer-Thorbecke poverty measures, Herfindal index, Tobit and Probit regression methods were employed for data analyses at p = 0.05. Mean age of household heads, household size and dependency ratio were 49.9 ± 0.6 years, 6.8 ± 0.1 and 0.7 ± 0.1, respectively. The mean year of schooling of household heads was 8.8 ± 0.2 and 83.7% of households were headed by male. The mean per capita income was N206.7 ± 160.3/day while the per capita cost of basic needs was N253.4 ± 28.6/day. The incidence, depth and severity of poverty were 76.4%, 32.9% and 17.3% respectively. Ninety four percent of the households derived their income from a diversified portfolio of livelihood activities, with non-farm activities accounting for 67.1% of the income. The non-farm activities included skilled (18.0%) and unskilled (22.9%) wage employment, self-employment (81.3%) and social and community service (8.8%). Self-employment was the largest non-farm income source contributing 42.1%. Involvement in non-farm labour activities was significantly higher among poor than non-poor farm households. The level of income diversification depicted by Herfindal index was 2.8 ± 0.04 and it was significantly higher among poor than non-poor farm households. The implicit wage rate of household labour use in farming activities (N1,773.4/manday) was significantly higher than in non-farm activities (N878.0/manday). Education (0.1) and electricity (0.5) significantly increased non-farm income diversification while distance to urban centre (-0.04), landholding (-0.6) and animal asset base (-0.2) significantly reduced non-farm income diversification. Participation in non-farm skilled (-0.1) and unskilled (-0.1) wage employments significantly reduced the probability of being poor. Other characters of respondents that significantly reduced the probability of being poor included education (-0.1), landholding (-0.4), investment asset base (-0.000005) and rural electricity (-0.1) while household size (0.1) increased the probability. Participation in skilled and unskilled wage employment significantly reduced poverty among rural farm households in Southwest Nigeria.