Abstract:The study was on the analysis of the resource management ability by catfish farmers in Nigeria: A case of Ogbaru Local Government Area, Anambra State. The study focused on the five objectives which investigated the socioeconomic characteristics, costs and net returns, production function, determinants of the returns, resource use efficiency of the farmers, and the challenges facing fish farmers. Data for the study was collected from a cross-section of 240 randomly selected catfish farmers using a well-structur… Show more
“…This may be as a result of their access to productive resources than the women such as land and capital needed to set up the business. This is on line with the findings of Aloysius et al (2020) [2] , who posited that majority (72.1%) of catfish business in Anmbra State were dominated by males. Data in Table 1 reveal that a greater proportion (79.2%) of the catfish farmers was married.…”
Section: Socio-economic Distribution Of Catfish Farmers In Anambra We...supporting
The study assessed the economic analysis of catfish production in Anambra West Metropolis, Anambra state, Nigeria. The sample size for the study comprised one hundred and twenty catfish farmers in Anambra West metropolis who were purposively selected. Data were collected using structured interview schedule by the researcher and other research assistants. Simple descriptive statistics like percentage, frequency, mean scores standard deviation and Net Farm Income were used for data analysis and result presentation. The study found that catfish production is a profitable business in the area with estimated total cost of ₦14,246,163 Net Farm Income of ₦20,000,000 and ROI of 2.47. Catfish producers in the area cited high feed costs, lack of capital and others as major constraints. The study suggests government engagement to manage and lower the import taxes levied on dealers who import foreign feeds and to develop local feed mills to increase feed production and nutritional content.
“…This may be as a result of their access to productive resources than the women such as land and capital needed to set up the business. This is on line with the findings of Aloysius et al (2020) [2] , who posited that majority (72.1%) of catfish business in Anmbra State were dominated by males. Data in Table 1 reveal that a greater proportion (79.2%) of the catfish farmers was married.…”
Section: Socio-economic Distribution Of Catfish Farmers In Anambra We...supporting
The study assessed the economic analysis of catfish production in Anambra West Metropolis, Anambra state, Nigeria. The sample size for the study comprised one hundred and twenty catfish farmers in Anambra West metropolis who were purposively selected. Data were collected using structured interview schedule by the researcher and other research assistants. Simple descriptive statistics like percentage, frequency, mean scores standard deviation and Net Farm Income were used for data analysis and result presentation. The study found that catfish production is a profitable business in the area with estimated total cost of ₦14,246,163 Net Farm Income of ₦20,000,000 and ROI of 2.47. Catfish producers in the area cited high feed costs, lack of capital and others as major constraints. The study suggests government engagement to manage and lower the import taxes levied on dealers who import foreign feeds and to develop local feed mills to increase feed production and nutritional content.
The study was on the economics of good agronomic practices adopted by rice farmers in the value chain development programme, Anambra State, Nigeria. The specific objectives focused primarily on the extent of good agronomic practice (GAP) adoption, cost and returns from GAP rice production, resource use efficiency and challenges of GAP adoption in the study area. Data were collected through a well-structured questionnaire from a cross-section of 337 (representing 91% of the approved sample size) rice farmers randomly selected by multi-stage sampling procedures. A combination of analytical techniques was used to operationalize the models. The study established that farmers did not adopt any technology disseminated at a pre-planting stage of rice farming, but adopted timely planting, bund making for water management and weed and/ or pest control in the planting stage of the technologies, while winnowing and proper storage of paddy had been successfully adopted at the post-planting stage. Evidently, about 50% of the technologies disseminated in the study area are under trial or consideration stage. From the profitability analysis, the study revealed a 59% return on investment for every 1 USD invested. However, the project implementers need to reduce the cost of fertilizer and labour, these could be achieved through increasing beneficiaries’ budget on fertilizer by 12.4% and over 100% for labour through mechanization to justify the estimation of resource allocation efficiency which reported inefficiency for all the plating inputs. The study equally identified some factors militating against the adoption of GAP which were rotated into four components named institutional, socioeconomic, and economic and management factors. These four factors: institutional (24.5%), socioeconomic (10.9%), economic (10.5%) and management (9.5%) accounted for 55.4% of the challenges to GAP adoption. The study, therefore, concludes that GAP has not been fully adopted by farmers, this is because one-time use of technology does not guarantee its adoption. However, efforts should be prioritized by the appropriate authorities to tackle the identified challenges since the gain in rice production is worthwhile. Key words: rice farmers, adoption, good agronomic practice, value chain development
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.