ABSTRACT
This study evaluated the Beekeeping Investment using Kenyan Top Bar and Langstroth hives in Abia State, Nigeria. The specific objectives of this study were to: describe the socioeconomic profile of the bee farmers in the study area, ascertain the extent of involvement in beekeeping activities, determine the profitability of beekeeping in the study area, compare the income and yield of Kenya Top bar and Langstroth hives in Abia state, determine the factors influencing honey bee production in the study area and identify the factors or constraints affecting beekeeping in the study area. Primary data were collected using structured questionnaires administered to 120 respondents, who were selected by purposive and simple random sampling techniques. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Net returns, Z - test distribution statistics, Ordinary Least Square (multiple) regression and Aiche sustainability index. Results indicate that the mean age of bee farmers in the study area was 44.2 years, 50.0% of respondents had household size of between 6-10 persons and 37.5% of the farmers were within the age range of 41 and 50 years. The result of extent of involvement in Beekeeping activities showed a grand mean of 3.20 indicating a high extent, the respondents were involved in beekeeping activities. Furthermore, the respondents were highly involved in harvesting (
= 3.9), marketing (= 3.4), baiting and processing (=3.3). the result indicates that beekeeping is very profitable with a total variable cost of N61978.6, total cost of N113,207.8, Net returns of N 1,217,716.8. The comparative analyses of the difference in the yield and income of Kenya Top Bar and Langstroth bee hives showed that the mean yield and income of Langstroth hive were 287.1kg and N79,537.5 respectively while that of a Kenya Top Bar was 194.12kg and N 50441.7 while the mean difference in yield and income was 92.98kg and N29095.8 respectively, this result implies that the honey bee farmer earned more income from the Langstroth bee hive than the Kenya Top Bar. Econometric analysis indicates that number of training, number of hives, farmer`s experience, income, household size and education were positively related at different levels of significance. Results also revealed that the severe constraints encountered by the honey bee farmers were pest (
= 4.9), hive destruction during Langstroth users had considerable desire to maintain best practices with the Kenyan Top Bars recording a component value of 0.923. It is recommended that appropriate policies should be targeted at encouraging more investment in beekeeping and providing accessible credit to beekeepers to foster the use of modern bee hives for improved productivity and profitability.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Title Page i
Declaration ii
Certification iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgement v
Table of contents vi
List of tables vii
List of figures viii
Abstract ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study 1
1.2
Problem Statement 7
1.3 Research Questions 8
1.4 Objectives
of the Study 8
1.5 Justification
for the Study 9
1.6 Hypotheses 11
CHAPPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Overview
of Beekeeping in Nigeria 12
2.1.1 Historical background of beekeeping in Nigeria 13
2.1.2 History and development of Kenyan top bar
hive 15
2.1.3 History and development of Langstroth hives 17
2.1.4 Economic
importance of beekeeping 21
2.1.5 Migratory beekeeping 23
2.1.6 Transitional system of beekeeping 25
2.1.7 Modern system of beekeeping 26
2.1.8 Importance of beekeeping in Nigeria. 26
2.1.9 Importance of beekeeping in rural
development 28
2.1.10 Beekeeping and the environment 30
2.1.11 Bee pollination of agricultural crops 31
2.2 Beekeeping Sustainability 33
2.3 Factors affecting Beekeeping 34
2.4 Empirical Framework 36
2.5 Theoretical
Framework 39
2.5.1 The accelerator
theory of investment 40
2.5.2 The profits theory
of investment 41
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
3.1 Study Area 42
3.2 Population of the Study 43
3.3 Sampling Technique 43
3.4 Data Collection 44
3.5 Data Analysis 44
3.6 Model Specification 44
3.6.1
Socioeconomic characteristics of
respondents 44
3.6.2 Likert type scale 45
3.6.3 Net
return and cost benefit ratio 46
3.6.4 Z test 47
3.6.5 Multiple regression 47
3.6.6 Likert type scale 48
3.6.7 Sustainability
analysis 49
