Economic analysis of rice consumption patterns in Nigeria

Abstract

The study specifically examines the nature of rice consumption in Nigeria, using Kwara State as a case study. The study methodology comprised a two-stage sampling technique which was used to survey 110 rice consumer households across two villages and six towns in Kwara State. Analytical tools used in the study include the descriptive statistics and the multinomial logit model. The study results show that 55.4 per cent of the households in the study area consume both imported and local rice, while the remaining 26.4 and 18.2 per cent consume the imported rice only and local rice only, respectively. The poor quality of the local rice was found to reduce its demand. The major factors that significantly influence households' preference for either a combination of local and imported rice or the imported rice only to the local rice were the income of the household's head, household size and the educational status of the household heads. However, the price per unit kilogramme of rice was not a significant factor. The study therefore, recommends that effort should be made to increase rice production coupled with the provision of standard processing facilities. This will help to make the local rice more competitive enough thereby increasing its demand.

Full text

J. Agr. Sci. Tech. (2010) Vol. 12: 135-144
135
Economic Analysis of Rice Consumption Patterns in Nigeria
S. B. Fakayode 1*, O. A. Omotesho1, and A. E. Omoniwa1
ABSTRACT
This study examined the nature and patterns of rice consumption in Nigeria, using
Kwara State as a case study. The study methodology comprised a two stage sampling
technique which was used to survey 110 rice consumer households across two villages and
six towns in Kwara State. Analytical tools used in the study include descriptive statistics
and the multinomial logit model. The major factors that significantly influence household
preferences for either a combination of local and imported rice or the imported rice only
to the local rice were the income of the head of household, household size and the
educational status of the heads of household, the price per unit kilogramme of rice,
however, was not a significant factor. This study therefore recommends that an effort
should be made to increase rice production coupled with the provision of standard
processing facilities. This will help to make the local rice sufficiently more competitive
thereby increasing its demand.
Keywords: Consumer choices, Food availability, Multinomial logit model, Nigeria, Rice.
_____________________________________________________________________________
1 Department of Agricultural Economics and Farm Management, P. M. B. 1515, University of Ilorin,
Ilorin, Nigeria.
* Corresponding author, e-mail: segun_fakayode@yahoo.com,
INTRODUCTION
Rice is an important annual crop in
Nigeria. It is one of the major staples, which
can provide a nation’s population with the
nationally required food security minimum
of 2,400 calories per person per day (FAO,
2000). The crop is commonly consumed
even as a food crop for household food
security. The average Nigerian consumes
24.8 kg of rice per year, representing 9 per
cent of annual calorie intake (IRRI, 2001).
Due to its increasing contribution to the per
capita calorie consumption of Nigerians, the
demand for rice has been increasing at a
much faster rate than domestic production
and more than in any other African countries
since mid 1970s (FAO, 2001). For instance,
during the 1960s, Nigeria had the lowest per
capita annual consumption of rice in the
West African sub-region with an annual
average of 3 kg (See Table 1). Since then,
Nigeria’s per capital consumption levels
have grown significantly at 7.3 per cent per
annum. Consequently, per capital
consumption during the 1980s increased to
an annual average of 18 kg and reached 22
kg between 1995-2000.
As a response to the prevailing rice supply
deficit situation in Nigeria, successive
Nigerian governments intervened in the rice
sector by increasing tariffs so that local
production could be encouraged. This was
expected to widen the home market for the
nation’s local rice. The Government also
established the Federal Rice Research
Station (FRRS) at Badeggi in 1970 and the
National Cereal Research Institute (NCRI)
in 1974. Also established were the National
Seed Service (NSS) with the assistance of
the Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) in 1975, and Operation Feed the
Nation (OFN) in 1976. Other government
programmes were the River Basin
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
1 / 10

