Complete Project PDF

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF IMPROVED
SORGHUM (CSR–01) PRODUCTION IN TAKAI
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF KANO STATE,
NIGERIA.
BY
SULAIMAN ABUBAKAR ABDULLAHI
[AGR/15/AGR/00018]
AUGUST, 2020
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF IMPROVED
SORGHUM (CSR–01) PRODUCTION IN TAKAI
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF KANO STATE,
NIGERIA.
BY
SULAIMAN ABUBAKAR ABDULLAHI

[AGR/15/AGR/00018]
A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS AND EXTENSION, FACULTY
OF AGRICULTURE, BAYERO UNIVERSITY KANO.
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE AWARD OF BACHELOR DEGREE IN AGRICULTURE.
AUGUST, 2020.
S
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this project titled “Economic Analysis of Improved Sorghum (CSR-01)
Production in Takai Local Government Area of Kano State, Nigeria” has been written by me
and was carried out under the supervision of Dr. Muhammad Halliru, Ph.D. That no part of this
project has been presented in any previous application for another degree or diploma in this or any
other institution. That all borrowed information have been duly acknowledged in the text and a list
of references were provided.
_________________________ _ ___________________
SULAIMAN A. ABDULLAHI DATE
[AGR/15/AGR/00018]
i
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that, this project work entitled “Economic Analysis of Improved Sorghum
(CSR–01) Production in Takai Local Government Area of Kano State, Nigeria” written by
SULAIMAN ABUBAKAR ABDULLAHI (AGR/15/AGR/00018) have meets the regulations
governing the award of Bachelor Degree in Agriculture, Bayero University Kano and is certified
for its contribution to knowledge and literary presentation.
____________________________ ______________________
Dr. Muhammad Halliru, Ph.D. Date
[Project Supervisor]
___________________________ ________________________
Dr. Ali Abdullahi, Ph.D. Date
[Head of the Department]
ii
APPROVAL PAGE
This project titled “Economic Analysis of Improved Sorghum (CSR–01) in Takai Local
Government of Kano-Nigeria” Prepared by SULAIMAN ABUBAKAR ABDULLAHI
(AGR/15/AGR/00018) has been supervised and approved in accordance with the regulations
governing the award of Bachelor Degree in Agriculture.
_______________________ _____________________
External Examiner Date
________________________ _____________________
Project Supervisor Date
___________________________ _____________________
Head of Department, HOD Date
iii
DEDICATION
I dedicate this work solely to Almighty Allah under whose everlasting shelter I have found my
refuge and who has granted me favor before any mortal person who had one thing or the other to
do with regard to this work. Also to my beloved parents, Alhaji Abdullahi Tokal and Hajiya
Aminatu Abubakar, my siblings, friends and other relatives who showed me much love, concern
and support, my programme would not have been successful without you.
To my wife-to-be (Insha Allah) in person of Fareeda Ibrahim Laushi, I pray may Allah make you
my wife and the coolness of my eye.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I thank Allah, the almighty for his mercy and grace that kept me alive and healthy all through the phase
of my academic career. May the peace, salutations and blessings of Allah be upon His beloved Prophet
Muhammad (SAW), His righteous companions, His purest wives and those that follow their path till
the Day of Judgments. I wish to acknowledge the contribution of this distinguished personalities that
help in bringing this research project to fruition. Firstly, I am greatly indebted to my parents; Alhaji
Abdullahi Tokal and Hajiya Aminatu Abubakar for their financial and moral support throughout my
life. I would like to express my profound gratitude to my supervisor; Dr. Muhammad Halliru for his
tireless guidance, encouragement, supports, suggestions and critical comments which help in
actualizing the success of this research work. A very special thanks to my family and friends especially
my siblings Adam, Umar, Bashir, Ibrahim, Auwal, Idris, Abubakar, Musa, Abdul-Hamid, Khadija,
Fatima and Hauwa’u, all in the Tokal family. To some of my good friends like Uzaifa Hamza, Yasir
and Sulaiman AMB, Elhussain Daud, Jela, Bar. Y. Shitu, Abdurrahman dantsuntsu, Maryam Uba
Ibrahim, Aisha Shehu, Sulaiman badi, Maigida Lajjiya among many which space could not allow me
to mention. To all my good friends from Fodio Memorial College Yelwan-Shendam, Government Sec.
School Sumaila and Jibril Aminu Model Sec. School Bauchi. My undying appreciation to all my BUK
family, great people like Musaddiq Abbas, Bilal Kwa, Salisu Gano, Khalil Assudani, Xamany, Mubee,
Nazie, Shukrah, Sa’adatu, Eljimit & Ramlat Kabara. I thank you all for being patient with me since
day one despite my short-tempered attitudes. Special thanks to my step-mum Maman Nana, my in-
laws Maman Farida, Maman Zakiyya and Anty Maryam, also to my beloved second mother Hajiya
Hauwa (Maman Okka), thank you so much for the love. The love, understanding and the good time I
share with you Fareeda Ibrahim Laushi must be recognized and acknowledged, thank you for
everything, you have made an indelible mark in my heart.
Finally, I wish to thank Malam Abdullahi Maigarabi (studio), Malam Abdul-Wahid (KNARDA), Dr.
Nasir Bako PhD and some of my colleagues such as Nuhu Toro, Scholar etc. for making this project
possible. I also want to express my sincere appreciation to acknowledge the contribution of Prof. A.B
Mohammed, Prof. Aminu Suleiman, Prof. Amina Mustapha, Prof. A. Abba, Prof. M.I Daneji, Dr. Ali
Abdullahi, Dr. I. Tafida, Dr. M.S. Suleiman, Dr. U. Sani, Dr. A.A. Idris, Dr. A. Lawan and my level
coordinator Dr. Z.A. Abdullahi among all academic and non-academic staffs from the Department of
Agricultural Economics and Extension, Bayero University Kano.
THANK YOU ALL AND MAY GOD BLESS...
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Scientific Classification of Sorghum
Table 2: Summary of the Sample Frame and Size of Sorghum farmers
Table 3a: Socio-economic Characteristics of Sorghum Farmers
Table 3b: Socio-economic Characteristics of Sorghum Farmers
Table 4: Average Costs and Return Analyses of Sorghum Farming
Table 5: Maximum Likelihood Estimate of Technical Efficiency of Sorghum Farmers
Table 6: Maximum Likelihood Estimate of Allocative Efficiency of Sorghum Farmers
Table 7: Frequency Distribution Technical, Allocative and Economic Efficiency among Sorghum
Farmers
Table 8: Constraints Militating against Sorghum Farming in the Study Area.
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Sorghum Production trend by countries, 2019 in million metric tonnes (MMT)
Figure 2: World Sorghum Production in million metric tonnes (MMT) from 2012 – 2019.
Figure 3: National Total Sorghum Production Statistics in Nigeria (2010 – 2020)
Figure 4: Regional Percentage Contribution to Sorghum Production in Nigeria, 2009 – 2010
Figure 5: Geographical Map indicating the Study Area
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS PAGES
DECLARATION…..…………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….i
CERTIFICATION….…………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ii
APPROVAL PAGE ……………..………………………………………………………….……………...……………………………………………………………...….iii
DEDICATION…..…………..………………………………………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………….…. iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…….……..……………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………..….….v
LIST OF TABLES………………………………………..…………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…..vi
LIST OF FIGURES………………………………….…………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…..vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………….………viii
ABSTRACTS………………….…………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………….xi
CHAPTER ONE ...............................................................................................................................1
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................1
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ......................................................................................1
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ..................................................................................................3
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY .........................................................................................4
1.4 JUSTIFICATIONS OF THE STUDY ..................................................................................5
CHAPTER TWO ..............................................................................................................................6
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................6
2.1 ORIGIN AND DISTRIBUTIONS OF SORGHUM .................................................................6
2.1.1 Appellations of Sorghum ...................................................................................................7
2.1.2 Scientific Classification of Sorghum ..................................................................................7
2.2 THE WORLD SORGHUM PRODUCTION TREND ..........................................................8
2.3 SORGHUM PRODUCTION TREND IN NIGERIA............................................................9
2.3.1 Background of Improved Sorghum CSR–01 Production in Nigeria ................................ 12
2.4 ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF SORGHUM ................................................................. 15
2.5 REVIEW OF ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORKS ............................................................... 15
2.5.1 Descriptive Statistics ....................................................................................................... 16
2.5.2 Measurement of Profitability .......................................................................................... 16
2.5.3 The Stochastic Frontier Production Function Analysis ................................................... 18
CHAPTER THREE ........................................................................................................................ 21
3.0 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................ 21
3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA .......................................................................... 21
3.2 METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................. 22
3.3 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE................................................................................................ 22
viii
3.4 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................ 22
3.4.1 Models Specification ....................................................................................................... 23
CHAPTER FOUR .......................................................................................................................... 26
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................. 26
4.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF SORGHUM FARMERS ........................ 26
4.1.1 Sex of the Sorghum Farmers ........................................................................................... 28
4.1.2 Marital Status of Sorghum Farmers................................................................................ 28
4.1.3 Level of Education .......................................................................................................... 28
4.1.4 Cooperative Membership ................................................................................................ 29
4.1.5 Type of Land Ownership................................................................................................. 29
4.1.6 Sources of Improved Sorghum CSR – 01 seed ................................................................. 30
4.1.7 Type of Labour Employed .............................................................................................. 30
4.1.8 Availability of Extension Contact .................................................................................... 30
4.1.9 Age of Sorghum Farmer.................................................................................................. 31
4.1.10 Household Sizes of Sorghum Farmers ........................................................................... 32
4.1.11 Household Land Size for CSR – 01 Farming ................................................................. 32
4.1.12 Years of Cooperation..................................................................................................... 32
4.1.13 Years of Farming Experience. ....................................................................................... 33
4.2 COSTS AND RETURN ANALYSES OF SORGHUM FARMING ....................................... 33
4.3 MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATE OF THE STOCHASTIC FRONTIER
PRODUCTION FUNCTION ...................................................................................................... 35
4.3.1 Maximum Likelihood Estimate of Technical Efficiency and Inefficiency Model for
Sorghum Farmers: .................................................................................................................. 36
4.3.2 Maximum Likelihood Estimate of Allocative (Cost) Efficiency and Inefficiency Model for
Sorghum Farmers: .................................................................................................................. 38
4.3.3 Estimation of Technical, Allocative and Economic Efficiency Model for Sorghum
Farmers:.................................................................................................................................. 41
4.4 CONSTRAINTS MILITATING AGAINST SORGHUM FARMING IN THE STUDY AREA
.................................................................................................................................................... 42
4.4.1 High Cost of Chemical Fertilizer ..................................................................................... 43
4.4.2 High Incidents of Pests and Diseases ............................................................................... 43
4.4.3 Inadequate Access to Extension Services ......................................................................... 43
4.4.4 Lack of Access to Credits Facilities ................................................................................. 43
4.4.5 Lack of Access to Improved Sorghum Seeds ................................................................... 44
4.4.6 Inadequate Infrastructural Development ........................................................................ 44
ix
4.4.7 High Cost of Hired Labour ............................................................................................. 44
4.4.8 High Cost of Transportation ........................................................................................... 44
CHAPTER FIVE ............................................................................................................................ 45
5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENTATION ................................................. 45
5.1 SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... 45
5.2 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... 47
5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................... 48
5.4 CONTRIBUTION OF THE STUDY TO KNOWLEDGE ..................................................... 49
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 50
APPENDIX I: ................................................................................................................................. 56
x
ABSTRACT
The main concern of the study is on the Economic Analysis of Improved Sorghum (CSR–01)
Production in Takai Local Government, Kano State Nigeria. Data for the study was collected using
structured questionnaire which was administered to seventy (70) sampled sorghum farmers.
