Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies & Management 8(2): 182 – 195, 2015. ISSN:1998-0507 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ejesm.v8i2.8 Submitted: November 28, 2014 Accepted: February 13, 2015

LAND ACCESSIBILITY AMONG URBAN CROP FARMERS IN THE INFORMAL SECTOR, , NIGERIA ODUDU, C.O. Department of Estate Management, , , Lagos Email: [email protected]

Abstract Urban crop farming as a variant of urban agriculture is practised in towns and cities of both developed and developing countries and is found to make immense contributions to their development. The study therefore investigated constraints affecting land accessibility among urban crop farmers as an informal sector activity and identified issues that must be resolved to enhance their productivity in the Lagos metropolis. Respondents of seven communities were selected through simple random sampling and administered with structured questionnaires. Data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics while regression analysis was used to investigate the research hypothesis. The study established that the most critical issues that determined land accessibility among urban crop farmers in the Lagos metropolis were in the following descending order: affordability (47.616%), security of tenure (18.056%), competition with other uses (12.797%), availability (7.287%) and usability (6.286%). Thus, availability and usability were not the most critical issues in urban crop farming. Also, publicly-owned lands were found to be readily available but not accessible for crop farming. The study produced a constraints analysis model that could be used to predict land accessibility among the farmers and concluded that the Lagos state government should support and promote urban crop farming by providing land in designated areas for the activity.

Key Words: Land, Accessibility, Informal, Urban, Crop, Farmers

Introduction (intra-urban) or on the fringe (peri-urban) Urban crop farming which is used of towns, urban centers or cities, which interchangeably with urban farming and grows or raises, processes and distributes a urban agriculture is a system of growing diversity of food and non-food products, crops in and around an urban area. It reusing mainly human and material thrives in towns and cities of both resources, products and services found in developing and developed countries world- and around that urban area, and in turn wide. Its importance prompted UN-Habitat supplying human and material resources, (2008) report that the system produces products and services largely to that urban between 15 and 20% of the world’s food area. It is an informal sector activity which and involves some 800 million urban and is accessed by low-income urban residents peri-urban farmers and gardeners. (Foeken, 2005). In the Lagos metropolis, Mougeot (2000) defined urban crop the major activities of the informal sector farming as an industry located within vary from small scale enterprises made up 182

Land Accessibility Among Urban Crop Farmers in the Informal Sector ...... ODUDU, C.O. largely of self-help activities which include Lawal and Aliu (2012) reiterated that urban operators in repair services, transportation, farming was rapidly growing in many cities household helps, restaurants, retail trading, in Nigeria including the megacity of Lagos. urban crop farming, etc. Urban crop They therefore established the need for farming as an informal activity is known to stakeholders to re-examine the relevance of afford households self-sufficiency in food urban farming in the city and provide provisioning thereby enhancing food support for its growth. This study shall security, income and employment therefore be carried out on the following generation. It is also important in urban basis: environmental management as it can be Statement of Problem used to turn derelict open spaces into green As an informal activity, there is no zones. The activity is generally land- formal land allocation for urban crop dependent and land is obviously outside the farming compared with other land uses in reach of the urban crop farmers as most of the Lagos metropolis; thus undermining its them are generally not fertile (van numerous contributions to a city’s social, Veenhuizen, 2006) and are unable to afford economic and environmental development. or compete with other uses for land. Land There is therefore need to recognize the accessibility in Lagos as in other parts of activity as an urban land use in its own Nigeria is governed by the Land Use Act right. Cap L.5 2004 (Decree 6, 1978). Bello Research Question (2007) noted that the Act in conjunction What is the relative importance of the with the 1999 Constitution, guaranteed constraints encountered by urban crop equal access to land for all Nigerians farmers in land acquisition in the Lagos irrespective of tribe, religion, occupation, metropolis? level of education, political affinity and Specific Objective gender. In Lagos state, the demand for land To investigate constraints affecting land for various land use activities is accessibility for urban crop farming as an overwhelming vis-à-vis the ever-increasing informal activity in order to identify issues population which was estimated as over that must be resolved to enhance its 21million people compared with its land productivity in the Lagos metropolis. mass of 356,861 hectares (Lagos State Broad Objective Government, 2014). There is no official To determine the relative importance of land zoning for the informal sector constraints encountered by urban crop activities and urban crop farming as an farmers in land acquisition in the Lagos activity in this sector is not considered in metropolis. the scheme of things and has no official Hypothesis land use zoning. New policies on urban The hypothesis that there is no crop farming are therefore overdue to significant difference in the relative rating enable the integration of the activity into of constraints to land accessibility among urban development. FAO (2007) noted that urban crop farmers in the Lagos metropolis owing to the dominant view on urban will be resolved in this study. planning and lack of access to research data Justification among other reasons, policy makers often The study is important because of the had a misconceived view of urban growing popularity of urban crop farming agriculture as a temporary phenomenon or as an informal activity in towns and cities a remnant from migration of rural farmers worldwide and particularly in the Lagos to the city that would fade over time. metropolis. The study will therefore be a 183

Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 8 no. 2 2015 major source of data in formulating a land (2004) in Bamako identified multiple policy that can assist urban crop farmers in means of accessing land for urban the metropolis. agriculture which were through formal, Major Constraint informal and semi-informal methods. The study recognized the importance of These modes of access did not, however, government attitude towards urban crop confer any legal status on the farmer that farming but efforts by the researcher to would ensure security of tenure. obtain information on government did not Nonetheless, the most appropriate mode of yield satisfactory results as questionnaires accessing land by urban crop farmers using administered to government ministries and the Velez-Guerra’s concept is formal parastatals were not returned while those access through customary or statutory law returned were largely uncompleted without which is possible through government answers to the relevant questions. recognition. Urban farmers are accessing Land Accessibility Constraints and Urban land through renting, inheritance, Crop Farming borrowing, squatting, leasing and Land is very key to the practice of spontaneous occupation. These modes of urban crop farming. It is however observed accessing land were also reiterated by that one of the greatest hindrances to its Crush et al. (2011). Although land growth is inaccessibility to land and the accessibility is largely attributed to market attitude of policy makers to its cause constraints particularly affordability, (Reuther & Dewar, 2005; Asiama, 2005). Omirin (2003) noted that it was The farmers do not possess formal land multifaceted and embraced availability, ownership documents such as certificates affordability, security of tenure and ease of of occupancy and therefore are unable to transaction. Drechsel and Dongus (2009) secure bank loans to improve on in their study on dynamics and productivity, purchase agricultural inputs sustainability of urban agriculture noted (fertilizers, insecticides, etc.) or to build that the risks in urban agriculture more permanent structures such as concrete comprised, “tenure insecurity, lack of fence walls and deep wells or to engage in subsidies, official support or extension perennial crop production. As a result, they services, high land competition with non- resort to the use of marginal land with less agricultural land use, poor soils and productivity potentials or they occupy land possible prosecution due to illegal or water informally - which may lead to ejection use”. Furthermore, Akinmoladun and without notice. In spite of the negative Adejumo (2011) apart from stressing the attitude of government to the activity, it has importance of urban farming listed socio- continued to thrive in towns and cities of cultural and institutional bias, developing countries because of the organizational constraints, post production difficult economic times faced, particularly constraints and, “problems of access to by the poor who are either unemployed or resources especially capital, inputs and have lost their paid jobs. The ubiquity of services” as challenges facing urban urban farming has enabled it to thrive in farming. Writing on the constraints on parklands, open spaces within the urban crop farming, Cisse et al. (2005) had community, steep slopes, wetlands, rivers, earlier noted that it was a high value-added lakes, roads and rights-of-way such as sector of tremendous interest to public power lines, gas lines, railways, buffer authorities, civil society and researchers. zones at airports and industrial complexes They added that it contributed to job- (Nasr, 1996). The study of Velez-Guerra creation, income generation, food security 184