_____________________________________________________________________ Fakayode et al.
136
Table 1. Comparison between Nigeria and the Rest of West Africa
Indicator Mean
(1961-75)
Mean
(1976-82)
Mean
(1983-85)
Mean
(95-2000)
Nigeria
Production in metric tonnes 332800 806222 2306794 3189833
Import in metric tonnes 2036 420756 334974 525307
Self-reliance ratio 99% 54% 77% 79%
Total consumption in metric tones 178199 833640 1599609 2248113
Per capita consumption 3.0 12.0 18 22
West Africa without Nigeria
Production in metric tones 1779376 2344073 2822635 4041384
Import in metric tones 416183 894073 1760884 2107146
Self-reliance ratio 65% 56% 42% 50%
Total Consumption in metric tonnes 1178753 1950821 2973885 3985721
Per capital consumption 21.0 27.0 30.0 34
Source: Okorowa and Ogundele, (2005)
Development Authority (RDBA),
Agricultural Development Projects (ADP),
the National Grain Production Programmes
(NGPP), the Structural Adjustment
Programmes (SAP), and the Presidential
Initiative on Increased Rice Production,
Processing and Export. The last mentioned
Programme, which was the latest, was aimed
at addressing the ever widening demand-
supply gap for rice and stimulating surplus
rice harvest for export by the year 2007. The
implementation of this initiative started in
2004 under which rice boxes containing 10
kg of rice seeds and enough agrochemicals
for 0.25 hectares were sold to farmers in
each state at N3,500.00 per box. The idea
was to encourage farmers in each
beneficiary state to cultivate rice on at least
250 hectares of land. This initiative has thus
encouraged farmers to go into the
production of rice. The emergence of the
VEETEE rice company was another way to
boost local rice production in Nigeria. The
company is initiating a rice out-growers
scheme with farmers to boast domestic
output. The company has the facility for
polishing rice, which means high quality of
local rice (FAO, 2004).
Despite the numerous Nigerian
government policies on rice, the demand–
supply gap for rice still persists. Recent rice
production figures from 2004 put national
rice production at 2.96 million tonnes of
paddy cultivated on an area of 1,595,840
hectares. This estimate established a yield of
1.82 metric tonnes per hectare and total
milled rice of 1,480,168 tonnes giving a
milling recovery rate of 51 percent while
total national demand of milled rice is
estimated at 3.0 million tonnes per annum.
There is therefore a deficit of 1,519,832
tonnes of milled rice. Estimates indicate that
rice imports represent more than 25 per cent
of agricultural imports and over 40 per cent
of domestic consumption (FMARD, 2004).
Nigeria has thus become a major rice
importer in the world market and second
only to Indonesia in the last five years of this
decade (2000-2005). From 1999, the value
of rice imports rose steadily from US $259
million to US $655 million and US $756
million in 2001 and 2002, respectively
(CBN, 2006). These estimates do not take
into account the unrecorded smuggled rice
imports into Nigeria (Rahji, 2005).
The demerit of Nigeria’s dependence on
imported rice is more so as the share of the
imported rice in the Nigerian food market is
far above that of the domestically produced
rice. Rice imports have affected the
domestic production and marketing of
Nigeria’s local rice. This is due to the
decreased demand for local rice by
Nigerians as opposed to the imported ones.
The local Nigerian variety has a lower
demand due to the high cost of producing
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
2 / 10

