Effectiveness of Direct Resource Delivery Policy to Crop Farmers: A Case of Fadama III Project in Enugu State, Nigeria

Global Advanced Research Journal of Management and Business Studies (ISSN: 2315-5086)Vol. 4(2) pp. 049-60, February, 2015 Available online https://garj.org/garjmbs/index.htm Copyright © 2015 Global Advanced Research Journals Full Length Research Paper Effectiveness of Direct Resource Delivery Policy to Crop Farmers: A Case of Fadama III Project in Enugu State, Nigeria Okechukwu, Obodoechina. E Department of Co-operative Economics and Management, Nnamdi Azikiwe. University, Awka Anambra State, Nigeria Email: [email protected] Accepted 01 December 2014 This work measures the effectiveness of direct resource delivery on food production evaluating the Fadama III project in Enugu State of Nigeria. The study estimated annual incomes and productive resources used by the farmers before and after joining the project and identified constraints to the realization of project objectives. Descriptive statistics such as frequency counts, means and percentages, as well as multiple regression model using the ordinary least squares (OLS) approach were used to analyze data obtained. Hypotheses were tested using t-statistic in Two-Sample T-test. Chow-statistic was used to test for differences in the coefficients of the regression variables. Findings indicated that the farmers realized Mean incomes and productive resources of N169,139.44 and N521,042.36; and N67,313.45 and N242,307.12 were respectively estimated for farmers before and after joining the project. There were significant differences between incomes and productive resources of the farmers before and after joining the project implying goodness of the policy. The crop farmers’ annual incomes before and after joining the project were significantly determined by distance to the market, farm size, extension visits and value of productive resources. Irregular fund disbursement topped the list of nine constraints to effective realization of project objectives arranged in descending order of seriousness. Early and prompt release of productive resources and cash counterpart contributions to the farmers, provision of more extension agents, services and logistics for the farmers and reduction of users’ cash contribution will ensure improved productivity, income and project sustainability Keywords: Cassava; Co-operatives; Enugu State; Fadama III project; Income; Productive resources; Significant; Sustainable; Yams 050 Glo. Adv. Res. J. Manag. Bus. Stud. INTRODUCTION The Nigerian agricultural sector has continued to be characterized by increasing reduction in production and productivity thereby limiting the ability of the sector to perform its traditional role in economic development including an enhanced income for the farmers. In order to break this low productivity cycle and improve on the performance of the agricultural sector, Nigerian government over the years introduced and implemented several policies and programmes aimed at revamping the sector (Ajibefun and Aderinola, 2004). Attempts in the past aimed at poverty alleviation, increase in productivity, and enhancement of farmers income, according to HenriUkoha, et al (2011) include: i. National Agricultural Research Projects—World Bank Assisted (1991), ii. National Agricultural support Programme (1992), iii. National Programme on Food Security (1999), and iv. Presidential Initiative on Livestock and other agricultural sectors for production, processing and export (2002). Self-sufficiency in food production based only on rainfed agriculture is difficult to achieve. This is particularly true for Nigeria. Therefore, for self-sufficiency in food production, there is need to extend the farming season beyond the rainy season through irrigated agriculture (Ajayi and Nwalieji, 2010). This is one major thrust of Fadama Projects. These farmers have limited access to supplementary services and facilities needed to procure, transform, and deliver productive resources to improve on their output and by extension, their income. The inadequacy of productive resources is exacerbated by lack of credit facilities for small farmers, the shortage of marketing centres, inefficient transport system, poor communications, insufficient physical infrastructure and dearth of agricultural extension services. Amelioration of these handicaps in order to increase food security, reduce rural poverty and improve on rural infrastructure by directly delivering resources to the benefiting rural farmers efficiently and effectively; and empowering them to collectively decide on how resources are allocated and managed constitute Fadama III Project’s hallmark objective. The development objective of Fadama III is to increase the income of the users of rural land and water resources on sustainable basis. It relies on the facilitation of demand–driven investment and empowerment of local community groups and to improve productivity and land quality. Successive governments, collaborating with various development partners, have invested huge sums of money in poverty reduction projects especially in rural areas but not much have been achieved in terms of sustained growth and improved