ADOPTION OF IMPROVED FISH PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES AND FOOD SECURITY STATUS OF SMALLHOLDER FISH FARMERS IN RIVERS STATE, NIGERIA

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00009190

No of Pages: 114

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $

ABSTRACT

The declining output and worsening food insecurity among rural fish farming households is of great concern to government and other developmental partners. This study analyzed the adoption of improved fish technologies and food security statues of fish farmers in Rivers State Nigeria. It specifically investigated the types of fish production technologies available, the adoption level of the fish production technologies, the determinants of adoption level and the determinants of food security among the farmers. Purposive and random sampling techniques were used to select 120 respondents for the study. Data were collected by means of questionnaire. Data collected were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative measures. The determinants of adoption level and food security were analyzed using the tobit regression and probit regression respectively. The results showed that males (80%) dominated fish farming in the area. The fish farmers were mostly married (85.83%) and had high level of literacy (76.67%). The three most important fish production technologies adopted by the farmers were floating feed (96.67%), stocking density (83.33%) and water management (81.67%). Majority of the fish farmers had adoption index of between 41 – 80%. The result of the tobit regression showed that educational level (significant at 5% level), access to credit (significant at 1% level) and membership of cooperative societies (significant at 5% level) increased the probability of the farmers adopting fish production technologies. The converse was the case for age. The result also showed that the adopters of fish production technologies were more food secured (64.06%) than the non-adopters (51.76%). The result of the probit regression showed that household size (negatively significant at 10% level) reduced the probability of non-adopters being food secured, while fishing experience (significant at 5% level) and membership of cooperative society (significant at 5% level) increased that of adopters. Educational level (significant at 10% level) and number of fish stocked (significant at 10% level) increased the probability of food security among non-adopters. The result also showed that fish farming experience, number of fish stocked and cooperative membership (significant at 5% level respectively) positively influenced the food security status of all the farmers. Education, income, extension service and adoption (significant at 1% level) respectively positively influenced the probability of food security of fish farmers in the area. The study recommended that there should be the provision of free and quantitative education to enable the farmers access and process information on improved fish production technologies. Fish farmers should be encouraged to form cooperatives. This will confer on the fish farmers immense benefits that such organizations provide for their members, and the extension service should be strengthened to make it more vibrant and responsive to the needs of the farmers. Government should look into the extension services and meet up with their needs so as to give special attention to the fish farmers.

 

 







TABLE OF CONTENTS

Tittle Page                                                                                                                   i                  

Declaration                                                                                                                ii

Certification                                                                                                                iii

Dedication                                                                                                                             iv

Acknowledgements                                                                                                              v

Table of Contents                                                                                                                  vi

List of Tables                                                                                                               ix

Abstract                                                                                                                                  x

 

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1       Background Information                                                                                        1

1.2       Problem Statement                                                                                                 4

1.3       Objectives of the Study                                                                                          6

1.4       Research Hypotheses                                                                                               7

1.5       Justification of the Study                                                                                         7


 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1       Concepts and Definitions                                                                                        9

2.1.1    Improved production technology                                                                         9                                                     

2.1.2    Technology transfer and adoption                                                                        10

2.1.3    Smallholder fish farmers                                                                                       11

2.1.4    Food security                                                                                                         12

2.1.5    Food insecurity in Nigeria                                                                              14

2.1.6    Improved Fish production technologies                                                         16

2.2       Theoretical Framework                                                                                              20

2.2.1    Theories of adoption                                                                                              20

2.2.2    Theories of food security                                                                                       22

2.3       Empirical Literature Review                                                                                      25

2.3.1    Socioeconomic characteristics of fish farmers                                                          25

2.3.2    Index of adoption of Improved fish production technologies                        26       

2.3.3    Food insecurity Status in Nigeria                                                                   30

2.3.4    Determinants of Food Security                                                                      32

2.4       Analytical Framework                                                                                              33