Rice Consumption Pattern in Nigeria __________________________________________
137
Table 2. Study Sample Design Outlay
ADP
Zone
Town/Village No of
Respondents
B
Lafiagi
Pategi
Edogi
Sabo-Gondangi
15
15
10
10
C
Ilorin Metropolis
Oke-Oyi
Afon
Jebba
15
15
15
15
Total 8 110
Source: Field Survey (2007)
the crop and cost of production is usually
not subsidized by the government. The non-
competitiveness could also be as a result of
poor processing resulting in a final product
with a high percentage of broken grains and
debris (FAO, 2004).
The foregoing therefore raises pertinent
questions regarding the place of local
Nigerian rice in the nutrition of the nation’s
households. It also raises questions as to the
nature and pattern of local rice consumption
in the country. The current study therefore
examined the nature and pattern of rice
consumption in Nigeria using Kwara State,
Nigeria as a case study. The study’s specific
objectives were to examine those socio-
economic characteristics of rice consumers
and the determinants of rice type: -whether
domestic or imported rice- preferred by rice
consumers.
The study is of paramount importance as it
examined a contemporary issue in the
Nigerian economy: the nature of rice
consumption in Nigeria. It identifies those
factors explaining the nature of rice
consumption by Nigerian households
especially those factors that explain the
demand differentials between local and
imported rice. Such study outcomes could
therefore serve as a pointer to policy options
that could be adopted by stake-holders in the
domestic rice industry, to raise the demand
for local rice thereby raising the nation’s rice
production at the local farm level. This in
turn will reduce Nigeria’s import
dependency on rice.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Area of Study and Sample
This study was carried out in Kwara State,
Nigeria. The state serves as a ‘bridge’ state
between northern and southernwestern
Nigeria, sharing boundaries with Ondo,
Oyo, Osun, Niger and Kogi States in
Nigeria, and an international border with the
Republic of Benin. The State has a
population of about 2.37 million people
(NPC, 2006), who individually consume
about 24.6 Kg of rice annually (IRRI, 2001).
The state is divided into four Agricultural
Zones by the Kwara State Agricultural
Development Project (KWADP) authority
based on agro-ecological considerations.
Although rice is produced in all the
KWADP Zones, the KWADP Zone B
produces about 90 percent of the state’s
annual rice production. Kwara State’s
annual rice production estimate ranges
between 17.5-118.3 metric tonnes: 49.6
metric tonnes on average (KWADP, 2004).
The target population for this study are
those households that consume rice, whether
the local or the imported rice types, in the
study area. Given the four ADP zones of
Kwara State, a two stage sampling
procedure was adopted to select a
representative sample for the study. The first
stage comprised the random selection of
towns and villages in KWADP Zones B and
C. Towns and villages in these zones were
selected because they are representative
zones for rice consumption in Kwara State.
Zone C was selected because it has more
towns than all the other ADP Zones in
Kwara State. Imported rice consumers are
therefore expected in this Zone than in the
other Zone(s). The second stage involved the
random selection of 110 households across
the selected towns and villages as shown in
Table 2. The households (respondents) were
interviewed via the use of interview
schedules that were administered to them.
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
3 / 10

_____________________________________________________________________ Fakayode et al.
138
Additionally, some information for the study
was sourced from secondary sources namely
academic journals, Food and Agricultural
Organization (FAO) bulletins, National
Cereal Research Institute (NCRI) bulletins,
International Institute for Tropical
Agriculture (IITA) reports and the Central
Bank of Nigeria (CBN) bulletins.
Analytical Techniques
Data Analysis
The tools employed for analysing the
study data were the descriptive and the
multinomial logit analysis. The descriptive
statistical tool comprised frequency counts,
percentages means and mode which were
used to analyse the socio-economic
characteristics of rice consumers. The
multinomial logit tool was used to examine
those factors that influence household
preference for either the imported rice only,
or a combination of both the imported and
local rice, to the local rice only option.
The Multinomial Logit Model
The multinomial logit model was used to
asses why households in the study area prefer
other rice types to the local Nigerian rice type.
The model was chosen based on survey results
that revealed that household rice consumption
(dependent variable) was found to be a
categorical variable which can take three (3)
categories or levels. These categories were
assigned numbers 0, 1 and 2. 0 was used to
indicate the combined (local and imported
rice) consumer group; 1 for the only imported
rice consumer group and 2 was used to
indicate the local rice consumer group. The
local rice consumer group was taken as the
reference group. The multinomial logit model
was therefore used to identify the variables
that make households belong to categories 0
(local and imported rice consumer group) and
1 (imported rice consumer group) instead of 2
(the local rice consumer group) as follows.
The probability that the ith household
belongs to the jth rice consumer group Pij
reduces to:
∑
=
=
jk
βjxi
βjxi
ij e
e
P (1
According to Maddala (1983), the model
makes the choice of probabilities on
individual characteristics of agents.
Following Maddala (1990) and Babcock et
al. (1995), the basic model is written as:
∑
=
=
0k
βjxi
βjxi
ij e
e
P (2
Where i= 1, 2,----- n variables; k= 0, 1, ---
j groups and
β
j is vector of parameters that
relates Xj

