Assessment of Crop Diversification Among Rural Farm Households
CHAPTER ONE
Objective of the study
The objectives of the study are;
- To determine the socio-economic characteristic of crop diversification
- To ascertain the farm activities carried out by rural household
- To ascertain the factors influencing crop diversification
- To find out the benefit derived from diversification of crop
- To ascertain the constraint faced by rural farm household in diversification of crop
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Importance of Crop Diversification Context
Given the fact that maize has continued to dominate in terms of production by smallholder farmers and under rain-fed cultivation, this implies that whenever there is a drought, it may entail food crisis. Therefore, the importance of crop diversification cannot be over emphasized. The tendency of farmers to depend on just one crop can have serious consequences thereby leaving farmers in a more vulnerable situation (Sitko et al., 2011). For example, the income of the monoculture farmer can be reduced as a result of a slump in the market value of a particular crop thus leaving the farmer in ruins. On the other hand, if farmers diversify, they can reduce over dependency on maize and they can avoid the risks associated with it. By diversifying, their crop output will be able to increase thereby improving nutrition by providing for their families and enhancing food security. Furthermore, with the increase in demand for food every day due to population increase, diversification can provide for the population hence fighting hunger, poverty and reducing malnutrition levels, which is still an issue of national urgency thus meeting the key Millennium Development Goals of reducing hunger and preserving natural resources and the environment for future generations (Chiwele and Sikananu, 2004). Besides, diversification provides an opening to farmers through change in consumer demand. This is so because when consumers in developing countries become richer, their food consumption patterns change noticeably. They move away from a staple diet to one with a greater content of animal products, fruits and vegetables. This acts as an incentive for farmers to diversify in order to meet their needs. In addition, diversification adds value to the export potential of a country. Since smallholder farmers are the ones who produce in bulk, when they diversify, they are able to respond to market opportunities hence producing a variety of crops and meeting the export market demand (Felgenhauer, n.d).
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research design
The researcher used descriptive research survey design in building up this project work the choice of this research design was considered appropriate because of its advantages of identifying attributes of a large population from a group of individuals. The design was suitable for the study as the study sought to assessment of crop diversification among rural farm households
Sources of data collection
Data were collected from two main sources namely:
(i)Primary source and
(ii)Secondary source
Primary source:
These are materials of statistical investigation which were collected by the research for a particular purpose. They can be obtained through a survey, observation questionnaire or as experiment; the researcher has adopted the questionnaire method for this study.
Secondary source:
These are data from textbook Journal handset etc. they arise as byproducts of the same other purposes. Example administration, various other unpublished works and write ups were also used.
Population of the study
Population of a study is a group of persons or aggregate items, things the researcher is interested in getting information on assessment of crop diversification among rural farm households. 200 residents kaduna south was selected randomly by the researcher as the population of the study.
CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION ANALYSIS INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Introduction
Efforts will be made at this stage to present, analyze and interpret the data collected during the field survey. This presentation will be based on the responses from the completed questionnaires. The result of this exercise will be summarized in tabular forms for easy references and analysis. It will also show answers to questions relating to the research questions for this research study. The researcher employed simple percentage in the analysis.
DATA ANALYSIS
The data collected from the respondents were analyzed in tabular form with simple percentage for easy understanding.
A total of 133(one hundred and thirty three) questionnaires were distributed and 133 questionnaires were returned.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Introduction
It is important to ascertain that the objective of this study was to ascertain assessment of crop diversification among rural farm households. In the preceding chapter, the relevant data collected for this study were presented, critically analyzed and appropriate interpretation given. In this chapter, certain recommendations made which in the opinion of the researcher will be of benefits in addressing the challenges of assessment of crop diversification among rural farm households
Summary
This study was on assessment of crop diversification among rural farm households. Five objectives were raised which included: To determine the socio-economic characteristic of crop diversification, to ascertain the farm activities carried out by rural household, to ascertain the factors influencing crop diversification, to find out the benefit derived from diversification of crop and to ascertain the constraint faced by rural farm household in diversification of crop. In line with these objectives, two research hypotheses were formulated and two null hypotheses were posited. The total population for the study is 200 selected residents in kaduna south The researcher used questionnaires as the instrument for the data collection. Descriptive Survey research design was adopted for this study. A total of 133 respondents made up men, women, farmers and businessmen were used for the study. The data collected were presented in tables and analyzed using simple percentages and frequencies
Conclusion
Diversification can also help to relax credit or capital constraints among farmers. Similarly, the socio-economic characteristics of the respondents such as number of children under 12 years, number of adults above 60 years, availability of electricity in the household and distance from a local market influence the level of income diversification. Furthermore, the age and level of education of the household head, extension contact, availability of tractor hiring services, returns from crop production and road condition significantly determine the level of crop diversification.
Recommendation
- Policies and programmes to raise the income of the poor households must also focus on increasing the income from crop production. This can be achieved by improving agricultural extension delivery in the country. Therefore, there is a need for the State governments to pay more attention to agricultural extension programmes through the recruitment and training of adequate extension workers to meet the needs of the nation.
- Programmes to help farmers raise farm income through crop production should also focus on providing tractor hiring services in order to reduce drudgery and to increase the hectarage and income of the poorest households.
- There is a need for government to provide more rural roads and rehabilitate bad ones in order to reduce the high transaction cost of buying from or selling to markets, as transaction cost reduces the returns from market sales.
References
- Chibnik, M. (1994) Risky Rivers: The Economics and Politics of Flood Plain Farming in Amazonia. University of Arizona Press.
- Tuscon Ellis, F. (1998) Household livelihood strategies and rural livelihood diversification Journal of Development Studies, 35(1):1-38
- Ersado, L. (2003) The determinants of nonfarm income diversification in rural Peru. World Development 29(30): 497-508
- Escobal, J. (2001) The determinants of nonfarm income diversification in rural Peru. World Development, 29(30):497-508
- Joshi, P.K., Gulati, A.A., Birthal, P.S. and Twari, L. (2003) Agriculture diversification in South Asia: Pattern, determinants and policy implications. Discussion Paper No. 57. Market structure studies division. International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington
- D.C. Minot, N. (1999) Effectiveness of transaction cost on supply response and market surplus: Simulation using nonseparable household models. Discussion paper No. 36. Market Structure Studies Division, International Food Policy Research Institute Washington
- D.C. Minot, N., Epprecht., M., Anh., T.T.T. and Trung, L.Q. (2006) Income diversification in the northern uplands of Vietnam’: Research report No.145. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C. National Population Commission, (2005) National Population and Housing Census Report Federal Republic of Nigeria
- Omamo, S. (1998) Transport costs and smallholder cropping choices: An application to Siaya District, Kenya. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80(February):116-123
