EFFECT OF INFORMAL CREDIT SOURCES ON PERFORMANCE OF CASSAVA BASED FARMERS

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00009183

No of Pages: 125

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $

ABSTRACT

 

The study was carried out to examine the Effect of Informal Credit Sources on Performance of Cassava-based Farmers in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria.  The objectives of this study were to: identify the informal credit sources utilized by cassava-based farmers in Akwa Ibom State, estimate the determinants of choice of informal credit sources by cassava-based farmers in the study area, estimate the determinants of performance of the cassava-based farmers in the study area, examine the effect of informal credit on performance of cassava-based farmers in the study area and identify constraints faced by cassava-based farmers in accessing informal credit in the study area.  Three hypotheses were tested in this study.  Multistage sampling procedure was used to select 96 informal credit beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries respectively to make up a total of 192 respondents for the study.  Data collection was done through the application of structured questionnaire and interview schedule.  Analyses of data were done using descriptive statistical tools such as frequencies and percentages and inferential statistics such as Ordered Probit Regression Model, Ordinary Least Square (OLS) Regression Model and Chow Test.  The major sources of informal credit in the study area were Rotatory and Non-Rotatory Savings and Credit Associations, Village Cooperatives and Daily Money Collectors (Etibbe).  Ordered probit regression estimates of determinants of informal credit sources showed that out of the nine explanatory variables, six were statistically significant with five exhibiting positive effects (sex, age, interest amount, educational level and farm size) and one exhibiting negative effect (annual net farm income). The significant variables that positively influenced the performance of informal credit beneficiaries were farm size, farming experience, amount of credit used, household size, educational level and cost of farm inputs; age of farmers and interest amount charged on credit were negative and significant for the beneficiaries.  On the other hand, the significant variables that positively influenced performance of non-beneficiaries were farm size, farming experience and educational level while the household size, distance to market and total cost of farm inputs negatively influenced the performance of non-beneficiaries. The Chow test analyses of effect of informal credit on performance of cassava farmers in the study area showed inequality between the coefficients of informal credit beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries in the study.  The result also confirmed heterogeneity of slopes and shift in intercepts between the two groups.  Inadequate credit, short repayment time, late disbursement of credit and inability to repay credit were the major constraints to informal credit access in the study area. Among other recommendations, the study recommended that informal credit sources should be improved to compete favourably with the formal credit sources through a direct linkage between Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the informal credit sector to facilitate the direct extension of credit to the sector without going through intermediaries.







TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Title Page                                                                                                                                i          

Declaration Page                                                                                                                     ii

Certification                                                                                                                            iii

Dedication                                                                                                                              iv        

Acknowledgements                                                                                                                v

Table of Contents                                                                                                                   vi

List of Tables                                                                                                                          x

List of Figures                                                                                                                         xi

List of Appendixes                                                                                                                 xii

Abstract                                                                                                                                  xiii

CHAPTER 1  - INTRODUCTION

1.1       Background to the Study                                                                                            1 - 5

1.2       Statement of the Problem                                                                                           5 - 6

1.3       Objectives of the Study                                                                                              7

1.4       Hypotheses of the Study                                                                                             7

1.5       Justification of the Study                                                                                            7 - 8

1.6       Scope and Limitation of the Study                                                                             8 - 9

CHAPTER 2  -  LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1                   Conceptual Review                                                                                       10

2.1.1                Concept of credit                                                                                            10  

2.1.2                Concept of agricultural credit                                                                         10 - 11

2.1.3                Role of credit in agricultural performance                                                     11 - 13

2.1.4                Credit types and sources                                                                                 13

2.1.4.1             Formal credit sources and institutions                                                            13 - 14

2.1.4.2             Informal credit sources and institutions                                                         14

2.1.4.2.1          Social network                                                                                                14 - 15

2.1.4.2.2          Money lenders                                                                                                15

2.1.4.2.3          Rotatory and Non-Rotatory Savings Credit Association                                    

(ROSCA/Non-ROSCA)                                                                                  15 - 16

2.1.4.2.4          Daily money collectors                                                                                  16 - 17

2.1.4.2.5          Village cooperatives                                                                                       17

2.1.4.3             Semi-formal credit sources and institutions                                                   17 - 18

2.1.4.3.1          Cooperative societies                                                                                      18

2.1.4.3.2          NGO microfinance institutions                                                                      18

2.1.5                Reasons for low patronage of formal credit sources by small-holder

farmers                                                                                                            18 - 20

2.1.6                Conceptual framework of the study                                                               20

2.2                   Theoretical Review                                                                                       22