2.4.1    Measurement of adoption level                                                                      33

2.4.2    Determinants of the level of adoption                                                                       36

2.4.3    Measurement of food security                                                                                  37

2.4.4    Measurement of effect of adoption of food security                                      38

 

 

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1       The Study Area                                                                                                        40

3.2       Sampling Procedure                                                                                                  41

3.3       Data Collection                                                                                                         42

3.4       Analytical Techniques                                                                                              42

 

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1       Socioeconomic Characteristics of the Respondents                                                  50                               

4.1.1    Gender                                                                                     50

4.1.2    Age                                                                                                                             51

4.1.3    Marital status                                                                                                              52

4.1.4    Educational attainment                                                                                   53

4.1.5    Household size                                                                                                           54

4.1.6    Fish farming experience                                                                                            55

4.1.7    Membership of cooperatives                                                                          56

4.1.8    Number of extension visits                                                                                        57

4.1.9    Credit access                                                                                                   58

4.1.10 Number of fish stocked                                                                                             59

4.1.11 Income                                                                                                            60

4.2       Analysis of Improved Fish Production Technologies and Adoption

Levels among Fish Farmers in the Study Area                                              61

4.2.1    Improved Fish Production Technologies used by Farmers                            61

4.2.2    Level of Adoption of Technology                                                                              62

4.3       Adoption Index of Improved Fish Production                                                          65

4.4       Determinants of Levels of Adoption of Improved Fish Technologies by

Farmers                                                                                                           65

4.5       Food Security of Fish Farmers in the Study Area                                                     69

4.5.1    Food insecurity depth and severity                                                                     70

4.6       Determinants of Food Security Status among Adopters and Non

Adopters of Fish Production Technologies                                                               71

4.7           Effect of Fish Technology Adaptation on the Food Security of the

Farmers                                                                                                           75

 

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION

5.1       Summary                                                                                                             79

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                                 80

5.3       Recommendation                                                                                            81

5.4       Contribution to Knowledge                                                                            81

References                                                                                                      82

Appendix                                                                                                        102

Questionnaire                                                                                                




 


LIST OF TABLES

                                                                                                                    

3.1       Agricultural zones with their LGAs                                                                       41

4.1       Distribution of respondents according to gender                                           50

4.2       Distribution of respondents according to age                                                         51

4.3       Distribution of respondents according to marital status                                           52

4.4       Distribution of respondents according to educational attainment                             53

4.5       Distribution of respondents according to household size                              54

4.6       Distribution of respondents according to fish farming experience                        55

4.7       Distribution of respondents according to membership cooperatives             56

4.8       Distribution of respondents according to extension visits                                       57

4.9       Distribution of respondents according to credit access                                             58

4.10     Distribution of respondents according to number of fish stocked                 59

4.11     Distribution of respondents according to income                                                     60

4.12     Distribution of respondents according to fish production technologies

used                                                                                                                 61

4.13     Rating scale analysis of level of adoption improved technologies used

by fish farmers                                                                                                63

4.14     Distribution of respondents according to adoption indices of

improved fish production Technologies                                                         65

4.15     Determinants of probability adoption of improved fish production

technologies                                                                                                    66

4.16     Hypothesis table for probability of adoption of improved fish technologies    69

4.17     Distribution of respondents based on food security indices                           69

4.18     Distribution of respondents according to food insecurity depth and

severity.                                                                                                          70

4.19     Probit result for the determinants of food security status of adopters and

non adopters in the Study area                                                                        71

4.20     Hypothesis for adopters                                                                                  74

4.21     Hypothesis for non adopters                                                                           75

4.22     Hypothesis for pooled                                                                                    75

4.23     Determinants of probability of food security of the fish farmers                   76 

4.24:    Hypothesis table for determinants of probability of food security                 78






 

 