s to the probability of being in
group j where there are j+1 groups.
For this study, the Xi variables range from
X1–X4, where X1= Income of household of
household head, X2 - Household size, X3=
Educational status of household head and
X4= Price per kilogramme of rice in Naira N
(where N140 equals $1).
Normalization of the Model
As a rule, the summation of the probability
for the three categorical groups in our model
must equal to unity. This calls for
normalization of the equation model. The
common rule is to set one of the parameters
vectors equal to zero (Kimhi, 1994). Hence,
for k number of choices only v–1 distinct
parameters are identified and estimated.
Based on Equation (2), the probability of
being in the reference group: the local rice
consumer group with parameter vectors
equal zero is
∑
=
+
=
jk
βjxi
io e1
1
P (3
Similarly, the probability of being in each
of the other j groups is
∑
=
+
=
jk
βjxi
ij e1
1
P (4
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
4 / 10

Rice Consumption Pattern in Nigeria __________________________________________
139
Table 3. Socio-Economic Characteristics of Rice Consumers
Characteristic Frequency Percentage %
Educational Status
Quranic Education
9
8.3
Primary Education 4 3.6
Secondary Education 27 24.5
Tertiary Education 66 60.0
Adult Education 1 0.9
No Formal Education 3 2.7
Total 110 100.0
Primary Occupation
Trading 8 7.4
Farming 71 64.5
Civil Service 5 4.5
Others 26 23.6
Total 110 100.0
Secondary Occupation
Trading 55 50.0
Civil Service 23 20.9
None 32 29.1
Total 110 100.0
Household Size
<5 37 33.4
5-9 46 41.8
10-14 16 14.5
15-19 6 5.5
>20 5 4.8
Total 110 100.0
Source: Data Analysis (2007)
Dividing equation (3) by (4) gives
βjxi
io
ij e
P
P= (5
This denotes the relative probability of
each group to the probability of the
reference group. Hence, the estimated
coefficients for each group reflect the
effect of Xi’s on the likelihood of the
consumer’s household belonging to that
alternative group relative to the reference
group. The logarithm of the odd ratio in
the equation to base e gives the estimating
equation.
In βjXi
P
P
i0
ij =





 (6
Following Hill (1983), the coefficients of
the group can be given using the formula
βv = - [β1 + β2 + ----- v-1] (7
Issues: Coefficients, Their Signs and
Interpretations
i. A positive coefficient indicates that the
variable is associated with a higher
probability of being in the group choice
under consideration relative to the reference
group. This implies that the probability of
the individual selecting the particular group
is greater than the probability of choosing
the reference group.
ii. A negative coefficient means that the
probability of the household choosing the
particular group is smaller than the
probability of being in the reference group.
iii. Estimates not significantly different
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
5 / 10

_____________________________________________________________________ Fakayode et al.
140
Table 4. Type of rice consumed by households.
Type of Rice Frequency Percentage
%
Local 20 18.2
Imported 29 26.4
Combined 61 55.4
Total 110 100.0
Source: Data Analysis (2007).
Table 5. Reasons why households prefer
imported rice to local rice.
Reason Frequency Percentage
%
Quality and
taste
100
90.9
Personality
status
10
9.1
Total 110 100.0
Source: Data Analysis (2007).
from zero indicate that, the particular
regressor (Xi) does not affect the
consumption nor the probability of the state
to which it applies relative to the reference
group (Basant, 1997).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Socio-economic Characteristics of Rice
Consumers
Table 3 presents the socio-economic and
demographic characteristics of rice
consumer respondents in the study area. The
educational status of the head of household
to a large extent influences his/her choice of
rice type to be fed to the family. Those with
some level of formal education are expected
to prefer the imported rice type. This is most
probably because of the higher quality of
imported rice. However some of the
educated heads of household may patronise
local rice because of its higher raw nutrients
composition. Table 3 indicates that a sizable
number of the head of household
respondents have had at least primary
education. Occupation is a primary
determinant of the consumers’ income level;
income, in turn, determines the household
level of consumption. Consumption is
usually hypothesized to be a function of
disposable income. The majority of
respondent heads of householdin the study
area (64.5%) practised farming as their
primary occupation. The remaining
respondents 35.5%) were in trading and civil
service jobs as their primary occupation.
However, they supplemented their primary
occupation with farming. The size of the
household to a large extent determines the
type of rice that would be consumed by the
household. It is expected that larger
households will tend to consume more of the
cheaper local rice as opposed to those with
small households. This is because the large
households have less per capita income than
the small households. About three-quarters
of the household respondents (75.2%) have
families that comprised less than 9 persons
while the remaining respondent households
(24.8%) have family sizes that comprised
more than nine people. The average family
size per household is six while the modal
household class in the study area ranged
between 5-9 persons per household.
Within the study area, three categories of
rice consumer households were identified
during the study: those households that
consume the local Nigerian rice type, those
that consume the imported rice type and
those that consume a combination of the
local and imported rice types. Table 4 shows
that the commonest rice type consumed by
farming households in the study area was a
combination of the local and imported rice
types. This is consumed by over half of the
respondents (55.4%) in the study area.
About a quarter of the farming households
(26.4%) consumed the imported rice type
only. Only a few (18.2%) consumed the
local rice type only. The study respondents
also gave reasons as to why they preferred
one particular rice type to the others (Table
5). Almost all the household respondents
reported that they preferred imported rice to
the local rice, because the imported rice is of
a higher quality and grade: it has a better
taste, it is polished, not broken and is free of
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
6 / 10

