This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
36 CHAPTER 5


Table 5.4 Value of productive assets for Fadama II beneficiaries (matched sample) (nairas)


Value of productive asset Group-owned Type of asset Production equipment Transport equipment Processing equipment Fishing equipment


Water and irrigation equipment


Livestock equipment Building structures Before FIIa 71,944


(148,483) (n = 18) 176,882


(122,897) (n = 17) 165,149


(740,261) (n = 69) 43,422


(53,878) (n = 27) 47,475


(205,301) (n = 118) 38,482


(113,752) (n = 31) 139,903


(624,995) (n = 31)


After FIIa 158,888


(156,116) (n = 18) 194,529


(117,323) (n = 17) 527,011


(793,466) (n = 69) 147,674


(167,484) (n = 27)


1,362,937 (1,440,951) (n = 118) 447,900


(492,751) (n = 31) 512,419


(1,018,658) (n = 31)


Individually owned Before FIIa 38,335


(74,809) (n = 65) 66,513


(95,992) (n = 127) 49,440


(87,664) (n = 69) 111,187


(326,758) (n = 41) 17,000


(28,967) (n = 74) 16,964


(34,555) (n = 49) 92,504


(203,157) (n = 50)


After FIIa 52,856


(70,038) (n = 65) 86,485


(115,898) (n = 127) 59,512


(84,749) (n = 69) 91,589


(174,255) (n = 41) 63,331


(124,446) (n = 74) 41,385


(97,515) (n = 49) 119,024


(232,709) (n = 50)


Notes: Number in parentheses is the standard deviation of the corresponding mean. Produc- tion equipment = ox plow, oxen, tractor; transport equipment = bicycle, wheelbarrow, pickup truck, motorcycle, other means of transport; processing equipment = honey- processing equipment, milling machine, refrigerator, other processing equipment; fishing equipment = fishing gear, canoe, fishing boat engine; water and irrigation equipment = water pump, borehole, tube well; livestock equipment = cattle pen, cattle trough; building equipment = storage, fishpond. FII, Fadama II.


a“Before FII” indicates the year before Fadama II started (October 2004–September 2005). “After FII” indicates the year after the project started (October 2005–September 2006).


above, there was generally an increase in the value of individually owned assets for most groups, even though in some cases, such increases were not significant and/or declined slightly. The marked differences of the matched and unmatching groups are likely due to the factors analyzed in the propen- sity score regression.


Overall, the increase in the value of productive assets was generally less for individually owned productive assets than for those owned by EIGs. Even though Fadama II did not support individuals in purchasing productive assets, FUG members—especially male-headed households—were able to acquire such


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93