EMPIRICAL RESULTS 39 Table 5.5 Access to credit, 2005–06 Nonbeneficiaries FII beneficiaries Type of access
Has access to credit (share of households)
Source of credit (proportion of households with access)
Banks
Relatives, social clubs, and friends
Cooperatives Farmer associations NACRDB Local government Nongovernmental organizations State government Fadama II Other 0.073
(0.262) 0.220
(0.416) 0.186
(0.391) 0.046
(0.210) 0.130
(0.338) 0.018
(0.135) 0.037
(0.189) 0.037
(0.189) 0.109
(0.313) 0.046
(0.210) 0.118
(0.325) 0.250
(0.437) 0.308
(0.466) 0.020
(0.140) 0.115
(0.323) 0.059
(0.238) 0.000
(0.000) 0.039
(0.196) 0.020
(0.140) 0.000
(0.000) 0.118
(0.325) 0.289
(0.457) 0.179
(0.386) 0.013
(0.115) 0.113
(0.318) 0.013
(0.115) 0.013
(0.115) 0.039
(0.196) 0.000
(0.000) 0.039
(0.196) 0.097
(0.297) 0.249
(0.433) 0.210
(0.408) 0.030
(0.170) 0.121
(0.327) 0.025
(0.158) 0.021
(0.144) 0.038
(0.192) 0.055
(0.228) 0.034
(0.181)
Notes: Numbers in parentheses are standard deviations. FII, Fadama II; LGA, local government author- ity; NACRDB, Nigerian Agricultural Cooperative and Rural Development Bank.
aEmpty cells imply paired comparison of any two groups in the corresponding columns that are not sta-
tistically different at the 5 percent level. bDifference between FII beneficiaries and nonbeneficiaries living in the same LGA is significant at the
5 percent level. cDifference between nonbeneficiaries living in and those living outside FII LGAs is significant at the
5 percent level. dDifference between FII beneficiaries and nonbeneficiaries living outside FII LGAs is significant at the 5 percent level.
2007b). The mission also noted that most of the processing equipment acquired by women was operated by hired hands who benefited more than the project beneficiaries. The Bank thus recommended that the beneficiary contribution for women and the vulnerable be reduced to 10 percent. Initially the project set the contribution of beneficiaries of the PAA component to 40 percent of the value of the productive asset (NFDO 2006), but reduced it to 30 percent because of overwhelming evidence of the failure of the poor to
b,d (0.381)
In FII LGAs
0.089 (0.286)
Outside FII LGAs
(n = 621) (n = 568) (n = 539) Total 0.176
0.141 (0.348) 0.137 (0.343) Testa b,c
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