Multistage sampling technique involving purposive selection of four (4) villages based on
concentration and intensity of sorghum farmers was employed. The analytical tools used include;
Descriptive Statistics, Gross Margin Analysis and Stochastic Frontier Analysis. The study revealed
that 80% of the sampled sorghum farmers in the study area are male with average age of about
45years which indicated that the farmers are at their productive age. Most of the sampled farmers
(82.9%) are married with approximately 11 members in their households. On the level of
education, the study revealed 60% of the farmers with non-formal education and 40% having either
primary, secondary or tertiary education. Mode of land of land acquisition is mostly by inheritance
(44.3%) with others acquire land through purchased (25.7%), rent (21.4%), and borrowed (8.6%).
The type of labour employed in the study area was found to be 51.4% and 48.6%S for hired and
family labour respectively. The study revealed that 62.9% of the sampled farmers have no contact
with extension services, only 39.1% have either weekly (18.6%), monthly (27.1%) or yearly
(27.1%) extension visits. Farmers experience in cultivation of the improved sorghum (CSR–01)
was found to be approximately 11years on average. Furthermore, the findings of the study revealed
that improved sorghum (CSR–01) was cultivated on an average of 2.72 hectares of land with an
estimated average yield of 1,695.50kg equivalent to approximately 1.7/ha. The results on Farm
budget analysis revealed an average total variable cost of farming sorghum CSR–01 to be
₦503,497.3 with an estimated gross return of ₦1,020,656.98 which gives a gross margin of
₦517,159.68 for 2.72ha. The rate of return to investment was estimated to be ₦2.03 indicating that
for every ₦1 invested a sum of ₦1.03 will be realized as profit. Results on the constraints militating
against sorghum farming in the study area revealed high cost of chemical fertilizer (84.3%),
incidents of pest and diseases (77.1%), inadequate extension visits (72.9%), lack of adequate
access to credit facilities (67.1%), lack of adequate access to improved sorghum seed (58.6%),
lack of adequate infrastructural development (50.0%), high cost of hired labour (40.6%), and high
cost of transportation (31.0%) The constraints were ranked according to their level of severity in
the study area. The study affirmed that on average sampled sorghum farmers in the study area
operate on 66.2%, 76.3% and 52.8% of technical, allocative and economic efficiency of
respectively, which indicated that the farmers are not operating on the production frontier, that is
they are not 100% efficient. The study reveals that farmer’s age, years of formal education, years
of experience and access to credits positively and significantly influence technical, allocative and
economic efficiency of sorghum farming. The study finally recommend that government through
its agricultural policy should provide fertilizer subsidy grants and also provide means of tackling
the effects of pest such as the striga etc. through IPMC. Also farmers should be encouraged to
adopt the use of resistant varieties to reduce the effects of pests and diseases. Also that
governments and its institutions such as NAERLS to as the matter of urgency recruits and train
adequate number of extension and change agents that will at least meet the ratio of 1:1000.
xi
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Sorghum, also known as Guinea corn (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) is indigenous to Africa,
particularly the Sub-Saharan Africa where it is now widely grown (R.M Sani et al, 2013). It is well
known for its capacity to tolerate conditions of limited moisture and to be productive during
periods of extended drought, a situation that would impede the production of most other C4 crops
(N. Dercas, 2017). This makes it an important crop in arid and semi-arid environments of the
world, where it may not be economical to grow other cereals. Sorghum belongs to the family
graminae (formerly known as poaceae) in the genus Sorghum of the plant kingdom. It is the fourth
economically important cereal crop after rice, wheat, and maize (T.T Bello, 2018). According to a
research findings by International Crop Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropic, over half a billion
people worldwide rely on sorghum as a dietary mainstay owing to its diversity of uses as an
important source of income generation among small-scale farmers (ICRISAT, 2016).
Sorghum being one of the oldest and most economically important crops in the world, the
estimated contributions of world sorghum production according to the United States Department
of Agriculture (USDA), showed that a sum of 58.46 million metric tons and 61.62 million metric
tons of sorghum was produced in 2019 and 2020 respectively which represents an increase of 3.16
million metric tons equivalent to 6.31% in sorghum production around the globe. Statistical report
by Food and Agricultural Organization Statistical Database revealed that the world-leading
countries in sorghum production as of 2020 were the United States of America with 9.5 million
metric tons, followed by Nigeria with an estimate of about 6.9 million metric tons, then Ethiopia
with 5.2 million metric tons, Sudan with 5.0 million metric tons, Mexico with 4.5 million metric
tons, India with 3.85 million metric tons and China with 3.55 million metric tons (FAOSTAT,
2019) making Nigeria the second world largest sorghum producer and the first in Africa.
The production in developing countries Nigeria inclusive, account for about 90% of the world’s
sorghum area and 70% of its outputs. Asia and Africa each account for 25-30% global sorghum
production, even though much of the crop is grown by small-scale farming household operating at
the margin of subsistence (USGRAIN, 2014) in (IFPRI, 2015).
However, in Nigeria sorghum is one of the most extensively grown cereal grains, about 50% of
the total area devoted to cereal crops in Nigeria is occupied by sorghum (Oladeji, 2014;
1
FAOSTAT, 2018). In Nigeria sorghum was cultivated on about 10.845 million hectares of land
in 2014 representing about 50% of the total land area under cereal crop production and about 13%
of the total arable land with an estimated national output of 6.883 million tonnes, making sorghum
one of the most extensively grown cereal grains in the country (NAERLS, 2015). Nigeria’s
sorghum production also accounted for 35% of the African production in 2016 with the total output
of about 7.6 million metric tonnes (AATG, 2016). In 2018, about 6.86 million tonnes of sorghum
were produced in Nigeria on 6.12 million hectares, giving an average productivity of 1,120 kg per
hectare. Industrial demand for sorghum has grown from a base of 2% of annual production to about
20% of the total sorghum produced in 2018 according to an estimate by the International Crops
Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT, 2018). In 2019, the production of
sorghum in Africa accounted for about 28.62 million metric tons which is equivalent to 49.4% of
the world sorghum outputs level. Nigeria been the largest sorghum producing country in Africa
contributed to about 24.11% of the regional sorghum output with total national sorghum
production estimated to about 6.9 million metric tonnes (FOASTAT, 2019). As of 2020, the
country is the second largest world producer after the United States. However, 90% of sorghum
produced by United States is destined to animal feed through its sorghum export to China, this
make Nigeria the world leading country for food grain sorghum production (FAOSTAT, 2020).
In 2020, the production of sorghum in Nigeria grew by 3.53% compared to the previous year and
it was estimated to amount to almost 7.14 million metric tons (Statista, 2020). The percentage
contribution of Nigeria to over-all sorghum production across the world was estimated to be 11.6%
in the year 2020 according to the World Bank collection of data indicators 2021 despites the
devastating effects of covid-19 to the country’s economy. Several researches have revealed that
sorghum crop production in the country have seen an overall increase between 2010 to 2020
despite the upwards and downwards movement in the level of sorghum production within those
years, however since 2009, the production and area harvested decreased in the same proportion
with yields going back to 1990 levels despites the rapidly increasing industrial demand for
sorghum. This production decline is mainly due to the reduction of area harvested, but the
declining yields level probably occurred as a result of continues usage of local varieties as well as
increasing local prices and high growing demand for corn as an industrial crop.
To date, Nigeria has been generally self-sufficient in meeting local demands for sorghum, with
incidental complementary imports at a statutory 5% import tariff. Nigeria does not officially export
2
sorghum. However, over 100,000 tonnes of sorghum is estimated to be traded informally in
regional markets, especially to the neighboring countries like Niger and Chad. Industrial demand
for sorghum by beverage, cereal and confectionery producers is one of the major drivers of the
sorghum market. Sorghum production in Nigeria therefore has the potential to be viable and
profitable, even in the midst of inhibiting factors such as climatic change among other natural
phenomena. According to a research report on “Sorghum Value Chain in Nigeria, an Explorative
study, 2020” which revealed that quite number of sorghum varieties are being produced in the
country over the years mostly by smallholder farmers scattered around rural areas across the major
parts of the country, some of the cultivars are the local varieties such as Qaura, Fara-fara, rainfed
sorghum, and guinea. Other improved cultivars include samsorg3, samsorg14, samsorg40, SKR,
CSR–01 and CSR–02, samsorg14 among others, but the cultivation of improved CSR–01 sorghum
cultivar which is an open air pollinated indigenous to Nigeria is practiced normally in the North-
Western and Eastern states of Nigeria. According to a limited survey report conducted by the
United States Agency for International Development/Maximizing Agricultural Revenue And Key
Enterprises in Target Sites USAID/MARKET-I project, in 2009 on the regional contribution to
sorghum production output in Nigeria, it revealed that the states in the Northern part of the country
contributed to about 80% of the total sorghum outputs with the remain 20% coming from the
Southern and Eastern states.
In view of the above, this study is set out to investigate the extent it undermines the production of
improved sorghum (CSR–01) variety in Takai local government area of Kano state.
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Available statistics have shown that while Nigeria’s overall food demand has been growing at a
rate of 3.5% per annum, food crops production has been growing at a rate of 2.0% per annum, thus
creating a serious food gap between the rate of production and consumption (Oladeji, 2014).
According to Central Bank of Nigeria, low level of food crops production has resulted in reduced
export earnings, large food imports, shortage of raw materials to meet the rapidly increasing
industrial demand, and increased inflationary pressure (CBN, 2011).
Sorghum however, is one of the most extensively grown cereal grains in Nigeria, about 50% of
the total area devoted to cereal crops in Nigeria is occupied by sorghum (Oladeji, 2014) being it a
source of staple food for most communities as well as a good source of income when it is produced
commercially. Though there is no official figure on the national demand and supply of sorghum
3
in Nigeria, but the local demand is more than the current local supply, owing to the increasing
demand from local industries in the country. The industrial demand for sorghum is growing with
about 20% of the total sorghum produced being taken up by industries. Moreover, sorghum being
one of the crops with comparative advantage in its local production, the level of its productivity
across the country does not meet the level of its national demand (ICRISAT, 2019). A lot of factors
are responsible for this, some of which are the use of local and unimproved sorghum seeds which
tend to have poor yield, wrong combination and improper-utilization of resources, wrong tillage
practices, continues usage seeds from previous harvest and wrong intercropping system thereby
creating a huge gap between the forces of demand and supply.
Akiyanka et. al, (2020), found out that most of the sorghum farmers in most of the sorghum
producing states still use local seed varieties which they purchased in their local markets or seeds
saved from previous harvest for the next production and this accounts for low grain yield.
Therefore, this study intends to analyze the production of improved sorghum (CSR–01) in Takai
local government through the farmers that actively participated in sorghum production across the
selected communities in order to determine the efficiency and estimate the costs and return
sorghum farming. In line with the problems stated above, this research will attempt to provide
answers to the following research questions.
1. What are the socioeconomic characteristics of sorghum farmers in the study area?
2. What is the profitability of sorghum production of in the study area?
3. What are the technical, allocative and economic efficiency sorghum farmers?
4. What are the major constraints militating against sorghum production in the study area?
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The broad objective of this study is to analyze the economics of sorghum production in Takai local
government area of Kano State, Nigeria. The specific objectives, however, are to:
i. to describe the socio-economic characteristics of sorghum farmers in the study area.
ii. to estimate the costs and returns from producing sorghum in the study area.
iii. to determine the technical, allocative, and economic efficiency of sorghum production.
iv. to describe the major constraints militating against sorghum production in the study
area.
