Publisher: Asian Economic and Social Society ISSN (P): 2304-1455, ISSN (E): 2224-4433 Volume 2 No. 3 September 2012.

The Effect of Agricultural Development Project (ADP) on the Rural Farmers in Adamawa State,

Umar Adamu Madu (Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension Adamawa State University Mubi, Nigeria)

Abba Mohammed Wakili (Department of Agric. Education Federal College of Education Yola, Nigeria)

Citation: Umar Adamu Madu and Abba Mohammed Wakili (2012) “The Effect of Agricultural Development Project (ADP) on the Rural Farmers in Adamawa State, Nigeria”, Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 405-410.

The Effect of Agricultural Development.....

The Effect of Agricultural Development Project (ADP) on the Rural Farmers in Adamawa State, Nigeria

Abstract

Majority of communities in Nigeria are rural dwellers and Author(s) agrarian by occupation. Development strategy for a country whose rural population are mainly farmers cannot be achieved Umar Adamu Madu without first sustained growth in rural income and standard of Department of Agricultural living primarily from agriculture. It was based on this that the Economics and Extension state wide Agricultural Development Project (ADP) was Adamawa State University Mubi, Nigeria established to raise productivity, income and standard of living Email: of rural farmers in Nigeria. This study assesses the effect of the [email protected] ADP activities on the wellbeing of the rural farmers in Adamawa State, Nigeria. Data for this study were collect on Abba Mohammed Wakili annual crop output, annual income, farm size, use of improved Department of Agric. Education Federal College of Education technology, access to credit among farmers, farmers’ training Yola, Nigeria and rural infrastructure development. The data were sourced using structured questionnaire and personal interviews. The statistical analysis used to determine the effect to the project on the participating farmers include, descriptive statistics and comparability test for difference (T-test) analysis. The results indicates that Adamawa ADP had positive and significant impact on rural farmers productivity, income, access to credit, standard of living as measured by assets ownership. However, the project did not have significant impact on the rural

infrastructure, adoption of improved technologies and farm sizes, even though the change from before and after ADP activities was positive. The study recommends that much attention should be paid to the provision of rural infrastructure and the needed improved technologies. The study also recommends that the two tiers of government in Nigeria should adequately fund the project to efficiently cope with its responsibility of developing the rural sector.

Keywords: Effect, ADPs, Rural, Farmers

food productivity and subsequently, the welfare Introduction of the rural farmers (Adejo, 1983; Umar, 2005; Dennis, 2007; Omonona, 2009). Some of these The average Nigerian farmers still produces programs include Operation Feed the Nation crops and livestock at a subsistence level, and (OFN), Green Revolution, National Accelerated this low productivity stems partly from Food Production Program (NAFPP), River inadequate support from the government. At the Basin and Rural Development Authority same, the continuing increase in the size of the (RBRDA) and Agricultural Development nation’s population has created high demand for Projects (ADPs). food which was not being met with existing traditional technologies. This has caused the There is strong and urgent need to transfer and government of Nigeria to establish several extend new practices, knowledge and skills of agricultural development projects to increase production to rural farmers to improve efficiency and thus improve the living standard

405

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 2(3), pp. 405-410.