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 Socioeconomic
Profile of Bee Farmers 52
4.1.1 Age 53
4.1.2 Marital status 53
4.1.3 Household size 54
4.1.4 Educational level 54
4.1.5 Farming experience 55
4.1.6 Major occupation 55
4.1.7 Type of ownership 56
4.1.8 Membership of
beekeeping association (MBA) 56
4.1.9 Beekeeping method in
use 56
4.2 Extent of
Involvement in Beekeeping Activities 57
4.3 Net Returns Analysis of Profitability of
Beekeeping in the Study Area 58
4.4 Comparism
of Income and Yield of Kenya Top Bar and Langstroth Hives 62
4.5 Factors
Influencing Beekeeping 63
4.6 Constraints of Beekeeping 67
4.7 Sustainability
of Beekeeping 69
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1
Summary 74
5.2
Conclusion 76
5.3 Recommendation 77
References 79
Appendix
LIST OF TABLES
4.1 Distribution of
Respondents According to their Socioeconomic
Characteristics 52
4.2 Distribution of respondents based on
their extent of involvement in
beekeeping
activities 57
4.3
Net Returns analysis of beekeeping
in the study area for one year. 59
4.4
Comparative analysis of the
difference in the yield and income of
Kenya
Top Bar and Langstroth bee hives in the study area. 62
4.5 OLS Regression result of the factors
influencing beekeeping in the
study
area 64
4.6
Distribution of the respondents
based on the constraints to
beekeeping
in the study area. 67
4.7
Distribution of the respondents
based on sustainability practice
in
the study area. 70
LIST OF FIGURES
1:
African honey
production 2006 15
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
OF THE STUDY
Beekeeping is defined as the art of
keeping bees for the purpose of producing honey and other bye-products for
commercial purpose (Obialor, 2003). Beekeeping is an applied science of rearing
honey bees for man's economic benefits, and also the mother source of honey
production (Ezekiel, Olagungu and Olapade, 2013). Much of the knowledge about
honeybees is derived from managed colonies especially those kept in movable
combination hives (Onyekuru et al.,
2010).
Beekeeping
is emerging as a very successful agricultural practice for rural area based
people in less developed countries mainly due to its economic benefits from the
products of this practice (Kugonza 2009). In Uganda, honey, beeswax, propolis,
royal jelly and bee venom are the major financial products (Kamatara 2006),
with pollination as the major biodiversity benefit (Delaplane 2008). Since food
security cannot be achieved without income security, beekeeping could be a
useful tool for improving rural economy; however, people are reluctant on taking
up this enterprise.
The
most commonly found honeybee in Nigeria is the Apis mellifera adansoni which lives in colonies throughout the
year. Other species of honeybees include Apis
dorsata, A. labonoser, A. mellifere,
A. larnica and A. mellifera Linquistica, etc (Onyekuru, Okorji and Machebe 2010). The two
products of commercial volume made by the bees are bee wax and honey. The bees use the wax for building their combs
and it is one of the most remarkable phenomenon in the organization of the honey
bee (Obialor, 2003). Honeybee venom, bee pollen, raw honey, royal jelly and
propolis are the products generally considered to have medicinal effects.
The
common African honeybee (Apis Mellifera
Adansonni), live throughout the year in colonies consisting of a queen or
mother bee, which is a fertile egg-laying female 10,000 to 200,000 worker bees
and few thousand drones that may be present in the colony only during the
reproductive season. Honey bees naturally build their nests in a hole of a
tree, inside a cave and under the roof of buildings, but traditionally, people
also keep bee colonies (Alberg, 2004).
The
honey extracted from hives is used for dressing wounds, as anti-diarrhoea drug,
in alcoholic drink, tobacco curing, bakery and confectionery and in
manufacturing of cosmetics. In addition, other honey products like bee wax,
propolis, bee venom, and royal jelly are foreign exchange earning commodities
for some countries while the cross pollination role of the bees is of tremendous importance. Besides selling honey and other bee products, beekeepers
also provide pollination services to farmers and orchardists (Admin, 2011).
Honey, the natural food of the honey bee, is described as man's sweetest food
(FAO, 2001). Honey is a sweet, thick, supersaturated sugar solution
manufactured by bees to feed their larvae and for subsistence in dry season.