4
1.4 JUSTIFICATIONS OF THE STUDY
It is important to emphasize that despite the potential benefits streaming for expansion of
agricultural sector through various government’s effort, its overall productivity remain low and
the poor performance of agriculture is most clearly evidenced by the low standard of living of
these small scale rural farmers (Dogondaji, 2005). Nonetheless, sorghum production contributes
substantially to sustaining the livelihood and standard of living to most rural farming communities,
as it goes a long way in alleviating poverty among farmers. Sorghum is one of the most
economically important cereal crops, is among the key staple food material for the larger part of
the African continent. Not only as food, with recent development in knowledge which permits the
use of sorghum in malting and brewing, production of sorghum especially the improved sorghum
CSR–01 variety which according to IITA report 2016, revealed that the improved sorghum CSR01
is an early maturing variety that takes just 100 to 110 days to mature and harvest with high
germinative capacity, and has some excellent grains qualities for industrial use in malting and
brewing coupled with its high yielding potentials of increasing farm yield from less than 1 metric
tonne per hectare to even 2.0 metric tonnes per hectare (IITA, 2016). Therefore, the production of
such important variety of sorghum is a key source of income generation to most farmers in
commercial production.
Thus, the importance of sorghum production to the people of Takai local government cannot be
overemphasized. This is evident by the farming activities of sorghum as one of the primary sources
of food and income to most of the people in the area. But looking at the current production level
of the improved sorghum CSR–01 cultivar in the area, this called for the conduction of this
research work. Therefore, this study will try to investigate and analyze the production of improved
sorghum CSR–01 especially concerning issues of profitability, efficiency and constraints
militating against its production. Hence, the results of the study will be hoping to provide useful
information to sorghum farmers as well as researchers and students in the field of agricultural
economics and other related disciplines.
5
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 ORIGIN AND DISTRIBUTIONS OF SORGHUM
There are different point of views about the place of origin of sorghum. R.M et al. (2013) cited the
opinion of Warth (1937) in their research that sorghum was originated in Africa and/or India. De
Candolle (2000) Confirm the findings of Warth, said that sorghum was solely originated in the
tropical Africa, been it a tropical crop, it has its history related to the hot and humid areas of the
world. Sorghum is believed to originate from the North East of Africa or Abyssinia. Several
species of annual and perennial sorghum are still found in the wild form, the greatest variation in
the genus is found in the North East quadrant of Africa within the latitude and longitude of 10 0N
and 250E respectively. It is a staple food in the drier parts of the tropical Africa, India and China.
Agricultural crops were developed from wild plants relatively quickly. The whole development of
arable agriculture probably covers a period of less than 15,000 years, and basic development of
the individual crops occupied a much shorter period. Against the background of the time-scale for
the operation of natural selection in evolution. Jongur (2006) reported that of 16 different species
were found in the genus Sorghum which are indigenous to Africa. It is believed that a form or
forms of sorghum was first domesticated in the Ethiopian region some 5,000 or more year ago to
produce Sorghum bicolor as the dominant specie of sorghum. Sorghum was taken from eastern
Africa to India, probably the first millennium BC and from there to China then it was brought to
the United States and other European countries by slaves during ancient slave trades. Later
sorghum spread to other Mediterranean countries. The crop was introduced to the United States
from Africa in about the middle of the 19th Century. It was grown along the Atlantic coast and then
carried westward to the drier regions.
Because of its draught resistance, sorghum is the crop of choice for dry region and areas with
unreliable rainfall. In recent years, maize has tended to replace sorghum in many of tropical Africa
in East. In the Northern Nigeria also, production of millet and maize progressively replaces
sorghum where the annual rainfall is less than 750mm (Ojo, et. al 2000) in (Jongur, 2006). Not
until recently after fully realizing the potentials of sorghum production in beverage industries and
brewing companies, now sorghum is produced on a very large hectares of land, approximately in
2019 and 2020 it was about 58.46 million metric tons and 61.62 million metric tons respectively
6
which represents an increase of 3.16 million metric tons equivalent to 6.31% in sorghum
production around the globe (USDA, 2020).
2.1.1 Appellations of Sorghum
Sorghum, is called by different names across the world, for example in India it is called “Juar” by
Bengali, Gujarati, and Hindi, “Jola” by Kannada, “Cholam” by Malayalam, Tamil, and Jwari
Marathi, “Janha” by Oriya, “Jonnalu” by Telugu. It is called “Durra” in Sudan, in some parts of
USA it is called “Sogo or Milo”. Like in other parts of the world, in Nigeria sorghum is called with
number of names by different tribes such as Hausa called it as “Dawa”, Fulani normally called it
“Gauri”, and in the southern part of the country, Yoruba called it as “Okababa”, and Igbo called it
“Okili” (Jongur, 2006).
2.1.2 Scientific Classification of Sorghum
Sorghum is a genus of about 25 species of flowering plants in the grass family known as Poaceae.
Some among these species have grown as cereals for human consumption and many in pastures
for animals. The scientific classification of Sorghum follows the rules of the Linnaean system of
binomial nomenclature and it is represented in the Table 1 below.
Table 1: Scientific Classification of Sorghum
Kingdom Plantae
Clade Tracheophytes
Clade Angiosperms
Clade Monocots
Clade Commelinids
Order Poales
Family Poaceae
Subfamily Ponicoideae
Supertribe Andropogonodae
Tribe Andropogoneae
Subtribe Saccharinae
Genus Sorghum
Specie S. bicolor
Source: Wikipedia
The Sorghum bicolor is the only specie out the 25 known species that is globally recognized as
food grain in sorghum syrup or molasses. Other species include; S. amplum, S. controversum, S.
grande, S. brychopodum, S. laxiflorum, S. escarinatum among others.
7
2.2 THE WORLD SORGHUM PRODUCTION TREND
Sorghum being one of the oldest and most economically important cereal crops, it is the fifth most
important grain crops in the world with the estimated contributions of world sorghum production
according to United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), which revealed that a sum of 58.46
million metric tons and 61.62 million metric tons of sorghum was produced in 2019 and 2020
respectively which represents an increase of 3.16 million metric tons equivalent to 6.31% in
sorghum production around the globe. Statistical report by Food and Agricultural Organization
Statistical database (FAOSTAT) revealed that the world-leading countries in sorghum production
as of 2019 were the United States of America with 9.3 million metric tons, followed by Nigeria
with an estimate of about 6.9 million metric tons, then Ethiopia with 5.1 million metric tons, Sudan
with 5.0 million metric tons, Mexico with 5.0 million metric tons, India with 4.5 million metric
tons and China with 3.6 million metric tons (FAOSTAT, 2019) making Nigeria the second world
largest sorghum producer and the first in Africa. Production by country is likely to change as
farmers are hit hardest by climate change as a result of global warming and with the corresponding
decreased in rainfall level, farmers are forced to replace maize with drought-resistance sorghum.
The figure1 below displayed the world statistics of sorghum production level in 2019 indicating
the countries with high production capacities.
FIGURE 1: Sorghum Production by Countries in 2019 measure Million Metric Tonne
Sourced: USDA, 2019.
8
Over the last seven years, global production has fluctuated between 66.0 million to 58.0 million
metric tons. Between 2015 and 2019 global demand for sorghum increased dramatically driven
largely by China who began to buy US sorghum to use as livestock feed in replacement for their
domestically grown corn. This result to a serious gap between the levels of demand and supply of
sorghum. Global demand of sorghum is highly increasing as a result of rapidly increasing industrial
growth, and consequently the level of sorghum production have been fallen since 2015 up to the
current level. Even though there has been a recorded improvement in the global output level of
sorghum in 2020 despites the global devastating effects of Covid-19, yet an increase of 3.16
million metric tons equivalent to 6.31% in sorghum production around the globe was realized
against the previous 2019 harvest (FAOSTAT, 2020). The figure2 below displayed the variations
in the world sorghum production level in million metric tonnes, from the year 2012 to 2019.
FIGURE 2: World Sorghum Production from 2012 – 2019 in Million Metric Tonnes
Source: USDA, 2020
The United State Department of Agriculture, USDA forecast global production of sorghum to
reach around 67million metric tons by 2025.
2.3 SORGHUM PRODUCTION TREND IN NIGERIA
In Nigeria sorghum was cultivated on about 10.845 million hectares of land in 2014 representing
about 50% of the total land area under cereal crop production and about 13% of the total arable
land with an estimated national output of 6.883 million tonnes, making sorghum one of the most
9
extensively grown cereal grains in the country (NAERLS, 2015). Nigeria’s sorghum production
also accounted for 35% of the African production in 2016 with the total output of about 7.6 million
metric tonnes (AATG, 2016).
In 2018, about 6.86 million tonnes of sorghum were produced in Nigeria on 6.12 million hectares,
giving an average productivity of 1,120 kg per hectare. Industrial demand for sorghum has grown
from a base of 2% of annual production to about 20% of the total sorghum produced in 2018
according to an estimate by the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics
(ICRISAT, 2018). In 2019, the production of sorghum in Africa accounted for about 28.62 million
metric tons which is equivalent to 49.4% of the world sorghum outputs level. Nigeria been the
largest sorghum producing country in Africa contributed to about 24.11% of the regional sorghum
output with total national sorghum production estimated to about 6.9 million metric tonnes
(FAOSTAT, 2019). As of 2020, the country is the second largest world producer after the United
States. However, 90% of sorghum produced by United States is destined to animal feed through
its sorghum export to China, this make Nigeria the world leading country for food grain sorghum
production (FAOSTAT, 2020).
In 2020, the production of sorghum in Nigeria grew by 3.53% compared to the previous year and
it was estimated to amount to almost 7.14 million metric tons (Statista, 2020). The percentage
contribution of Nigeria to over-all sorghum production across the world was estimated to be 11.6%
in the year 2020 according to the World Bank collection of data indicators 2021. Several statistical
data have revealed that sorghum crop production in the country have seen an overall increase
between 2010 to 2020 despite the upwards and downwards movement in the level of sorghum
production within those years, however since 2009, the production and area harvested decreased
in the same proportion with yields going back to 1990 levels despites the rapidly increasing
industrial demand for sorghum. This production decline is mainly due to the reduction of area
harvested, but the declining yields level probably occurred as a result of continues usage of local
varieties as well as increasing local prices and high growing demand for corn as an industrial crop.
To date, Nigeria has been generally self-sufficient in meeting local demands for sorghum, with
incidental complementary imports at a statutory 5% import tariff. Nigeria does not officially export
sorghum. However, over 0.1 million tonnes of sorghum is estimated to be traded informally in
regional markets, especially to the neighboring countries like Niger and Chad. Industrial demand
for sorghum by beverage, cereal and confectionery producers is one of the major drivers of the
10
sorghum market. Sorghum production in Nigeria therefore has the potential to be viable and
profitable, even in the midst of inhibiting factors such as climatic change among other natural
phenomena. Its traditional reputation as ‘the poor man’s food and it’s rather self-consumer nature
results in today’s sub-optimal farmer-to-market connectedness. Nevertheless, the usage of
sorghum for brewing at an industrial level has increased the chances of sorghum moving from
staple food and local beverage among people in Northern Nigeria to a wider consumption and use
in the production of other foods and beverages nationwide. This is as a results of the rapidly
increasing industrial demand of sorghum grains by companies like the Nigerian Brewing Company
Plc. among others. The Figure 3 below presents the total national outputs of sorghum for a decade
(that is from 2010 to 2020) indicating the fluctuations in the level of production through that
decade.