and quality of life of the majority of the rural The study was conducted in Adamawa State of poor as well as improved the economy of the Nigeria. It is located in the north eastern part of country. Rural people in Nigeria seem to have the country. The state lies between latitude unique opportunities to benefit from the well 12.20° N to 11.52° N and longitude 7.0° E to tested package of the improved technologies of 7.5° E. Adamawa State is bordered by the states the Agricultural Development Project (ADP) of Borno to the northwest, Gombe to the west strategies. It is the focus of this study therefore, and Taraba State to the southwest. Its eastern to investigate the effect of the Adamawa ADP border forms the international border with on the quality of life of the rural farmers. Cameroon. Based on 2006 population and housing census, the state has an estimated Overview of the Agricultural Development population of 3,194,781 (NPC, 2006). Project (ADP) The concept of Agricultural Development To achieve the objective of the study, primary Projects (ADPs) evolved from the desire of the data were collected in five (5) local federal government to throw its might behind governments’ areas of the state, namely Gombi, the state government’s efforts in the Hong, Maiha, Mubi North and Michika. These development of agricultural projects. This local government areas were selected based on desire was buttressed in the Third National considerable number of participating ADP Development plan in which it was recognized farmers. In each local government area selected, that rapid economic development cannot be 20 farmers were randomly selected making a achieved within defective institutional total number of 100 famers selected for the framework (Nwoko and Mabawonku, 1983). study. Structured questionnaire and personal ADPs were established in 1975 as three enclave interviews were used to collect the data used in projects in Funtau, Gombe, and Gusau. this study. The data were collected on farmers’ Presently, ADPs have evolved into state-wide characteristics, total annual output, income per project which covers the whole states of the annum, farm sizes, adoption of improved country (Omonona, 2009). The main objectives technology, access to credit and farmers of the projects are to promote agricultural and training. The analytical tools used include, rural development especially among the small descriptive statistics and statistical test for scale farmers. Some of the objectives of ADPs difference (T-test). The selection of the t-test is include: based on its proven capability to determine the difference between two means (Dehejia and  The supply of farm inputs through Wahba, 2004). In this study, T-test is used to farm services centres. test for difference in the mean of explanatory  The supply, improvement of extension variable before and after participating in ADP. staff and farmers’ training.  Introduction of new credit and Result and Discussion marketing services  Provision of improved seeds Socio-economic and demographic profiles of  Provision of rural infrastructure such the respondents as rural roads, construction of dams The socio-economic characteristics of the and boreholes for water supply. respondents are shown in Table 1. The results indicate that 60% of the participating farmers In their integrated supply of farm inputs and were males, with about 70% of them falling infrastructural support and in their efforts to below 51 years of age. The farmers’ level of revitalized and revamp extension systems, the education in the study area is generally low as ADPs represent a truly innovative approach to 33% had no formal education and another 26% agricultural and rural development in Nigeria. obtaining only primary education. This means that majority of the farmers are illiterates, and Methodology thus the new practices introduced by ADP have suffered poor understanding.

406

The Effect of Agricultural Development.....

Table 1: Socio-demographic Characteristics of the Respondents Variable Categories Frequency Percentage Male 120 60 Gender Female 80 40 20 – 30 29 14.5 31 – 40 51 25.5 Age (years) 41 – 50 60 30 51 – 60 50 25 Above 60 10 5 None 66 33 Primary 52 26 Education Secondary 63 31.5 Tertiary 19 9.5 Source: Field work, 2009

Total Annual Crop Output of the Farmers Total Annual Income of the Farmers The study investigated if participation in ADP The total annual income of the ADP activities has influenced increase in output of participants was examined before and after the farmers and consequently increases in their participating in the project. There is substantial income. The result shows that there was and positive impact of the ADP on the income improvement in the output of the participating of the participants. As shown the Table 2, there farmers as a result of the ADP activities. There is a remarkable improvement in the incomes of is disproportionately high difference between the beneficiaries of this project. The statistical the total output of the farmers before and after test for difference, indicates that there is a ADP activities. The statistical test for difference significant difference in their incomes before as shown in Table 2, indicates that there is a and after participation at p = 0.05. This significant difference in total output before and achievement may not be unconnected with after ADP activities at p = 0.05. This is increase in output realized by the farmers. consistent with findings by Kwa (1992), Ayichi Farmer’s income is to a large extent determined (1995), Rahman & Lawal (2003) that crop by crop out. Similar findings by Kwa (1992), output increased substantially among the ADP Umar (2005), Dennis (2007), farmers participants due to the project’s activities. participating in ADP activities have achieved substantial increase in income due to the project’s activities.