living standard in the rural communities. It is against this background that the Third National Fadama Development project was embarked upon by the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) (Enugu State Fadama Coordination Office, 2008). Enugu State Fadama III Context Fadama III Project is a comprehensive five-year action programme developed by the then Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources (FMAWR) in collaboration with the Federal Ministry of Environment (FME) and other federal and state government ministries, local governments and key stakeholders (donors, private operators, NGOs). The Project which is anchored on community-driven development (CDD) approach is a World Bank assisted project implemented beginning from July 2008 and terminating in December 2013. It is one of such projects enunciated by the Federal government of Nigeria predicated on the development of the rural areas for the reduction of poverty, unemployment and inequality. It was established to ensure all year round production of crops in all the states of the federation through the exploitation of shallow aquifers and surface water potentials in each state The word “Fadama” is a Hausa name for irrigable land, usually low-lying, and flood plain areas underlined by shallow aquifers found along Nigeria’s river system (Echeme and Nwachukwu, 2010). According to Nwachukwu, et al, (2009), Fadama also refers to a seasonally flooded area used for farming during the dry season. When Fadama spread out over a large area, they are often called ‘wetlands’ [Blench and Ingawa, (2004 and Nkonya, et al, (2008)]. Wetlands are recognized by the Ramsar 3 Convention of 1971, according to Anon (2004), as areas of marsh, fen, peat land or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meters. The Fadama Project adopts community-driven development approach such that the benefitting groups – Fadama Users Groups (FUG) have the opportunity of choosing adoptable activity that can attract the support of the World Bank according to Echeme and Nwachukwu, (2010). According to United Nations (2010) the Fadama III Okechukwu, 051 Project development objective is to increase the income of users of rural land and water resources on a sustainable basis in order to reduce rural poverty, increase food security as well as contribute to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Its Community Driven Development (CDD) approach is meant to concede project initiation, planning and implementation to the benefiting communities with the assistance of facilitators. Local communities, under the umbrella of Fadama Community Associations (FCAs) and Fadama User Groups (FUGs), oversee the design and implementation of the project and are empowered through skills and capacity-building to improve their livelihoods by increasing income generating activities. One major thrust of Fadama Projects is to extend the farming season beyond the rainy season through irrigated agriculture (Ajayi and Nwalieji, 2010). The NFDP has the general goal of increasing food production in the states through expanded cultivation, using simple smallscale irrigation facilities with appropriate technologies. It was aimed at increasing the land area under cultivation by providing an all-year round cropping of marketable and high-valued crops such as cereals (maize and rice. The increase in the total population of these crops annually would increase the incomes of the farmers and raise their standard of living. Furthermore, NFDP would serve as an insurance against crop failure as a result of environmental hazards. The disturbing demand-supply gap for agricultural products was meant to be narrowed and relative price stability ensured over time (Anambra State Agricultural Development Programme (ASADP), 1995). In all, the socioeconomic life of the farmers would be improved. The strategies for achieving the above objectives involved the delivery of several inputs and services that would generate desired outputs directly to the benefitting communities. These included: (i) development of requisite infrastructure such as access roads, culverts, tubewells and pumps, within the fadama areas in the state; (ii) provision of marketing/storage facilities such as storage sheds; and (iii) organizing farmers into Fadama Users Associations (FUAs) for irrigation management, better access to credit, cost recovery and training on improved technologies (Ajayi and Nwalieji, 2010). This study was carried out in Enugu State of Nigeria. Enugu State was created on August 27, 1991 with the city of Enugu, euphemistically referred to as the "coal city", as its capital. The state derives its name from the capital city which was established in 1912 as a small coal mining town, but later grew to become the capital of the former Eastern Region of Nigeria. Enugu remained the capital of the East Central State of Nigeria, one of the three states carved out of the former Eastern Region in 1967. Enugu State shares boundaries with Anambra on the West, Abia State on the South, Kogi on the North with Benue and Ebonyi on the East. The State occupies an 2 area of approximately 7,161 km with a population of over 3.3 million by 2005 estimation (Online