2.2.1                Credit information asymmetry theory                                                            22

2.2.2                Rational choice theory                                                                                    23 - 24

2.3                   Empirical Review                                                                                         24

2.3.1                Sources of credit to farmers                                                                           24 - 29

2.3.2                Determinants of access to and choice of credit sources                               29 - 36

2.3.3                Determinants of farmers’ performance                                                          36 - 37

2.3.4                Effect of agricultural credit on farm performance                                         37 - 43

2.3.5                Constraints to credit access                                                                            43 - 45

2.4                   Analytical Review                                                                                         45

2.4.1                Ordered probit regression model                                                                    45

2.4.2                Ordinary least squares (OLS)                                                                                     46 - 47

2.4.3                Chow test                                                                                                        47 - 48

CHAPTER 3  -           METHODOLOGY

3.1       The study area                                                                                                            49

3.2       Sampling procedure                                                                                                    51 - 52

3.3       Data collection                                                                                                            54

3.4       Methods of data analyses                                                                                           54 - 59

CHAPTER 4  -           RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1       Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Respondents                                                 60

4.1.1    Age distribution of the respondents                                                                            60 - 61

4.1.2    Sex distribution of the respondents                                                                            61 - 62

4.1.3    Education distribution of the respondents                                                                  62 - 63

4.1.4    Marital status distribution of the respondents                                                            63 - 64

4.1.5    Household size distribution of the respondents                                                          64 - 65

4.1.6    Distribution of respondents by farming experience                                                   65 - 66

4.1.7    Farm size distribution of the respondents                                                                   66 -67

4.1.8    Distribution of respondents by membership of farmers’ groups                                    67 - 68

4.2       Sources of informal credit available in the study area                                               68 - 69

4.3       Determinants of choice of informal credit source                                                      69 - 73

4.3.1    Test of Hypothesis one (H1)                                                                                       73 - 74

4.4       Determinants of production performance of cassava-based farmers                                    74

4.4.1    Analysis of costs and returns to cassava production by the two groups of Farmers       74 - 77

4.4.2    Regression result of the determinants of performance of respondents                 77 - 82

4.4.3    Test of Hypothesis two (H2)                                                                                       82

4.5       Effect of informal credit on performance of respondents in the study area                    83 - 84

4.5.1    Test of Hypothesis three (H3)                                                                                     84

4.6       Constraints to informal credit access                                                                         84 - 87

CHAPTER 5  - SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1       Summary                                                                                                                    88 - 90

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                                  90 - 91

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                                     91 - 92

            References                                                                                                                  93 - 107

            Appendixes                                                                                                                 108-110

 

 


 

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

3.1       a priori expectation of the independent variables used in the determinants of

choice of informal credit sources in the study                                                            56

3.2       a priori expectation of the independent variables used in the determinants of

performance of informal credit beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries in the study     58

4.1       Distribution of respondents by age                                                                             60

4.2       Distribution of respondents by sex                                                                             61

4.3       Distribution of respondents by education                                                                  62

4.4       Distribution of respondents by marital status                                                             63

4.5       Distribution of respondents by household size                                                           64

4.6       Distribution of respondents by farming experience                                                   65

4.7       Distribution of respondents by farm size                                                                   66

4.8       Distribution of respondents by membership of farmers’ group                                         67

4.9       Distribution of informal credit beneficiaries by informal credit source(s) utilized   68

4.10     Result of ordered probit model analysis of determinants of informal credit sources

             by informal credit beneficiaries                                                                                70

 

4.11     Cost and returns on cassava production of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries   75

4.12     Regression estimates for determinants of performance among informal credit

beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries                                                                            78

 

4.13     Chow test analyses of effect of informal credit on performance of respondents in

the study area                                                                                                              83

 

4.14     Constraints to informal credit access in the study area                                              85

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1       Conceptual framework of the study                                              21

3.1       Map of Akwa Ibom State                                                        50

3.2       Sampling procedure for selection of informal credit beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries                                                   53

 

 


 

 

 

 

LIST OF APPENDIXES

1          Sampling procedure and sample size selection – beneficiaries                                    108

2          Sampling procedure and sample size selection – non beneficiaries                                    110

 

 

 

 



 

 

                   

                                                               CHAPTER 1

                                                            INTRODUCTION


1.1       BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

For many decades, developing countries have heavily relied on agriculture.  Accordingly, there is a rising interest in the agricultural sector arising from high population growth and urbanization which has led to increasing demand for agricultural produce (Wiggens, 2013).  As opined by World Bank (2008), agriculture contributes maximally to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for agriculture-based economies when compared to other sectors and serves as the primary livelihood option for majority of their total workforce.  Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa has continued to be a vital instrument towards the achievement of sustainable development, alleviation of rural poverty and a reliable means of gaining self-sufficiency in food production for the region (World Bank, 2008).  Notwithstanding, agricultural productivity in the region has been experiencing continuous decline over the last decades with a resulting rise in poverty levels (Olwande et al, 2009). 

