DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://repository.ui.edu.ng/handle/123456789/453
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item Effects of Rice Trade Policies on Household Welfare in Nigeria(2014) Obi-Egbedi, O.Inconsistent trade policies have characterised Nigeria’s rice importation, leading to planning and decision-making challenges for producers and consumers, and with fluctuating consequences on welfare status. However, studies on Rice Trade Policy (RTP) have been carried out within the partial equilibrium framework which do not reveal the welfare effects on all sectors and households in the economy. For effective RTP, an understanding of the economy-wide welfare effects is necessary which is possible within a general equilibrium framework. The economy-wide welfare effects of RTPs on households in Nigeria were therefore investigated. Value of domestic production, inputs and intermediate products were obtained from Nigerian Institute for Social and Economic Research’s Input-Output (I-O) table. From the I-O, the economy was grouped into rice, Other Agriculture (OA), Oil and Mining (OM) and Manufacturing and Services (MS) sectors. Household incomes were collected from National Bureau of Statistics’ Nigerian Living Standards Survey (NLSS). From NLSS, households were classified into Rural North Household (RNH), Rural South Household (RSH), Urban North Household (UNH) and Urban South Household (USH). Value of imports and import charges, as measures of Import Tax (IT), were gathered from the Central Bank of Nigeria’s trade summary. All data were for year 2004. Two trade protection policy instruments: Import Ban (IB) and Eighty Percent Tariff Increase (EPTI); and two trade liberalisation policy instruments: Five Percent Tariff Reduction (FPTR) and Tariff Elimination (TE) were identified for simulation. Data were analysed using computable general equilibrium model and Hicksian measures of equivalent variation. Total output valued at ₦11,065 billion comprised MS (42.9%), OM (28.9%), OA (27.5%) and rice (0.7%). Household Income (HI) totaled ₦8,260 billion comprising USH (43.1%), UNH (32.8%), RSH (13.5%) and RNH (10.6%). The IT contributed 77.5% of government revenue. Rice output increased most by 3.1% under TE followed by 1.1% under FPTR. Least increase in rice output of 0.1% occurred under EPTI. Output decreased most in OA (21.7%), OM (0.01%) and MS (0.1%) under TE. However, output increased by 0.5% in OA and decreased least in OM and MS with 0.1% and 0.6% respectively under FPTR. Rural north household had the highest increase in HI of 0.3% under IB but recorded the highest decrease of 17.9% under TE. Least decrease in HI was recorded for RNH (0.1%), RSH (0.01%) and USH (0.2%) under FPTR whereas, UNH income increased by 0.1%. Import ban improved RNH welfare most by ₦2.3 billion while TE decreased it most by ₦115.0 billion. Social welfare loss occurred under all RTPs but was lowest (₦8.0 billion) under FPTR. Highest loss in welfare of ₦694.1 billion occurred under TE. Rural households benefitted under protectionist rice trade policies but the social welfare effect on the economy was negative. However, mild rice trade liberalisation of 5% tariff reduction would minimise Nigeria’s welfare loss from rice trade policiesItem Gender Dimension of Social Capital and its Effects on Rural Household Welfare in Osun and Ondo States, Nigeria(2012) Agboola, T. O.Social capital is trust and willingness to live by the norms of one’s associates. This household welfare asset has the potential to break the poverty cycle. However, there is little evidence on gender sensitivity of the effect of social capital on welfare status in Nigeria. Hence, gender dimension of social capital and its effects on rural household welfare in Osun and Ondo states, Nigeria were investigated. A multistage random sampling technique was employed for the study. Osun and Ondo states were selected from the six states in Southwestern Nigeria. Eight Local Government Areas (LGAs) were selected from each state. Thereafter, five communities were selected from each LGA. Three hundred and seventy respondents were selected from all the communities based on probability proportionate to size. Data were collected using structured questionnaire on socio-economic characteristics and social capital dimensions; group and network; trust and solidarity; Social Cohesion and Inclusion (SCI); collective action and cooperation; Information and Communication (IC); and Empowerment and Political Action (EPA). Attendance at associations’ meetings is the number of times present on monthly basis. The mean per capita household expenditure was used as a proxy for welfare. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, multiple and Tobit regressions at p= 0.05. Male Headed Households (MHH) constituted 51.3%. Mean age of MHH and Female Headed Households (FHH) was 44.1 ± 2.2 and 42.3 ± 1.2 years respectively. The mean household size was 6.2 ± 2.3 and 5.1 ± 1.4 for MHH and FHH respectively. Average meeting attendance by both sexes was two out of five. Density of membership index in association was 0.30 and 0.34 for MHH and FHH respectively. MHH had 0.73 index of participation while FHH had 0.58. FHH were more involved in IC (0.69) compared with MHH (0.46). The SCI index was 0.47 for MHH and 0.65 for FHH. Male household heads had higher EPA (0.67) compared with FHH (0.21). On the average MHH participated in three of five decision- making and two for FHH. Monthly cash contributions of male and female heads were N895.90 ± N55.37 and N985.67 ± N72.11 in 2007 respectively. Monthly average labour contributions for MHH and FHH were 2.4 ± 0.3 and 3.2 ± 0.1 mandays respectively. There was no significant difference between MHH monthly per capita expenditure (N2, 936.67 ± N143.43) and FHH (N3, 221.82 ± N104.10). Aggregate social capital enhanced welfare of MHH and FHH by 0.503 and 0.681 respectively. Meeting attendance reduced welfare for both sexes by 0.258. Participation in decision- making increased welfare of MHH and FHH by 0.714 and 0.812 respectively. Increase in household size reduced welfare for both sexes by 0.782. Increase in age reduced welfare of MHH and FHH by 0.225 and 0.319 respectively. Increase in level of education increased welfare of MHH (0.123) and FHH (0. 913) indicating that female benefit more. Social capital influenced welfare of female headed households more. Participation in decision- making, and level of education enhanced households` per capita expenditure. Household size, meeting attendance and age negatively affected households’ welfare.