ANALYSIS OF RISK, INVESTMENT AND PRODUCTIVITY OF SMALLHOLDER ARABLE CROP AGRIBUSINESS ENTREPRENEURS

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00009199

No of Pages: 178

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $

ABSTRACT

The study examined risk, investment and productivity of smallholder arable crop agribusiness entrepreneurs in Akwa-Ibom State, Nigeria. Objectives of the study were to examine the socioeconomic characteristics of smallholder entrepreneurs, derive an index of risk attitude for the farmers and classify them into risk averse, risk neutral and risk takers; derive and compare investment and productivity indices of farmers based on their risk attitudes; examine risk management strategies used by farmers and examine the determinants of risk attitude, investment and productivity of agribusiness entrepreneurs. A multistage sampling technique was adopted in selecting 120 entrepreneurs for the study while structured questionnaire was used to elicit data from them. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics such as Total Factor Productivity model, Ordinary Least Square (OLS), and multinomial logit models. Mean age of 47 years indicates that farmers were moderately young, innovative and able to take risks; men were predominantly in farming activities. Marital status of the respondents indicates that majority of the entrepreneurs (72%) were married.  A risk index mean score of 2.41 strongly indicates that majority of the respondents were risk averse while the productivity distribution of farmers showed that as expected, risk takers were the most productive. The mean value of N36, 834 for risk-seeking farmers implies that this group of farmers invested more than other groups of farmers. The Multinomial result shows that gender, household size, farm size and total income were positively related to risk-averseness, while age, access to credit, level of education, land acquisition and labour cost were negative. On the other hand, access to credit, level of education, household size, farming experience, farm size, land tenure, labour cost and cooperative membership were positively related to risk-taking attitude of the farmers and negative for gender and income. Also, age, education, farm size, farming experience and gender were positively related to the farm productivity of risk-taking farmers and negatively related to household size, capital inputs and fertilizer. Results further showed that extension contacts and cooperative membership were positively related to the productivity of risk-averse while age of farmers, level of education of farmers, household size, farming experience, capital inputs and gender were negatively related. The result further showed that age, education, loan size, farming experience and nature of ownership were positively related to the amount of capital invested of risk-taking farmers and negatively related to interest rate. Age of farmers, education, loan size, farm size, source of investment capital and nature of ownership were inversely related to amount of capital invested while off-farm income was positive. Enterprise diversification, insurance against disaster and loans from cooperative societies were some of the risk-mitigating measures adopted. Policies that will encourage subsidizing of cost of inputs, provisions of cheap credit facilities to farmers, stability of agricultural product prices, and the use of improved technologies are recommended. Diversification should be encouraged to ensure that farmers’ assets are improved at regular farming seasons and intervals. Development programmes that aim at reducing farmers’ risks need to be tailored to specific characteristics of farmers.







TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover page

Title page                                                                           i

Declaration                                                                              ii

Certification                                                          iii

Dedication                                                                     iv

Acknowledgements                                                       v

Table of Contents                                            vii

List of Tables                                                             xi

List of Figure                                                                       xii

Abstract                                                                             xiii

 

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study                                                                                   1

1.2 Problem Statement                                                                                            5

1.3 Objectives of the Study                                                                                     7

1.4 Hypotheses of the Study                                                                                    8

1.5 Justification of the Study                                                                                   9

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1     Concepts and Definitions                                                                             11

2.1.1  Concept of risk                                                                                             11

2.1.2  Classifications of risk attitude of investors                                                  17

2.2     Concept of Investment                                                                                 19

2.3     Concept of Productivity                                                                               20

2.3.1 Types of productivity                                                                                    22

2.4     Concept of Agribusiness                                                                               24

2.4.1  Smallholder arable crop agribusiness                                                           25

2.4.2   Problems of smallholder arable crop agribusinesses                                      27

2.5     Conceptual Framework                                                                                29

2.6     Theoretical Framework                                                                                30

2.6.1   Investment theory                                                                                        30

2.6.2   Investor behavior theory                                                                              30

2.6.3   Behavioral portfolio theory                                                                         31

2.6.4   New investment theory                                                                                31

2.7      Risk Theories                                                                                               33

2.7.1   Modigliani and miller's capital structure theory of risk                                      33

2.7.2   Credit, economic and political risks theory                                                 33

2.7.3   The economic utility theory of risk                                                             34

2.8      Theory of Productivity                                                                                35

2.9       Empirical Literature Review                                                                      38

2.9.1    Socioeconomic characteristics of smallholder arable

                           Crop agribusiness enterprise                                                                               38