 

In Nigeria, agriculture contributes greatly to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and small-scale farmers play significant roles in this aspect (Rahji and Fakayode, 2009).  Despite this contribution, the Nigerian agricultural sector incidentally lies on the shoulders of small scale farmers whose expansion is hampered by low inputs and low income.  Several factors add to the pitiable performance of Nigerian agricultural sector; these include among others: virtual neglect of the sector, poor access to modern agricultural inputs and technologies and lack of optimum credit supply (Enyim et al, 2013).  Apart from the problem of poor accessibility to cutting edge farming technologies, the abysmal performance of Nigeria’s economy, majorly in terms of agricultural productivity and growth, hinders the availability of adequate inputs and credit for agricultural activities (Odoemenem and Obinne, 2010; Salami and Arawomo, 2013; Asogwa et al, 2014).  

 

Report from literatures has affirmed that domestic agricultural output in Nigeria is extremely lower than quantity demanded (Adegbola et al, 2011; Akpan et al, 2012).  Investment in small scale agriculture and modern technologies suited to local conditions would create possibilities for local food production sufficiency thereby alleviating poverty and hunger. It was estimated that the national poverty incidence in Nigeria is about 54.7 per cent, while majority of Nigerians live in absolute poverty (National Bureau of Statistics, NBS, 2012).  Billions of dollars are spent yearly on food aid yet about one billion people of the world’s population are still suffering from hunger and malnutrition (Jansen, 2010) and Nigeria is not an exception.    Agricultural credit therefore provides the needed strategy in reaching the small-scale farmers and building a global financial system that will cater for the financial needs of agriculturists (Cottheim, 2010).

 

Cassava (Manihot esculenta) originated from South America and is cultivated in all warm regions of the world.  Cassava has been reported to be the most popular root crop grown in West Africa and presently a staple food in Nigeria (Okon, et al, 2012).  Given the importance of cassava to the Nigerian economy, the Nigerian government in 1999, embarked on the Cassava Production Initiative to enable the country achieve independence in cassava farming and have excess for export with a goal of producing 150 million tons of cassava every year (Awotide et al, 2015).  After many years of massive investment in this programme, the objective has not been met.  The failure of this programme is traceable to the fact that despite all the objectives outlined; the ease of accessing credit facilities was not properly considered; coupled with the fact that at the farm level, the costs of production for cassava in Nigeria are very high when compared to other countries (Akinnagbe, 2010).  Nigeria’s agricultural sector, particularly cassava production, therefore requires a large chunk of agricultural inputs and finance to achieve increased output and performance necessary for improvement in the production of this staple crop.

 

By definition, agricultural credit is the immediate conveyance of purchasing power by the owner to another person who needs it, allowing the borrower opportunity to command the use of capital belonging to another person for farming purposes, but with the assurance that the borrower will be willing and able to pay back the capital at an agreed date with or without interest (Nwaru et al, 2011).  Agricultural credit is considered as a guarantee by individual farmers/farm owners to acquire funds and inputs from mediators for investment in farm operations.  Agricultural credit is an essential factor of agricultural production which enable farmers to secure farm credit like equipment and labour (Odoh et al, 2009).  Agricultural credit is extensively acknowledged as an important intermediating factor between adoption of farm innovations and technologies and increased farm income.  Moreover, it serves as a fundamental ingredient of sustainable production and its accessibility, demand and correct usage is among the pre-requisites for realizing the national objective of poverty eradication and self-sufficiency in food production (Omonona et al, 2008; Oladeebo and Oladeebo, 2008; Nwaru et al, 2011; Anyiro and Oriaku, 2011; Akpan et al, 2013; Akudugu, 2012).  Furthermore, credit to agriculture serves as a vital secondary input among others to boost productivity (Sriram, 2007; Das et al, 2009).  Farmers’ need for agricultural credit is justified by the infinite challenges facing agriculture in Nigeria such as inadequate funding, scarcity and high cost of inputs, underdeveloped marketing channels and systems as well as poor infrastructural facilities (Fakayode et al, 2008).  With technological advancement in farming systems, farmers require more investments by way of agricultural credit. 

