Constraints to Increasing Agricultural Productivity in Nigeria: A Review

The implementation of the various presidential commodity initiatives has suffered significant
setbacks. FDA/FMARD (2006) cited the following constraints to the implementation of the PIOC
and PIOR:
inadequate and untimely fund release by all tiers of government
lack of funds to procure processing machinery and equipment
lack of state and local government implementation committees
For the PIOC especially, the PRCU (2006) identified three external trade constraints
including the absence of:storage warehouses for processed cassava products
railway systems for large-volume movement from inland locations to warehouses
designated and equipped ports for agricultural exports
These VODEP implementation constraints were cited by FDA/FMARD (2006):
aging and inefficient processing equipment,
inability to install new processing equipment due to high offshore costs,
high costs of production inputs and farm machinery,
inability of local vegetable oil to compete with cheaper imported products,
inadequate and untimely funding of the program, and
delay in the certification of projects.
The recurrence of funding as one of the key implementation constraints of the presidential
initiatives is better appreciated in relation to the information in Table 1, in which fund allocations
for 2004 and 2005 were dismally low compared to the estimated project cost for each
commodity in the package of initiatives.
Figures 1 and 2 show the indices of area planted and national outputs of rice, cassava,
groundnuts, and maize from 2001–02 to 2005–06. Relative to the base year (2001–02), the
indices for the area planted with rice decreased annually except for the year 2005–06. The
cropped area indices for cassava, maize, and groundnuts relative to 2001–02 increased
generally but not consistently. The output indices for rice fell in 2002–03 and 2003–04 relative to
2001–02 but rose in 2004–05 and 2005–06. The output indices for cassava rose consistently
relative to the base year. That was not the case for maize and groundnuts, for which the output
indices showed declines relative to the base year.
Maize was not among the presidential initiative commodities. But it is significant that the
performance of its planted area and outputs relative to the base year is not entirely inferior to
those observed for the presidential initiative crops. Thus, the seeming gain in the area planted
and outputs of such crops as rice, cassava, and groundnuts cannot be totally attributed to the
launch of presidential initiatives for them.
17