Figure 3: National Total Outputs of Sorghum from 2010 to 2020
TOTAL YIELD
8,000,000
7,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Sourced: Statista, 2020
With regard to the growing conditions, sorghum grows well on deep, fertile and well-drained
loamy soils (USAID/MAKETS, 2009). In Nigeria, these soils are common in the Northern Guinea
Savannahs and in the Sudan Savannah of Nigeria. Sorghum is grown mostly in the North West
and North East of the country, the figure 4 below portrayed the productivity percentage of states
across the country in 2009 indicating the percentage contribution for each of the national zones.
11
Source: USAID-MARKET-II, 2009
Making the North become the largest sorghum producing area in the whole of Africa. The red and
yellow sorghums are used for animal feed and human consumption, by contrast only the white
sorghum with large diameter grains can be processed into malt (USAID/MARKET-II, 2009).
2.3.1 Background of Improved Sorghum CSR–01 Production in Nigeria
The cultivation improved sorghum (CSR–01) variety which is commonly known as Farfara Ex-
Kano, is practiced normally in the North-Western states of Nigeria, especially in Kano and Jigawa
states. The seed was developed by Nigerian Breweries Public Limited Company (NBPLC) in
collaboration with various implementing partners which include the United States Agency for
International Development/Maximizing Agricultural Revenue And Key Enterprises in Target Sites
(USAID/MARKET-II project, the Institute of Agricultural Research (IAR), Ahmadu Bello
University (ABU) and International Crop Research Institute For Semi-Arid Tropics, ICRISAT
among other partners in sorghum value chain. According to NBPLC in 2006 and Global Biofuels
limited (GBFLMT) in 2019, the seed was successfully breed by Professor A. B. Obilana, Ph.D
(plant breeding and Genetics), IAR - ABU Zaria (NBPLC, 2006 and GBLMT, 2019) after which
it was registered in 2006 by the National Centre For Generic Resources And Biotechnology in
2006 (NACGRAB, 2006) and introduced to farmers through extension agents and introductory
projects in 2010 to 2011. It is certified to be an important variety of sorghum with high yield
potentials, and have the capacity to increase farm yield from less than 1.0metric tonne per hectare
12
to even 2.0metric tonnes per hectare (USAID/MARKET-II project, 2006). The improved sorghum
(CSR-01) is an early maturing variety that takes just 100 to 110 days to mature and harvest (IITA,
2016). It has an excellent grains qualities for industrial use in malting and brewing.
The Nigerian brewing industry is the second largest in Africa after South Africa. The sector is
dominated by global players, such as Nigerian Breweries Plc. (NB) which is partly owned by
Heineken, Guinness Nigeria Brewery, and AB in Brewery. NB and Guinness have committed to
sourcing the majority of their raw materials locally (sorghum constituting the majority of this
supply). In 2017, NB sourced 50.2% of all agricultural raw materials locally, while Guinness
Nigeria sourced 75%. NB has a target to source a minimum of 60% of its raw materials locally by
2020; the company’s annual demand of sorghum is approximately 100,000 metric tonnes per
annum which equates to approximately 1.4% of total sorghum production in Nigeria. The Nigerian
brewing industry turned its attention to the use of sorghum in 1988, in response to a proposal from
the Nigerian military regime to ban the use of imported barley for national beer production. This
shift led to substantial adjustment of all national production plants to become
The active exploration of the use of local raw materials by Nigerian Brewing (NB) was done in
collaboration with grain research institutes such as the Institute of Agricultural Research in Zaria
and the International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics in Kano, with the active
supportive partners of the USAID/MARKETS programme. In the frame of MARKETS-II
collaboration, NB’s sorghum development programme recorded a major breakthrough in 2006,
when its selection of open-pollinated varieties of sorghum CSR-01 and CSR-02 yielded 2.0 and
2.5 tonnes per hectare, respectively, compared to the annual national average yield of between 0.8
to 1.2 tonnes per hectare at that time during the trials and error method. These varieties, with
maintained high productivity expected to last 8 years, were introduced to the market and several
farmers’ cooperatives in 2006. In 2012, in the frame of the MARKETS-II project, NB completed
research and development work on two new high-yield hybrid sorghums, CSR-03H and CSR-04H,
with the potential to yield 4 metric tonnes per hectare. In 2014 to 2015, NB signed over the
intellectual property (IP) rights for the hybrid seeds to the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and
Rural Development (FMARD) to secure government support for seed multiplication and
distribution to farmers. NB’s role in the development of the new varieties of sorghum included;
the coordination of sorghum activities with stakeholders; training farmers on new sorghum
production; coordination of reporting and dissemination of sorghum development activities;
13
supporting the attainment of 50% buy-back success for produced CSR-01 and CSR-02 seeds and;
bringing onboard its suppliers to be linked to farmers. An assessment of the adoption level of the
new varieties (CSR-01 and CSR-02) among sorghum farmers in Northern Nigeria confirmed that
88.6% of the farmers in that study were fully aware of new improved varieties of sorghum, while
about 42.7% of the interviewed farmers obtained the improved sorghum variety seeds from
extension agents within their localities. The evaluation of the MARKETS-II programme implied
that farm households in each value chain, including sorghum, were experiencing increased
incomes and diversified crops, ensuring higher resilience to intermittent shocks as a result of the
project. The sorghum buy-back scheme was to ensure steady and guaranteed supply of sorghum
for NB and enable the company to maintain stronger oversight of the value chain within the USAID
MARKETS-II programme. Consequently, one of the major roles of USAID MARKETS II was to
“Work to attain 50% buy-back success for produced CSR-01 and CSR-02 seeds through timely
market price surveys and coordination between producers and buyer. Essentially, this means
getting seed companies to multiply the seeds of the open-pollinated varieties and to directly
distribute the seeds to farmers for cultivation, with the intention to buy back harvested sorghum
directly from these farmers, which the process was not fully successful.
Despite unsatisfactory results of the NB’s buy-back scheme, the usage of sorghum for brewing, as
well as the introduction and free distribution of new varieties of seeds, changed the status of
sorghum from ‘the poor man’s food’ primarily found in Nigeria’s northern zones to a much more
profitable crop used in the production of food and beverages and with national appeal. However,
there are also unexpected dynamics of the usage of sorghum for brewing, which are related to the
cultural and religious norms in the main area of production. One of the nation’s top-5 seed farmers
and distributor revealed in an interview that he had to relocate to Kaduna state from Borno state
due to direct threats received from insurgents in his home state. Such anecdotal stories contribute
to apparent complexity of the context of sorghum production in northern Nigeria, which in itself
prompted the need for further research. Hence, this exploratory study was conducted to obtain a
deeper understanding of the local dynamics (Sorghum Value Chain Report in Nigeria, Explorative
Studies, 2020).
14
2.4 ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF SORGHUM
Sorghum is widely used as animal feeds and a variety of traditional foods, most common of these
are akamu, kunu or ogi and through milling process, the flour produced are used for preparing
tuwo, dakkere, kunu, fura and waina In most part of Africa, Nigeria inclusive. The stalks are used
for fencing walls, huts, roof, basket making, mat and argawa, the grains are used for fermentation
to alcohol drinks known as Burukutu, peto (Jongur, 2006).
Recently, sorghum has been used industrially for various purposes, it is used as raw material in
brewery and food beverages. Some improved varieties like the CSR–01 and CSR–02 among others
have been found to have important qualities in malting and brewing, also in the making of
composite flour for baking breads, biscuits, cakes and pastries in Nigeria (Sorghum Value Chain
Report, 2020). It was first used industrially as brewing adjunct in conventional lager beer
production during the Second World War (Obilana, 2005).
In Africa, sorghum grain is germinated, dried and ground to form malt, which is used as a
substratum for fermentation in local beer production. White grain is generally preferred for
cooking, while red and brown grains are normally used for beer making (Brink and Belay, 2006).
In China, sorghum is extensively distilled to make a popular spirit and vinegar. Sorghum grain is
a significant component of cattle, pig and chicken feeds in the United States, Central and South
America, Australia and China, and is becoming important in chicken feed in India. It requires
grinding, rolling, flaking, or steaming to maximize its nutritional value. Several non-edible
sorghum cultivars are exclusively grown for the red dye present in the leaf sheaths and sometimes
also in adjacent stem parts (Brink and Belay, 2006).
The majority of domestic production is used for household consumption and fodder. Indeed,
producers first use their sorghum to meet household requirements, only a small proportion being
traded, mostly on the local market (USAID/Markets project 2, 2009). Sorghum is mainly eaten in
the form of flour or paste. It has a high caloric and nutritional value and is therefore recommended
for infants, pregnant and lactating mothers, the elderly and the convalescents (Obilana, 2005).
2.5 REVIEW OF ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORKS
This section review some related literatures on the tools of data analysis that are used in
productivity and efficiency analysis.
15
2.5.1 Descriptive Statistics
The descriptive statistics which includes the measurement of central tendencies such as mean,
frequency distribution, percentage and standard deviations. The descriptive approach is briefly
explained below:
i. Arithmetic Mean: this is the set of scores divided by the total number of the observation.
Mean is written mathematically as:
X = Σxi = X1 + X2 + X3 +……………….Xn ………................………………….(1)
n n
Where;
X = Arithmetic mean
Σ = Summation
Xi = Individual observation
i = 1, 2, 3………………….n
n = total number of the observations
ii. Percentage: This will be employed to determine the population of farmers to a particular
response. Percentage is written mathematically as:
Percentage (%) = X x 100 ………………………………….....................…………..(2)
n
Where;
% = percentage
X = Individual observation
N = Total observation
2.5.2 Measurement of Profitability
Costs and returns analysis is the basis for the measurement of profitability of farm enterprises. The
procedure involves itemizing the various costs of inputs and returns from the production. More
often, the values obtained are further tested statistically to verify differences between the values.
Furthermore, monetary units should be used as the basis for measuring all inputs and outputs in
cost and returns analysis for cropping systems (Olukosi and Erhabor, 2008). The cost and return
analysis involve the use of Farm budget technique which include; the gross margin, operating ratio,
and rate of return to naira invested.
16
i. Gross Margin Analysis
Gross margin analysis forms the basis for farm profitability analysis. It involves accurate collection
of costs of variable inputs and the gross income obtained from a particular enterprise (Bernard,
2003). Essentially, gross margin is a budgeting tool used to estimate total variable costs of
production and total revenue. Gross margin is the difference between gross income and total
variable cost. It is a very useful planning tool in situations where fixed capital is a negligible
portion of the farming enterprise as is the case in subsistence agriculture (Olukosi and Erhabor,
2008). Variable costs vary according to output and are incurred on variable inputs which can be
attributed to specific enterprises. Costs incurred on variable inputs vary in proportion to the level
of output, for example, cost of hired labour, maintenance costs, crop expenses and utilities. The
variable cost is a major component in the derivation of gross margin. The gross farm income, also
called total value of production, is the total physical product multiplied by the unit price of the
product. The formula is:
Gross Margin (GM) = GI – TVC………………………………………………………………. (3)
Where: GM = Gross margin (Naira/hectare)
GI = Gross Income (Naira /hectare)
TVC= Total Variable Cost (Naira/hectare)
ii. Farm Operating ratio (FOR):
This will be used to measure the solvency of the farm. A ratio less than one is desirable because it
indicated that the farm is making profit, a ratio of one implies that there is break even and a ratio
of greater than one indicate that the enterprise is at loss (Olukosi and Erhabor, 2008). And this is
according to Musa et al (2006), the lower the ratio the higher the profitability of the farming. It is
mathematically expressed as: OR = TVC/TR…………………………................…………..(4)
Where;
OR = Operating ratio
TVC = Total variable cost (₦/ha)
TR = Total revenue (₦/ha)
iii. The Return per Naira Invested (RPI):
The return for every naira invested was measured so as to determine the profitability of the farming
business. Thus, the return per naira invested is equals to Gross income divided by the Total variable
cost. That is; RPI = GI/TVC ………………………………………................……………(5)
17
2.5.3 The Stochastic Frontier Production Function Analysis
The Stochastic Frontier Production was used to determine the technical, allocative and economic
efficiency of sorghum farming. The implicit form of this model is written as;
Yi= f (Xi*β) + Ei ………………………………….…………………………………………… (6)
Ei = Vi – Ui ……………………………………………………………………………………..(7)
Where; Yi = quantity of sorghum outputs of the ith farm
Xi = a vector of the inputs used by the ith farm
Β = vector of the parameters to be estimated
Ei = error term or stochastic noise term (which is equals to vi – ui)
Vi = random error outside the farmers control, like weather and climate
Ui = technical inefficiency effects.