Rice Consumption Pattern in Nigeria __________________________________________
141
Table 6. Multinomial logistic estimates.
Consumers of local and
imported rice group
Consumers of imported
rice group only
Variables Parameter Parameter
Income (N) 3.972(1.156)* 0.916 (16.626)*
Household size -18.882(4.655)* -8.250(2.495)*
Educational status of household head 4.517(1.916)* 0.786(16.644)*
Price (N/Kg) -1.87E-02(0.275) 9.947E03(0.339)
Constant 15.062(4.898) 11.557(3.523)
Log likelihood 19.572
likelihood ratio (λ) 395.759*
ρ
2 91.0
n 110
Note: Figures in brackets are the t-value of the estimated regression coefficients.
* Implies significant at 5 percent level of significance.
Source: Data Analysis (2007).
stones and other debris. As regards the local
rice, respondents agued that the local
Nigerian rice is of low quality and less tasty
like the imported rice. It is broken and
usually accompanied by little stones and
other debris like rice husks. These findings
concur with Oni and Olayemi (1973) and
Spenser (1979), who both reported that the
Nigerian rice is of a lower quality when
compared with rice imported into the
country. Clark (1982) also reported that
during the processing of the local rice, no
polishers and cleaners are used while the
hullers are usually in a bad state. Other
processing problems reported by Clark were
poor parboiling and drying techniques. The
resulting rice is thus generally dirty, having
mineral and vegetable contamination (2
percent and 0.2 percent, respectively) and
often having a strong off-odour due to slight
fermentation during the parboiling process
(Akpokodje et al., 2001). Other reasons why
study respondents preferred the imported
rice to the local rice was found to be the
personality of the consumer household head.
Only a few of the respondents (9.1%)
reasoned along this line. They explained that
they purchased the imported rice because
they believe it was the elites’ rice. They
therefore consumed the imported rice
because they wanted to be like the elites.
Multinomial Logistic Regression
Estimates for Determinants of Rice
Consumption.
The variables that determine the various
rice consumer categories were analysed
using the multinomial logit model. The
result of the model estimation is presented in
Table 4.
From the study, the likelihood ratio test for
the model lambda (λ) is 395.750 which is
significant at 5 percent. This implies that the
rice consumer groups are heterogeneous.
The multinomial logistic estimate for the
combined rice consumer group (consumers
of local and imported rice groups) indicates
that income, the educational status of the
head of household and household size were
significant. These variables therefore
determine why households prefer to
consume a combination of local and
imported rice to the local rice. The price per
kilogramme of rice is not significant and
therefore it did not significantly influence a
household’s preference for a combination of
local and imported rice to the local rice only.
Also, the multinomial logistic estimate for
the imported rice only group indicates that
income, educational status of the head of
household and household size were all
significant. These variables therefore
determine why households prefer to
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
7 / 10