Table 2: Summary of T-test Analysis of Parameters Used to Measure Effects of ADP Parameter Mean Before Mean After T-statistics P - Value Total output 764 1528.86 1.186 0.0276** Annual Income 402.02 523.12 4.783 0.0123** Farm Sizes 716,02 746.2 2.389 0.0743 Improved Techn. 417.06 435.02 2.594 0.0667 Access to Credit 409.5 422 5.764 0.00359** Farmers’ Training 435.6 562.8 3.236 0.01345** Property Acquisition 356,4 452.78 3.142 0.01545** ** = significant at 5%

Farm Sizes of the Farmers the participating farmers never witnessed The introduction of the ADP system did not substantial increases over the period of assist farmers in the study area to realize much participation in ADP activities. The result from increase in their farm sizes. The farm sizes of the field as shown in Table 2 above indicates

407

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 2(3), pp. 405-410.

that there is no significant difference in the farm project’s operation. The result as shown in sizes of the farmers before and after Table 2 above indicate that there is substantial participation at 5% level of significance. Even difference in access to credit before and after though, the number of plots increased for ADP activities. The statistical test for difference individual farmers, the increases were not (T-test) between before and after participation significant. One of the criteria for measuring the shows significant difference at p = 0.05 (Table status of rural farmers is their farm sizes 2). This difference may be attributed to the (Dennis, 2007). Considering this result awareness campaign and trainings provided by therefore indicate that a good number of the project on the importance of credit, source farmers are not sure of their regular farming of credit and how to access credit facilities. plots and this is detrimental to proper farm However, Dennis (2007) in his findings planning and job security needed for population revealed that the average loan received by ADP stabilization and the development of the rural farmers was grossly inadequate to influence areas. meaningful agricultural activities. The importance of credit to farmers is not debatable, Adoption of Improved Technology thus it is regrettable if farmers access to credit The study investigated the use of improved is poor because no meaningful agricultural technology among the participants which investment can be made. included tractors and related machines, improved seeds, use of chemicals, among Farmers’ Training others. Little achievement is made in the area of Farmers in Adamawa State have received one technology use among farmers in the study form of training or the other from the ADP. area. Statistical test for difference from before These includes techniques of storage, compost and after participation shows that there is no making, land preparation, cooperatives, significant changes at p = 0.05 (see Table 2). importance of credit, fish farming and animal Even though there is a difference in the mean husbandry among others. The data as gathered from before and after, the improvement is not from the respondents indicates that substantial statistically significant. This non application of impact is made by the ADP in the area of improved technologies may not be attributed to farmers’ trainings. Statistical test for difference unwillingness by the farmers, but relative (T-test) at p = 0.05 suggests significant scarcity, cost and poor management of some of difference in the number of farmers trained the technologies e.g. tractors (Dennis 2007; during pre-ADP and post-ADP operations (see Umar 2005). Table 2). These trainings have enabled the farmers to understand and apply the innovations Acquisition of Assets by Farmers introduced by the ADP to some extent. Participation in ADP activities has improved the lot of the farmers in Adamawa State. Generally there is increase in income which Infrastructure Development by ADP subsequently led to substantial increases in the The performance of ADP in the provision of number of assets owned by the farmers. T-test rural infrastructure in the farming communities analysis of assets acquire by farmers before in Adamwa State as stipulated was its objective and after participation as shown in Table 2 is not encouraging. One of the objectives of the above shows that there is significant difference ADP was provision of rural infrastructure such at 5% level of significance. The farmers have as bore holes, rural feeder roads, culverts, acquired modern gadgets ranging from modern irrigation dams, tube wells, wash bore, etc. the houses, motorcycle, pick-up, TV sets, videos, field data shows that no bore holes were satellite dish, etc. provided, only 22 tube wells out of targeted 936 were provided by the project in the study area. Access to Credit Facilities by Farmers Rural roads, dam and food storage Access to credit facilities among the farmers constructions recorded zero achievement, while participating in ADP activities in Adamawa only 542 km roads out of targeted 2489 km State has improved over the period of the roads were rehabilitated

408

The Effect of Agricultural Development.....