Nigeria, 2013). The State has a total of 17 local government areas: Agwu, Aninri, Enugu North, Enugu South, Enugu East, Ezeagu, Igbo-Eze North, Igbo-Eze South, Isi-Uzo, Igbo-Ekiti, Nkanu, Nkanu East, Nsukka, Oji-River, Udenu, Udi and Uzo-Uwani, The State is located in a tropical rain forest zone which means that it has a tropical savanna climate. The climate is humid and this humidity is at its highest between March and November. For the whole of Enugu State the mean daily temperature is 26.7 °C (80.1 °F). Enugu State is traversed by a number of rivers and streams prominent among them are Adada. Iyoko, Idodo, Ekulu, Oji, Ebonyi Rivers and Mamu/Ezu River which is the natural boundary between the State and Anambra State Economically, the state is predominantly rural and agrarian, with a substantial proportion of its working population engaged in farming, although trading (18.8%) and services (12.9%) are also important. The main produce are yam tubers, palm produce and rice. Besides coal, new mineral deposits have recently been discovered in Enugu State. These include limestone, iron ore, crude oil, natural gas and bauxite (Adeyemi, 2011). A major cultural festival in the state is the New Yam festival. The new yam festival also known as ‘iwa ji’, is held between August and October marking the beginning of the harvest season. Theoretical Framework This work was based on Collective Action Theory. Collective action is traditionally defined as any action aiming at improving the group’s conditions (such as status or power), which is enacted by a representative of the group (Wright, Taylor, and Moghaddam, 1990). Tajfel and Turner (1979) posited that people strive to achieve and maintain positive social identities associated with their group memberships. Pandolfelli, Meinzen-Dick, and Dohrn (2007), saw collective action as both the process by which voluntary institutions are created and maintained and the groups that decide to act together. Collective action plays a vital role in many people’s lives, through such areas as income generation, risk reduction, public service provision, and the management of natural resources. Integrating both women and men into collective action can lead to greater group effectiveness. In many 052 Glo. Adv. Res. J. Manag. Bus. Stud. instances, the gender composition of groups is an important determinant of effective collective action, especially for natural resource management in two key dimensions: (i) the ability of groups to meet their immediate purposes, whether that purpose is the management of a natural-resource or the disbursement of funds to members of a burial group, and (ii) the process by which the group works to meet that purpose. Specific measures of effectiveness might include tangible indicators such as economic returns to group members, compliance with rules, transparency and accountability in managing funds, or the incidence and severity of conflicts, as well as less tangible indicators, such as members’ satisfaction with the group (Pandolfelli, Meinzen-Dick, and Dohrn,2007). This conforms with the co-operative principles of open membership and gender equality. Marshall (1988) suggests that collective action is an action taken by a group (either directly or on its behalf through an organization) in pursuit of member’s perceived shared interest. He went on in his work to maintain that collective action requires involvement of a group of people; share of interest within the group; common action which works in the pursuit of the shared interest and voluntary action to distinguish it from hired labour. Collective action is also seen as a voluntary action taken by a group of people to achieve common interest. Co-operative, as voluntary association of independent individuals who come together in order to solve their socio-economic problems, requires collective action to succeed. Okechukwu (2001) stated that all known definitions of co-operative tend to highlight the following about co-operatives: co-operation is a form of organization of people; the people are rational beings; they are together on equality basis; are there for the promotion of socio-economic interest of themselves; and are democratically managed. Based on the premise above, the theory of collective action becomes apt in this work especially as Fadama Users’ Groups are organized, incorporated and managed as co-operative organisations. This is buttressed more by Chavez (2003) who opined that collective theory definition, principles and practice directly or indirectly relate to co-operative seven internationally recognized principles of voluntary and open membership, member economic participation; co-operation among cooperatives, concern for community etc. According to Dick, Gregorio, and McCarthy (2004) collective action theory is a theory that is very useful in agriculture, rural resource management, and rural development programmes. These are the hallmark of Fadama Users Groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study centered on Fadama User Groups (FUGs) crop farmer-members within Enugu State of Nigeria. It was aimed at determining if their performance was in tune with the objective of Fadama III Project of increasing the income and