2.10     Arable Crop Agribusiness Risk Attitudes of Farmers                                      42

2.10.1  Risk attitude and welfare of farmers                                                          42

2.11    Risk Management Strategies                                                                       44

2.12    Determinants of Risk Attitude, Investment and Productivity                              53

2.12.1 Risk attitudes of Smallholder Farmers                                                          53

2.12.2  Determinants of investment                                                                       57

2.12.3  Determinants of productivity                                                                     59

2.13     Analytical Framework                                                                                63

2.13.1  Simple statistical tools                                                                                63

2.13.2 The total factor productivity (TFP) measure and index number approach       64

2.13.3  Five point likert type scale                                                                       65

2.13.4  Multinomial logistic regression (MLR)                                                     66

2.13.5  The method of ordinary least squares                                                         69

2.13.6   Measurement and classification of risk attitude of crop farmers                          72

 

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1   Study Area                                                                                                     74

3.2   Sampling Procedure                                                                                      75

3.3   Data Collection                                                                                              76

3.4   Method of Data Analysis                                                                               76

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1    Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Respondents                                 83

4.1.1 Age distribution of the respondents                                                              84

4.1.2 Sex distribution of the respondents                                                              85

4.1.3 Marital status                                                                                                86

4.1.4 Farm size distribution of the respondents                                                     87

4.1.5 Household size distribution of the respondents                                            87

4.1.6 Primary Occupation distribution of the respondents                                      87

4.1.8 Years of education distribution of respondents                                            88

4.1.9 Years of farming experience distribution of respondents                                      88

4.1.10 Method of land acquisition distribution of respondents                                      89

4.2       Risk Status of the entrepreneurs                                                                89

4.3       Productivity and Investment Levels of the Entrepreneurs with Respect to their Risk Status                                           90

4.4       Risk Management Strategies Used by Risk-Averse Farmers                        91

4.5       Determinants of Risk Attitude, Investment and Productivity of the Agribusiness Entrepreneurs                          93

 

4.5.1   Determinants of Farmers’ Risk Attitude                                                   93

4.5.2   Determinants of Investment of Risk-Averse and Risk-Seeking Farmers        102

4.5.3 Determinants of Productivity of Risk-Averse and Risk-Seeking Farmer       108

 

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1     Summary                                                                  118

5.2     Conclusion                                                                                               122

5.3     Recommendations                                                                                    122 

References                                                                                                       125

Appendices                                                                                                        155

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

4.1 Distribution of respondents by their socio-economic characteristics                   83

 

4.2 Distribution of the respondents by risk status                                                     89

 

4.3 Productivity levels of the entrepreneurs                                                              90

 

4.4 Investment levels of the entrepreneurs                                                                91

 

4.5 Risk coping strategies employed by the risk-averse farmers                              92

 

4.6 Risk attitude multinomial logit log-likelihood test                                             93

 

4.7 Multinomial logit result for the determinants of farmers’ risk                             94

 

4.8 Determinants of investment of risk-seeking farmers in Akwa Ibom State        103

 

4.9 Determinants of investment of risk-averse farmers in Akwa Ibom State          107

 

4.10 Determinants of productivity of risk-seeking farmers in Akwa Ibom State    109

 

4.11 Determinants of productivity of risk-averse farmers in Akwa Ibom State      115

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF FIGURE

 

2.1 Conceptual framework of risk, investment and productivity of smallholder arable crop agribusiness entrepreneurs          29                                                            

 

 

 


 

 

 

 


CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

 