Table 3: Rural Infrastructure Development by ADP infrastructure 1991 2003 Target Bore holes 0 0 1,200 Road construction 0 0 NA Roads rehabilitated 201 km 341 km 2489 km Culverts const. 18 11 NA Tube wells 16 6 936 Wash bores 13 77 3540 Water pumps 0 200 2352 Irrigation dams 0 0 NA Source: Field work, 2009 farmers. The farmers expressed This is a good indication that Adamawa ADP willingness to use these technologies, did not perform up to expectation in the area of but always resort to traditional rural infrastructure provision. The targets set by methods due to non availability. It is ADP were not met in any year. This is shared therefore recommended that any by Ekpo and Olaniyi (1995) that ADP technology introduced should be made performed poorly in infrastructure development available to farmer at subsidized rate during its operation. Poor roads in the farming through farmers’ cooperatives. communities has forced the farmers to sell at  Rural farmers have not been receiving lower price as it is not feasible to transport better price for their commodities due produce to urban market for better prices. It has to bad road network that makes it also incapacitated the farmers to increase difficult and costly to transport their productivity due to poor access to farm inputs. produce to the urban centres where better prices are obtained. Bad roads Conclusion and Recommendations also hinder evacuation of produce and supply of farm inputs. Portable water The results of the findings have shown that supply borders on the health of the Adamawa State ADP has positively on the farmers. The funding level of the ADP livelihood of the farmers in the state. The could not support the provision of project has influenced the rural farmers in the these amenities. It is imperative that study area to realize increased in crop output, the government set machinery in income, access to credits, ownership of assets motion to provide portable water and trainings. However, the project’s impact on supply and good access roads in all farm size, adoption of new technologies and rural areas to support the activities of rural infrastructure were not found to be the farmers. statistically significant, though some level of  Finally, it is observed that even the positive changes were notice from before and farmers are worried that there is after participation in the project. These findings dwindling activities of the ADP and suggest that ADP’s impact on the rural wished it will catch up again with its development in Adamawa State is pronounced past glory. The funding level of ADP as it has contributed significantly to rural is not commensurate with its activities. farmers’ wellbeing. The federal and state governments Based on the findings and experience gathered should as a matter of urgency during the course of this study, the following reconsider funding the project to recommendations are hereby made to address enable bounce back to its role in some of the problems: developing the rural areas.

 The scarcity of tractors, other needed References technologies and their relative cost has been an impediment to adoption of Adejo A. J. (1983) “Role of ADP in Rural new technologies among the rural Development”, In Uzo I and Raza R (eds,)

409

Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 2(3), pp. 405-410.

Rural Nigeria: Development and Quality of NPC (National Population Commission) Life. A proceeding of a Seminar on Quality of (2006) “Population and Housing Census of the Life in Rural Nigeria. AMRTI, , 1983. Federal Republic of Nigeria”, Report; , Ayichi D. (1995) “Models of Rural Nigeria. Development in Nigeria: With Special Focus on Nwoko S. G. and Mabawonku A. F. (1983) ADPs”, In Eboh, E.C, Okoye, C.U and Ayichi “Welfare Indicators in Lafiya ADP Area”, In (eds). Rural Development in Nigeria. Uzo I and Raza R 1983 (eds,) Rural Nigeria: Autoccentury Publishing Company Limited, Development and Quality of Life. A proceeding Nigeria. of a Seminar on Quality of Life in Rural Dehejia, R. and S. Wahba (2004) “Propensity Nigeria. AMRTI, Ilorin, 1983. score matching methods for non-experimental Omonona B. T. (2009) “Knowledge Review on causal studies”, Review of Economics and Poverty and Rural Development in Nigeria”, Statistics Vol. 84(1), pp. 151–161. International Food Policy Research Institute Dennis A. L. O. (2007) “The Impact of ADPs (IFPRI). Nigeria Strategy Support Programme on Rural Development in Adamawa State, Report, December, 2009. Nigeria”, Unpublished PhD Thesis.FUT Yola. Rahman S. A. and Lawal A. B. (2003) Ekpo E. C. and O. Olaniyi (1995) “Analysis of “Economic Analysis of Maize Based Cropping the Impact of the Directorate of Food, Road and System in Giwa Local Government Area of Rural Infrastructure In Eboh E C, Okoye C.U & State, Nigeria”, ASSE Series A Vol. Ayichi D. Rural Development in Nigeria: 3(2), pp. 139-140. Autocentury Publishing Co. Ltd, Nigeria. Umar, A. M. (2005) “Evaluation of the Impact Kwa A. R. (1992) “The Impact of ADP on the of the ADPs on the Development of Rural Nigerian Farmers”, Paper Presented at a Communities in Adamawa, Nigeria”, Journal of Symposium Organized at Agricultural Show, Tropical Agriculture and Sustainable Kaduna, Nigeria. Development, Vol. 5(6), pp. 120-134

410