Land Accessibili ty Among Urban Crop Farmers in the Informal Sector ...... ODUDU, C.O. and environmental conservation but that the indigenous resources, family ownership, activity faced a large number of constraints small scale operations, labour intensive and that impeded the achievement of these adaptive technology, skills acquired outside goals. These constraints nonetheless of the formal sector and unregulated and prompt urban farmers to occupy land competitive market”. The informal sector informally or illegally. Quon (1999) also is thus, at the forefront of unemployment attributed urban farmers’ accessibility reduction. The rising rate of constraints to lopsided land use planning unemployment is attributed largely to policies which emanated from urbanization which according to Hoornweg 1. Lack of formal recognition of urban (2008) is a problem most developing crop farming countries have great difficulties coping 2. Lack of awareness of the socio- with and are unable to create sufficient economic and environmental role of formal employment opportunities for the urban crop farming poor. Akintoye (2008) also opined that, 3. Lack of clear government “unemployment can be reduced by responsibility for urban crop examining the activities of the informal farming sector”. The importance of the sector was 4. Lack of resources, technical and further stressed by the Nigerian Federal financial support for urban crop Government (as cited in Onyenechere, farming 2011) that, “the share of informal Quon (1999) consequently summarized economic sector employment out of total land acquisition constraints in respect of gainful employment in Nigeria rose from urban crop farming as land availability, 27.3% in 1970 to 38.2% in 1989”. This accessibility and usability. This study, was seen as arising from the high urban however, takes a broader look at population and increasing demand for accessibility as a major constraint which is goods and services which could not easily affected by other variables in land be met by the formal sector (Tipple, 2005). acquisition among urban crop farmers For instance, between 50% and 75% of the contrasting Quon’s view that accessibility Lagos metropolitan inhabitants were was only one of the constraints. That is, employed in the informal sector the framework for this study identified land (Lawanson, 2009). These statistics accessibility constraints as availability, corroborated the earlier findings of the ILO affordability, security of tenure, usability survey in 1999 (as cited in Onyenechere, and competition with other uses. The next 2011) to the effect that the proportion of the section further discusses the relationship of urban workforce engaged in the informal urban crop farming and the informal sector. sector was the highest in sub-saharan The Informal Sector and Urban Crop Africa and that indeed, accounted for more Farming than 50% of urban employment in two- The term “informal” is considered as thirds of the surveyed countries. The any urban economic activity taking place informal sector thus, comprises a wide outside the legal and regulatory framework sphere of informality that can have governing employment (Hitimana et al. , environmental, economic, social and spatial 2011). This no doubt corroborates impacts on the sector itself. Lawanson International Labour Organization (ILO) (2009) opined that the informal sector definition (as cited in Lawanson, 2009) of consisted of small-scale economic activities informality as, “a way of doing things which accounted for a substantial share of characterized by ease of entry, reliance on urban employment or that it was the highest 185

Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 8 no. 2 2015 employer of the urban poor. The place of Lagos as consisting of the territory within urban agriculture in the informal sector is Latitudes 6° 23 ʹ N and 6° 41 ʹ N and hardly discussed in the literature. That is, Longitudes 3° 09 ʹ E and 3° 20 ʹ E. many writers have discussed the informal Olayiwola, Adeleye and Oduwaye (2005) sector with only scanty details on the role also noted that the Lagos lagoon stretches of urban agriculture in the sector. For through the eastern boundary; bounded in instance, Freeman (1991) noted that studies the south by the Atlantic Ocean while the of the informal sector in Kenya tended to northern boundary has the landmass of ignore both the significance of urban Ikorodu local government area and agriculture and the role of women. Tinsley Alagbado towards Abeokuta axis in Ifako- (2003) also noted that the activity did not Ijaiye local government area. Badagry and get government support compared with Republic of Benin define the Western other informal activities in Kenya which boundary. Metropolitan Lagos constitutes enjoyed support by government and non- over 1,140km 2 (or one-third) of the total governmental organizations (NGOs). land mass (3,577km2) of Lagos State. The Tinsley added that, “urban farmers do not pressure on land by the various uses is generally have access to the important over-whelming and distribution of land in supporting mechanisms…that are provided the metropolis is relatively uneven against by the government and aid agencies in the urban crop farming. As regards spatial rural areas”. By current developments, distribution of urban farming communities, urban crop farming or urban farming is the Lagos State Agricultural Development now considered to be located in the Authority (LSADA) demarcated Lagos informal sector and Hoornweg (2008) State into three agricultural blocs as added that the activity largely remained in eastern, western and far western blocs. The the informal sector as it was not being western bloc which lies within the Lagos integrated into agricultural policies or metropolis has a high population of urban urban planning (Ndi, 2009). This study crop farmers distributed in ten agricultural was therefore conducted as discussed in the circles and each circle consisting of three next part. cells or farming communities. Study Area Communities identified included Adiyan, The study is limited to metropolitan Iju/Grailland, Ayobo/Aboru, Lagos which is home to many companies Idimu/Powerline, PWD , and industries and located in the south- Volkswagen/Ojo and Festac Town (Figure western part of Nigeria. Oni (2001) 1). defined the boundaries of metropolitan

186

Land Accessibility Among Urban Crop Farmers in the Informal Sector ...... ODUDU, C.O.

