EMPIRICAL RESULTS 59
The value of productive assets owned increased the probability of adopt- ing all technologies, soil and water conservation practices, and postharvest technologies. This finding is consistent with past studies (see the review by Feder and Zilberman 1985) that have observed higher adoption rates among wealthier farmers. However, the value of productive assets is negatively associated with the adoption of financial management skills, which could be due to an adoption of such skills before the start of Fadama II. Surprisingly, the value of livestock does not have a significant impact on the adoption of any of the technologies considered. It was expected that the value of live- stock would increase technology adoption—just as for other assets. It is pos- sible that the farmers owning many valuable livestock—like the pastoralists in northern Nigeria—do not employ crop production technologies or improved livestock production technologies, such as livestock breeds. Adoption of most technologies was generally higher in both the moist and dry savannah zones during the study period. As expected, proximity to roads increased adoption of improved livestock breeds and postharvest, marketing, business, and financial management technologies. Similarly, proximity to a town encouraged adoption of financial management technologies. These results confirm the role that rural services play in helping farmers access pro- duction, farm management, and marketing technologies and services. Rural services also encourage the adoption of technologies for the production of perishable products, such as milk and other animal products.
Fadama II has focused on providing postharvest handling, agricultural marketing, and financial management advisory services. However, it is only for postharvest advisory services that beneficiaries have significantly greater demand compared with nonbeneficiaries (at p = 0.10). However, participa- tion in Fadama II increased the propensity to adopt soil fertility management, suggesting that the program may have supplied such technology, given that the beneficiaries did not demand it. Nonbeneficiaries reported significantly greater demand for soil fertility management technologies and financial advi- sory services than did beneficiaries (at p = 0.05).
It is not clear why nonbeneficiaries expressed higher demand for soil fer- tility management technologies than beneficiaries. Perhaps the public exten- sion services provided by the ADP—the major source of advisory services for nonbeneficiaries—provide production technologies, which include soil fertility management practices. The results suggest the need to increase the provision of postproduction technologies—including processing, storage, marketing, and financial advisory services—among nonbeneficiaries. Those services are important for implementing the National Economic Empowerment and Devel- opment Strategy framework, which aims to reduce poverty by transforming
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