Bee honey is composed of fructose, glucose, and water, in varying proportions;
it also contains several enzymes and oils. As reported by USDA (2007) honey is
a mixture of different compounds including; sugars mainly fructose and glucose,
other carbohydrates, water, trace amount of vitamins and minerals, and other
compounds. Philip (2003) described honey as a natural invert sugar, in fact a
sugar invertase (B-Fructosidase) trapped in the pouch of bees and thus
transforms the excess of sucrose in the necter and its P.H (4.0) is a little
higher than that of industrial invert sugar.
According
to Animene (2007) honey is produced by worker Bees mainly from the nectar of
flower or honey dew on leaves, bark of trees etc. Thus honey is defined as “The
nectar and saccharine exudation of plants, gathered, modified and stored as
honey in the comb by honey bees (Apis
mellifera).
Beekeeping
provides an excellent service for farmers by crops pollination as honey bees
are the main pollinator for most plants. Apart from Crops pollination for food
increases production. Trading in Bee products has gained grounds and many
Nations of the World have improved their economy through Beekeeping. Other
benefits of Beekeeping include beeswax which is used in the manufacturing of
cosmetic candles, foundation sheet (for houses) and polishes. Propolis produced
by honey bees has therapeutic and antibiotic usage. Pollen is used for making
of perfumes. Bee venom is useful for treatment of rheumatism, eye and skin
diseases while royal jelly is used to cure infertility and for dressing wounds.
According to Anineme (2007); honey is so much in use and consequently in demand
that it can be termed a money spinner. Apart from being delicious and
nutritious, it has been found useful in many industries especially for
pharmaceutical purpose. Beekeeping can rightly be seen as a liable key in
reducing poverty and malnutrition. By keeping bees one can obtain a large
quantity of honey and other products for home consumption and for commercial
purposes.
China
for instance, was the number one honey exporter in the world, selling 284
million dollars’ worth in 2009. China contributed 12% of the global honey
sales. Germany was the second largest exporter followed by Mexico. Exported
Mexican honey accounted for 7% of the total market supply. Germany was the
number one honey importer in 2009. They imported almost a quarter of the
available honey, 24%. United States was the world’s second largest honey
importer, importing 16% of the market share at an estimated value of 383
million dollars. The United Kingdom was third, France was fourth, and Japan was
the fifth with total estimate of 2 billion dollars in revenue (World trade
Daily, 2012). By promoting Beekeeping, we can place our economy on the part
of growth enhancement.
Different beehive types are used for
honeybee’s nest in the world. The sole purpose of a hive is to encourage the
bees to build their nests in such a way that it is easy to manage and maintain
them (FAO, 2012). Beekeeping can be an important profitable agro-business
enterprise with little investment made in it and requires the most suitable
management practice (considering other environmental factors) to maximize its
output. One of the management considerations in beekeeping is selecting a
suitable hive and fulfilling seasonal management requirements. Research
findings indicate that the temperature and humidity created inside the hive
have effect on survival and honey yield of the colonies (Human et al., 2006). Honey production surveys
and experimental researches in Ethopia indicated that honey yield varies within
the range of 6-25kg/hive in traditional hive (Teferi et al., 2011, Gidey et al.,
2012, CSA, 2013, Melaku et al.,2013)
and 16-50kg/hive from modern hive (Teferi et
al., 2011, Gidey et al., 2012,
CSA, 2013, Haftom and Awet 2013, Melaku et
al., 2013).
In terms of modern
beekeeping system, there are two notable types, the Kenya top-bar hive as well
as the Langstroth hive. Among the two hives, the Langstroth hive is the most
sophisticated hive in use. It is not popular in developing countries because of
its high cost, high technology that requires precision and fineness and of
course, maintenance (Olagunju, 2002).