_____________________________________________________________________ Fakayode et al.
142
consume imported rice alone to the local
rice. The price per kilogramme of local rice
was not significant. The variable therefore
did not significantly influence a household’s
preference for imported rice only. The
household size variable coefficient was
negative, implying that the probability of the
household consuming either a combination
of local and imported rice or the imported
rice only relative to the local rice increases
as the household size decreases. The income
and educational status of the head of
household were positive implying that the
two variables explain why the household
would forgo local rice for a combination of
local and imported rice or the imported rice
only. The probability of consuming a
combination of local and imported rice or
the imported rice only relative to the local
rice increases as the income increases and as
the educational status of the household head
rises.
CONCLUSIONS
This study examined the nature and
patterns of rice consumption in Nigeria,
using Kwara State as a case study. The study
result shows that a majority of households
were agrarian with an average household
size of 6. Based on the types of rice
consumed by household, households can be
classified into three groups: households that
consumed local rice type only, those that
consume imported rice type only and those
that consumed a combination of the local
and imported rice types. The poor quality of
the local rice was revealed as a deterrent to
its consumption by households. These
groups constitute 18.2 percent, 26.4 percent
and 55.4 percent of the total household
respondents in the study area, respectively.
The multinomial logit model revealed that
household size, income of the household and
the educational status of the head of
household significantly influenced a
household’s preference for either a
combination of local and imported rice or
imported rice only to consuming the local
Nigerian rice only. The price per unit
kilogramme of rice did not significantly
influence a household’s preference for a
combination of local and imported rice or
imported rice only to the local Nigerian rice
only.
The study therefore recommends that
efforts should be geared towards the
provision of modern processing equipment
for the local rice industry. Such efforts are
expected to improve the Nigerian local rice
grade, thereby enhancing its competitiveness
amongst the rice varieties consumed by
Nigerian households. Also it was discovered
that, as the income and the educational
status of the household appreciates,
households tend to prefer the imported rice
to the local rice. In this respect, the study
recommends raising the awareness of the
middle class and the general populace on the
adverse consequences of importing large
tonnages of rice into Nigeria, at the expense
of the nation’s domestic rice market.
Government and extension agents can play
pivotal roles in such campaigns.
Additionally, Government on its part can
encourage the consumption of the nation s
rice via the enactment of policies like trade
embargoes on rice imports to Nigeria. Such
efforts would not only be in favour of
increased local rice consumption by
Nigerians, but will also broaden the local
rice market. This, in turn, will encourage
private capital investments in the rice
milling sector thereby raising the quality of
the nation’s rice.
REFERENCES
1. Akpokodje, G., Lancon, E. and Erenstein, O.
2001. Nigeria's Rice Sector: State of the Art.
Paper Presented at the NISER/WARDA
Nigerian Rice Economy Workshop, Ibadan,
8-9 November, 2001, Bouka, Cote D'ivoire
4-9.
2. Babcock, B. A., Chaherli, N. M. and
Lakshiminariayam, P. G. 1995. Programme
Participation and Farm Level, Adoption of
Conservation Tillage: Estimates from a
Multinomial logit model. Working Paper 95-
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
8 / 10