productivity of the member-farmers sustainably by direct delivery of productive resources to them. The study tried to determine if there is any significant difference between the fortunes of farmermembers of the FUGs before and after joining the scheme with respect to their income and values of productive resources used as well as output performance of various crops under the project. The population for this study consisted of all the FUG crop farmer-members within the 17 Local Government Areas in Enugu State spread through the three Agricultural Zones (Enugu, Nsukka, and Awgu) of the State. A multistage and random sampling method were adopted to select 1 L.G.A from each agricultural zone in the first stage to get a total of 3 LGAs, in the second stage, 4 Fadama User Groups (FUGs) were selected from each of the selected LGAs to arrive at a total of 12 FUGs. In the third stage, 6 crop-farmers were selected from each FUG to give a total of 72 crop farmer-members for the study. This constituted the final sample size for the study. Primary data were collected from crop farmer-members of the FUGs using well structured and pre-tested questionnaires, scheduled interviews and panel discussions. Primary data were collected on socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents, their income, access to productive resources and constraints to effective realization of the project objectives. Data on constraints were collected by means of a 5-point Likert Scale. Members of the FUGs responded to any of the five response ratings of Strongly Agree (4), Agree (3); Disagree (2); Strongly Disagree (1) and Indifferent (0); Descriptive statistics such as frequency counts, means and percentages, were used to analyze data on socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents, their incomes, outputs and constraints to effective realization of the project objectives while multiple regression model using the ordinary least squares (OLS) approach was used to determine the influence of socio-economic characteristics of the farmers on their income before and after joining the project. The multiple regression model is implicitly specified as follows: Okechukwu, 053 Table 1: Variables Gender Male Female Socio-economic characteristics of the FUG crop farmers (N= 72) Percentage Age (years) 20 — 39 40 — 59 ≥ 60 Averages 75 25 09.72 55.56 34.72 51 Marital status Married Single 94.44 05.56 Family size 1—4 5—9 ≥ 10 08.33 76.39 15.28 7 Education (years) 0—6 7 — 12 ≥ 13 16.67 63.89 19.44 9 Farming Experience (years) 1 — 20 21 — 40 41 — 60 22.78 45.83 03.13 24 Farm size (hectares) 0.1 — 2 2.1 — 4 ≥ 4.1 56.96 38.88 04.16 1.9 Distance to Market (km) 1—5 6—10 > 10 Average Source: Field survey 2013. 80.56 13.88 05.56 INC = f(EDU, AGE, ASI, DTM, FFS, FAS, ETV, GEN, EXP, PDR) + e Where: INC = Income generated by the FUG crop farmers; EDU = Education level (years); AGE = Age of the farmer (years); ASI = Availability of special infrastructure (dummy: available = 1; otherwise = 0); DTM = Distance to market (kilometers); 4 FFS = Farmer’s farm size (hectares); FAS = Family size (number); ETV = Extension visit/contacts (number); GEN = Gender (Male = 1; Female = 2); EXP = Farmer’s farming experience (years); and PDR = Productive resources (available = 1; otherwise = 2) Four functional forms of the regression model were tried, namely, linear, exponential, semi-log, and double- 054 Glo. Adv. Res. J. Manag. Bus. Stud. Table 2. Estimated income of the farmers before and after joining the Fadama Project _ Before After Amount % Amount % of total (N) of total Variables (N) Yam 7,150,660 58.72 18,408,750 49.07 Cassava 3,950,270 32.44 16,515,800 44.02 Rice 889,640 7.31 1,752,000 4.67 Plantain 187,470 1.53 838,500 2.24 Total 12,178,040 100 37,515,050 100 Mean income 169,139.44 521,042.36 Source: Field survey, 2013. Table 3. Estimated difference in means of income of farmers before and after joining the project _ Mean Difference between T P df Variable (N= 72) means ________________________ IAP 521,042.36 IBP 169,139.44 351,902.92 -7.07** 0.000 125 Notes: IAP = Income after joining the project; IBP = Income before joining the project. N = Number of respondents. ** =Significant at 5% level. Source: Field survey, 2013 Table 4. Estimated value of productive resources of the farmers before and after joining the Fadama Project Before Amount % Variables (N) of total Yam 1,385,543.8 Fertilizer 1,339,750 Cassava 873,628,75 26.27 Rice 763,150 Agrochemicals 343,496 Cash 122,900 Labour 18,100 Total 4,846,568.5 Mean value 67,313.45 Source: Field survey, 2013. After Amount Variable (N) 28.59 Yam 27.64 Fertilizer 18.03 Cash 15.74 7.08 2.53 0.47 100 Cassava Agrochemicals Rice Labour log. Output of the form with the highest value of 2 coefficient of multiple determination (R ), highest number of significant variables and F-statistics value were selected as the lead equation. The explicit versions of the four functional forms are as follows: Linear: INC = b0 + b1EDU + b2AGE + b3ASI + b4DTM + b5FFS + b6FAS + b7ETV + b8GEN + b9EXP +b10PDR + ei Exponential: InINC = b0 + b1EDU + b2AGE + b3ASI + b4DTM + b5FFS + b6FAS + b7ETV + b8GEN + b9EXP + b10PDR + ei % of total 4,823,600 4,797,800 4,584,053 1,466,050 