Kenyan
Top Bar (KTB) hive was also acknowledged to increase the profitability of the
beekeeping sector for many sub Saharan African countries due to the low cost of
making the hive (Wilson 2006). The European box hive (Langstroth) has been
introduced and recognized for its increased production under good management
conditions. High yield and other quality, ease of inspection and, ease of
product harvesting are the major relative advantages of
Langstroth hive. On the other hand, high cost, high skill requirement
need of accessories and unavailability of the box hive are the main relative
disadvantages of Langstroth hive (Werkneh et al., 2008). Wax foundation used in
the framed hive and the accessories that it requires are expensive (Patricia
and David 2007). Although movable frame hives are recommended for experienced
beekeepers that want to optimize honey production, the Kenya top-bar hive (KTB)
has been proved to be most suitable because of its low cost and the fact that
the beekeepers or local carpenters can easily construct it, significantly
cheaper and easier to use (Tessega 2009; FAO 1990). Also a Langstroth hive costs three times as much as a
Kenyan top-bar hive and the beekeeper has to install a wired comb foundation
which is scarce and expensive. For Kenyan top bar hive, all materials required
can be obtained locally and more beeswax can be produced (FAO 1990). About 8
percent beeswax per kilogram of honey can be obtained from the Kenyan top bar
hive (Tessega 2009). While, the amount of beeswax produced from the Langstroth hive is 0.5-2% of the honey yield (Melaku
et al., 2008). However, its
temperature regulation potential, attack from pests and lack of foundation
sheet /wax, and its requirement of other tools such as extractors are making it
difficult for the local farmers to maximize their benefit out of its merits
(Gangwar et al., 2010, Chala et al., 2012, Gizachew et al., 2013). It is also clear that
such problems could arise from inadequate management skill, quality of the
material used in temperature regulation, and variations in the bee space
requirement of local honeybee races (Kerealem et al., 2009).
The
term ‘investment” could be associated with the different activities, but the
common target in these activities is to “employ” the money (funds) during the
time period seeking to enhance the investor’s wealth. Funds to be invested come from assets already
owned, borrowed money and savings. By foregoing consumption today and investing
their savings, investors expect to enhance their future consumption Jones and
Charles (2010).
There
are two types of investors: individual
investors and Institutional investors.
Individual investors are individuals who are investing on their own. Sometimes individual investors are called
retail investors. Institutional investors are entities such as investment
companies, commercial banks, insurance companies, pension funds and other
financial institutions. In recent years the process of institutionalization of
investors can be observed. As the main reasons for this can be mentioned the
fact, that institutional investors can achieve economies of scale, demographic
pressure on social security, the changing role of banks.
One
of important preconditions for successful investment both for individual and
institutional investors is the favorable investment environment. Our focus in
developing this course is on the management of individual investors’
portfolios. But the basic principles of investment management are applicable
both for individual and institutional investors Haugen and Robert A. (2010).
1.2 PROBLEM
STATEMENT
Nigeria
has huge potential for beekeeping production because of its endowment with
diversity in climate and vegetation resources which offer potentially
favourable conditions for beekeeping.
However, despite this enormous potential, not enough has been done to
harness its production. Beekeeping has evolved into a farming enterprise that
involves the use of sophisticated and artificial techniques to keep honey bees
for bee products such as honey, propolis, wax, pollen, bee venom and royal
jelly (Ojeleye, 1999). It contributes significantly to securing sustainable
livelihoods by assisting in transforming vulnerabilities into security (Ahmad et al., 2007).
More
so, access to large acres of land in the rural area is becoming unattainable
due to the tenure system of inheritance where land has been excessively
fragmented. Ayinde (2011) argued that this phenomenon needs to be arrested by
injecting less land-demanding farm business opportunities which are relatively
easy to set up with a modest capital outlay and less-demanding administrative
skills
The
major constraints that affect beekeeping sub-sector are lack of beekeeping
knowledge, shortage of skills, man power, shortage of bee equipment, pests and
predators, pesticide threat, poor infrastructure development, shortage of bee
forage and lack of research extension (Kerealem, 2009). Low productivity and
quality of bee products are the major economic impediments for beekeepers
(Nuru, 1999). Thus, the need to evaluate Beekeeping future potential is immense
in the area. Besides, there is limited information regarding honey production
potential using the modern hives systems.
Beekeeping
activities are mainly further constrained by inability in the transformation,
promotion, scaling up to rapid growth, lack of commercial beekeeping
development and beekeeping technology, limited credit supply, quality issue,
and information transmissions (Ayalew, 2008). These related and interrelated
problems limit the State and the Country at large from getting the potential
benefit from the sub-sector. Proper understanding of the potential yield from
Kenyan top bar and Langstroth hives will pave way for commercial and
industrialization of the subsector.