Rice Consumption Pattern in Nigeria __________________________________________
143
WP 136, Centre for Agricultural and Rural
Development Iowa State University, Ames,
Iowa.
3. Basant, R. 1997. Technology Strategies of
Large Enterprise in Indian Industry: Some
Explorations. J. World Develop., 25(10):
163-1700
4. Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), 2006. CBN
Statistical Bulletin 2006.
5. Clark, P. A. 1982. Off-odour in Nigeria
Rice. Part 2: Field and Extension Studies. J.
Tropic. Sci., 24(3): 165-172.
6. Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development (FMARD), 2004. Ministerial
Press Briefing by Minister of Agriculture
and Rural Development on the State of
Nigerian Agriculture at Maizube Farms.
May 16, 2004, Niger State.
7. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO),
2000. Agriculture towards 2015/30
Technical Interim Report. April, 2000.
Rome
8. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO),
2001. FAO Rice Conference 2001. Accessed
Online at www.fao.org On 23rd July, 2007.
9. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO),
2002. FAO Rice Conference 2002. Accessed
Online at www.fao.org On 23rd July,2007.
10. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)
2004 FAO Rice Conference 2004. Accessed
Online at www.fao.org 23rd July, 2007.
11. International Rice Research Institute (IRRI),
2001. Rice Statistics. Accessed Online at
http://oryza.com/africa/nigeria/index.shtml
on 27th July, 2007.
12. Kimhi, A. 1994). Participation of Farm
Owners in Farm and Off-farm Work
including the Option of Full-Time Off-farm
Work. J. Agric. Econ., 45(2): 232-239.
13. Kwara State Ministry of Information,
(2002). Kwara State Diary 2000. PP. 1-10.
14. Kwara State Agricultural Development
Project (KWADP), 2004. Crop Area Yield
Survey (CAY) Results 2004. Kwara State
Agricultural Development Project Authority
2004 CAY Report (2004).
15. Maddala, G. S. 1983. Limited Dependent
and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
16. Maddala, G. S. 1990. Limited Dependent
and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
17. McFadden, D. 1973. Conditional Logit
Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behaviour.
In: “Frontiers in Econometrics”, Zaremka,
P. (Ed.). New York Academic Press.
18. Micheal, D. 2006. Nigeria Grain and Feed.
Annual Report of USDA Foreign
Agricultural Services, Global Agricultural
Information Network (GAIN), Report
N16007: 7-8.
19. National Population Commission (NPC)
(2006): “Population of Kwara State”
National Population Commission of Nigeria.
Abuja (2006).
20. Okoruwa, V. O. and Ogundele, O. O. 2005.
Technical Efficiency Differentials in Rice
Production Technologies in Nigeria.
Nigerian Institute for Social and Economic
Research (NISER). Ibadan Nigeria.
21. Oni, C. A. and Olayemi, J. K. 1973.
Economics of Rice Milling in Kwara and
North-Western States: A Comparative
Analysis. Bull. Rural Econ. Soc., 8(2).
22. Rahji, M. A. Y. 2005. Determinants of
Efficiency Differentials in Lowland Rice
Production Systems in Niger State, Nigeria.
J. Agric. Res., 1(1):7-17.
23. Spenser, D. S. C. 1979. Rice Projects: A
strategy for Rice Milling and Marketing in
Anambra and Imo States. West African Rice
Development Association (WARDA).
24. Wudiri, B. B. 1990. Research to Meet
Nigeria’s Rice Requirement in the 1990s and
Beyond. Paper Presented at the Federal
Ministry of Science and Technology
Technical Seminar, Lagos.
25. Hills, M. A. 1983. Female Labour Force
Participation in Developing and Developed
Countries: Considerations of the Informal
Sector. Rev. Econometrics and Statistics,
63(3):459-468
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
9 / 10