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION


1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION                                                   

Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations (FAO) (2008) showed that Africa had much agriculture potentials indicating an opportunity to improve food security, nutrition and generating of income by the poor. Food security generally means having at every time an adequate level of basic product to handle increasing consumption demand and mitigate fluctuations in output and prices (Idrisa et al., 2008). According to Maharjan and Chhetri, (2006), nourishment security is generally observed as access by all individuals at untouched to enough sustenance for a functioning life, while sustenance weakness is the powerlessness of a family or individual to meet the required utilization levels notwithstanding fluctuating creation, cost and pay. At the national dimension, sustenance security exists when all individuals consistently have the physical and financial access to adequate, protected and nutritive nourishment to meet their dietary needs and sustenance inclinations for dynamic and sound lives while at little scale family level, nourishment security implies physical and monetary access to sustenance that is satisfactory as far as amount, wellbeing and social openness, to address every individual's issue (Ingawa, 2002). A country is said to have food security when its people have enough to eat and the most vulnerable group (women and children) in the rural areas have access to adequate quality of food they needed.

In the case of Nigeria, an average Nigerian is said to be undernourished, taking less than 13.5g/caput/day of animal protein recommended by the world health organisation (Ekelemu and Olele, 2010). To achieve this 13.5g/caput/day of animal protein recommended by the World Health Organisation, fish being one of the cheapest sources of animal protein has become a major item in the diet of Nigerians and livelihood security in the developing countries (Shalini et al., 2012). According to Ekelemu, (2012) aquaculture can be defined as the rational rearing of fish in an enclosure and fairly shallow body of water, where all its life processes can be controlled. ICLARM (2001), reported that aquaculture appears to be one of the last frontiers to increase contribution to food security in the developing world and it now represents the fastest growing agricultural industry in some countries, with fresh water aquaculture dominating total aquaculture production. In the world aquaculture is seen as a means of meeting future demands for fish at a time when stocks from the wild are showing signs of depletion.

However, aquaculture as generally practiced in Africa is in a small scale, simple, low input and fresh water pond culture economic activity hardly producing enough to cater for the ever increasing demand for fish product. The continent produces very little, accounting for only about 0.5% of the world aquaculture output. About 80% of this is produced by just two countries viz: Nigeria (Tilapia, carp and catfish) and Egypt (Tilapia, crap and Mullet) (Sverdrup-Jensen, 2000; FAO, 2011).

Commercial fisheries can contribute to food security directly by producing fish in large quantities for food while also indirectly generating employment, income for the purchase of food and acting as a source of foreign exchange. (FDF, 2005; 2008) had it that Nigeria is the largest single consumer of fish and fish products in Africa despite the abundance of fisheries resources. FAO (2004) noted that Nigeria has the resource capacity  to produce 2.4million metric tons (MMT) of fish every year but yet the country is a large importer of 648,000MT of fish annually while domestic fish production is estimated at only 496,000MT from all source.

Nigeria has a fish demand of 2.66million metric tons per annum and internal production of 0.7million metric tons per annum (CBN, 2007; FDF, 2008). The Country had to import about 1.012million tonnes of fish worth 97million naira to meet up with these demand (Ayinla, 2012 and Atanda, 2012). Fish production in Nigeria comes from three sources and their contributions to Nigeria fish supply according to FDF (2008) were; artisanal (Inland, rivers, lakes, costal and brackish water) contributed between 2000 - 2007, 81.9% - 89.5%, industrial fishing (Inshore and Offshore) contributed 4.3% - 5.0% and aquaculture (fish farming) 5.5% - 13.8%. Despite the decreasing output in artisanal sector, this economic activity still contributes the largest proportion of about 90% to the gross fish production in Nigeria (Adepegba, 2007; FDF, 2008). Captured fisheries are not projected to increase therefore aquaculture represents the best option to bridge the gap between the demand and supply of fish product for the Country. The world population of 6.91billion consumes about 118million tons/ year (an additional 34million tonnes/ year) and so aquaculture production should be increased by 50million metric tonnes by 2050 (Tarcon and Forster, 2001).