 

Due to prevalence of fragmented land holding, poor saving, insufficient owner-equity; farmers resort to external borrowings from diverse sources which are formal or informal (Chisasa and Makina, 2012).   Formal sources such as agricultural, commercial, microfinance and development banks, poverty eradication programmes, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) supply about 35% of farmers’ credit needs whereas the informal credit sources such as friends, local money lenders, relations, traders and merchants, Osusu (Isusu) and informal traditional lenders not bounded by the legal framework, supply about 65% of farmers’ credit needs (Ugwumba et al, 2009).  From available statistics of commercial bank total sectorial allocation of credit, the amount of credit allocated to Nigeria’s agricultural sector has declined over the years.  For instance, credit quota to the sector fluctuated between 6.98% and 10.66% in 1981 to 1985 and between 1.67% and 3.44% in 2010 to 2013 (Central Bank of Nigeria, Statistical Bulletin, 2013). Usually, poor farmers have no claims to funds from the banking system given the difficulties in mortgaging required collaterals, high loan administrative charges alongside high rates of interest on loans (Hermes and Lensink, 2011).

 

A study by Bassey et al (2014a) observed that due to high rate of agricultural loan default in Akwa Ibom State, commercial banks seldom approve loans to farmers and often times do so at very high interest rates with other stringent requirements such as the provision of collaterals thereby making financial services inaccessible to poor farmers (Nelson and Nelson, 2010).  Most times, small-holder farmers operating in Akwa Ibom State who succeed in getting bank loans receive such loans after planting season thereby resulting in diversion and subsequent default (Bassey et al, 2014a).  With all these problems associated with accessing agricultural credit from formal sources, most farmers depend on the services of informal financial units and groups for credit for funding agricultural activities (Henri-Ukoha et al, 2011).  As posited by Osondu et al, (2015), the informal financial sector through which small-scale farmers can access credit comprises essentially the informal credit groups and money lenders.  Agents of obtaining informal credit include Rotatory and Non-Rotatory Savings and Credit Association (ROSCA/Non-ROSCA), Daily money collectors, village cooperatives, age grades, work groups, town unions, religious associations, family and kin associations.  These informal groups have impacted tremendously in the development of villages where they reach out to give credit facilities to participating members devoid of collaterals except guarantors (Onyeagocha et al, 2012).  A survey carried out in Nigeria by World Bank (2007) indicated that only few rural farmers obtained credit from formal financial institutions.  This may also be the case for Akwa Ibom farmers, who are mostly small holder farmers.  Accordingly, Okon et al, (2012) concluded that agricultural credit can provide a striking increment to production and profit levels of small-holder farmers in the state which further helps to improve their living conditions and enhance rural household welfare.

                                                                                  

1.2       STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The low output from the agricultural sector in the South-South region has been seen to have negative effect on the livelihood activities of farmers with its resultant effect shown in rise in poverty levels, huge capital flight, unemployment, malnutrition and militancy (Kolawole and Olufunsho, 2014).  Cassava production is a very common enterprise in Akwa Ibom State but most of the cassava farmers operate at the subsistence level, characterized by use of crude tools, traditional farming techniques and low capital investment, hence, low productivity and output (Akpan and Udoh, 2016). The government of the state has introduced various programmes aimed at boosting cassava output in the state but these programmes have not achieved its intended objectives as large proportions of cassava and its by-products are still being brought in from the neighbouring states to complement local production (Akpan et al, 2015).  The continuous reliance on neighbouring states for provision of cassava products in Akwa Ibom State indicates an increase in capital flight from the state.

 

The challenges associated with formal lending from financial institutions for agricultural purposes has led cassava farmers to shift their attention to informal sources of credit which has been notable for the provision of a large chunk of finances to small-scale enterprises in Nigeria (Ojo, 2010).  Olusola and Tayo (2012) observed that informal credit units have gained preference of micro and small scale entrepreneurs due to their accessibility and simple loan procedures despite their limited financial capacity.  These informal sources of credit have helped to fill the void to meet the financial demands of Nigerian farmers in general and Akwa Ibom State specifically. 

 

Informal credit sources are often neglected despite their simplicity of operation and reliance by small-scale farmers.  They are often times faced with problems of inadequate credit facilities to extend to their borrowers.  The amounts of informal credit obtainable from those informal sources are usually small because informal credit sources are under-funded.  This study aims at providing an insight into the operations of informal credit groups operating within Akwa Ibom State in terms of extension of credit to small-scale cassava farmers as well as their general role in improving the performance cassava producers in the state.