Source: Geography Department, University of Lagos, 2012 Figure 1: Metropolitan Lagos Showing the Study Locations.

Methodology Oko-Oba, Agege to enable the The study population was made up of determination of the sample size in each all the practitioners of urban crop farming farming community (Fig. 1). The elements in the western agricultural bloc (Figure 1). or respondents in each farming community Multi-stage sampling was adopted for the were selected through simple random selection of sample size because of the sampling from each stratum. Thus, the complexity of the population of farmers sample size for each population of farmers which was distributed all over the Lagos in a farming community was determined metropolis. Purposive sampling was used using Kish (1965) equation which noted as to select seven agricultural circles from the follows: N = n’ [1 + (n’/N)] ten circles in the metropolis. Thereafter, a Where: cell or farming community was randomly N = total population (of each farming selected from each circle of three cells. community) is recorded in the register This gave a total of seven farming n = sample size from finite population communities. n’ = sample size from infinite population Lists of registered urban crop farmers in calculated from the formula [n’=S 2/V 2] in each farming community were obtained which, from the Lagos State Agricultural S2 = standard error of population elements, Development Authority Headquarters in S2 = P (1-P); maximum at P = 0.5 187

Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 8 no. 1 2015

V2 = standard error of sample population measured in ordinal scale, respondents’ equals 0.05 for the confidence level of sources of finance were measured in 95%=1.96 nominal scale while expenditure on inputs n’ = S 2/V 2 = (0.5) 2/ (0.05) 2 = 100. was measured in ordinal scale. Table 1: Urban farmers’ population, sample size and response rate Results and Discussion Farming Population Sample No. of Land Ownership and Accessibility Communities size Questionnaires The study confirmed that 65.8% of land Adiyan 120 55 26 in the study area was owned by public Iju/Grailland 56 36 17 Ayobo/Aboru 45 31 17 bodies, 23.6% by private organizations Idimu/Powerline 55 36 17 while only 7.2% was owned by individuals. PWD Ikeja 150 60 44 Thus, most of the lands which farmers Volkswagen/Ojo 325 77 98 occupied were government-owned except Festac Town 430 81 129 those of Idimu/Powerline and Total 1,181 376 348 Volkswagen/Ojo communities which were

Presented in Table 1 is the sample owned by individuals and private frame, sample size and questionnaires organizations respectively. Furthermore, returned by the farmers. Copies of Idimu/Powerline community was a zone of structured questionnaire were administered petroleum pipelines and therefore not really to a total of 376 respondents in the farming suitable for farming. Farmers in communities. Interview schedules with occupation were therefore renting from the farmers were carried out by the illegal land owners. Similarly, researcher and eight extension officers of Volkswagen/Ojo farming community was the Lagos State Agricultural Development government-owned until it was sold to a Authority which took place during meeting private organization and most of the days of the various farming communities. farmers occupied their lands through Data collected were analyzed using renting or squatting. Table 2 gives details descriptive statistics such as cross of land ownership in the study area. The tabulations, frequency and percentages ownership trend in Table 2 agreed with while the hypothesis was tested using Hubbard and Onumah (2001) and multiple regression analysis. Affordability Asomani-Boateng (2002) that government variable was investigated via rent paid, owned much of the lands in many cities in quantum of rent paid, rent review clauses, developing countries and that inefficient sources of finance and costs of inputs. The land administration encouraged ability to pay was measured in likert scale; unauthorized use by farmers of open spaces quantum of yearly rent was measured in like roads and undeveloped public and ordinal scale, manner of rent review was private sites.

188

Land Accessibility Among Urban Crop Farmers in the Informal Sector ...... ODUDU, C.O.