The explicit form of the empirical stochastic frontier production model was specified as follows
(Tanko and Opara, 2010). The Cobb-Douglas stochastic frontier production function (SFPF) which
simplifies the production technology of the farmer can be express as follows:
LnYi = βo + βI LnX1 + β2LnX2 + β3LnX3 + β4LnX4 + β5LnX5 + (Vi – Ui) ..………………….(8)
Where:
Yi = Output of sorghum (Kilograms).
X1 = Farm size (hectares)
X2 = Quantity of Seed (Kilogramme)
X3 = Labour (man-hours)
X4 = Chemical Fertilizers (Kilogramme)
X5 = Agro-chemicals (liters)
Β0 - β5 = Co-efficient to be estimated
Ln = Natural logarithm
Vi’s = are the random or statistical disturbance term which captures the effects of weather and
other factors outside the control of the farmer, having zero mean and unknown variance.
Ui’s = are the farmer and farm specific characteristics related to production efficiency.
Ui’s defined by: the determinants of technical inefficiency explained.
The frontier model is divided into four, these are:
i. Technical Efficiency Model:
18
Where:
β 0 - β5 = Co-efficient to be estimated
Vi’s = are the random or statistical disturbance term which captures the effects of weather and
other factors outside the control of the farmer, having zero mean and unknown variance.
Ui’s = are the farmer and farm specific characteristics related to production efficiency. Ui’s
defined by: the determinants of technical inefficiency explained.
ii. Allocative Efficiency Model
The Allocative Efficiency is calculated using the Cobb-Douglas Stochastic Frontier Cost Function
stated as follows:
lnTVCi = βo + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + Vi + Ui ………………………………….(10)
Where;
TVCi = Total cost of sorghum production (₦)
βo = intercept or constant
β1 - β4 = Parameters to be estimated
X1 = cost of renting land (₦)
X2 = Cost of seed (₦)
X3 = Cost of chemical fertilizer (₦)
X4 = Cost of agrochemicals (₦)
X5 = Cost of labor (₦)
Vi = Error term which are random variables and beyond farmer’s control
Ui = Error term which are non-random variables or technical inefficiency effect
X2 is expected to be positively related to the cost of sorghum production.
19
iii. Economic Efficiency Model (EE)
The Economic Efficiency (EE) is defined as the capacity of a firm to produce a predetermined
quantity of output at minimum cost. It is equal to the product of technical efficiency and allocative
efficiency expressed as;
EE = TE * AE ………………………………………………………………………………(11)
Where;
TE = Technical efficiency
AE = Allocative efficiency.
iv. Inefficiency Model (IE)
The model used is a two limit Tobit model procedure, given that the efficiency indices are bounded
between 0 and 1 (Green, 1980). This model showed that technical inefficiency effects (EI) is
obtained by truncation (at zero) of the normal distribution with mean, (i) and variance (2) such
that:
Efficiency Indices: o + I*Age + 2*HHsize + 3*Experience + 4*Cooperative + 5*Credit +
6*Extension
Whereas;
Inefficiency Indices: is the technical and allocative inefficiencies of farmers calculated in the
frontier function. Based on literature the variables used in this study were adopted in many other
stochastic frontier studies. The variables used are defined as follows:
1. Age: is defined as the age of the respondent and is also considered as the experience of the
farmers in primary decision making in the farming operation or the number of years the
farmers have being involved in improved sorghum farming.
2. Education: this involve the level of education or educational status of sorghum farmers in
the study area. Education is a dummy variable and was coded as 1=Non-formal, 2=Primary,
3=Secondary 4=Tertiary.
3. Household size: this is defined as the number of people per sorghum farming household.
4. Cooperative Association: this indicates that if a particular sorghum farmer is a member of
farmers association or cooperative, it was coded as 1=Yes and 2=No.
5. CREDIT indicating whether the farming household used credit for the purchase of
inputs in their production activities. It was coded 1=Yes and 2=No.
6. ’s these are vectors of unknown coefficients of the farm-specific inefficiency variables.
20
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 METHODOLOGY
3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA
This research was conducted in Takai local government area of Kano state. Takai local government
area is one of the forty-four (44) local governments of Kano state situated within the Kano South
senatorial district. The area lies between the latitude 11o27’43” North of the equator and longitudes
9o 10’32” East of Greenwich. It was created in 1989 by the present-day Sumaila local government.
Takai local government area covers a total land area of 648km2, a total density of 423.1/km2 and a
total population of 202,743 and the population was projected to be almost 281,900 people by 2016
according National Population Commision (NPC census, 2006).
The Takai local government shares political border with Sumaila local government from the North,
Albasu local government from the South, Wudil local government from the West and Birnin Kudu
local government in of Jigawa state from the East (Tanko, 2010).
Agricultural production, marketing, processing and input supply are the basic means of income
generation in the area. Food crops such as sorghum, maize, millet, sesame, groundnut, cowpea,
rice, sugarcane and different vegetables among other food crops are produced in large quantities
for both commercial and household consumption (KNARDA, 2011). In essence, very large
number of hectares of land are allocated to production of cereals in this area sorghum inclusively
(ADP, Takai LGA). As such Takai local government area is very suitable for this study. Figure 5
below shows the position of Takai local area in Kano state google map.
FIGURE 5: Geographical Map indicating the Study Area
Source: GoogleMap
21
3.2 METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION
The data for this study was generated from primary sources using a well-structured questionnaire
which was administered to the farmers in the area. Focused Group Discussion and Interview were
also employed during the data collection process. The questionnaire was designed to provide
information on socio-economic characteristics of sorghum farmers, cost and return analysis and
constraints militating against sorghum production in the study area.
3.3 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE
A multi-stage sampling technique was employed for this study. The first stage involved the
purposive selection of four (4) villages out of the ten (10) district communities existing in the study
area, the villages includes; Birnin Bako, Langwami, Sakwaya, and Takai. These villages were
purposively selected based on concentration and intensity of sorghum farmers. The second stage
involves the purposive selection of 2 farmer’s cooperative each in the selected villages. The last
stage involves the random selection of 233 farmers where 70 farmers were sampled for the study.
The sample size was arrived at using a Slovin’s formula at a 90% confidence level given 0.1
precision/alpha level.
The Slovin’s formula is expressed as; n = N/1 + N ℮2 ..............................................(12)
Whereas; n = sample size, N = Population (sample frame) and ℮2 = alpha level (error margin).
Table 2 below shows the distribution of respondents across the selected areas of study.
Table 3: Summary of the sample frame and sample size
Villages Farmers Coop. Sample Frame Sample size
Birnin Bako 2 50 13
Langwami 2 54 15
Sakwaya 2 75 27
Takai 2 54 15
Total: 8 233 70
Source: Field Survey, 2020.
3.4 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK

For this study, the following tools of analysis were employed;
1. Descriptive statistics; mean and percentage, was used to achieve objective (i) and (iv).
22
2. Farm Budget Analysis such as gross margin, operating ratio and rate of return per naira
invested was used to achieve objective (ii).
3. Stochastic Frontier Production Function was used to achieve the objective (iii).
3.4.1 Models Specification
1. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS:
The descriptive statistics which includes the measurement of central tendencies such as mean,
frequency distribution, percentage and standard deviations were used to attain objective (i) and
(iv). FARM BUDGET ANALYSIS
This model comprises analysis such as the gross margin, Operating ratio, and Rate of return per
naira:
i. Gross Margin Analysis:
This is an important tool of analysis which involve evaluating the profitability of an individual
enterprise, it is a very useful planning tool in situation where fixed capital is a neglible portion of
the enterprise (Olukosi, 2008). This tool was used to achieve objective (ii). Gross margin analysis
was used to estimate the profitability through analysis of the costs and return in production
sorghum, the model is expressed as follows:
By definition, gross margin is the difference between the gross farm income (GI) and the total
variable cost (TVC). That is; GM = GI – TVC ………………………………………………..(15)
Where; GM = Gross margin (₦/ha)
GI = Gross income (₦/ha)
ii. Operating ratio (OR):
This will be used to measure the solvency of the farm. A ratio less than one is desirable because it
indicated that the farm is making profit, a ratio of one implies that there is break even and a ratio
of greater than one indicate that the enterprise is at loss (Olukosi and Erhabor, 2008). And this is
according to Musa et al (2006), the lower the ratio the higher the profitability of the farming.
It is mathematically expressed as: FOR = TVC/TR ………….…………................…………..(16)
Where;
FOR = Operating ratio
TR = Total revenue (₦/ha)
23
iii. The Return Per Naira Invested (RPI):
The return for every naira invested was measured so as to determine the profitabilty of the farming
business. Thus, the return per naira invested is equals to Gross income divided by the Total variable
cost.
That is; RPI = GI/TVC.………………………………………………….................…………..(17)
2. The Stochastic Frontier Production Function:
The Stochastic Frontier Production was used to determine the technical, allocative and economic
efficiency of sorghum farming. The implicit form of this model is written as;
Yi= f (Xi*β) + Vi – Ui ………………………………………………………………………… (18)
Where; Yi = quantity of sorghum outputs of the ith farm
Xi = a vector of the inputs used by the ith farm
Β = vector of the parameters to be estimated
Vi = random error outside the farmers control, like weather and climate
Ui = technical inefficiency effects.
The frontier model is divided into four, these are:
i. Technical Efficiency Model:
Where:
β 0 - β5 = Co-efficient to be estimated
Vi’s = statistical disturbance term which captures the effects of other factors outside the control of
the farmer, having zero mean and unknown variance.
Ui’s = are the farmer and farm specific characteristics related to production efficiency.
24
ii. Allocative Efficiency Model
The Allocative Efficiency is calculated using the Cobb-Douglas Stochastic Frontier Cost Function
stated as follows:
lnTVCi = βo + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + Vi + Ui ………………………………….(20)
Where;
TVCi = Total cost of sorghum rice production (₦)
βo = intercept or constant
β1-β4 = Parameters to be estimated
X1 = cost of renting land (₦)
X2 = Cost of seed (₦)
X3 = Cost of chemical fertilizer (₦)
X4 = Cost of agrochemicals (₦)
X5 = Cost of labor (₦)
Vi = Error term which are random variables and beyond farmer’s control
Ui = Error term which are non-random variables or technical inefficiency effect
X2 is expected to be positively related to the cost of sorghum production.
iii. Economic Efficiency Model (EE)
The Economic Efficiency (EE) is defined as the capacity of a firm to produce a predetermined
quantity of output at minimum cost. It is equal to the product of technical efficiency and allocative
efficiency expressed as;
EE = TE * AE ………………………………………………………………………………(21)
Where;
TE = Technical efficiency
AE = Allocative efficiency.
iv. Inefficiency Model (IE)
The model used is a two limit Tobit model procedure, given that the efficiency indices are bounded
between 0 and 1 (Green, 1980). This model showed that technical inefficiency effects (EI) is
obtained by truncation (at zero) of the normal distribution with mean, (i) and variance (2) such
that the determinant of technical inefficiencies are explained as follows:
Efficiency Indices = o + I*Age + 2*HHsize + 3*Experience + 4*Cooperative + 5*Credit +
6*Extension
25
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF SORGHUM FARMERS
Socio-economic characteristics of farmers are important human attributes that enhance the
adoption level of agricultural innovations and productivity. They also assist in getting clear
understanding of the behaviors of the farmers as well as providing hints toward explaining their
disposition that could be used as a tool to improve their productivity (Ayinde, 2007). Moreover,
according to Tosan Fregene in a lecture note at the National Open University Nigeria, a farmer’s
socio-economic characteristics are considered as one of the basic factors that facilitate the adoption
an innovation or its resistance. The socio-economic variables identified for this research include;
sex of the respondents, marital status, level of education, cooperative membership, ownership of
land, type of labor employed, extension visit, frequency of extension visits, age, household size,
household land size allocated to improved sorghum CSR – 01 farming, and the years of experience
of sorghum farming.
