IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jasjnl/v5y2013i4p85.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Crop Productivity, Land Degradation and Poverty Nexus in Delta North Agricultural Zone of Delta State, Nigeria

Author

Listed:
  • F. Aigbe
  • R. Isiorhovoja

Abstract

This paper examined the nexus among crop productivity, land degradation and poverty in Delta North Agricultural Zone of Delta State, Nigeria. The hypothesis was that there is no significant relationship among crop productivity, land degradation and poverty in the study area A Multistage sampling technique was used to collect data from 150 respondents. Data were analyzed using percentages and Logit regression. In the regression analysis of Determinants of Crop Productivity, the adjusted R-square showed that about 46 percent of the variability in crop productivity was due to the explanatory variables. The F-stat of 21.41 was significant P = 0.01. All significant variables were positively related to the farmers’ crop productivity. The weighted measure of poverty was employed to determine the poverty line as N5, 383.98. The logit model estimated the determinants of poverty in the study area. The model was well fitted with the log-likelihood function (-54.39) and the Chi-square X2(98.74) significant at 1% level and different variables being significant in the model. The estimated household size variable has a positive coefficient of 0.84 at 1 % significance level. The dependency ratio (X4) coefficient of -0.52 was significant p = 0.05 %. The value of elasticity showed that if dependency ratio decreases by one percent, the probability of being poor will increase by 0.13 percent. Household farm income (X5) coefficient was found to be significant at 1% and negatively related to poverty status. Also the marginal analysis revealed that if farm income increases by 1 percent, the poverty status will remain unchanged. Land ownership (X13) variable has a positive coefficient of 1.07 at 10 % significant level. Agricultural information (X14) was also found to be statistically significant at 5 % level but with negative coefficient of 1.56. We recommend that Policy on land management practices and natural resource exploitation should be reviewed or put in place where not existing and adhered to strictly by all relevant bodies and individuals as it will go a long way to conserving the natural resources and promoting crop yields with resultant increased farm income, all things being equal. Secondly, that family planning policy/programme of a maximum of four children to a family be revisited with a view to implementing it rigorously if the problems of large family size and unemployment are to be effectively addressed in the medium to long term.

Suggested Citation

  • F. Aigbe & R. Isiorhovoja, 2013. "Crop Productivity, Land Degradation and Poverty Nexus in Delta North Agricultural Zone of Delta State, Nigeria," Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(4), pages 1-85, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jasjnl:v:5:y:2013:i:4:p:85
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/download/25712/15885
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/view/25712
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. World Bank, 1996. "World Development Report 1996," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 5979.
    2. nan, 1997. "Sustainability, growth, and poverty alleviation: A policy and agroecological perspective," IFPRI books, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), number 0-8018-5607-8 edited by Reardon, Thomas Anthon; Vosti, Stephen A..
    3. Edward B. Barbier, 2001. "The Economics of Tropical Deforestation and Land Use: An Introduction to the Special Issue," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(2), pages 155-171.
    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. Block, Steven A., 1999. "Agriculture and economic growth in Ethiopia: growth multipliers from a four-sector simulation model," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 241-252, May.
    2. George Viksnins, 1998. "The East Asian model and the Baltic states," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 33(5), pages 238-244, September.
    3. Martin L. Weitzman, 1999. "Pricing the Limits to Growth from Minerals Depletion," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(2), pages 691-706.
    4. Azam, Jean-Paul, 1999. "Dollars for Sale: Exchange Rate Policy and Inflation in Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(10), pages 1843-1859, October.
    5. Amartya K. Sen, 1997. "From Income Inequality to Economic Inequality," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(2), pages 384-401, October.
    6. Sabuj Kumar Mandal & Devleena Chakravarty, 2017. "Role of energy in estimating turning point of Environmental Kuznets Curve: an econometric analysis of the existing studies," Journal of Social and Economic Development, Springer;Institute for Social and Economic Change, vol. 19(2), pages 387-401, October.
    7. Shah, Anwar, 1998. "Balance, accountability, and responsiveness : lessons about decentralization," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2021, The World Bank.
    8. Gerry Redmond & Sylke Schnepf & Marc Suhrcke, 2002. "Attitudes to Inequality after Ten Years of Transition," Papers inwopa02/21, Innocenti Working Papers.
    9. Jean-Louis Combes & Pascale Combes Motel & Philippe Delacote, 2014. "Public expenses, credit and natural capital: Substitution or complementarity?," Working Papers halshs-00979191, HAL.
    10. Novice Patrick Bakehe, 2019. "The effects of migrant remittances on deforestation in the Congo basin," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 39(4), pages 2361-2373.
    11. Choumert, Johanna & Combes Motel, Pascale & Dakpo, Hervé K., 2013. "Is the Environmental Kuznets Curve for deforestation a threatened theory? A meta-analysis of the literature," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 19-28.
    12. K. Herve DAKPO & Pascale COMBES MOTEL & Johanna CHOUMERT, 2012. "The environmental Kuznets curve for deforestation: a threatened theory? A meta-analysis," Working Papers 201216, CERDI.
    13. Kox, Henk L.M., 1998. "Welfare gains from liberalized banana trade and a new international banana agreement," Serie Research Memoranda 0012, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    14. Norman Myers, 1997. "Consumption in relation to population, environment and development," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 33-44, March.
    15. John Beirne & Nauro F. Campos, 2007. "Educational inputs and outcomes before the transition from communism," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 15(1), pages 57-76, January.
    16. Barbier, Edward B. & Damania, Richard & Leonard, Daniel, 2005. "Corruption, trade and resource conversion," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 276-299, September.
    17. Saraly Andrade de Sá & Charles Palmer & Stefanie Engel, 2012. "Ethanol Production, Food and Forests," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 1-21, January.
    18. Laurila, Juhani & Singh, Rupinder, 2000. "Sequential reform strategy: The case of Azerbaijan," BOFIT Discussion Papers 8/2000, Bank of Finland Institute for Emerging Economies (BOFIT).
    19. Alix-Garcia, Jennifer & Janvry, Alain de & Sadoulet, Elisabeth, 2005. "A Tale of Two Communities: Explaining Deforestation in Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 219-235, February.
    20. Nam, Ilchong & Oh, Soogeun, 2000. "Bankruptcy of Large Firms and Exit Mechanisms in Korea," KDI Research Monographs, Korea Development Institute (KDI), volume 127, number 200001.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:jasjnl:v:5:y:2013:i:4:p:85. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.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.