1,103,150 615,160 56,300 17,446,113 242,307.12 27.64 27.50 8.29 6.32 3.53 0.45 100 Semi-log: INC = b0 + b1InEDU + b2InAGE + b3InASI + b4InDTM + b5InFFS + b6InFAS + b7InETV + b8InGEN + b9InEXP + b10InPDR + ei Double-log: InINC = b0 + b1InEDU + b2InAGE + b3InASI + b4InDTM + b5InFFS + b6InFAS + b7InETV +b8InGEN + b9InEXP + b10InPDR + ei The b0 and the bis are the parameters to be estimated and the ei is the error term meant to capture errors arising from mistakes in specifications, exclusions, inclusions, data collection. In is the logarithm to base 10. The Okechukwu, 055 Table 5. Estimated differences in means of productive resources of farmers before and after joining the project ________________________________ Mean Difference between T P df Variable (N= 72) means ________________________ PRA 242,307.12 PRB 67,313.45 174,993.67 -5.83** 0.000 106 Notes: PRA =Productive resources after joining the project PRB = Productive resources before joining the project. N = Number of respondents. ** =Significant at 5% level. Source: Field survey, 2013 Table 6. Estimated determinants of farmers’ income before joining the project Parameter Linear Exponential Semi-log Double-log Constant 165167 3.1241 -276814 2.7132 (1.79) (18.32) (-1.17) (5.06) EDU -786 -0.008342 -13622 -0.0123 (-0.20) (-0.58) (-1.48) (-0.07) AGE 993 0.001213 6756 0.0563 (0.54) (0.56) (0.61) (1.15) ASI -13223 -0.001679 -2667 -0.0452 (-0.44) (-0.42) (-0.54) (-0.31) DTM 3472 0.00822 3365 0.08996 (1.86)* (0.74) (0.56) (1.08) FFS 40992 0.06814 188642 0.2856 (2.39)** (2.05)** (2.38)** (2.04)** FAS -4149 -0.006341 -2761 -0.09888 (-0.62) (-0.81) (-0.46) (-1.13) ETV 13939 0.009956 2448 0.2496 (2.40)** (2.13)** (2.11)** (1.87)* GEN -21155 -0.002113 -30176 0.03842 (-0.93) (-0.82) (-1.14) (0.32) EXP 321 0.002711 2746 0.0866 (0.19) (0.58) (0.38) (0.78) PDR 85850 0.000145 8965 0.3049 (1.89)** (1.14) (2.13)** (2.11)** 2 R 68.7% 62.5% 65.3% 64.5% 2 64.7% 60.1% 62.7% 62.6% R (adj) F-statistic 4.79 4.12 4.23 4.13 D-W statistic 1.78 1.56 1.67 1.47 Notes: * = Significant at 1% level; ** = Significant at 5% level. Figures in ( ) are t ratios. EDU, AGE, ASI, DTM, FFS, FAS, ETV, GEN, EXP and PDR are as earlier defined. D-W statistic = Durbin-Watson statistic. Source: Field survey 2013. acronyms – INC, EDU, AGE, ASI, DTM, FFS, FAS, ETV, GEN, EXP, PDR- are as earlier defined. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Socio-economic characteristics of the FUG cropfarmers A summary of the socio-economic characteristics of the crop farmers is shown in Table 1. The results reveal dominance of men (75%) over women (25%) in crop farming in Enugu State. The average age of the farmers was 51years. The fact that 65.28% of the respondents fell within this working age bracket showed prospects for greater productivity which the Fadama III project tends to achieve. The study revealed that 94.44% of the respondents were married and an average family size of 7 persons. Large household sizes have been noted to have correlation with food insecurity and poverty especially when the household head is engaged in agriculture as the main source of livelihood and income (Ike and Uzokwe, 2011). On the other hand large family size will add to the family labour and reduce production 056 Glo. Adv. Res. J. Manag. Bus. Stud. Table 7. Estimated determinants of farmers’ income after joining the project Parameter Linear Exponential Semi-log Double-log Constant 644672 2.7812 -23614 1.9431 (1.81) (13.14) (-0.98) (4.07) EDU -16054 -0.00813 -13438 -0.0112 (-1.80) (-0.63) (-1.25) (-0.08) AGE 6233 0.00213 5667 0.0449 (1.23) (0.55) (0.73) (1.13) ASI -10398 -0.00412 -1769 -0.0461 (-0.12) (-0.47) (-0.57) (-0.42) DTM 9755 0.00916 2887 0.0761 (1.98)* (0.77) (0.61) (1.11) FFS 39989 0.07116 176178 0.2671 (2.40)** (2.07)** (2.09)** (1.98)** FAS -15795 -0.00043 -2476 -0.0891 (-0.85) (-0.68) (-0.52) (-1.14) ETV 8322 0.08341 23641 0.2187 (1.83)** (2.14)** (2.08)** (1.94)* GEN -68232 -0.00781 -33672 0.0271 (-1.09) (-0.69) (-1.08) (0.46) EXP -2776 0.00347 2697 0.0674 (-0.61) (0.64) (0.51) (0.83) PDR 55461 0.00136 7729 0.1973 (2.15)** (1.12) (2.11)** (1.96)** 2 R 74,6% 68.4% 65.9% 70.7% 2 R (adj) 70.4% 64.4% 63.4% 68.2% F-statistic 8.09 4.21 4.14 7.04 D-W statistic 1.86 1.58 1.63 1.92 Notes: * = Significant at 1% level; ** = Significant at 5% level. Figures in ( ) are t ratios. EDU, AGE, ASI, DTM, FFS, FAS, ETV, GEN, EXP and PDR are as earlier defined. D-W statistic = Durbin-Watson statistic. Source: Field survey 2013 cost. The average number of education years attained by the farmers was 9, implying a post primary education. Good education enhances managerial, organizational effectiveness and efficiency of the farmer. These attributes will be manifested in his productivity and net income. The average farming experience was 24 years with an average farm size of 1.9 hectares in the State. The study also revealed that an average distance from the farmers’ farm site to the market was 4 kilometers. Income and productive resources of the Farmers before and after Joining the Fadama Project Table 2 presents the result of the estimated income of the farmers before and after joining the project. The study revealed that before joining the project yam earned the farmers