  

Several empirical studies have revealed a positive effect of credit on farm performance within Akwa Ibom State (Nelson and Nelson, 2010; Okon et al, 2012; Ekwere and Edem, 2014; Udoka, 2014; Akpan and Udoh, 2016; Ekpo, 2016; Malachy and Ikot, 2016).  However, empirical assessment of the effect of informal credit on farmers’– performance in Akwa Ibom State, and particularly in relation to cassava productivity is relatively lacking.  This shows that there is still a gap that must be filled.   Inorder to fill this gap and complement other studies, this study intends to examine the effect of informal credit sources on performance of cassava-based farmers in Akwa Ibom State through the following research questions:

1.     What are the socio-economic attributes of cassava-based farmers in Akwa Ibom State?

2.     What are the sources of informal credit utilized by cassava-based farmers operating in the study area?

3.     What are the determinants of choice of informal credit sources by cassava-based farmers in the study area?

4.     What are the determinants of performance of the cassava-based farmers in the study area?

5.     What is the effect of informal credit on performance of cassava-based farmers in the study area?

6.     What are the constraints faced by cassava-based farmers in accessing informal credit in the study area?

 

1.3       OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The broad objective being considered in this study is to assess the effect of informal credit on performance of cassava-based farmers in Akwa Ibom State.  The specific objectives (targets) are to:

(i)             describe the socio-economic attributes of cassava-based farmers in Akwa Ibom State

(ii)           identify the informal credit sources utilized by cassava-based farmers in the study area

(iii)         estimate the determinants of choice of informal credit sources by cassava-based farmers in the study area

(iv)          estimate the determinants of performance of the cassava-based farmers in the study area

(v)           examine the effect of informal credit on performance of cassava-based farmers in the study area

(vi)          identify constraints faced by cassava-based farmers in accessing informal credit in the study area

 

1.4       HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

H1: Choice of informal credit source is positively influenced by sex, age, farm size, level of education, and interest amount while it is negatively influenced by annual net farm income

H2: Performance of the farmers is positively influenced by farm size, farming experience, unit selling price, amount of credit used, membership of cooperative/farmers’ group, household size, educational level, marital status and sex while it is negatively influenced by distance to market, age, input cost and interest amount.

H3: Informal credit sources has no effect on the performance of cassava-based farmers in the study area.

 

1.5       JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

Agriculture significantly contributes to the achievement of any meaningful economic development in developing countries which explains why credit facilities should be made available and accessible to farmers (Owusu, 2017). Access to credit facilities by poor cassava farmers enable them to obtain farm inputs needed for expansion of production scale (Akwaa-Sakyi, 2013).  This study will enlighten low income farmers who intend to venture into cassava production specifically and agricultural production generally, on the various sources of mobilizing informal credit.  It will further be of great importance to Non-Governmental Organizations and financial institutions and groups, cooperative societies, money lenders, Self-Help Groups; in evolving plans to reduce poverty on small-scale agricultural operators in Nigeria and beyond.  This study will further be useful to policy makers/bankers/lending institutions in Nigeria in taking balanced review of the status, performance and role they should play in making agricultural credit accessible for improved contribution of agricultural businesses to the national economy. 

 

From a policy perspective, the answers to these research questions will help to address dwindling cassava productivity within Akwa Ibom State as well as attain the objective of alleviating poverty and improving the well-being of Nigerian rural farmers on the whole.  This research will also be useful to the government in setting out modalities and enacting policies that are geared towards the establishment and promotion of agricultural productivity.  Lastly, findings from this research work will add to available literatures in finance related issues which can be utilized by students and researchers in agriculture and finance related fields, inorder to enhance knowledge.

 

1.6       SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The study was conducted in Akwa Ibom State which is situated in the South – South region of Nigeria.  Cassava is one of the staple crops widely cultivated by farmers in Akwa Ibom State.  Therefore, cassava-based farmers were targeted for this study.  The prevalent source of credit to the small-scale farmers in the state is informal credit sources which informed the use of these credit sources for this study.  To better understand the effect of informal credit on performance of cassava-based farmers in the study area, the scope of this study was extended to include cassava-based farmers who were non-beneficiaries of informal credit. 

 

As reported by Simon (2011), limitation in a research constitutes the weaknesses which are outside the control of the researcher.  Based on this assertion, the major limitation faced in the course of this study was the issue of proper documentation of the activities of the various informal credit sources in the study area which made the researcher to concentrate on only three out of the numerous informal credit sources identified in the study area.  Another limitation faced by the researcher was the unavailability of borrower specific data for non-beneficiaries of informal credit to ensure that they did not obtain credit from any external sources.  To overcome this limitation, the study used survey data based on the opinions of the non-beneficiaries.

 

 

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