The development of agriculture and aquaculture can be enhanced through introduction of modern technologies (Nwachukwu and Onuegbu, 2007). Aquaculture growth and development is not possible without yield enhancing technological options. Research and adoption of technological improvement are crucial to increasing aquaculture productivity and food security (IFAD, 2011). The adoption of improved aquaculture technologies is a tool needed to improve aquaculture productivity which serves as the key to global food security and fight against poverty (Obisesan and Omonona, 2013). In Nigeria despite projects, programmes and policies targeted at reducing the problem of food insecurity, the country ranked 18th on the Global Hunger Index (GHI) of 81 countries with a GHI of 15.5 indicating a serious hunger situation (IFPRI, 2011; UNDP, 2011).

In the efforts to encourage culture fisheries in Nigeria, the fishery research institutions have developed and distributed various fishery production technologies some of which are integrated fish farming, pH test, water management, floating feed, flow through system, stocking density, race-way, induced breeding, water re-circulating system, transportation of fingerlings. The adoption of these technologies is assumed to increase fish production, improve self-sufficiency in production and contribution of fish to national food security (Agbamu and Orhorhoro, 2007). Improving the adoption of these technologies, it is important to develop sustainable financial options, use well trained and adequate staff also, utilize participatory expansion approach under stable strategy and reasonable institutional game plan (Koyenikan, 2008).

 

Rivers State, which is one of the coastal states in the Niger Delta has large potential for fish farming. It is characterized by various water bodies like rivers, fresh and brackish water, creaks, estuarine and also marine bodies. With these there are great opportunities for aquaculture in the State. Despite the introduction and adoption of improved technologies to the State, aquaculture is not developing at a fast rate (Amaniyie, 2006) because of the incidence of oil spillage which has not only affected the fishing waters in the state but also farmlands, economic crops and tress (Nnodim et al., 2004).

 

1.2       PROBLEM STATEMENT

There is high incidence of hunger, malnutrition and poverty in Nigeria with about 86% of the country's population earning less than two U.S dollars per day (World Bank, 2009). According to Otaha (2013) cases of malnutrition and under nutrition are growing by the day such that the food intake requirements of majority of Nigerians have fallen far below the international standard.

In Nigeria, food accounts for a large and increasing share of family budgets for poor and urban families. If prices of staple foods soar, poor people bear the brunt. The search for adequate food supply in view of the soaring population in Nigeria has been a serious source of concern nationally and among international agencies.The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), an agency of the United Nations (UN), have raised alarm that Nigeria, Morocco and Bangladesh faced imminent food crisis (Eme et al., 2014).

 

The search for adequate and accessible food supply in view of the soaring population in Nigeria has also been a serious concern for successive governments. Despite the formulation of policies and the execution of programmes and projects aimed at alleviating this anomaly the situation keeps getting worse. Nigeria with a population of approximately 140.7million and 3.2% annual growth rate (National Population Commission, 2006) is the most populated country in Africa. FAO (2004) argues that Nigeria has the resource capacity including land and water to produce 2.4 million metric tonnes of fish every year and yet imports 648,000 metric tonnes of fish annually. Furthermore, crude traditional technology being used by the fish farmers limits the quantity of fish being produced. Another challenge of fish production in Nigeria according to FAO (2008) is the hiatus in technology transfer with fishermen being left to fend for themselves with inherited, unwritten technology.

Despite the abundant fisheries resources and the relatively high consumption of fish in the country, Nigeria is a net importer of fish products in Africa (FDF, 2005; 2008).  Its domestic output of 0.62million metric tonnes (FDF, 2008), a supply deficit of 2.04million metric tonnes is required to meet the ever increasing demand for fish in Nigeria. This large deficit between the local demand and supply of fish is augmented by massive importation of frozen fish and the attendant effect on the foreign exchange earnings of the national economy as well as caput consumption 9.8kg/head/year (FDF, 2008). The vision of Nigeria to have physical and economic access to food on a continuous basis has therefore continued to remain a mirage (Fakayode et al., 2009). Over 40% of households across all agro-ecological zones in Nigeria face the problem of severe food insecurity (Mariya-Dixton et al., 2004). The 2010 MDG report states that the proportion of the Nigerian population living below the hunger threshold increased from 29% to 72 33% between 2000 and 2009, implying little prospect of achieving the 2015 target of 14.5%. These approaches classify farmers as either a food secure or a food insecure farmer.  