highest income accounting for 58.72% of the total income, followed by cassava with 32.44%, rice with 7.31% came third and plantain contributed the least with 1.53%. The estimated income of the farmers after joining the project revealed that yam maintained its lead with 49.07%, followed by cassava with 44.02% rice contributed only 4.67% while plantain earned only 2.24%. Table 4 shows the mean values of productive resources available to the farmers before and after joining the project to be N67,313.45 and N242,307.12 respectively with a significant mean difference of N175,342.98 as shown in Table 5. The significant increase in the value of productive resource delivery reflected in the very significant increase in the mean income of the farmers from N169,139.44 before joining the project to N521,042.36 after joining the project as shown in Table 2 and a mean difference of N351,902.92 as revealed by Table 3. This impression was further substantiated with the result of the test of hypothesis, there is no statistically significant difference between mean incomes of the FUG crop farmers before and after joining the project (Table 3) which indicated a remarkable difference between the mean incomes levels of these crop farmers before and after joining the Fadama project at 5% level. Okechukwu, 057 Table 8. Constraints to project realization_______________________________ _ Variable Mean score Rank Irregular fund disbursement method 3.83 1 st Late release of government cash contribution 3.44 2 nd Demand for users’ cash contribution 3.12 3 rd Non payment of beneficiary 3.09 4 th contribution Misconception of the project by benefiting communities 2.82 5 th Inadequacy of facilitators 2.61 6 th Inadequate logistics for facilitators/officers 2.60 7 th Internal wrangling/suspicion among benefiting communities Poor leadership/management by officers of FCAs/FUGs Source: Field survey, 2013. 1,56 8 th 1.40 9 th Estimated influence of socio-economic characteristics of the FUG Crop Farmers on their annual incomes before and after joining the project The multiple regression analysis was used to establish the influence of socio-economic factors of the farmers on their annual incomes. Four functional forms (Linear, exponential, semi-log and double-log) of the regression model were fitted with the data and tried using the MANITAB statistical software. It could be seen from Tables 6 and 7 that the output of the linear form gave the best result in terms of number, sizes and signs of 2 2 significant parameter estimates as well as R , R (adjusted), F-statistic and Durbin-Watson statistic. It was therefore adopted as the lead equation. The regression equation is stated as: INC = 165167 -786EDU + 993AGE -13223ASI + 3472DTM + 40992FFS -4149FAS + 13939ETV i 21155GEN + 321EXP + 85850PDR + e A total of 10 regressors were included in the model and four of them, distance to the market (DTM), farmers’ farm size (FFS), extension visits (ETV) and productive resources (PDR) were statistically significant. Distance to the market was significant at 1% level of probability at both before and after joining the Fadama project. This factor is an important determinant of the income of any farmer in that should there be no market for his products, the products will either spoil or he will be forced to give them away at any offer without an opportunity to optimize his income from the sales. Again the nearer the market the smaller the transportation cost and the higher the net income. This is probably the reason behind the construction of Fadama markets in some communities as community projects. Farmer’s farm size, extension visits and productive resources were significant at 5% level of probability. This implies that the FUG crop farmers who used more of these resources were likely to realize more income. This result agrees with Kern and Paulson (2011) who postulated that profit does vary with farm size as larger farms may be able to more efficiently use larger equipment complements or obtain discounts by buying larger volumes of inputs resulting in lower capital and/or variable input costs per acre. Improved farming technologies such as high yield crop varieties, chemical fertilizers, and irrigation techniques have been central in raising yields, however, farmers have been much slower in adopting these new methods 058 Glo. Adv. Res. J. Manag. Bus. Stud. because of lack of information regarding how to apply the improved inputs (Betz, 2007). Consequently, access to reliable information is an integral part in any farmer’s ability to raise productivity. This probably explains the significance of extension visits (EVT) in this result. Application of high yield crops, good irrigation and suitable agrochemicals will increase the productivity of any farmer; tractorization will save time and cost cumulating in improved income. This underlines why in this result, productive resources (PDR) was significant. 