Impact of the National Fadama Development Project Phase (II) on Poverty : Current School News

Impact of the National Fadama Development Project Phase (II) on Poverty Reduction and Food Security among Rice Farmer Beneficiaries in Kogi State, Nigeria

HURRY NOW! APPLY NOW FOR USA JOBS WITH FREE VISA!


 

Impact of the National Fadama Development Project Phase (II) on Poverty Reduction and Food Security among Rice Farmer Beneficiaries in Kogi State, Nigeria.

ABSTRACT

The study was conducted to examine the impact of the National Fadama Development Project (II) (NFDP-II) on poverty reduction and food security among rice-farmer beneficiaries in Kogi State Nigeria.

Four LGAs that participated in the Fadama (II) project and cultivated rice were selected through a multi-stage sampling, two Fadama Community Associations (FCAs) were also randomly selected from each of the four selected LGAs and two facilitators were selected from each of the LGAs selected.

A total of one hundred and twenty (120) respondents (112 farmers and 8 facilitators) constituted the sample size for the study. A set of interview schedules and questionnaires were used to collect the data for the study. Descriptive statistics like frequency, percentage and mean score were used to analyze the data collected.

Gross margin, Foster, Greer and Thorbecke (FGT) poverty model and food security model were used to determine farmers’ profitability, food security status and poverty level. Factor analysis with principal factor model with interaction and varimax rotation was used to determine major constraints while a t-test was used to analyze the impact of the project on farmers’ profitability and difference in respondents’ perception of problems encountered.

The result of the study showed that the majority of the farmers (51.8%) and facilitators (75%) were males, the mean age of the farmers was 45.5 years while that of the facilitators was 38.5 years. The majority (57.1%) of the farmers have farming as their primary occupation.

Information from fellow farmers was the most popular (96.4%) source of information on Madama project. Among some of the improved innovations on rice production introduced by the NFDP(II), only the rice farming inputs and field preparation/planting distance had an above average adoption ratio with an adoption index of 0.84 and 0.96 respectively.

The gross margins of rice production before and after the project was significantly different with a t-value of -14.94 at p < 0.05. The food security analysis of the farmers revealed that more (2.8%) of them were food insecure after the project. The project had a positive impact on the poverty reduction of the farmers.

With respect to the perceived problems being encountered by the farmers in the project, the poverty level of the farmers was perceived as the most serious (mean score = 3.89), while the facilitators perceived both the high cost of farm inputs and lack of credit facilities as the most serious problems (mean scores of 3.38 each).

The results of the analysis further revealed that both farmers and facilitators share similar opinions on twenty identified problems and have significant differences in their perception on seven identified problems at p< 0.05. The result, however, showed that several factors constrained the effectiveness of the NFDP (II) in the study areas.

These factors were grouped into technical problems; institutional problems and economic problems.

The most popular strategies suggested for the effective performance of the project were a provision of tractors for land preparation (65.2%) by farmers, proper implementation and completion of the programme plans as well as the supply of subsidised farm inputs and farmers’ training (87.5%) by the facilitators.

In conclusion, the study provided evidence of the effectiveness of the Community-Driven Development approach on food security and poverty reduction.

It is therefore recommended that to improve the overall performance of the programme, the programme staff at all levels should ensure that the programme implementation plans, (various local development plans (LDPs)) are followed religiously and the programme projects are completed.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title page ii
Certification iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgement v
Abstract vi
Table of contents viii
List of Tables x
List of Figures xi

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of study 1
1.2 Problem statement 6
1.3 Purpose of study 9
1.4 Hypotheses 9
1.5 Significance of study 9

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Concept of poverty 11
2.2 Concept of food security 16
2.3 Efforts in reducing food insecurity and poverty 23
2.4 Some agricultural development programmes 25
2.5 The national fadama development project phase II 28
2.6 Adoption and its theories and study 31
2.7 Rice production 36
2.8 Evaluation of agricultural projects 39
2.8.1 Theoretical framework 47
2.8.2 Empirical poverty reduction studies with models 54
2.8.3 Empirical food security studies 57
2.9 Conceptual framework 63

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Study area 66
3.2 Population and sampling procedure 67
3.3 Instrument for data collection 68
3.4 Measurement of variables 69
3.5 Data analysis 74

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

4.1 Respondents’ socio-economic characteristics 75
4.2 Adoption of improved innovation on rice production among fadama beneficiaries81
4.3 Profitability of rice production among Fadama(II) beneficiaries 83
4.4 Food security statuses of respondents by households 87
4.5 Poverty levels of the rice fadmer-beneficiaries 88
4.6 Major problems being encountered by both farmers and facilitators 90
4.7 Farmers’ perception of the problems being encountered 93
4.8 Facilitators’ perception of the problems being encountered 95
4.9 Possible strategies suggested for improving on the project performance 97
4.10 Test of difference in the perception of farmers and facilitators on problems encountered 101

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary of findings 104
5.2 Conclusion 107
5.3 Recommendations 107
REFERENCES 109
APPENDIX:

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Background of the Study

The major challenges facing developing countries such as Nigeria are food insecurity (insufficient food production) and poverty (DFID, 2006). More than a billion people in the developing world live in rural areas on less than a dollar per day, without enough money to buy food.

It is estimated that of the 1.2 billion hungry and poor of the world, over 800 million suffer from chronic under-nourishment. Out of this, 34 million live in Asia, while 186 million live in sub-Saharan Africa (DFID, 2006).

Poverty is one of the gravest challenges facing the world today, with a staggering 40 per cent of the world’s population living with the reality or the threat of extreme poverty, and one in five persons living in a state of poverty so abject that it threatens survival (Gustavo and Kostas, 2007).

Globally, extreme poverty continues to be a rural phenomenon despite increasing urbanization. And out of the world’s 1.2 billion extremely poor people, 75 per cent live in rural areas and, they largely depend on agriculture, forestry, fisheries and related activities for survival (Gustavo and Kostas, 2007).

Poverty is a multi-faceted affliction as well as a raging economic and social phenomenon that manifests in the inability of the victims to acquire the basic necessities of life.

REFERENCES

Adegeye, A. J. and Dittoh, J.S. (1985). Essentials of agricultural economics . New Edition, Impact Publishers Nig. Td., Ibadan
Adeolu, B.A. & Taiwo, A. (2004). The Impact of national fadama facility in alleviating rural poverty and enhancing agricultural development in south-western nigeria. journal of social science, 9(3): 157-161. 03-128.
Adesina, A.A. and Zinuah, M.M.(1993). Technology characteristics: Farmers’ perceptions and adoptions decision. A topic model analysis in Sierra Leone. Agricultural economics (9). Pp. 297-311.
African Development Fund (ADF) (2003), A republic of nigeria fadama development project appraisal report agriculture
African Development Fund (ADF) (2004), Fadama development project implementation manual. agricultural and rural development department OCAR.2.

    Hey You!

    Join Over 5 Million Subscribers Today!


    => FOLLOW US ON INSTAGRAM | FACEBOOK & TWITTER FOR LATEST UPDATE

    Tags: , , ,

    Comments are closed.

    %d bloggers like this: