Content uploaded by Oluwafemi Olajide Ajewole
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Oluwafemi Olajide Ajewole on Feb 28, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 72
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
Hungarian Association of Agricultural Informatics
European Federation for Information Technology in
Agriculture, Food and the Environment
Journal of Agricultural Informatics. 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2
journal.magisz.org
Gender Analysis of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice
Farming Household in Nigeria
Oluwafemi Ajewole
1
, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo
2
, Vivian Ojehomon
3
, Rita Agboh-
Noameshie
4
, Aliou Diagne
5
I N F O
Received 26 Febr 2015
Accepted 22 Apr 2015
Available on-line 29 Jun 2015
Responsible Editor: M. Herdon
Keywords:
Decision Making, Gender,
Innovation, Nigeria, Rice
farming households.
A B S T R A C T
Rice importance in food security and contribution to Nigeria economy cannot be
overlooked, rice is produced in Nigeria but productivity increase has been a challenge
due to many factors. Actors involved in the production process include women who are
faced with formidable obstacles. This research analyze agricultural innovation,
constraints faced by male and female rice farming households and decision making
among rice farming household in Nigeria rice hub. A 3-stage stratified random
sampling procedure were used, descriptive statistics, Ordinal Ranking, Least
Significant Difference and Women empowerment index were the tool of analysis. The
study showed that 23.81% of the respondents are female-headed and 76.19% are male-
headed; more than half of the women (54.29%) are without formal education as
compared to men (25.89%). Only 13.39% and 8.57% of the male and female headed
household use rice innovation; access to credit, high cost of input and poor soil fertility
are the major constraints; women empowerment results showed 76.60% of decision is
made by solely by male head, 7.80% is made by female and 7.09% of decisions are
jointly made. The study recommends that; innovation usage should be advocated,
subsidy should be intensified and gender consideration in decision making be made a
priority.
1. Introduction
Nigeria is the most populous country in Africa, with a population of about 168 million people. Its
domestic economy is dominated by agriculture, which accounts for about 40% of the Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) and two-thirds of the labour force. Agriculture supplies food, raw materials and
generates household income for the majority of the people (Federal Office of Statistics, 2012). Over
the years, improvement in agricultural production has led to specializing in certain crops or products;
maize, cowpea, sorghum, rice, etc. (Plucknett et al., 2000). Rice has emerged as one of the fastest
growing agricultural sub-sector, it has moved from a ceremonial to a staple food in many homes, such
that some families cannot do without rice in a day. (Idiong et al., 2006). Rice is produced in Nigeria
using a variety of rice production systems and technological levels coexisting together, the production
involve a chain of activities ranging from land clearing to post harvest activities such as winnowing,
1
Oluwafemi Ajewole
University of Ilorin
serapholuwaferanmi@gmail.com
2
Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo
University of Ilorin
opeayinde@yahoo.com
3
Ojehomon Vivian E. Titilayo
National Cereals Research Institute (NCRI) Badeggi, Bida, Niger State, Nigeria
tojehomon@yahoo.com
4
Rita Agboh-Noameshie
Leader, Gender Task force, Africa Rice Centre, Cotonou, Benin, Republic
A.Agboh-Noameshie@cgiar.org
5
Aliou A. Diagne
Leader, Impact Assessment and Policy Unit, Africa Rice Centre, Cotonou, Benin, Republic
a.diagne@cgiar.org
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 73
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
threshing among others which is been done by male and female small holder farmers who use
traditional manual methods that are characterized with problems of low productivity and consequently
poor livelihood (World Bank, 2013). Increase in production has been achieved largely through
extending the area under cultivation rather than using productivity-improving technologies (FAO,
1999). Within this production cycle, women have been reported playing vital roles in rice production,
processing and marketing.(Rahman 2004) However, women have limited access to a wide range of
physical assets including agricultural inputs, technological resources, land, and so forth (Arndt &
Tarp, 2000). Women are a key part of the mainstream in agriculture, yet they face formidable
obstacles (Kandiwa, 2013). Ayinde et al. (2013a) opined that, it is of importance to have strategy to
put men and women’s concerns and experiences at the centre of research design, implementation,
monitoring, and evaluation. This involves looking at the socioeconomic settings of men and women to
ensure that they benefit equally – often referred to as “gender mainstreaming”. Bridging the gap in
access to technology between men and women, we could increase productivity; Ayinde et.al. (2013b)
further affirmed that technological adoption among male and female farmers is crucial to improving
the productivity in the face of climate change. Transformation lies in using innovation to improve the
products and services delivered by men and women who are actors in rice production. However, the
prevailing condition in Nigeria is characterized with gender blindness, deafness and dumbness in the
formulation and implementation of most rice productivity policies (Ajani, 2008). Despite the effort to
intensify increase in rice productivity, the demand for rice has been on the increase in the country and
sadly Nigeria has not been able to produce enough rice for the domestic need of her teaming
increasing population. Recognition of gender disaggregated constraints, gender imbalances,
differentials in gender roles and decision making as related to rice production, technological transfer;
input used, method of farming, processing is important for any transformation of Nigeria rice sector.
It is against this background the study to answer the following; what are the socio-economic
characteristics of male and female headed rice farming household in the study area? What are the
available rice innovations? and the level of women participation in decision making within the rice
farming households which has not been carried out in this rice hub before now.
2. Theoretical Framework
This study is based on the theory of production, which states that, given level of technology and
production inputs, an efficient producer will achieve maximum production of outputs. This theory
assumed effects of external and internal factors on different households (especially smallholder
farmers) in agricultural production (Quisumbing, 1996). A production function is a technical
relationship between inputs and outputs that specifies the maximum level of output possible, given
input levels. The production function shows the ability of a farm manager to critically consider
available production resources, make necessary decisions and produce output, given level of
technology (Auma, 2010).
As a general preposition; provided technologies and managerial decision making skills are the
same, farmers who have identical access to identical factors (both quantity and quality) may produce
identical outputs of a given crop which will have overall effect on their income and subsequent
poverty status within the economic society. That is, their productivity will be identical. If they use
different technologies, or different quantities of these factors, or there is difference in quality of these
factors, their productivity will differ. There may be differences in the productivity of male and female
farmers and their income will drop which may also make them sit among the vast majority of the
poor. Men and women within the rural African household pursue both on farm and off-farm activities
and have different endowments such as land rights and education, and different access to
technologies, to factors of production such as labour and capital, and to support services such as
extension and credit and their level of decision making differs on productive inputs and other
household activities. Such factors affect households engaged in agricultural production differently.
Gender of the household head (farm manager) is an internal factor that may hinder achievement of
efficiency in agricultural production amongst the smallholder farmers due to decision making ability.
Gender is the cultural interpretation of sex which considers socially constructed roles, responsibilities,
characteristics, attitudes, and beliefs towards men and women. These roles are defined, supported, and
reinforced by societal structures and institutions.
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 74
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
There are two approaches to production function, the primal (direct estimation of production
function) and dual approach (indirect estimation of production function through profit or cost
function). Most studies on analysis of gender effects on agricultural productivity used primal
approach to production function and the application of dual approach is quite recent (Quisumbing,
1995). Primal-approach to production function analyzes and estimates directly the production
functions of a farm manager (gender of household head) i in household j
Yij = f (Vij, Xij, Zj)
Where Yij is quantity produced,
Vij is a matrix of inputs used by farm manager in household j, including land, labour, capital, and
extension advice;
Xij is a matrix of individual attributes, including gender; and
Zj are household-and community–level variables. Correlation of input use with individual and
household characteristics can be captured by interaction terms ViXi and ViZj respectively.
The study used the dual approach to production analysis, it estimates profit function as a function of
input and output prices, and derives the input demand and output supply functions from the restricted
profit function. This approach has its advantages when there are multiple outputs and inputs, as in a
multi-crop farming system. Modelling input choice explicitly also allows for the possibility that
farmer characteristic influence the decision making process of conventional inputs.
Y = α0Lα1Tα2
Where Y is output,
L is labour input (hired or family),
T is a matrix of land, capital, and other conventional inputs which include decision making.
Usually the equation is estimated by ordinary least squares (OLS) by linearizing the Cobb-Douglas
production function:
lnY = α0+ α1lnL+ α2lnT+ βlnE+ δSEX+ ε
Where Y, L, and T are as defined above;
E is educational attainment or indicator variable for level of schooling (of farm manager, or household
head);
SEX is the sex of household head or farm manager; and
ε is error term. The coefficient that indicates gender differences in technical efficiency is δ, an
intercept shifter
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 75
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
2.1. Conceptual Framework
Figure 1. Source (Author, 2013) adapted from Olayide and Heady input-output process (1982)
The concept of this study is presented in Figure 1, agricultural activity as it shown as the
combination of resources to yield an output and subsequent profit. These however determine the
poverty status of the farmer. Decision maker (which represent the farmer with their respective sex),
Research and Innovation envelopes agricultural activities. The effect of farmer’s decision on the
adoption of Innovation; the use of productive resources; output; profit and subsequent poverty status
of any decision maker is represented above with undotted arrows; the effect of Innovation on;
productive resources; Output; profit; poverty status; and its subsequent effect on the decision maker is
represented by the dotted arrows.
The decision maker make decision on productive resources on the amount of input (Land, Labour
and Capital) used, allocation of the output (How much to sell, save, consume and donate), the use of
the profit (amount invest and saved) after removing the amount consumed and other financial
obligation, the amount left for the farmer now determine the poverty status of the Decision maker (the
farmer). The poverty status of the farmer also affects the type of decision that the farmer will make on
the next productive cycle in form of the allocation of resources to yield a level of output. In similar
way, Innovation and Research affect the amount of resources used; (through improvement in rice
seed, planting methods, climatic information etc.) the final output (through harvesting methods, and
post harvesting techniques, equipment used to achieve the final output, etc.), the profit (through
market information); which later translate to increase or decrease in the poverty status of the farmer.
It also gives to the decision maker ability to choose among available research and innovation which
will consequently spur the adoption or rejection of innovations and the use for productive activities
and the cycle continues in that order.
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 76
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
3. Methodology
3.1. Study area
The study was carried out in the Nasarawa/Benue rice hub of Nigeria. Rice Sector Development
Hubs are zones where rice research outputs are integrated across the rice value chain to achieve
development outcomes and impact. The Hub involves large groups of farmers and other value-chain
actors, such as rice millers, input dealers and rice marketers (Cisse & Diagne 2012). The rice hub
shares in the benefits of the Benue river valley for rice production. The Nasarawa/Benue hub is made
up of four local government areas of Guma and Gwer-west in Benue state and Lafia and Obi Local
government areas in Nasarawa state. Benue state is located within longitude 7° 47’ and 10° 0’ East
and Latitude 6° 25’ and 8° 8’ North while Nasarawa state is located within 8°32′ and 8.533°North and
8°18′ and 8.3°East. The states are among the North Central States of Nigeria and are highly agrarian
with a large percentage of their populace engaged in rice farming and other agricultural activities.
Both states share a common boundary and have rich and diverse agricultural produce.
3.2. Sampling
A three-stage stratified random sampling procedure was used for this study. Local extension
offices were visited to collect the list of villages and household in each village in the two states (the
hub).Villages where rice is not produced or grown was dropped. The remaining list of villages was
stratified based on; dominance of rice production. The villages were grouped into two; (rice in the
target ecology as major crop; rice in the target ecology as minor crop). This resulted into two strata. In
each stratum, eight villages was randomly selected using Microsoft excel worksheet to form a total of
sixteen villages. Within these sixteen villages, ten households was randomly selected with a minimum
of three household headed by women giving a total one hundred and sixty respondents (160) and at
least thirty per cent of women headed household farmers.
3.3. Source of data
The study used primary data from the NCRI/Africa Rice baseline survey during which tablet
computers were used to obtain information from the rice farming households. Africa Rice Centre in
2012 developed the Mlax application in Tablet computers to collect baseline data in the Rice Sector in
Africa. The Mlax application is designed with such flexibility such that data collected are
automatically sent to a cloud server after connecting the tablets to the internet.
3.4. Method of Data Analysis
Descriptive Statistics was used to investigate the socio-economic characteristics of male headed
and female-headed rice farming household and available rice innovation, Likert ranking was done to
rank the constraints faced by rice farmers while Least Significant Difference (LSD) was used to test
for the significance level of the ordinal ranking of the constraints at 5% level of significance. Women
empowerment index was used to examine the participation of women in agricultural decision within
the households.
3.5. Likert scale and Least Significant Difference (LSD)
Constraints facing the rice farmers were asked to be listed and the three most important constraints
to the farmers was identified in their order of occurrence. The relative frequency with which a
constraint was experienced was used to establish its ordinal rank. Least significance difference (LSD)
was used to test the ranking for statistical significance using the method represented in pair-wise
comparison at 5% level of significant. The LSD expression is given by:
LSD (at α = 0.05) = 1.96 x (SF(n) x (n+1)/6)1/2,
Where:
SF was the number of surveyed farmers (disaggregated into sex)
n was the number of ranked constraints.
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 77
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
3.6. Computation of the Women Empowerment Index (WEI) following International
Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI 2011)
The WEI sub-index shows how empowered women are, capturing the roles and extent of women’s
engagement in the agricultural sector in five domains: (1) decisions over agricultural production, (2)
access to and decision-making power over productive resources, (3) control over use of income, (4)
leadership in the community, and (5) time use. It assesses the degree to which women are empowered
in these domains, and for those who are not empowered, the percentage of domains in which they are
empowered.
Where:
WEI all = women empowerment index for all decisions per respondent
x = value of decision maker
j = code for the specific decision matter
d = total number of decisions replied by the respondent
n = number of decisions.
The value ranges from 1.00 to 5.00
• A value of 1.00 means that the male head tend to be the sole decision maker.
• Any value below 3.00 but higher than 2.00 means that female heads join in making the
decisions but the decision of the male head dominates.
• A value of 3.00 means both the female and the male head makes the decision jointly with
equal contribution.
• A value near 5.00 and higher than 3.00 means that the female head dominates in decision
making than the male head.
• A value of 5.00 means the female head is the sole decision maker.
4. Results and Discussion
Majority of the respondent’s household (76.19%) are male-headed, only about 23.81% of the
respondents are female-headed suggesting that the involvement of women in rice farming in the study
area is low; more than half of the women (54.29%) are without any form of formal education as
compared to the men (25.89%). More than half of the male (52.68%) and female (68.57%) farmers do
not belong to any form of association. This implies that they do not have the advantages of what
groups could offer in term of; training, credits, mobilization of resources and dissemination of
necessary information. On the average the rice area cultivated by both male headed household and
female headed household are 3.05Ha and 2.58Ha and the mean household is 9 members for male-
headed households and 7 for female-headed households. Averagely, 85.71% and 88.59% of male and
female rice farmers have access to one form of improve variety or the other as shown in Table 1.
Table (1). Socio-Economic Characteristics of rice farming households
Householdhead
Sex
Frequency
Percentage
Female
35
23.81
Male
112
76.19
Total
147
100
Male
Female
Age
Frequency
Percentage
Age
Frequency
Percentage
≤30
8
7.13
≤30
0
0
31-40
27
24.12
31-40
3
8.57
41-50
31
27.69
41-50
14
40.01
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 78
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
51-60
24
21.44
51-60
12
34.29
61-70
17
15.17
61-70
5
14.3
≥71
5
4.45
≥71
1
2.83
Total
112
100
Total
35
100
Mean
49.08929
Mean
54.17143
Std. Dev.
13.64713
Std. Dev.
8.678865
Membership of Association
Membership of Association
No
59
52.68
No
24
68.57
Yes
53
47.32
Yes
11
31.43
Total
112
100
Total
35
100
Education Level
Education Level
Junior high school
8
7.14
Junior high
school
3
8.57
Literate/Koranic
9
8.04
Literate/Koranic
0
0
None
29
25.89
None
19
54.29
Primary
23
20.54
Primary
6
17.14
Senior high school
24
21.43
Senior high
school
4
11.43
Tertiary
19
16.96
Tertiary
3
8.57
Total
112
100
Total
35
100
Household Size
Household Size
≤5
27
24.1
≤5
12
34.29
6 – 10
50
44.65
6 – 10
17
48.55
11 – 15
28
25
11 – 15
4
11.44
16 -20
6
5.36
16 -20
1
2.86
≥21
1
0.89
≥21
1
2.86
Total
112
100
Total
35
100
Mean
8.839286
Mean
7.257143
Std. Dev.
3.960511
Std. Dev.
4.513658
Rice Cultivated Area
Rice Cultivated Area
≤2
62
55.36
≤2
21
60
3 – 4
31
27.68
3 – 4
11
31.43
5- 6
8
7.14
5- 6
2
5.71
7-8
5
4.46
7-8
0
0
≥9
6
5.36
≥9
1
2.86
Total
112
100
Total
35
100
Mean
3.047411
Mean
2.577143
Std. Dev.
2.539682
Std. Dev.
2.11338
4.1. Analysis of Rice Innovation in the study area
Technological Innovation if properly understood from the gender perspective can foster increase in
agricultural productivity (Tavya et. al. 2013). NERICA variety is a more recent innovation in the
study area. It was introduced by AfricaRice to increase farmers’ productivity in an attempt to reduce
poverty. This variety has the ability to double farmer’s productivity. Lower percentage of the male
and female rice farming household use NERICA variety. Table 2 presents gender usage of rice
technology and the particular NERICA Variety which is the innovation under consideration in the
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 79
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
study area. The result shows that male and female rice farming household considerably uses most of
the improved varieties present in the study area. Larger percentage of the surveyed female rice
farming households (88.57%) use improved varieties than the male rice farming household (85.71%)
13.39% and 8.57% respectively. Further test shows that there is no significant difference in the use of
the NERICA variety by both male and female rice farming households. The implication of this is that
innovation in rice farming has not been properly utilized in the study area.
Table 2. Technology and Innovation in Rice Farming
Distribution of Rice farming Household according to the use of
All Improved Variety except NERICA
Gender
Frequency
Percentage
t-value
Female
Non-use
32
91.43
Use
3
8.57
0.118
Total
35
100
Male
Non-use
97
86.61
Use
15
13.39
Total
112
100
Distribution of Rice farming Household according to Use of
NERICA Variety
Gender
Frequency
Percentage
t-value
Female
Non-use
4
11.43
0.383
Use
31
88.57
Total
35
100
Male
Non-use
16
14.29
Use
96
85.71
Total
112
100
4.2. Decision Making Analysis
Level of Women control over productive resources; ownership of the land and other productive
assets. Decision making is important in productive process. Ability to make decision as to the use of
resource and product from farm is important to know the gender empowerment within the household.
Table 3 presents the women involvement about decision making within the household, the decision
studied include; control over productive resources (land, capital structures as well as their
involvement in decision as to the use, acquisition, rent or sale of such resources); decision of types of
variety to be grown by the household and the ecology; plot management (planting, fertilizer
application, irrigation, weeding and harvesting); distribution of farm output; decision about income
from plot; total household income; other general agricultural decisions.
The result shows that 80.15% of the male have access and solely make decision as touching
productive resources as compared to 8.09% of the females. 8.09% of the decisions are jointly made in
equal proportion, the decision jointly made by the male and the female in the households but with the
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 80
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
male dominating such decisions represent 3.68%. 79.31% of decisions of choice of innovation to be
used in rice farming (type of variety and ecology) is solely taken by the male, 0.86% of the decision is
made by the female, 7.76% is jointly made with equal contribution from both the male and the female,
2.59% is jointly made with male dominating the decision, 0.86% are jointly made with the female
dominating. 81.88% of the plot management decision is solely made by males, 8.70% is solely made
by females, 7.24% is jointly and equally made while 2.17% of plot management decision is made
jointly but the male dominates. Farmers after harvesting distribute the output into categories; the
amount to be sold, the amount to be saved as seed, the amount to be given as donation and the amount
to consume within the household. 80.70% of distribution decisions are solely made by the male head,
10.53% are solely made by the female head, 6.14% of such decisions are jointly made with equal
contribution, 1.75% is jointly made with the female head dominating, 0.88% is jointly made with the
male head dominating. More than half of the decision as touching the income generated from the plot
is solely made by male head (80.74%), 8.89% is solely made by the female head; 7.41% is jointly
made with the male and female head having the same percentage of contribution. 2.22% of farm
income decision is jointly made but the male dominates while 0.74% of the decision is jointly made
but with women dominating. On household income, 78.44% of the income decisions are solely made
by the male head, 10.34% of the decision is made by the female head, 6.90% are jointly decided,
2.59% are jointly made with the male dominating and 1.74% are jointly decided with the female
dominating. On the general agricultural decision made, 76.60% of agricultural decision is made by
solely by male head, 7.80% of agricultural decision is solely made by female, 7.09% of the
agricultural decision is made jointly by both male and female head of the household. Decisions made
jointly by the male and the female household head with male dominating such decision represent
6.38% while only 2.13% of the household decision as related to agricultural activities are jointly
decided by females with males dominating. The result of the women empowerment index shows the
marginalization of women in decision making as touching agricultural activities in the household.