The socio-economic variables are presented the Table 3a and b below for qualitative and
quantitative variables respectively.
26
Table 3a: Socio-economic Characteristics of Sorghum Farmers
Variables Frequency Percentage (%)
Sex
Male 56 80
Female 14 20
Total 70 100
Marital Status
Single 7 10
Married 58 82.9
Widow 5 7.1
Divorcee 0 0
Total 70 100
Level of Education
Non-formal 42 60.0
Primary 11 15.7
Secondary 10 14.3
Tertiary 7 10.0
Total 70 100
Cooperative Membership
Member 70 100
Non-member 0 0
Land Ownership
Purchased 18 25.7
Rented 15 21.4
Borrowed 6 8.6
Inherited 31 44.3
Sources of Seed
Market 12 17.1
Farmers Cooperatives 22 31.4
Research Outlets 3 4.3
Previous Harvest 33 47.1
Type of Labour Used
Family labour 34 48.6
Hired labour 36 51.4
Extension Visit
Yes 51 62.9
No 19 39.1
Frequency of Ext. Visit
Daily 0 0
Weekly 13 18.6
Monthly 19 27.1
Yearly 19 27.1
Total 51 72.9
Missing system 19 27.1
Source: Field survey, 2021
27
4.1.1 Sex of the Sorghum Farmers
The term sex in this context as defined by Merriam-Webster Inc. Dictionary (2021), it is a
biological characteristics which described either of the two major forms of individuals that occur
in many species and that are distinguished respectively as either male or female especially on the
basis of their reproductive organs, processes of production, consumption and distribution. The
descriptive statistics presented in Table 3a above revealed that production of the improved
sorghum CSR – 01 in the study area is mostly dominated by male, this is clearly seen as 80% of
the respondents were male and only 20% of them were female. This could be as a result of the fact
that male are bread-winners as they bear most of the family responsibilities while female who are
expected traditionally to perform home chores and child bearing responsibilities especially in the
rural communities. The result on sex agreed with the findings of Muhammad, 2015 who reported
that 86.7% and 98% of legume grain farmers in Kano state are male both in project and non-project
areas respectively.
4.1.2 Marital Status of Sorghum Farmers
Marital status to some extent influenced the size of the famer’s family and availability of labour
for farm production, because the marriage institution consist of some restrictions as regards to
which member of the family should practice farming (Victor, 2004, Muhammad, 2015). It can be
seen from the result in Table 3a that high percentage of the farmers are married (82.9%) while the
remaining 17.1% are single and widows respectively. This could be as a result of the
responsibilities bestowed on married persons for the provision of the household’s basic needs. It
can also be attributed to the norms of typical Hausa/Fulani cultures and Islamic religion institution
which considered marriage as a symbol of respect, dignity and important for matured people which
can increase household size. This have agreed with the findings of Alimi, (2015) who reported that
85% of maize farmers in Bunkure L.G are married with 15% who are either single, widow or
divorced.
4.1.3 Level of Education
One of the basic factors that determine the level of adoption of an innovations by farmers is their
level of education (Daneji, 2020). According to Trichopoulou, (2002) he defined education as “the
wealth of knowledge acquired by an individual after studying a particular subject matter or after
experiencing a particular life lesson that equipped him with the understanding of a particular thing.
From the results in Table 3a above, it is clearly seen that the majority of farmers (60%) practicing
28
the cultivation of improved sorghum variety are having a non-formal education which involve
Islamic knowledge, skills and experiences. Respondents with primary, secondary and tertiary
education accounted for 15.7%, 14.3% and 10.0% respectively. This indicate that the sorghum
farmers are literate since about 40% of them have attended the western education and even the
60% with the non-formal education have accumulated lots of life experiences. The result is in
accordance with the findings of Muhammad, (2015) who reported that 42% of grain legume
farmers in the project area have non-formal education and the majority of the farmers have
acquired one kind of formal education (primary, secondary and tertiary).
4.1.4 Cooperative Membership
According to Wikipedia, the term cooperative pertains to an autonomous association or group of
persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social and cultural needs and
aspirations through a jointly-owned enterprise. Thus, farmers’ cooperative (also known as
agricultural cooperatives) is one of the types of cooperative societies which consist of group of
farmers with the same interest and goals, and which they pool all their resources and efforts in
certain area of farming activity in order to achieve their objectives and productive goals. From the
Table 3a above, it can be observed that all the farmers (100%) in the study area are into
membership of one farmers group or the other. This is as the result of the sampling technique
adopted for the study that purposively selected 2 farmer’s cooperative each in the selected villages.
This implies that sorghum farmers in the study area are entitled to several benefits of being in a
cooperatives such as access to seed, capitals, skills acquisition, credits, and group work among
others.
4.1.5 Type of Land Ownership
Land ownership refers to the mode of land acquisition. According to the result displayed in Table
3a above, most of the sorghum farmers (44.3%) in the study area acquired their land through
inheritance, whereas moderate number (25.7%) of the respondents purchased the land they utilized
for sorghum farming. Only 8.6% of the farmers borrowed the field they used for the sorghum
farming whereas considerable population (21.4%) of the farmers operate on a rented farmlands.
This indicates that the predominant mode of land acquisition in the study area was through
inheritance, though there is an appreciable percentage of the farmers that acquire land through
purchased and rent. Ayodele, (2016) in his study found out that inheritance is the major (49.07%)
29
mode of land acquisition for irrigated rice farmers in Kura L.G whereas 20.64%, 21.60%, 8.02%
of the farmers acquire land through rents, purchase and borrowed respectively.
4.1.6 Sources of Improved Sorghum CSR – 01 seed
The term seed is defined as a fertilized ovule containing the plant embryo, and giving the
appropriate growth condition it produces a new plant. The seed of sorghum CSR – 01 is an
improved sorghum seed variety which is an open air pollinated with high germination rate and
increased yield potential. The exponent of Table 3a above indicated high percentage (47.1%) of
the sorghum farmers sourcing their sorghum seeds from their previous harvest, whereas 31.4%
sourced their improved seed from their cooperative farmers group which implies that the farmers
are really enjoying the benefit of being in a group. Less percentage of the farmers secured seeds
from the markets and research outlets, 17.1% and 4.3% respectively.
4.1.7 Type of Labour Employed
The results in Table 3a indicated that hired labour accounts for about 51.4% of the total labour
requirements in the study area while family labour accounted for 48.6% representing a difference
of 2.8%. This could be attributed to the rapidly increasing rate of rural-urban migration by the
labor force making labor a scarce resources among the factors of production. The will also affect
the general profitability of sorghum farming enterprise.
4.1.8 Availability of Extension Contact
Extension is defined by FAO as an informal education process directed toward the rural
population. It is an aspect of learning process where an agent disseminates information,
knowledge, among other extension messages. The process offers advices, information, training,
and provision of possible solutions to the farming related problems. Moreover, extension education
is a medium through which improved technology and or seeds are made available to farmers in the
remote areas. Therefore, farmers-extension contact refers to the level at which this process is been
directed to the benefits of the farmers. From the results in Table 3a above, it is clearly seen that
majority (62.9%) of sorghum farmers in the study area had no contact with an extension services
and only about 39.1% had access to extension services. The results on the frequency of extension
visits indicated that, among the 39.1% farmers who had access to extension contact, only 18.6%
of them enjoyed frequent visitation on weekly basis. Majority of them (about 54.2%) only had a
monthly and yearly visitation. The result revealed 0% of daily extension visitation, this indicates
30
the high level of extension absenteeism in the study area which beyond any reasonable doubt it
has a lots of influence on the farmers’ level of productivity.
Table 3b: Socio-economic Characteristics of Sorghum Farmers
Variables Frequency Percentage Mean Minimum Maximum SD
Age (years)
25 – 30 5 7.2 45.24 28 60 9.072
31 – 36 7 10.1
37 – 42 16 22.9
43 – 48 16 22.9
49 – 54 12 17.2
55 – 60 14 19.7
Household size
0 – 10 34 48.8 10.90 0 30 6.607
11 – 21 33 47.0
22 – 32 3 4.2
HH land (ha)
0–3 54 74.3 2.72 0.5 8.5 1.6994
4–7 18 25.7
Cooperative
Membership
0 – 10 52 70 10.86 1 30 7.179
11 – 21 30 30
22 – 32 0 0
Farming Experience
0–9 47 67.2 7.27 1 25 3.546
10 – 19 22 31.4
20 – 29 1 1.4
Source: Field survey, 2021.
4.1.9 Age of Sorghum Farmer

Age is been defined as the amount of time during which someone or something has lived or existed.
This variable explained the years of the farmers in the study area. From the results displayed in
Table 3above, it can be seen that majority (45.8%) of the farmers are between the age bracket of
37 – 48 years. It is also seen that 36.9% and 17.3% of the respondents falls between the age
brackets of 25 – 36 years and 49 – 60 years respectively. From the result, the average mean age of
the farmers was estimated to be 45.24 which implies that the farmers are within their prime and
active ages of production. Collectively, about 80.3% of the farmers are within the age brackets of
25 – 54 years, this results have agreed with the provision of the Organization for Economic
31
Co-operation and Development (OEDC, 2020) who defined the working age population to be
individuals within the ages of 15 – 64 years that is an average of 39.5 years.
4.1.10 Household Sizes of Sorghum Farmers
Household size refers to the total number of individuals who live within one house and feed from
the same pot (Muhammad, 2015). According to the National Population Commission (NPC, 2006)
Household refers to individuals who think of themselves as a unit, they live in the same house.
Descriptive statistics results in Table 3b showed that individual farmers with household size ranges
between 0 – 21 pre-dominate the study area with an estimated 95.8%, the remaining 4.5%
accommodated individual farmers with household size ranging from 22 – 32. The result also
indicated an average population of household members to be approximately 11 individuals. This
implies that the sorghum farmers in the study area are pre-occupied with moderate number of
mouths to feed, hence providing enough surplus to the non-producing population in exchange of
cash.
4.1.11 Household Land Size for CSR – 01 Farming
Several researches had reveal that farmers in Nigeria are mostly small-scaled who have scattered
and fragmented landholdings usually between 0.5 – 5.0 hectares of land (A.L Mustapha, 2020).
The descriptive statistics results in Table 3b above revealed that sorghum farmers with farm size
ranging from 0 – 3 hectares are dominant in the study area with 74.3% as against those with land
size ranging from 4 – 7 hectares which have 25.7%. The results showed the estimated mean farm
size to be 2.72ha approximately, this indicates that sorghum farming in the study area is left in the
hands of small-scaled farmers which is against the findings of Ayinka et al. (2020) whose findings
revealed small-scaled farmers to be less important during the 2017/2018 growing season with over
70% of sorghum grains supplied to industries through medium and large scale farmers with 32%
and 42.4% respectively.
4.1.12 Years of Cooperation
This refers to the duration of cooperative membership, or the amount of time (in years) that a
farmer spent as a registered member of a particular cooperative group. From the descriptive
statistics result shown in Table 3b, it can be clearly seen that farmers within 0 – 10 years of
cooperation dominate the field with about 70% of the population, about 30% had between 11 – 21
years of cooperative membership. The average years of cooperative membership was estimated to
be 10.86 years. Membership of cooperative organization provides means of interaction among
32
farmers which can enhance innovation diffusion easily among them. According to Idiong et al.
(2007), membership of cooperatives affords the farmers the opportunities of sharing information
on modern rice practices. Membership of cooperatives can also enhance the accessibility of
farmers to information on improved technologies and to credit facilities for the purchase of inputs
and payment of hired labour as well as serve as a medium for exchange of ideas that can improve
their farm activities (Oyewole, 2012; Njoku, 1991).
4.1.13 Years of Farming Experience.
Stanger, (2000) stressed that a positive relationship exists between years of experience in business
and its performance. Farming experience might help farmers with vital information for increased
sorghum production. The result of descriptive statistics on Table 3b above, revealed that farmers
with 0 – 9 years of experience dominate the field with about 67.2% of the sample whereas 32.8%
of the farmers have more than 10 years of farming experience. The average years of farming
experience was estimated to be 7.27 years. From the results, it is clearly seen that majority of the
farmers have being actively practicing the production of improved sorghum (CSR–01) variety
which according to Fadama (iii) development project report 2012, the seeds was introduced to the
communities in the year 2011. This indicate the level of innovativeness of the sorghum farmers in
the study area when it comes to adoption of an innovation.
4.2 COSTS AND RETURN ANALYSES OF SORGHUM FARMING
Costs and returns analysis of sorghum production system were carried out using farm budgetary
techniques. The term cost is defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary as the amount of money or
equivalent that must be paid or charged in order to purchase something. Thus, cost of sorghum
production is the expenses incurred in the procurement of goods, inputs and or other resources
needed for the production of sorghum produce.
Whereas, return refers to the revenue generated from an investment, it can be in a monetary form
or in a form of output or produce. The Table 4 below explained the variable costs incurred and the
return from investment in sorghum farming in the study area.
33
Table 4: Average Costs and Return Analyses of Sorghum Farming
Variables Average Quantity Unit Price Total Value Percentage (%)
(kg/ha) (₦) (₦/ha)
1. Variable Cost
a. Seeds (kg) 27.20 217.42 5,913.82 1.17
b. Chemical fertilizer (kg): 27.30
NPK: 337.50 314.03 105,984.66
Urea: 105.71 205.97 21773.12
SSP: 70.37 143.06 10,067.13
c. Organic manure (kg) 15,593.15 2.0995 31,334.4349 6.48
d. Agro-chemicals (litre) 18.59
Herbicide: 0.6571 652.14 428.52
Pesticide: 38.27 2,438.57 93,324.07
e. Cos of renting land 68,933.33 13.65
f. Labour (man-days) 32.83
Land preparation: 10.53 798.57 8,408.94
Ridging: 2.20 5,921.07 13,026.35
Planting: 10.50 910.00 9,555.00
Fertilizer application: 11.59 1,133.04 13,131.93
Weeding: 10.80 1,922.32 20,761.32
Chemical application: 2.14 3,422.62 7,324.41
Harvesting: 10.97 1,077.5 11,820.18
Threshing: 3.87 17,479.64 67,646.21
Bagging and packaging: 8.64 641.93 5,546.28
Transportations: 1.04 8,189.97 8,517.57
Total Variable Cost, TVC (₦): 503,497.3
2. Returns/Revenue
a. Average sorghum grains 4,610.4 214.3428 988,206.05
(kg)
b. Average by-products 598.76 54.1966 32,450.93
(kg)
c. Gross Return (₦) 1,020,656.98
d. Gross Margin (₦) 517,159.68
e. Return Per Naira 2.03
Invested (₦)
f. Operating Ratio: 0.49
Sourced: Field survey, 2021.
34
The variable cost components considered in the average costs and return analysis include cost of
seeds, chemical fertilizers, organic manure, agrochemicals, and wages for labour operations such
as land preparation, ridging, planting, fertilizer application, chemical application, weeding,
harvesting and other post-harvest operations such as threshing, bagging and of cost of transporting
the products to storage or marketplace. The results of average costs and return analysis in Table 4
above showed that the total cost of variable inputs was estimated to be ₦503,497.3 which labour
accounted for about 32.83% of the total variable cost incurred in the course of sorghum farming,
while total cost of chemical fertilizer accounted for about 27.30% in the study area during the
2019/2020 production season. High cost of labour is as result of rapidly increasing rate of rural-
urban migration by the labour force creating serious scarcity of laborers in the rural farming
communities. The uncontrolled rate of increase in prices of chemical fertilizers have become a
serious contemporary issues to farmers and it is gradually reducing the profitability of farming,
mostly to small-scale farmers. Also, the results revealed the estimated average gross farm income
or gross return to sorghum farming as ₦1,020,656.98 which was used to calculate the Gross
margin. The gross margin was estimated to be ₦517,159.68 which represents the average income
or profit each sorghum farmer obtained from sorghum farming as an enterprise after all expenses
were removed. The results on average cost and return analysis further disclosed that the return to
every ₦1 invested was estimated to be ₦2.03 naira. This implies that for every ₦1 a farmer
invested into the sorghum farming enterprise, he gains a net profits of ₦1.03 naira. This denotes
how profitable sorghum farming is in the study area. This result is in agreement with that of Oladeji
(2014) which reported in his thesis on economic analysis of sorghum-based cropping systems sole
sorghum cropping is profitable in Garko L.G with a gross farm income of ₦23,900 and an average
return per naira invested of ₦1.77 to every ₦1 invested.
Also from the results on the Table 4 above, it is clearly seen that the operating ratio of the enterprise
was estimated to be 0.49 which indicated the high solvency level of sorghum enterprise in the area.
4.3 MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATE OF THE STOCHASTIC FRONTIER
PRODUCTION FUNCTION
The stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) is a parametric method of estimating efficiency which
assumes that the deviation from the efficient frontier depends on the farm’s inefficiency, thus the
farmer decision-making, and a stochastic parameter that is not controlled by farmers.
35
Therefore, the stochastic frontier production function estimated the efficiency of improved
sorghum farming in the study area.
4.3.1 Maximum Likelihood Estimate of Technical Efficiency and Inefficiency Model for
Sorghum Farmers:
Technical efficiency (TE): refers to the ability of the farms to attain the highest level of output
given a set of inputs. It thus provides a measure of how the decision making of the farmers support
its sustainability on efficient use of input resources (Gaviglio et al. 2021). The distance between
the optimal level of efficiency and the actual farm’s TE measures the technical inefficiency, which
is interpreted as the failure of farms in producing the maximum output that is possible considering
the inputs provided. The Table 5 below represent the estimate of stochastic frontier analysis on
technical efficiency and inefficiency model for sorghum farmers in the study area.
Table 5: Maximum Likelihood Estimate of Technical Efficiency and Inefficiency Model for
Sorghum Farmers
Variables Parameters Coefficients SD T-stat
Technical Efficiency
Constant β0 1.8729 0.1234 15.1794***
Farm Size (ha) β1 0.0293 0.0082 3.5776***
Seed (kg) β2 0.2837 0.0177 16.3752***
Labour (man-day) β3 0.0052 0.1370 0.2464
Fertilizer (kg) β4 0.4613 0.15419 13.6902**
Agrochemicals (liters) β5 -0.1073 0.0176 -6.1070***
Inefficiency Model
Constant 0 -0.0694 0.9961 -0.0697
Age of respondent (years) 1 -0.5204 0.2465 -2.1111***
Household size (Numbers) 2 -0.3681 0.1609 -2.2873
Years of Experience (years) 3 -0.5207 0.2457 2.1193***
Education (years of formal edu.) 4 -0.0334 0.0216 -1.5453***
Membership of Association 5 -0.1994 0.7051 -0.2828
Access to Credit 6 -0.0932 0.0358 -2.6026***
Extension Visits (Visits/month) 7 0.3382 0.7126 -0.4747
Variance Parameters
Gamma ɣ 0.8092**
Sigma-squared σ2 0.4164**
Log-likelihood function -0.6740
LR Test 0.4733
Average Technical Efficiency 0.6677
***Significant @1%(p<0.01), **@5%(p<0.05), *@10%(p<0.10). Sourced: Field survey, 2021
36
The results of Stochastic Frontier Analysis on technical efficiency as presented in Table 5 above
showed that the sigma square (σ2) value was found to be 0.4164 and statistically significant at 5%
probability level, signifying a good fit and the correctness of the specified distributional
assumption for the composite error term. The gamma (γ) with value of 0.8092 was significant at
5%, implying that approximately 80.92% of the variation in output of improved sorghum CSR–01
in the study area was due to differences in technical efficiency. Thus, 80.92% of the variation in
composite error term was due to the inefficiency component. This also suggests that about 19.08%
of the variation was due to random shocks outside the farmer’s control such as weather and climate
changes. The average technical efficiency of the farmers was 0.67 implying that, on the average
the respondents were able to obtain 67% of output from a given mixture of production inputs.
Thus, in a short run, there is minimal scope (36%) of increasing the efficiency, by adopting more
of improved sorghum varieties. The study estimated the generalized log likelihood function to be
-0.6740 indicating that inefficiency exist in the data set. The estimated coefficients of farm size,
seed and chemical fertilizer were positive and significantly related with improved sorghum output
at different levels of probability. Only the coefficient of agrochemicals was found to be negative
and significant at 1% levels of probability. The estimated coefficient of fertilizer was found to be
positive and statistically significant at 5% level which implies that fertilizer is a significant factor
that influences sorghum output in the study area. So the output can therefore, be increased by 46%
with a corresponding percentage increase in the chemical fertilizer application if other inputs are
held constant. This result is in agreement with that of Rahman et al. (2005) who found out that
coefficients of farm size, labour and fertilizer to be significantly related with sole sorghum output
at 5% level of probability in their study on the technical efficiency in sorghum-based cropping
systems in Soba area of Kaduna State, Nigeria.
From the result on technical inefficiency model as presented in Table 5 above it is seen that the
coefficients of farmers’ age, years of formal education, farming experience and access to credits
were negatively and significantly related with technical inefficiency at 1% level of probability.
Years of farming experience and membership of cooperative association were found to be
negatively and insignificantly related with technical inefficiency. The negative sign for farming
experience means that an increase in the years of farming experience will result in reduced
technical inefficiency. Increase in years of membership of cooperatives tends to reduce technical
inefficiency of farmers, this is because increased membership of cooperative societies afford the
37
farmers the opportunity of sharing information on modern practices and gaining access to
improved technologies and credit access for the purchase of inputs and payment of hired labour
which may reduce their technical inefficiency (Njoku, 1991). The negative coefficient of credit
access suggests that greater access to credit reduces technical in efficiency. The reason is that the
availability of credit enhances the farmers’ ability to purchase the inputs embodied in new
technologies and to pay for hired labour needed for the use of these inputs and improved
management practices (Njoku, 1991).
4.3.2 Maximum Likelihood Estimate of Allocative (Cost) Efficiency and Inefficiency Model
for Sorghum Farmers:
The Allocative Efficiency (AE) concerned with achieving maximum outputs efficiently with the
least cost of inputs procurement. It is the ability of the farmer to decrease his cost of production
and increase the level of his output. Whereas cost inefficiency is a situation in which the total cost
distribution of input resources between alternatives does not fit the level of output. The Maximum
Likelihood (ML) estimates of the stochastic frontier trans-log cost parameters for improved
sorghum in the study area are presented in the Table 6 below.