_____________________________________________________________________ Fakayode et al.
144
ﻪﻳﺮﺠﻴﻧ رد ﺞﻧﺮﺑ فﺮﺼﻣ يﻮﮕﻟا يدﺎﺼﺘﻗا ﻞﻴﻠﺤﺗ و ﻪﻳﺰﺠﺗ
س .ب .دﻮﻳﺎﻛﺎﻓ، او. ا .ﻮﻣواﻮﺸﺗ،ا .ا .اﻮﻴﻧﻮﻣوا
هﺪﻴﻜﭼ
رد ﺞﻧﺮﺑ فﺮﺼﻣ يﻮﮕﻟا ﺖﻌﻴﺒﻃ ﻲﺳرﺮﺑ ﻪﺑ يدرﻮﻣ ﻪﻌﻟﺎﻄﻣ ناﻮﻨﻋ ﻪﺑ اراوﺎﻛ ﺖﻟﺎﻳا بﺎﺨﺘﻧا ﺎﺑ ﺶﺨﺑ ﻦﻳا رد
ﺖﺳا هﺪﺷ ﻪﺘﺧادﺮﭘ ﻪﻳﺮﺠﻴﻧ .ﻪﻠﺣﺮﻣ ود يﺮﻴﮔ ﻪﻧﻮﻤﻧ ﻚﻴﻨﻜﺗ ﻞﻣﺎﺷ ﻖﻴﻘﺤﺗ شور ﻲﺳرﺮﺑ ﻪﺑ ﻪﻛ ﺖﺳا يا110
ﺖﻟﺎﻳا رد ﺮﻬﺷ ﺶﺷ و ﺎﺘﺳور ود زا ﺞﻧﺮﺑ هﺪﻨﻨﻛ فﺮﺼﻣ راﻮﻧﺎﺧﺖﺳا هﺪﺷ بﺎﺨﺘﻧا اراوﺎﻛ . درﻮﻣ ﻞﻴﻠﺤﺗ راﺰﺑا
ﺪﺷﺎﺒﻴﻣ يا ﻪﻠﻤﺟ ﺪﻨﭼ ﺖﻴﺟﻮﻟ لﺪﻣ و ﻲﻔﻴﺻﻮﺗ رﺎﻣآ ﻞﻣﺎﺷ ﻖﻴﻘﺤﺗ رد هدﺎﻔﺘﺳا . ﻲﻨﻌﻣ رﻮﻃ ﻪﺑ ﻪﻛ ﻲﻠﺻا ﻞﻣاﻮﻋ
هﺪﻨﻨﻛ فﺮﺼﻣ نﺎﺤﺟر يراد ﺖﺤﺗ ﻲﺗادراو و ﻲﻠﺧاد ﺞﻧﺮﺑ زا ﻲﺒﻴﻛﺮﺗ ﺎﻳ و ﻲﺗادراو ﺞﻧﺮﺑ زا هدﺎﻔﺘﺳﺎﻳاﺮﺑ ار نﺎﮔ
زا ﺪﻨﺗرﺎﺒﻋ هداد راﺮﻗ ﺮﻴﺛﺄﺗ: راﻮﻧﺎﺧ ﺖﺳﺮﭘﺮﺳ تﻼﻴﺼﺤﺗ ﺢﻄﺳ و راﻮﻧﺎﺧ هزاﺪﻧا ،راﻮﻧﺎﺧ ﺖﺳﺮﭘﺮﺳ ﺪﻣآرد
ﺖﺳا ﻪﺘﺷاﺪﻧ فﺮﺼﻣ يﻮﮕﻟا ﺮﺑ يراد ﻲﻨﻌﻣ ﺮﺛا ﺞﻧﺮﺑ مﺮﮔ ﻮﻠﻴﻛ ﺮﻫ ﺖﻤﻴﻗ ﻪﻛ دﻮﺑ ﺪﻫاﻮﺧ. دﺎﻬﻨﺸﻴﭘ ﺶﺨﺑ ﻦﻳا
ﺪﺑﺎﻳ ﺶﻳاﺰﻓا مزﻻ يﺎﻫدراﺪﻧﺎﺘﺳا تﺎﻧﺎﻜﻣا ﺎﺑ ﺞﻧﺮﺑ ﺪﻴﻟﻮﺗ ﺎﺗ دﺮﻴﮔ ترﻮﺻ ﻲﻳﺎﻬﺷﻼﺗﺪﻳﺎﺑ ﻪﻛ ﺪﻨﻜﻴﻣ . ﺮﻣا ﻦﻳا
ﻴﻣ ﻚﻤﻛ ﺶﻳاﺰﻓا ار ﻲﻠﺧاد ﺞﻧﺮﺑ يﺎﺿﺎﻘﺗ ﻲﺗادراو ﺞﻧﺮﺑ ﺎﺑ ﻪﺴﻳﺎﻘﻣ رد ﻲﻠﺧاد ﺞﻧﺮﺑ ﻲﺘﺑﺎﻗر ﻲﺒﺴﻧ ﺖﻳﺰﻣ ﻪﻛ ﺪﻨﻜ
ﺪﻫد .
[ DOR: 20.1001.1.16807073.2010.12.2.3.1 ] [ Downloaded from jast.modares.ac.ir on 2023-02-09 ]
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) 10 / 10