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Risk is supposed to play an important role in the investment decisions of individual farmers (Isik and Khanna, 2003 and Knight, 2003). Risk in production is a strong characteristic of agricultural production. Although risk is closely associated with agricultural production, it can be controlled, to some degree, by farmers through the use of modern inputs, such as chemical fertilizers and pesticides (Rabin, 2000; Rabin and Thale, 2001 and Knight et al. 2003). Risk in agricultural production can be exogenously-caused or endogenously-induced. According to Rabin (2000); Rabin and Thale (2001) and Knight et al. (2003) exogenous risk, which may arise from extreme weather conditions or threats of disease and pest outbreaks, is independent of farmers’ production decisions while endogenous risk is incurred solely by such production decisions. In other words, while the pest outbreaks can be categorized as exogenously-caused, the change in risk from the use of pesticide to control for pest outbreaks is endogenously-induced by farmers’ decisions.

 

Productions are conquered by large number of unorganized producers, many unskilled and therefore little are able to absorb new technologies. Most farmers are small-scale with little opportunity for diversification and insurance. Their attitudes to risk are nevertheless major determinants of rate of diffusion of new technologies among farmers and of the outcome of rural development program. Researchers have established that risks cause farmers to be less willing to undertake activities and investments that have higher expected outcomes, but carry with them risks of failure (Adebusuyi, 2004 and Alderman, 2008).

Agriculture in Nigeria, as in most other developing countries, is dominated by small farm producers (Oladeebo, 2004). Smallholder farmers make up about 80% of the farming population in Nigeria (Awoke and Okorji, 2004). These smallholder farmers although individually look insignificant but collectively form an important foundation upon which the Nigerian agriculture rests, several constraints and barriers, which appear impossible, limit the overall farming activities and if this is anything to go by, the destiny of a developing economy heavily rests on the shoulder of the small producers.

 

Odoemenem et al. (2013) asserted that agriculture is practiced at subsistent level and is characterized by numerous farmers operating several scattered small and fragmented plots of land using traditional methods such as land rotation, bush burning and crude implements. According to Oluwepo, (2010), majority of the rural populace in Nigeria either depend entirely on farming and farming activities for survival and generation of income, or depend on other non-farming activities to supplement their main sources of income. The validity of this statement becomes apparent when it is recognized that over 90.0% of the country’s local food production comes from small farms which are usually not more than 10 hectares in size, while at least 60.0% of the population earn their living from these small farms. It might then be seen that most farmers have limited resources, a factor that limits their production output, income, and investment.

 

Over the years, many farmers in Nigeria have increasingly not been able to invest adequately on their farming activities. They have as such resorted to forming cooperative movements to achieve a common goal through democratically controlled business organizations. The most significant economic responsibility of members of the cooperative society is savings. Farmers save a specified amount of money daily, weekly, monthly or quarterly as it is convenient for the group and the individuals. This type of savings is important for agricultural production, because it allows farmers or members’ access to credit at the onset of the farming season which could boost farm production and income of the farmers. Odoemenem et al. (2013) were of the view that small scale farmers invest their savings in two major areas. These are the agricultural and non-agricultural divisions.

 

One of the basic problems confronting the development of agricultural sector in Nigeria could be attributed to inadequate savings, income and investment by the small scale farmers. In spite of this problem, policy makers have not really drawn up adequate and comprehensive rural savings scheme that will motivate the farmers to invest their capital productively (Sunday et al., 2011 and Odoemenem et al., 2013). According to Shitu (2012) capital accumulation is a major prerequisite of economic development and if the volume of savings are inadequate to meet investment requirements, major bottlenecks are likely to develop in the process of capital formation and the drive for development. The volume of investment has been found to depend on income, cost of procuring investible funds and entrepreneur’s expectations on the trend of the business in future.

 

Agricultural production is subject to many risks. Any farm production decision plan is typically associated with multiple potential outcomes with different probabilities. Many risks directly affect farmers´ production decisions and welfare. Agricultural producers face many risks in their economic activity due to weather conditions, plant or animal diseases, price volatility, and policies such as agricultural trade liberalization and restrictions on the use of crop protection products (World Bank, 2005). Weather, market developments and other events cannot be controlled by the farmer but have a direct effect on the returns from farming (Baquet et al., 1997). In this context, the farmer has to manage risk in farming as part of the general management of the farming business.