1.3
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
i.What is the socioeconomic profile of the bee farmers in the study
area?
ii. What is the extent of
involvement in honey production activities in the study area?
iii.What is the profitability of beekeeping in the study area?
iv.What is the difference in income and yield of Kenya Top bar and
Langstroth hive in the area?
v.What are the factors influencing beekeeping in the study area?
vi.What are the constraint affecting beekeeping in the area?
vii. What is the
sustainability of beekeeping in the study area?
1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The
broad objective of this study is to evaluate beekeeping investment using Kenyan
Top Bar and Langstroth hives in Abia State. However, the specific objectives
are to:
i.describe the socioeconomic profile of the bee farmers in the study
area
ii. ascertain the extent of
involvement in honey production activities
iii.determine the profitability of beekeeping in the study area
iv.compare the income and yield of Kenya Top bar and Langstroth hives
in Abia state.
v.determine the factors influencing honey bee production in the
study area
vi.identify the constraints to beekeeping in the study area.
vii. evaluate the
sustainability of beekeeping in the study area.
1.5 JUSTIFICATION
FOR THE STUDY
In
recent years, Kenyan Top Bar Hive (KTB) and improved frame hives are in the
state of introduction to beekeepers in various sub-Saharan areas though the
rate of adoption is very low (Aregawi et
al., 2014). High yield of honey, ease of inspection to know the status of
colony and ease of product harvesting are the major advantage of modern and KTB
hives over traditional ones (FAO, 1990; Beyene et al., 2015). Improved frame hives enhance honey production
because they save bees' effort in creating beeswax comb: for that reason,
improved frame hives enable harvests of honey rather than beeswax (FAO, 2012).
However, the colony strength and hive preference of honeybees vary in different
environmental conditions and different honeybee races (Abou-Shaara et al., 2013). So far, there is little
study undertaken to assess the performances of colonies in different beehives
and their profitability under the environmental conditions of the study areas.
In order to improve beekeeping sector, selection and adoption of hive types has
to be based on productivity, affordability, availability and profitability.
(Duruson 2011) Studied the profitability of Apiculture as a business venture in
Ikwuano Local Government Area of Abia State and he found that majority of his
respondents were rural youths within the ages of 21-40. He also examined the
strengths and weaknesses of commercial Beekeeping in the area and found that
honey production was profitable and a good business venture due to its
viability Duruson (2011). Study did not compare the yield and profitability of
Kenya Top bar and Langstroth hives. The study created an information gap that
needs to be filled. This study serves to compare the yield and profitability of
Kenya Top bar and Langstroth hives.
Employment
creation and income generation are essential for poverty eradication. Nigeria
is currently facing strong economic issues and high unemployment rate. There is
need to develop those activities which require less capital but create more
employment and income. Apiculture activities need less capital but have the
capacity to create more employment and generate more income for poverty
reduction in rural areas. But the Apiculture sector in Nigeria is facing many
challenges relating to infrastructure, investment, technology, marketing,
finance, etc. This study is important in finding out the potential of
Apiculture practices in creating employment and generating income using
different hive management systems in Abia
state.
The
study would help to improve our understanding of beekeeping production systems,
and production potential of beekeeping sub sector useful to help policy makers
develop appropriate beekeeping development strategy plan and indicate future
research areas for those who would like to conduct researches on
beekeeping. Thus, the purposes of this
study are to identify the suitability of Kenya top bar and Langstroth beehives
in the production of honey evaluate yield performance and profitability of beehive
types in Abia State
Finally,
this study will fill the gap in the existing literature on the best Beehive
application between Kenya top bar and Langstroth in Beekeeping investment in
the study area.
1.6 HYPOTHESES
H1: There is no significant difference in the
yield and profitability of Kenya top bar and Langstroth hive.
H2:
Level of technology, scale of
production, level of education, forage plants, extension contact and years of
experience have no significant effect on Beekeeping investment in the study
area
Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects
FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!
+(234) 0814 780 1594
Login To Comment