Table 2: Land Ownership in Farming Communities Farming Private An individual Public body Don’t Other Communities organization know Adiyan 0% 0% 24(92.3%) 0% 1(.3%) Iju/Grailland 1(5.9%) 0% 15(88.2%) 0% 1(5.9%) Ayobo/Aboru 0% 0% 17(100%) 0% 0% Idimu/Powerline 0% 16(94.1%) 0% 0% 1(5.9%) *PWD Ikeja 0% 2(4.5%) 40(90.9%) 1(2.3%) 0% Volkswagen/Ojo 80(81.6%) 5(5.1%) 13(13.3%) 0% 0% Festac Town 1(0.8%) 2(1.6%) 120(93%) 0% 3(2.3%) Total 82(23.6%) 25(7.2%) 229(65.8%) 1(.3%) 6(1.7%) *PWD = Public Works Department The difficulties of occupying land with illegal land owner’s permission among urban crop farmers in most (11.8%). See detailed mode of land developing countries lead to different accessibility in the study area in Table 3. modes of land accessibility by the farmers. The findings generally agreed with Velez- Thus, the study established that 60.1% of Guerra (2004) who identified multiple the farmers accessed their lands by means of land access by urban crop farmers squatting, 28.7% by renting, 8.1% by as renting, inheritance, borrowing, owner’s permission while less than 1% squatting, leasing and spontaneous either leased or undertook outright occupation. The study further established purchase of their lands. Most of the that urban crop farming was not officially squatters were found in all the farming recognized and that government was communities except in Idimu/Powerline indirectly supporting it by allowing the that had renters (88.2%) who were paying practitioners on its land as well as rents to illegal land owners or occupying providing them with extension services.

Table 3: Respondents’ Extent of Use of Existing Methods of Accessing Land in Study Area Farming Occupation Squatting Renting Leasing Outright Other Missing Total Communities with purchase values owner’s permission Adiyan 9(34%) 15(57.7%) 0 1(3.8%) 0 0 1(3.8%) 26 Iju/ 1(5.9%) 16(94.1%) 0 0 0 0 0 17 Grailland Ayobo/ 0 17(100%) 0 0 0 0 0 17 Aboru Idimu/ 2(11.8%) 0 15(88.2%) 0 0 0 0 17 Powerline *PWD Ikeja 5(11.4%) 34(77.3%) 3(6.8%) 1(2.3%) 0 1(2.3%) 0 44 Volkswagen/Ojo 1(1%) 13 (13.3%) 81(82.7%) 0 0 1(1%) 2(2%) 98 Festac Town 10(7.8%) 114(88.4%) 1(0.8%) 1(0.8%) 1(0.8%) 0 2(1.6%) 129 Total 28(8.1%) 209(60.1%) 100(28.7%) 3(0.8%) 1(0.3%) 2(0.6%) 5(1.4%) 348

*PWD = Public Works Department

189

Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 8 no. 2 2015

Hypothesis Testing The hypothesis that there was no significant difference in the relative rating of constraints to land accessibility among urban crop farmers was tested using factor-based scores as shown in Table 4. Following principal component analysis, components 1 to 5 were retained as their eigenvalues exceeded one. The components and associated variables were labeled for convenience as: Component 1 = affordability, Component 2 = security of tenure, Component 3 = competition with other uses, Component 4 = availability and Component 5 = usability.

Table 4: Constraints of Land Accessibility Among Urban Crop Farmers Component Item Mean Standard Variance Deviation Availability *Farm-size (no. of farm beds) 3.54 0.702 0.493 **Farm-size (Plot of 120’x60’) 3.40 0.704 0.496 Owner of the land 3.60 0.724 0.524 Affordability Yearly rent 3.18 1.170 1.368 Cost of hiring labour 4.12 1.068 1.141 Cost of applying organic fertilizer 3.97 1.154 1.331 Cost of purchasing seedling 3.52 1.357 1.842 Cost of harvesting 3.07 1.458 2.125 Cost of wetting or irrigating 3.62 1.521 2.314 Income from farm 4.95 0.991 0.981 Income from non-farm activities 4.45 0.890 0.792 % of farm income to annual 3.88 1.224 1.549 income Security of Land accessibility by gender 3.00 0.600 0.160 Tenure Threat of eviction 4.50 0.993 0.986

Usability Farmland topography 3.93 0.959 0.919 Soil texture 3.66 0.822 0.675 Moisture or water content 3.57 0.976 0.952 Organic matter content 3.59 0.990 0.981 Competition with Rate of change of farm location 1.73 1.056 1.106 other uses Period of farming in land location 3.91 0.782 0.612 Reasons for vacating the land 2.48 1.075 1.155 Land use activity replacing 3.40 1.198 1.434 farming Rate of change of use 2.73 1.062 1.127 *1 Farmbed=60’ x 4’=18.288m x 1.219m, **1 Plot=120’ x 60’=36.576m x 18.288m=669m 2

A validity analysis for the study was further carried out using Cronbach’s α (alpha) – a coefficient of reliability or a measure of the internal consistency for the sample of urban crop farmers – as shown in Table 5.