 

The spectrum of risks that affect the income of agricultural producers and agribusinesses is quite broad. However, the two predominant risks are: price risk, reflecting variations in market prices for agricultural commodities and production inputs; and production risk, which encompasses variations in the volume or quality of the commodity produced (Freshwater and Jette-Nantel, 2008). Weather is one of the most pervasive sources of production risks, and it impacts all aspects of the agricultural supply chain, particularly in countries that rely on rain-fed agriculture (Swiss-Re, 2007). Even with the introduction of new crop varieties, production technologies such as irrigation, and new management practices that offer the potential to increase yields and improve resistance to weather perils, the majority of agricultural activities in developing countries remain highly susceptible to extreme, uncontrollable weather events that can severely impact both quality and yield of a crop. Such events include excessive or insufficient rainfall and extreme temperatures. The effects of weather risk are felt most acutely at the household level, particularly by poor, vulnerable agricultural households, the majority of whom are subsistence farmers.

Traditionally, farmers have managed risks by using less risky technologies of lower but reliably yielding drought-resistant crops; by seeking diversification both in terms of production activities on-farm and income generating activities off-farm; and by devising informal and formal risk sharing arrangements (Friedberg, 2003). While these mechanisms may work well for low-magnitude losses, even if they are frequent, they often prove to be inadequate for risk that is infrequent but severe (Hazell, et al., 1986). There is the potential for these major risks to increase in the future - price risk due to liberalization of trade and production risk due to the effects of climate change (World Bank, 2005). The trend towards agricultural specialization is likely to continue and this will increase risks as producers rely on the production of a smaller range of crops and consequently cannot diversify away risks effectively (Glauber, 2004).

 

Weather risks such as drought in particular typically affect entire regions at once, rendering informal risk sharing arrangements insufficient. Affected farmers are often forced to employ short term coping strategies such as borrowing from money lenders or neighbors, selling assets, or cutting already small expenditures on household goods and services. In many cases, farmers could benefit from investing in agricultural activities that require higher initial investments but ultimately would generate higher income if the risks affecting these investments such as weather could be managed.

 

 1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Smallholder farmers in Nigeria face many risks in their farming activities. For example, in the past, the country has recorded drought, crop diseases and pests as well as fluctuations in prices of both farm produce and inputs. As a result, there has been variability in household income. Risk hinders farmers from pursuing their farming as a business. The risk situation is complicated by the fact that they operate in an environment with weak markets. They do not have access to sufficient support institutions that can help them cope with risks.

 

Unlike Sub-Saharan Africa, Nigerian agriculture (Akwa Ibom state inclusive) has not seen a substantial increase in per capita value, it is rather a declining trend on average over the last decades since the creation of the state with no considerable variation over time (Food and Agricultural Organisation- FAO, 2008 cited in Wayo et al., 2011).

 This declining per capita food production has resulted in increasing rural poverty, rising food prices, widespread famines and increasing food imports. Some of the factors hindering agricultural development in Nigeria including Akwa Ibom State  includes, inadequate investment in agriculture, limited access to credit by smallholder farmers, high cost and unavailability of inputs such as fertilizers and improved seeds, inadequate use of modern technologies, agricultural producers especially smallholder arable crop agribusiness face many risks in their economic activity due to weather conditions, plant or animal diseases, price volatility, and policies such as agricultural trade liberalization and restrictions on the use of crop protection products (World Bank, 2005). Weather, market developments and other events cannot be controlled by the farmers but have a direct effect on the returns from farming, inefficient agricultural input markets, and the absence of a conducive policy environment.

