IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/naaenj/267821.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patterns and determinants of adoption of crop production technologies among food crop farmers in Nigeria

Author

Listed:
  • Shittu, A.M.
  • Okuneye, P.A.
  • Olarewaju, T.O.

Abstract

The need to improve agricultural productivity through technological adoption is undoubtedly critical in the drive for economic growth and poverty reduction in Nigeria. This study therefore examines availability, awareness and adoption rates of crop production technologies among farm household in Nigeria as well as the determinants.The study was based on data collected in a National Agricultural Research System (NARS) survey to determine available technologies, and a nationwide Farm Households Technology Use (FHTU) survey to assess awareness, adoption and impacts of the technologies on farm households. The NARS survey was focused on all public, private and multinational Institutions involved in agricultural research, extension and technology goods production and marketing identified across the six geopolitical divisions of Nigeria. The FHTU survey covered 1,663 randomly selected farm households drawn by multistage random sampling across about 240 farming communities/villages in 80 Agricultural Development Project (ADP) cells spread across all block in six states (Benue, Ebonyi, Cross-river, Ogun, Sokoto and Taraba), which were drawn one state per geopolitical division of Nigeria. The data were analysed using descriptive, budgetary and econometric techniques. The NARS survey revealed that a wide range of improved varieties of cassava (57), maize (54), rice (65) and tomato (11) as well as innovative farming practices, equipment and intermediate materials have been developed and released to farmers across the country. However, while the awareness rates of many of the technologies are quite high (above 70%), the adoption rates, defined by the percentage of potential users that have tried and are willing to continue the use of the technology, are generally low, except for cultivation of improved varieties (above 70%),and use of fertilizer (56%), herbicide (52%) and mechanised tillage (43%). The current (2011/2012) use rates were however much lower than the adoption rates due to non-availability of many of these technologies in the local market, and where available, high cost. There are also significant (p<0.01) variation in adoption rates of the technologies across the states, with likelihood of adoption generally declining significantly with increase in travel cost to nearest agro-service centre (p<0.05) and household size (p<0.05), but rising significantly with increase in farm size (p<0.01), household wealth (p<0.01), and education level of the household head (p<0.05). The likelihoods of adoption were also generally and significantly (p<0.05) lower among female headed households than among male headed households.

Suggested Citation

  • Shittu, A.M. & Okuneye, P.A. & Olarewaju, T.O., 2015. "Patterns and determinants of adoption of crop production technologies among food crop farmers in Nigeria," Nigerian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Nigerian Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 5(01).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:naaenj:267821
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.267821
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/267821/files/Volume%205%281%29R_Shittu.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/267821/files/Volume%205%281%29R_Shittu.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.267821?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew D. Foster & Mark R. Rosenzweig, 2010. "Microeconomics of Technology Adoption," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 395-424, September.
    2. Shittu, Adebayo M. & Obayelu, Oluwakemi A. & Salman, Kabir K., 2014. "Welfare Effects of Policy-induced Rising Food Prices on Farm Households in Nigeria," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170697, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Polson, Rudulph A. & Spencer, Dunstan S. C., 1991. "The technology adoption process in subsistence agriculture: The case of cassava in Southwestern Nigeria," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 65-78.
    4. Olomola, Aderibigbe S., 2013. "The Political Economy of Food Price Policy in Nigeria," WIDER Working Paper Series 016, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Varshney, Deepak & Joshi, P.K. & Roy, Devesh & Kumar, Anjani, 2021. "Understanding the Adoption of Modern Cultivars in India: Adoption probability and use intensity," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 47(01), January.
    2. Muganga Kizito, Andrew & Kato, Edward, 2018. "Does linking farmers to markets work? Evidence from the World Food Programme’s Purchase for Progress satellite collection points initiative in Uganda," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(2), June.
    3. Raju Ghimire & Wen-Chi Huang, 2016. "Adoption Pattern and Welfare Impact of Agricultural Technology," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 11(1), pages 113-137, April.
    4. Omotuyole Isiaka Ambali & Francisco Jose Areal & Nikolaos Georgantzis, 2021. "Improved Rice Technology Adoption: The Role of Spatially-Dependent Risk Preference," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-13, July.
    5. Jinhua Xie & Gangqiao Yang & Ge Wang & Shuoyan He, 2024. "How does social capital affect farmers’ environment-friendly technology adoption behavior? A case study in Hubei Province, China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(7), pages 18361-18384, July.
    6. Mekonnen, Daniel Ayalew & Gerber, Nicolas & Matz, Julia Anna, 2018. "Gendered Social Networks, Agricultural Innovations, and Farm Productivity in Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 321-335.
    7. Peter Bergman, 2020. "Nudging Technology Use: Descriptive and Experimental Evidence from School Information Systems," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(4), pages 623-647, Fall.
    8. Raphaël Soubeyran, 2019. "Technology adoption and pro-social preferences," CEE-M Working Papers halshs-02291905, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    9. Sseruyange, J. & Bulte, E., 2018. "Do Incentives matter for Knowledge Diffusion? Experimental Evidence from Uganda," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275896, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. B Kelsey Jack, "undated". "Market Inefficiencies and the Adoption of Agricultural Technologies in Developing Countries," CID Working Papers 50, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    11. Michael J. Andrews, 2020. "Local Effects of Land Grant Colleges on Agricultural Innovation and Output," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Research and Innovation in Agriculture, pages 139-175, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Bensch, Gunther & Grimm, Michael, 2024. "Behavioural constraints in energy technology uptake: Evidence from real-purchase offers in rural Rwanda and Senegal," Ruhr Economic Papers 1081, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    13. Chen, Cheng & Senga, Tatsuro & Sun, Chang & Zhang, Hongyong, 2023. "Uncertainty, imperfect information, and expectation formation over the firm’s life cycle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 60-77.
    14. Nicholas Bloom & Luis Garicano & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2014. "The Distinct Effects of Information Technology and Communication Technology on Firm Organization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2859-2885, December.
    15. Martin Nordin & Sören Höjgård, 2017. "An evaluation of extension services in Sweden," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 51-60, January.
    16. Chen, Shuo & Lan, Xiaohuan, 2020. "Tractor vs. animal: Rural reforms and technology adoption in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    17. Muscillo, Alessio & Pin, Paolo & Razzolini, Tiziano & Serti, Francesco, 2018. "Does "Network Closure" Beef up Import Premium?," IZA Discussion Papers 12036, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Terrance Hurley & Jawoo Koo & Kindie Tesfaye, 2018. "Weather risk: how does it change the yield benefits of nitrogen fertilizer and improved maize varieties in sub‐Saharan Africa?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 711-723, November.
    19. Wilson, Nicholas, 2021. "Why is ageing associated with lower adoption of new technologies? Evidence from voluntary medical male circumcision and a structural model," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 19(C).
    20. Johan Swinnen, 2016. "Value Chain Innovations for Technology Transfer in Developing and Emerging Economies: Concept, Typology and Policy Implications," Working Papers id:10694, eSocialSciences.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:naaenj:267821. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/naaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.