 

1.3       OBJECTIVES

The broad objective of this study was to examine the adoption of improved fish production technologies and food security status of smallholder fish farmers in Rivers State of Nigeria.

Specifically, the study

  1. examined the socio-economic characteristics of the fish farmers
  2. identified and examined the fish production technologies and adoption levels of the improved fish production technologies
  3. estimated the indices of adoption of improved production technologies among the fish farmers
  4. estimated the determinants of adoption of improved technologies by the farmers
  5. derived the food security indices of adopters and non-adopters of fish production technologies
  6. estimated the determinants of food security for adopters and non-adopters of fish production technologies
  7. determined the effect of fish technology adoption on the food security of the farmers

 

1.4       HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

The following hypotheses were tested;

H1: Age negatively influenced the level of adoption of improved fish production technologies while gender, marital status, educational level, household size, number of fish stocked, farming experience, access to credit, membership of cooperatives, number of extension visits and income positively influenced it.

 Ho1: Food insecurity is less severe among non-adopting fish farming households than among adopting fish farming households

H2: Age negatively influenced the food security status of the respondents while

gender, educational level, household size, fishing experience, membership of cooperative, number of extension visits and income positively influenced the food security status of the respondents,

H3:   Age and household size influenced food security status of the fish farmers negatively while education, credit, fish farming experience, cooperative membership, extension services, income and adoption influence the food security status positively.

                        

1.5    JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY.

The development and dissemination of improved agricultural technologies particularly in Africa is as a result of the need to improve the wellbeing of the rural poor farmers and also to enhance national income. Consequently, several improved aquaculture technologies have been developed and introduced by research institutes including Nigeria Institute for Oceanography and Marine Research and National Institute for Freshwater Fishery Research, with the financial support of multilateral organization such as World Bank. In Nigeria, many improved fish technologies are being disseminated to fish farmers through different programs and policies. All these efforts are geared towards increasing fish productivity to encourage the attainment of national and household food security. This is based on the premise that the adoption of improved fish technologies could lead to significant increase in aquaculture productivity in Nigeria. This can also stimulate the transition from low productivity subsistence agriculture to a high productivity agro-industrial economy. This study examined the available technologies and their contributions to productivity and output among the farmers.

Aquaculture is generally practiced by smallholder farmers who use crude implements and out-dated technologies. This study investigated the importance of the fishery subsector to the national economy, especially as it pertains to the attainment of self-sufficiency and food security necessitates the need for a cursory look at the level of technology adoption in the sector.  Some authors have looked at the subject from the perspective of the outcome of food insecurity such as low weights and extreme hunger, while others care more about dietary diversity. This study however comes from the perspective of technology adoption in the fishery sector and its effect on the food security status of fishing households. It therefore seeks to provide a solution to the dilemma of actors in the fishery industry as it pertains to high cost of production.

It is also imperative to point out that this study is charting a new course in the sense that it brings together the issues of technology adoption in the fishery sector. It is therefore filling a critical gap in the body of knowledge.

Policy makers and government officials will find this study useful in the formulation of appropriate policy framework for the development and dissemination of technology in the fishery sector. It will also become a resource material for researchers and scholars who are interested in the fishery sector while filling the obvious knowledge gap on the issue of technology adoption in the sector.

 

Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects

FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!

+(234) 0814 780 1594

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.

Ratings & Reviews

0.0

No Review Found.


To Review


To Comment