 

According to Osondu et al. (2015) related research works on analysis of risk, investment and productivity of smallholder arable crop agribusiness entrepreneurs had revealed that farmers participating in crop production and self-employed activities earn the largest total farm and total off farm monthly income. Nevertheless, little or no similar work on analysis of risk, investment and productivity of smallholder arable crop agribusiness entrepreneurs has been done in Akwa-Ibom State. Thus, this research vacuum has prompted the researcher to undertake this research work in other to close the research vacuum by analyzing the risk, investment and productivity of smallholder arable crop agribusinesses to know the types of risk faced by the farmers, and also to find out their investment and productivity level in Akwa Ibom State of Nigeria. Thus, the following questions were asked with the aim of achieving the specific objectives of the study.

i. What are the socio-economic characteristics of the smallholder arable crop agribusiness entrepreneurs?

ii. In what way do you derive an index of risk attitude and how do you classify them into risk averse, risk neutral and risk takers as a farmers?

iii. In what way (s) do you compare investment and productivity indices as a farmer base on risk attitudes (risk averse, risk neutral and risk takers)

iv. What risk management strategies do the farmers use?

v.   What are the determinants of investment and productivity of the agribusiness enterprise?


1.3          OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The broad objective of this study analyzed the risk, investment and productivity of smallholder arable crop agribusiness entrepreneurs in Akwa-Ibom State, Nigeria.

The Specific objectives were to:

i. examine the socio-economic characteristics of the smallholder agribusiness   entrepreneurs;

ii. derive an index of risk attitude for the farmers and to classify them into risk averse, risk neutral and risk takers or risk preference farmers;

iii. derive and compare the investment and productivity indices of the farmers based on their risk attitudes (risk averse, risk neutral and risk takers);

iv. examine risk  management strategies used by the risk averse farmers; and

v. examine the determinants of risk attitude, investment and productivity of the agribusiness entrepreneurs.

 

1.4          HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

The following hypotheses were used to guide the study:

HO1:      The Total factor productivity of the arable farmers is positively related to the farmers’ age, level of education, farm size, experience, amount of fertilizer and number of extension contacts and negatively related to the farmers’ household size and capital inputs.

HO2:      The risk preferring attitude of the farmers is positively influenced by age, credit volume available, farming status, educational attainment, years of farming, farm income, total investment capital, labour employed and membership of cooperative societies and negatively influenced by age, marital status and household size.

HO3:      The amount of capital invested in arable crop farming is positively related to farmers’ year of formal education, farm size, farmers’ experience, amount of credit accessed, cooperative membership and risk preferring attitude of the farmers and negatively related to age of farmers, involvement in off-farm activities and risk averse attitude of the farmers.

1.5          JUSTIFICATION FOR THE STUDY

Risks, investment and productivity in agribusiness enterprises have been a major issue to scholars, policy makers and agribusiness entrepreneurs in Akwa Ibom State. The importance of risk in agribusiness, investment and productivity cannot be over emphasized following the importance that is attached to it. Agriculture plays a vital role in the provision of food, employment to smallholders, foreign earnings and raw materials for industries that depend on their products. For Akwa-Ibom State to boost its national output like other states in the country to meet her fast growing population, it is very vital to give high regards to the sector. In the same observation Landes (2008) cited in Nto, ( 2010) mentioned that the rate of investment in the economy has continued to rise, while, on the other hand the rate of investment in agribusiness have declined over the years.

Risk has important implications to agriculture in that it affects the types of investments that farmers make. Ultimately, it affects the level of farm output achieved and economic growth especially in sub-Saharan African countries (Nigeria inclusive) where agriculture contributes up to 24% of GDP. Information on the analysis of risk, investments and productivity of smallholder arable crop agribusiness represents important contributions to existing body of knowledge. Findings from the study will enable government agencies, stakeholders, policy makers to assist farmers cope with risks.

 

It will also serve as a veritable input into the natural framework for agricultural development institutes. More so the findings will enable development agencies to identify existing gaps and know where to apply their interventions for a better investment and productivity of smallholder arable crop agribusinesses to emerge, this research finding will also be of great benefit to smallholder arable crop agribusinesses in Akwa-Ibom State on how to manage risk whenever they are into arable crop production using the management strategies and other findings the research hope to uncover. Most importantly, it will assist policy makers and stakeholders to understand the current situation and the needed policy support to reduce the effects of risk and thus encourage farmers to gradually move away from subsistence farming to more profit-oriented but higher-risk commercial farming. This will help to make the farm family food secure and make the nation self-sufficient in food production thus bringing about the needed transformation of the agricultural sector as a net exporter of agricultural produce.

 

 

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