These results agree with (Rahman, 2008; Ani, 2003)
Table 3. Results of the Women Empowerment Index (Decision Making)
Decision Making About;
Freq.
Percentage
Cum.
Productive Resources
Male Alone
109
80.15
80.15
Joint but male Dominating
5
3.68
83.82
Joint with equal contribution
11
8.09
91.91
Female alone
11
8.09
100
Total
136
100
Choice of innovation
Male Alone
92
79.31
79.31
Joint but male Dominating
3
2.59
81.9
Joint with equal contribution
9
7.76
89.66
Joint with female dominating
1
0.86
90.52
Female alone
11
9.48
100
Total
116
100
Plot management plot
Male Alone
113
81.88
81.88
Joint but male Dominating
3
2.17
84.06
Joint with equal contribution
10
7.25
91.3
Female alone
12
8.7
100
Total
138
100
Distribution of output
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 81
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
Male Alone
92
80.7
80.7
Joint but male Dominating
1
0.88
81.58
Joint with equal contribution
7
6.14
87.72
Joint with female dominating
2
1.75
89.47
Female alone
12
10.53
100
Total
114
100
Distribution of income from plots
Male Alone
109
80.74
80.74
Joint but male Dominating
3
2.22
82.96
Joint with equal contribution
10
7.41
90.37
Joint with female dominating
1
0.74
91.11
Female alone
12
8.89
100
Total
135
100
Household income
Male Alone
91
78.45
78.45
Joint but male Dominating
3
2.59
81.03
Joint with equal contribution
8
6.9
87.93
Joint with female dominating
2
1.72
89.66
Female alone
12
10.34
100
Total
116
100
General agricultural practices
Male Alone
108
76.1
76.6
Joint but male Dominating
9
6.3
83
Joint with equal contribution
10
7
90.1
Joint with female dominating
3
2.1
92.2
Female alone
11
7.7
100
Total
141
99.3
5. Summary and Conclusion
The study revealed that despite the available rice technologies present, the use of recent rice
innovation (NERICA variety) by farming household is low; Technological interventions aiming to
improve livelihoods that bring gender equity can become successful only when the prevailing gender
roles in society and access to different livelihood opportunities are fully understood. Aside households
whose head are majorly women, the result of the women empowerment index women are not
justifiably included in decision making as touching agricultural activities in the household. It is
therefore recommended that if progress will be made in rice production across the value chain,
innovation usage should be properly advocate, subsidy should be intensified and women
consideration in decision making to foster their empowerment should not be a matter of propaganda
in policy, it should rather be a priority.
Acknowledgement
The Authors are grateful to Africa Rice Centre Cotonou, Benin Republic for funding this research,
Department of Agricultural Economics and Farm Management, University of Ilorin. Kwara, State.
Nigeria and National Cereals Research Institute, Badeggi, Nigeria for providing the technical support
Journal of Agricultural Informatics (ISSN 2061-862X) 2015 Vol. 6, No. 2:72-82
doi: 10.17700/jai.2015.6.2.179 82
Oluwafemi Ajewole, Opeyemi Ayinde Eyitayo, Vivian Ojehomon, Rita Agboh-Noameshie, Aliou Diagne: Gender Analysis
of Agricultural Innovation and Decision Making among Rice Farming Household in Nigeria
References
Ajani O.I.Y. (2008) Gender Dimensions of Agriculture, Poverty, Nutrition, and Food Security in Nigeria.