190

Land Acce ssibility Among Urban Crop Farmers in the Informal Sector ...... ODUDU, C.O.

Table 5: Results of Validity and Reliability Test Variable Cronbach’s Alpha Mean Std. Deviation Affordability 0.89 3.91 0.57 Security 0.91 4.32 0.62 Competition with other uses 0.92 4.11 0.67 Availability 0.90 3.89 0.61 Usability 0.94 3.99 0.68

The test results were relatively stable and consistent since the α-values were significantly higher than the value of 0.7. R squared in Table 6 was the coefficient of determination or the square of the correlation coefficient, R. Thus, five independent variables were found to be most significant in determining land accessibility among urban crop farmers as the multiple correlation coefficient between the five predictors and land accessibility among urban crop farmers was 0.802 (R=0.802) indicating high positive correlation. The five predictors consequently explained 76.1% (R 2=0.761) of the variation in land accessibility among urban crop farmers. The multiple correlation between the independent variables and the dependent variable was 0.802 which was highly significant at 0.05 level. A contingent constraints equation model for land accessibility among urban crop farmers was therefore formulated as follows: Land Accesibility = 6.352 + 0.532 (affordability) + 0.459 (security of tenure) + 0.417 (competition with other uses) + 0.211 (availability) + 0.131 (usability) + 0.841 (error term)

Table 6: Regression Results - Land Accessibility and Constraints tonLand Among Urban Crop Farmers Constraints Estimates Std. Error t Sig. (Constant) 6.352 1.642 4.103 0.00* Affordability 0.532 0.138 4.527 0.00* Security 0.459 0.141 4.162 0.00* Competition with other uses 0.417 0.152 4.024 0.00* Availability 0.211 0.138 1.454 0.08* Usability 0.131 0.251 1.111 0.23 R 0.802 R2 0.761 Adjusted R 2 0.712 Std. Error 0.841 DW 0.723 F 86.523* Note: * Significant at 0.05 level

The model suggested that an increase of independent variables. The intercept 0.532 in land accessibility among urban (6.352) represented the mean of land crop farmers on the average could be accessibility when each independent expected for each unit increase in variable equaled zero or it showed the affordability when all other variables and degree of land accessibility when the the slope intercept remained constant. The independent variables were absent. The F- same interpretation goes for the other value (86.523) and Durbin Watson (DW) 191

Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 8 no. 2 2015 value (0.723) showed the model to be growing population and available land statistically significant at p<0.05). mass for various urban land uses in the Generally, affordability showed the highest metropolis. The study further noted the significance followed in succession by importance of land for the activity and lack security of tenure, competition with other of accessibility by practitioners as they are uses, availability and usability. Thus, the unable to afford or compete for urban land hypothesis that there is a significant with other uses. These constraints variance in rating or variability of prompted practitioners to resort to marginal constraints on land accessibility among land or occupy land informally. The study urban crop farmers is upheld. The model highlighted the relationship between the can therefore be used to predict land informal sector and urban crop farming and accessibility among urban crop farmers pointed out its role in the informal sector based on tackling the problems of which was due to urbanization and lack of affordability such as reducing costs government support for the activity incurred in yearly rent, hiring labour, compared with other informal activities. applying fertilizer, harvesting and irrigating The study in its analysis established that as well as improving income from farm and most of the farmers’ lands were owned by non-farm activities. The model also public bodies (65.8%), followed by private showed that availability and usability of organizations (23.6%) while 7.2% was land were not the most critical issues in owned by individuals. The study further urban farming. It should be noted that established that the various land although land was available, it was not accessibility constraints prompted urban necessarily allocated officially for urban crop farmers to access land by renting, crop farming. The findings agreed with inheritance, borrowing, squatting, leasing Omirin (1992) that land accessibility was a and spontaneous occupation. Finally, the function of land availability, affordability, study provided a unique constraint analysis security and ease of transaction and model for determining the relative concluded that affordability or costs of contribution of critical factors that private land acquisition was the most determine land accessibility among urban critical factor. The study also agreed with crop farmers. It is therefore recommended Asiama (2005), Reuther and Dewar (2005) that the Lagos state government should as well as Gittleman (2009). devise an urban crop farming policy that will allow issuance of temporary title Conclusion and Recommendations documents to urban crop farmers with lease The study discussed the importance of periods of up to 20 years or leases that can urban crop farming in food security, be renewed periodically. Also, the income and employment generation. It government through urban planners can noted that urban crop farmers were unable identify and make lands available and to access land formally as they lacked the accessible by clarifying and formalizing requirements for obtaining certificates of land use and land tenure arrangements for occupancy. Practitioners consequently crop faming. access land by way of squatting or illegal occupation. The study also discussed the References rampant occurrence of crop farming in the Akinmoladun, O.I. and Adejumo, O.T. Lagos metropolis in relationship to the (2011). Urban agriculture in