2 The R values of 68.7% and 74.6% before and after joining the project respectively showed that 68.7% and 74.6% of the variations in the income levels were explained by the explanatory variables and buttressed by 2 R (adj) of 64.7% and 70.4% for before and after joining the Fadama project respectively. It also showed an Fstatistic of 4.79 and 8.09 respectively significant at 5% level implying the goodness of fit of the model and confirmed by Durbin-Watson statistic of 1.78 and 1.86 respectively which signify the absence of auto-correlation among observations of the independent variables. The result led to the rejection of the null hypothesis that the socio-economic characteristics of the FUG crop farmers have no statistical and significant effects on their incomes and the acceptance of the alternative hypothesis which is that socio-economic characteristics of the FUG crop farmers have statistical and significant effects on the farmers income both before and after joining the Fadama Project. Difference of the estimated variables influencing the income of the FUG crop farmers before and after joining the project The Chow-statistic was used to test for the coefficients of the regression variables. In this work it was used to determine whether the independent variables have different impact on the crop farmers’ income before and after joining the project. The Chow-test = {SABP – (SAP + SBP)}/ (K) (SAP + SBP) / (NAP + NBP – 2K) Where SABP = Sum of squared residuals from the pooled data of the crop farmers’income regression output before and after joining the project; SAP = Sum of squared residuals from the crop farmers’ income regression output after joining the project; SBP = Sum of squared residuals from the crop farmers’ income regression output before joining the project; NAP = Number of observations after joining the project; NBP = Number of observations before joining the project; K = Total number of parameters. SABP = 3.07612 SAP = 2.04844; SBP = 0.8249689 NAP = 72; NBP = 72; K = 10 Substituting into the formula = {3.07612 – (2.04844 + 0.8249689)} / 10 = 0.02027111 = 0.87 (2.04844 + 0.8249689) / 124 0.02317265 The Chow-statistic gave a p value of 0.87 which is greater than 0.05 at 5% level of significance. This shows that there is no statistical significant difference in the impact of the socio-economic variables on the income of the crop farmers before and after joining the project. Estimated Values Of Productive Resources Of The Farmers Before And After Joining The Fadama Project Productive resources of the farmers before and after joining the Fadama Project The estimated values of the productive resources of the farmers before and after joining the Fadama project is presented in Table 4. In Enugu State, yam seeds topped the list with 28.59%, followed by fertilizer with 27.64%, cassava accounted for 18.03% while labour that accounted for 0.47% was the least. A mean value of N67,313.45, was expended on productive resources accessed by the FUG crop farmers in Enugu State before the advent of Fadama III Project. Estimated values of productive resources used by the farmers after joining the Fadama Project revealed that seed yams still topped the list with 27.64%. Fertilizer had 27.50%, while labour with 0.45% occupied the least position. After joining the Fadama project, the FUG crop farmers in Enugu State expended a mean value of N242,307.12 on the productive resources which is more than double the N67,313.45 expended by the farmers before joining the project. This is a confirmation of the achievement of the project’s objective of delivering resources directly to the farmers effectively in order to Okechukwu, 059 sustainably increase their income, food security and productivity. Difference in mean values of productive resources of the FUG Crop Farmers before and after joining the Fadama Project Hypothesis II, mean values of productive resources of the FUG crop farmers before and after joining the Fadama project are not significantly different was tested with Paired Samples T-test of the MINITAB statistical packages. The result in Table 5 showed existence of significant differences between the mean values of productive resources of the crop farmers before and after joining the Fadama project in Enugu State (T-cal 5.83 > T-tab 2.10) at 5% level of significance. The alternative hypothesis which implied that the Fadama project provided the FUG crop farmers more productive resources that enabled them to realize more income and better standard of living was accepted. increase in the estimated mean productive resources and income from N67,313.45 to N242,307.12 and N169,139.44 to N521,042.36 respectively. This has satisfied a cardinal objective of the project of sustainably increasing the incomes of Fadama resource users through effective and efficient delivery of productive resources directly to them. The Community –Driven Development (CDD) approach of Fadama III project has motivated the communities to take their destinies in their hands. The project has not only been favourable to the active age population but had been reasonably gender sensitive because as much as 25% of the farmers were females. It will be very ideal if the Project allocates its resource delivery for the production of crops in the State in order of their income yielding capabilities with yam topping the list. Early and prompt release of productive resources and cash counterpart contributions to the farmers, provision of more extension agents, services and logistics