Available online at ifpri-nigeria@cgiar.org. Accessed on 30th January 2013.
Ani, A.O. (2003). Taking farm decisions and socioeconomic characteristics of rural women farmers in Southern
Ebonyi State, Nigeria. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology. Vol 5, No 4, pp. 645-649.
Arndt C. & Tarp F. (2000) Agricultural technology, risk and gender: A CGE analysis of Mozambique, World
Development. Vol. 28, No.7, pp. 1307-1326. doi: 10.1016/s0305-750x(00)00017-6
Ayinde, O.E, Abduolaye T., Olaoye, G., Akangbe, J.A. (2013a) Gender and Innovation in Agriculture: A Case
Study of Farmers’ Varietal Preference of Drought Tolerant Maize in Southern Guinea Savannah Region of
Nigeria. Albanian J. Agric. Sci. Vol.12, No 4, pp. 617-625.
Ayinde O.E., Ojehomon V.E.T., Daramola, F. S. Falaki, A.A. (2013b) Evaluation of the Effects of Climate
Change on Rice Production in Niger State, Nigeria. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and
Management. Vol 6., pp. 763 – 773. doi: 10.4314/ejesm.v6i6.7s
Cisse B., Arouna, A., Diagne A. (2012) Rice Sector Development Hubs; Overview of Hub Activities and
Selected sites in the countries. 2012 AfricaRice Science Week and GRiSP-Africa Science Forum 1-5 October
2012, Cotonou, Benin, p 3.
Federal Office of Statistics. (2013) Poverty Profile for Nigeria 1980-1996 (19990Lagos:
www.nigerianstat.gov.ng. Accessed April 14th, 2013.
Federal Office of Statistics. (2012) Gross Domestic Product for Nigeria. Available at www.nigerianstat.gov.ng.
Accessed April 14th, 2013.
Idiong, C. I., Damian, J.A., Susan, B. O. (2006) Comparative Analysis of Technical Efficiency in Swamp and
Upland Rice Production System in Cross River State, Nigeria. Proceedings of Farm Management Association of
Nigeria (FAMAN), September, 18th – 21st 2006, Jos, Plateau State, pp. 30-38.
International Food and Policy Research IFPRI. (2011) Engendering Agricultural Research, Development, and
Extension, Washington, DC 20006-1002, USA, pp. 1-54. Available online at
http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/rr176.pdf. Accessed October 12th, 2013. doi:
10.2499/9780896291904
Kandiwa V. (2013) Mainstreaming gender in maize improvement research CIMMYT Report.
http://dtma.cimmyt.org/index.ptent/article/110-news-articles/158-mainstreaming gender-in-maize-improvement-
research-MMKN. (Accessed January 12, 2013).
Plucknett D.L., Philips, T.P., Kagbo, R.B. (2000) A Global Development Strategy for Cassava: Transforming a
Traditional Tropical Root Crops. Spurring Rural Industrial Development and Raising Incomes for the Rural
Poor. pp. 1-130.
Rahman, S.A., Gabriel, J., Marcus. N.D. (2004) Gender differentials in labour, contribution and productivity
infarm production. Empirical evidence from Kaduna State of Nigeria. Paper presented at the National
Conference on Family at makurdi, Nigeria. 1st-5th March 2004.
Rahman, S.A. (2008) Women's involvement in agriculture in Northern and Southern Kaduna State, Nigeria.
Journal of Gender Studies. Vol 17, No 1, pp. 17–26. doi: 10.1080/09589230701838347
Tavva, S., Abdelali-Martini, M., Aw-Hassan, A. Rischkowsky, B., Tibbo, M., Rizvi, J. (2013) Gender Roles in
Agriculture: The Case of Afghanistan. Indian Journal of Gender Studies. Vol 20, No 1, pp. 111-134. doi:
10.1177/0971521512465939
World Bank. (2013) Poverty Overview. Available online at
http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview. Accessed October 12th, 2013.