192

Land Accessibility Among Urban Crop Farmers in the Informal Sector ...... ODUDU, C.O .

Metropolitan Lagos: An inventory of Drechsel, P. and Dongus, S. (2009). potential land and water resources. Dynamics and sustainability of urban Journal of Geography and Regional agriculture: examples from sub- Planning, 4(1): 9-19. Retrieved Saharan Africa. Integrated research 03/03/12 from System for Sustainability Science, 5, http://www.academicjournals.org/JG 69-78. Doi: 10.1007/s11625-009- RP. 0097-x. Akintoye, I.R. (2008). Reducing Foeken, D.W.J. (2005). Urban agriculture Unemployment Through the Informal in East Africa as a tool for poverty Sector: A Case Study of Nigeria. reduction: A legal and policy European Journal of Economics, dilemma? ASC Working Paper 65 / Finance and Administrative Sciences. 2005. African Studies Centre, Leiden, 11 (2008). Retrieved from The Netherlands. Retrieved 20/04/09 http:/www.eurojournalsn.com from Asiama, S.O. (2005). Land Accessibility http://www.ascleiden.nl/pdf/workingp and Urban Agriculture in Freetown, aper65.pdf Sierra Leone. Journal of Science and Food and Agricultural Organization (2007). Technology. 25(2): 103-109. Profitability and sustainability of Asomani-Boateng, R. (2002). Urban urban and peri-urban agriculture, Cultivation in Accra: An Agricultural Management, Marketing examination of the nature, practices, and Finance Occasional Paper 19, problems, potentials and urban Rome. Retrieved on 11/12/14 from planning implications. Habitat ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a1471 International, 26(4): 591-607. e/a1471e00.pdf Pii:S0197-3975(02)00027-9. Freeman, D. (1991). A City of Farmers: Bello, M.O. (2007), Accessibility of land as Informal Urban Agriculture in the a tool for empowering the low-income Open Spaces of Nairobi, Kenya. earner of the informal sector in Toronto: McGill University Press. Nigeria , paper presented at FIG Gittleman, M. (2009). Urban Expansion in Working Week, Hong Kong, May 13- Addis Ababa: Effects of the Decline 17. of Urban Agriculture on Livelihood Cisse, O., Ndeye, F.D.G. and Moussa, S. and Food Security. Presented at the (2005). Institutional and legal aspects United Nations 17 th Commission on of urban agriculture in French- Sustainable Development speaking West Africa: from Hoornweg, D. (2008). Urban Agriculture marginalization to legitimization. for Sustainable Poverty Alleviation Environment and Urbanization , and Food Security, Retrieved 17(143): 142-154. Doi: 17/10/2014 from 10.1177/095624780801700211. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templat Crush, J., Hovorka, A. and Tevera, D. es/FCIT/PDF/UPA_-WBpaper- (2011). Food security in Southern Final_October_2008.pdf African cities: the place of urban Hubbard, M., and Onumah, G. (2001). agriculture, Progress in Development Improving urban food supply and Studies, 11 (4), 285-305. Doi: distribution in developing countries: 10.1177/146499341101100402

