Constraints to Increasing Agricultural Productivity in Nigeria: A Review

Transport
Materials (e.g., bags)
Association dues
1,263.16
725.00
136.67
34.4
19.7
3.7
38
2,323.08
602.22
173.33
Total 3,675.54 100.0 8,093.71
Source: Fade-Aluko 2007.
28.7
7.4
2.1
100.0
Table 21. Constraints to marketing of rice, Abeokuta metropolis, Ogun state, 2007
Constraint Number responding % of total *
Pricing
6
10.0
Poor processing facilities
32
53.0
Illiteracy
9
15.0
Finance
9
15.0
High transport cost
22
36.7
Low patronage
11
18.3
No problem
Source: Fade-Aluko 2007.
* Multiple responses allowed.
5
8.3
3,375.00
539.55
119.00
Table 22. Components, values, and percentages of marketing costs, Gari, Ekiti states, 2005
Cost item
Transport
Rent
Storage
Association dues
Security
375.00
187.50
325.00
206.25
118.75
Ikole
N/100 kg
% of total
30.9
15.5
26.8
17.0
9.8
277.50
230.25
262.50
231.25
100.00
Ayedun
N/100 kg
% of total
25.3
20.9
23.8
20.9
9.1
440.00
244.00
128.88
0.00
122.22
Ayebode
N/100 kg
% of total
47.1
26.0
13.8
0.0
13.1
42.7
6.8
1.5
7,904.98 100.0
255.00
200.00
131.25
500.00
100.00
Ijesa Isu
N/100 kg
% of total
Total 1,212.50 100.0 1,101.25 100.0 935.10 100.0 1,186.25 100.0
Source: Ayeni 2005.
Note: The costs of Gari to the traders were not specified in this study.
The foregoing discussion has shown that variation in agricultural productivity in SSA, including
Nigeria, has been mostly attributed to conventional inputs; there is potential for higher growth
with increased use of fertilizer, machinery, and livestock inputs. Yet increased use of these
inputs is limited by poor infrastructure, a poor policy environment, and lack of cash for input
purchase (Byerlee and Heisey 1996; Heisey and Mwangi 1996; Larson and Frisvold 1996). The
study by Messer et al. (1998) lists constraints including lack of improved crop varieties,
pesticides, policy reforms (in tax and foreign exchange), improved transportation, improved
communication, improved education, improved extension services, increased support for
research, and improved title to land. These views are largely supported by Pingali and Heisey
(1996).
Domestic and External Trade Constraints
The outputs of each agricultural commodity are allocated to domestic or external consumption
or both. The quantities of either domestic or external demands for an agricultural output are
expected to have an impact on domestic producers’ income. Specifically, an increase in the
level of domestic or foreign demand or both is expected to translate into an increase in domestic
producers’ income. Stated differently, low demand (domestic or foreign) for a country’s
agricultural output could reduce domestic farmers’ ability to purchase and use inputs at
recommended levels, which in turn could affect agricultural productivity. Related to this is the
tendency for domestic consumers to prefer cheaper and better-quality foreign products.
21.5
16.8
11.2
42.1
8.4