for the farmers and reduction of users’ cash contribution will ensure improved productivity, income and project sustainability. Constraints To Project Realization REFERENCES Crop farmers within Enugu State posited that Fadama III Project could have recorded more successes if not for some constraints. Analysis of the constraints posited by the farmers as being detrimental to the success of the project was done by comparing the calculated mean scores of the variables with the critical mean of 2.0 obtained using a 5-point Likert scale and presented in Table 6 ranked in order of seriousness. The crop farmers considered irregular fund disbursement method as the greatest set back, other problems listed in a descending order were late release of government cash contribution, demand for users’ cash contribution, nonpayment of beneficiary contribution, misconception of the project by benefiting communities, inadequacy of facilitators, inadequate logistics for extension staff/officers, internal wrangling/suspicion among benefiting communities and poor leadership/management by officers of Fadama Community Associations (FCAs)/Fadama User Groups (FUGs). CONCLUSION Fadama III is an applaudable intervention project which has adopted the direct and effective resource delivery to the farmers approach to improve on rural development, food security, productivity and enhanced income for farmers in Enugu State as evidenced by significant Adeyemi A (2011). Imo State – “Eastern Heartland”. Retrieved from https://www.cometonigeria.com/search-by-region/south-east/imostate/ Ajayi AR, and Nwalieji AH (2010). Impact of the Anambra State Fadama Project Phase -1 on the Socio-economic Life of the Rural Farmers. Retrieved from: https://www.krpublishers.com/02-Journals/JHE/JHE29-0-000-10-web Ajibefun IA, and Aderinola EA (2004). Determinants of technical efficiency and policy implication in traditional agricultural production: Empirical study of Nigeria food crop farmers. Final report presentation at Biannual Research Workshop of African Economic Research Consortium. Anon. (2004). What are Wetlands. Retrieved from: http:/www.ramsar.org/about - infopack - ie –htm. Anambra State Agricultural Development Programme (ASADEP, 1995). Proposal and application in the national Fadama facility. Awka: ASADEP Betz M (2009). The effectiveness of agricultural extension with respect to farm size: The case of Uganda The Ohio State University, Ohio. Blench RM, and .Ingawa SA (2004). A Practical Guide for National Fadama Development Project II on Conflict and Management. The World Bank PCF/Government of Nigeria PCU Fadama 11, 1-19 Chavez EM (2003). Increasing productivity of rural work. Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) Round Table. New York, United Nations’ Hq. Dick, Gregorio, and McCarthy (2004). Political institutions and development: Faile expectations and renewed hopes. Massachusetts, USA Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, Echeme II, and Nwachukwu, C.C. (2010) An investigation of Fadama 11 Project implementation in Imo State. American Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research. Retrieved from http/www.scihub.org/AJSIR Enugu State Fadama Coordination Office, (2008). Hand book on 060 Glo. Adv. Res. J. Manag. Bus. Stud. National Fadama III development project, Enugu State. Enugu,. Jabeen Printers Henri-Ukoha A, Ohajianya DO, Nwosu FO, Onyeagocha SUO and Nwankwo UE (2011). Effect of World Bank assisted Fadama 11 Project on the performance of fish farming in Imo State, South East Nigeria. American Journal of Experimental Agriculture 1(4). Retrieved from www.sciencedomain Marshal G (1988), A dictionary of sociology. New York, Oxford University Press Nkonya E, Philip D, Mogues T, Pander J, Yahaya MK, Adebowale G, Arokoyo T, Kato E (2008). Impacts of pro-poor Community-Driven Development Project in Nigeria. IFPRI discussion paper 00756, Washington, IFPRI, Nwachukwu IN, Agwu NM, Ezeh CI, Mbanasor JA, Onyenweaku CE, and Kamalu CE (2009) Evaluation of Second National Fadama Project in Nigeria: A rapid policy appraisal. Retrieved from https://mpr.ub.unimuenchen.de/12914/MPRAPaper No.12914 Okechukwu EO (2001). Co-operative business, principles and practice. Awka, Authors and Publishers, Online Nigeria (2003). Enugu State: Background information. Retried from https://www.onlinenigeria.com/links/enuguadv.asp Pandolfelli L, Meinzen-Dick R, and Dohrn S (2007). Gender and collective action: A conceptual framework for analysis. Collective Action Working Paper 64: 57. Tajfel H, Turner JC (1979). An integrative theory of inter-group conflict, in Austin, W. G and Worchel, S (ed) The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33-47): Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. United Nations, (2010). “The Millennium Development Goals report, 2006” UNDP Retrieved from www.undp.org/publications/MDGReport2006.pdf Ujumadu V (2011). Fadama 111 in South-East gulps N1.2bn. Retrieved from https://www.vanguard.com/2011/06/Fadam-111-gulps-n1.2bn-ngeast/ Wright SC, Taylor DM, Moghaddam FM (1990). Responding to membership in a disadvantaged group: From acceptance to collective protest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58: 994–1003.