193

Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management Vol. 8 no. 2 2015

the role of city authorities. Habitat Olayiwola, L.M., Adeleye, O.A. and International, 25 (3), 431-446. Oduwaye, A.O. (2005). Correlates of Kish, L. (1965): Survey sampling . New Land Value Determinants in Lagos York, NY: Wiley. Metropolis, Nigeria. J. Hum. Ecol ., Lawal, M.O. and Aliu, I.R. (2012). 17(3): 183-189. Operational Pattern and Contribution Omirin, M.M. (1992). Land for Private of Urban Farming in an Emerging Low Income Housing: An Evaluation Megacity: Evidence From Lagos, of the Effect of Land Nationaliztion Nigeria, Bulletin of Geography. Policy in Lagos Metropolitan Area, Socio-conomic Series, 17 (2012), 87- 1968 – 1988 (Unpublished doctoral 97, DOI: 10.2478/v10089-012-0009-1 dissertation), University of Lagos State Government Release (2014). Cambridge, UK.. Retrieved 11/12/2014 from Omirin, M.M. (2003). Issues in Land http://www.lagosstate.gov.ng/pagelin Accessibility in Nigeria. In M.M. ks.php?p=6 Omirin, T.G. Nubi and S.A. Lawanson, T.O. (2009). Poverty and the Fawehinmi (Eds.). Land Management Environment: Exploring the Informal and Property Tax Reform in Nigeria Sector of the Lagos Metropolis. In (pp.49-70). University of Lagos, T.G. Nubi, M.M. Omirin, S.Y. Adisa, Lagos, Nigeria. H.A. Koleoso and J.U. Osagie (Eds.). Oni, S.I (2001). Urbanization and Transport Environmental Economics and Development in Metropolitan Lagos. Conflict Resolution. (pp.229-240), In M.O.A. Adejugbe (Ed),. University of Lagos, Akoka, Lagos. Industrialization, Urbanization and Mougeot, J.A.L. (2000). Urban agriculture: Development in Nigeria 1950-1999 Definition, Presence, Potentials and (pp.193-219). Concept Publications Risks, and Policy challenges. In N. Ltd, Mushin, Lagos, Nigeria. Bakker, M. Dubbeling, S. Gundel, U. Onyenechere, E.C. (2011). The Informal Sabel-Koschella & H. de Zeeuw Sector and the Environment in (Eds.): Growing Cities, Growing Nigerian Towns: What we Know and Food, Urban Agriculture on the What we Still Need to Know. Policy Agenda, A Reader on Urban Research Journal of Environmental Agriculture (pp.1-42). Feldafing, and Earth Sciences, 3(1): 61-69. Germany: Deutsche Stiftung Quon, S. (1999). Planning for Urban Internationale Entwicklung (DSE). Agriculture-A Review of Tools and Nasr, J. (1996). Agriculture as a Strategies for Urban Planners, In sustainable use of urban land . Paper Cities Feeding People (CFP) Report, presented to Urban Planning and the 28 . Ottawa. IDRC . Retrieved Future of Urban Food Systems, 20/05/09 from: ACSP/AESOP Conference, Toronto. http://www.idrc.ca/cfp/factssq_e.html July, 25-28. Reuther, S., and Dewar, N. (2005). Ndi, H.N. (2009). Population growth an Competition for the use of public urban agriculture in Yaounde, open space in low-Income urban Cameroon. Journal of Applied Social areas: the economic potential of urban Sciences, 8(1&2): 60-73. gardening in Khayelitsha, Cape Town. Development Southern Africa,

194

Land Accessibility Among Urban Crop Farmers in the Informal Sector ...... ODUDU, C.O .

23(1): 97-122. doi: van Veenhuizen, R. (2006). Cities Farming 10.1080/03768350600556273. for the Future. In R.van Veenhuizen Tinsley, J. (2003): Urban Agriculture and (Ed). Cities Farming for the Future. Sustainable Livelihoods. Peace Urban agriculture for green and Review 15(3): 295-299. productive cities. International Tipple, G. (2005). The Place of Home Institute for Rural Reconstruction and based enterprises in the Informal ETC Urban Agriculture. Sector: Evidence for Cochabamba, Vélez-Guerra, A. (2004). Multiple Means New Delhi, Surabaya and Pretoria, of Access to Land for Urban Urban Studies, 42(4): 661-632 Agriculture: A Case Study of United Nations-HABITAT (2008). ‘Land Farmers’ Groups in Bamako, Mali, and Sustainable Food Production. Cities Feeding People Report Series , Proceedings of the 2 nd African Ottawa: IDRC, DECEMBER, 2004. Ministerial Conference on Housing Retrieved 11/03/12 from and Urban Development, Abuja, http://www.futurepolicy.org/fileadmi Nigeria, accessed at n/user_upload/Axel/Urban_Farming/ http://www.unhabitat.org/downloads/ Urban_land_use.pdf. docs/amchud/bakg8.pdf on August 18, 2011.

195