38
Table 6: Maximum Likelihood Estimates of Allocative Efficiency and Inefficiency Model for
Sorghum Farmers
Variable Parameters Coefficient SD T-ratio
Allocative Efficiency
Constant β0 1.8729 0.1234 15.1794***
Average Cost of seed(₦) β1 0.0293 0.0082 3.5776***
Average Cost of fertilizer (₦/per kg) β2 0.9837 0.0177 55.6357***
Average Cost Agrochemicals (₦/litre) β3 0.0052 0.0212 0.2464
Average wage rate ( Man-day) β4 0.0003 0.0137 0.0225
Inefficiency Model
Constant 0 -0.9078 0.9999 -0.9078**
Age of respondent (years) 1 -0.6532 0.9999 -0.6532**
Household size (Numbers) 2 -0.5072 0.9999 -0.5072
Years of Experience (years) 3 -0.8509 0.9999 -0.8509**
Education (years of formal schooling) 4 -0.6450 0.9999 -0.6450**
Membership of Association 5 -0.6679 0.9999 -0.6679
Credit Access 6 -0.3462 0.9999 -0.3462
Extension Visits (No. of visits/month) 7 -0.6276 0.9999 -0.6276
Variance Parameters
Gamma ɣ 0.8747**
Sigma-squared σ2 0.1746**
Log-likelihood function -0.2688
LR Test 0.1382
Average Allocative Efficiency 0.7329
***Significant at 1% (p<0.01), ** at 5% (p<0.05), * at 10% (p<0.10).

Source: Field Survey, 2021.
The results of Stochastic Frontier Analysis on cost efficiency of the sorghum farmers revealed that
there was a presence of cost inefficiency effect in sorghum production as confirmed by the
significance of the sigma-square (σ2) and present of log-likelihood function which were found to
be 0.1746 and -0.2688 respectively. The estimated gamma (ɣ) parameter of the model is 0.8747
implying that about 87% of the variation in the total cost of production among the sampled
39
sorghum farmers was due to differences in their cost efficiencies. Thus, 87% of the variation in
composite error term was due to the inefficiency component. The average allocative efficiency of
the farmers was estimated to be 0.73 implying that, on the average the respondents were able to
achieve 73% of their outputs with the least costs combination of production inputs. Thus, in a short
run, there is minimal scope (27%) of increasing the efficiency, by adopting more efficient ways of
saving money while increasing productivity. This agrees with the findings of Elisabetta et al.
(2005) who reported the average cost efficiency of German banks according to SFA was 84%
indicating higher level of efficiency. The results also revealed that all the coefficients of
independent variables of the stochastic cost frontier model conform to a priori expectation, as all
the estimated coefficients were found to be positive with the coefficients of seed and fertilizer been
significant at 1% probability level. This is similar to the findings of Bakary K. S. S. in his study
on “Evaluation of Technical, Allocative and Economic Efficiency of Rice Producers” which
revealed that positive coefficients or elasticity of costs with respect to all inputs confirm the
assumption that cost function monotonically increases with increase in input prices. This means
that as the cost of these factors increased, total cost of production increased ceteris paribus (all-
things being equal), indicating that an increase in price of any of the inputs as well as an increase
in output level will eventually increase total cost of production. The significant variables according
to T-ratio test are cost of seed and fertilizer, both significant at 1% probability level. This indicates
that the named variables were significantly different from zero. That is, they are very important
elements in sorghum production.
From the result on cost inefficiency model as presented in Table 6 above revealed that the
coefficients of farmers’ age, years of formal education, farming experience, access to credits and
years of formal education were negatively and significantly related with the cost inefficiency at
5% level of probability. The negative sign for farming experience and years of formal education
means that an increase in the years of farming experience and formal knowledge will result in
reduced allocative or cost inefficiency. This is true because as farmers become more experience
and formally educated, they tend to know the perfect least cost combinations that will yield higher
level of outputs. Increase in years of membership of cooperatives tends to reduce cost inefficiency
of farmers. This is because farmers in a cooperation tend to have the opportunity of sharing useful
information among themselves on the factor – factor production cost function which in turn will
reduces allocative inefficiency of the farmers (Njoku, 1991).
40
4.3.3 Estimation of Technical, Allocative and Economic Efficiency Model for Sorghum
Farmers:
Table 7: Frequency Distribution of Technical (TE), Allocative (AE) and Economic (AE)
Efficiency among the Samples Sorghum Farmers
Efficiency Frequency Percentage Mean Min Max SD
Scores (%)
TE scores
0.0 – 0.3 6 9.0 0.662 0.254 0.912 0.1734
0.4 – 0.7 46 65.4
0.8 – 1.1 18 25.6
AE scores
0.0 – 0.3 3 4.2 0.763 0.236 0.957 0.1664
0.4 – 0.7 27 37.8
0.8 – 1.1 40 58
EE scores
0.0 – 0.3 21 29.9 0.528 0.067 0.873 0.209
0.4 – 0.7 44 62.6
0.8 – 1.1 5 7.5
Source: Field Survey, 2021
The study reveals that Technical efficiency indices of improved sorghum CSR – 01 farmers range
from 0.254 to 0.912 with a mean efficiency of 0.662. This implies that the best practicing farmers
operates at about 91.2% efficiency, while the least practicing farmers operate at about 25.4%
efficiency and an average farmer operates at 66.2% efficiency level of production. Furthermore,
the results also disclosed the Allocative indices of the farmers range from 0.236 to 0.957 with a
mean efficiency of 0.763, this means that some of the sampled farmers are 23.6% cost efficient
while others are 95.7% cost efficient and average farmers are 76.3% cost efficient. Finally, the
result expose the mean Economic efficiency of 0.528 with minimum and maximum cost indices
of 0.067 and 0.873 respectively. This indicates that, on average improved sorghum farmers are
52.8% efficient economically. The best practicing farmers operate at about 87.3% of economic
efficiency while least practicing farmers operate at about 6.7%. The result on SFA therefore has
41
shown that inefficiency in improved sorghum production in the study area is dominated by
economic efficiency.
To give a better indication of the distribution of TE, AE and EE a frequency distribution of their
predicted efficiencies is presented in table 8 above. The frequencies score in the table indicate that
the higher numbers of farmers have Technical efficiency ranges from 0.4 to 0.7 (that 40% and 70%
respectively) representing about 46% of the sampled farmers. The frequencies score have also
shown higher occurrence of farmers under Allocative efficiency of 0.8 to 1 (that 80% and 100%
respectively) which accounted for about 58% of the respondents. Finally, for Economic efficiency,
the frequencies score revealed higher number of farmers occurred within 0.4 to 0.7 (that 40% and
70% respectively) which represented 62.6% of the sampled farmers. These frequency scores of
Technical, Allocative and Economic efficiencies have shown that none of the farmers are operating
on the frontier percentage, which is 100% efficiency level. This means that sorghum producers
have a room to improve on their productivity and level of production even with the same available
resources.
4.4 CONSTRAINTS MILITATING AGAINST SORGHUM FARMING IN THE STUDY
AREA
The term constraints is considered synonymous to the concept of challenges, problems and
inhibition. It is defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary as factor or factors that limits, restricts or
hinders someone or something from operating its full potentials. This component reviewed those
factors that militate against the full production potential of sorghum farmers in the study area. The
constraints militating against sorghum farming are presented in the Table 8 below. The constraints
are ranked based on their severity.
Table 8: Constraints Militating against Sorghum Farming in the Study Area
Constraints/Challenges Frequency Percentage (%) Rank
High cost of chemical fertilizer 59 84.3 1st
Incidents of pests and diseases 54 77.1 2nd
Inadequate access to extension services 51 72.9 3rd
Lack of access to credits facilities 47 67.1 4th
Lack of access to improved sorghum seeds 41 58.6 5th
Inadequate infrastructure 35 50.0 6th
High cost of hired labour 34 40.6 7th
High cost of transportation 28 31.0 8th
Sourced: Field survey, 2021 *Multiple options were allowed
42
4.4.1 High Cost of Chemical Fertilizer
From the results presented in the Table 8 above, it can be seen that high cost of purchasing
chemical fertilizer was ranked first (1st) among all the constraints that are preventing sorghum
farmers from attaining full production capacity, it was seen that 84.3% sampled farmers in the
study area complaint of high increasing price rate of chemical fertilizer, which may be due to
inefficient fertilizer distribution systems and the artificial hording of fertilizer by the exploitative
activities of middlemen in the communities. This result agreed with the findings of Muhammad
(2015) who ranked high cost of fertilizer as second (2nd) factor among the factors militating against
inputs demand of smallholder grain-legume farmers in both project and non-project area with
65.3% and 46.7% respectively.
4.4.2 High Incidents of Pests and Diseases
From the results in Table 8 above, incidents of pest and diseases was ranked second (2nd) after cost
of chemical fertilizer. It is clearly seen that 77.1% of the population which represent 54 farmers in
the study area were challenged by the several occurrences of pests attack in their farm. Which
causes serious damage to the outputs level of sorghum.
4.4.3 Inadequate Access to Extension Services
The result indicated inadequacy of extension service delivery as the third (3th) positioned among
the factors militating against sorghum farming in the study area. It is clearly seen that about 51
respondents equivalent to 72.9% of the sampled farmers had problem of less contacts with an
extension agent. This could be attributed to the failure of extension related organizations like the
National Agricultural Extension and Liaison Services (NAELS) to provide the farmers with the
standard ratio of one extension agent to five thousand farmers (1:5000). This have a lot of influence
to the level of productivity of the farmers as many have little or no knowledge of the good
management practice for a better harvest.
4.4.4 Lack of Access to Credits Facilities
The result revealed that 67.1% of the sampled sorghum farmers in the study had issues with access
to credits facilities to boost their productivity. Farming as an enterprise requires capital, more
especially financial capital to operate and expand, but the problem of inadequate access to credits
in the study area was ranked fourth (4th) among the factors that hinders sorghum farming. This
agreed with the findings of Alimi (2015) who also reported the same case of inadequate credits as
a factor militating against maize farming in Bunkure L.G.
43
4.4.5 Lack of Access to Improved Sorghum Seeds
This factor is ranked fifth (5th) among the constraints that hinders sorghum productivity in the
study area. It is clearly seen that about 58.6% of the sampled farmers had issues of accessing the
improved sorghum seed. The shortage of improved seeds may be caused by the limited supply of
the improved seeds by government and private seed agencies in the study area as a result of
deficiencies in them.
4.4.6 Inadequate Infrastructural Development
Lack of adequate social infrastructures and amenities such as access, access to safe drinking water,
access to electricity and equipped market among others is ranked sixth (6th) among the factors
militating against sorghum production. From the Table 9 above, it can be seen that 50% of the
respondents have no access to infrastructures.
4.4.7 High Cost of Hired Labour
The result ranked high cost of hired labour as the seventh (7th) constraints militating against
sorghum farming in the area, as it is clearly seen that 40.6% of the sampled farmers complaint
about high cost of hired labour. This is as a result family labour that dominated the field.
4.4.8 High Cost of Transportation
This factor is considered as a least factor as it was ranked as the eighth (8th) among the factors
influencing the level of productivity of sorghum in the study area. It is observed from the results
on Table 8 above that only 31.0% of the sampled farmers had issues of high cost of transportation.
44
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENTATION
5.1 SUMMARY
The study analyzed the economics of improved sorghum (CSR–01) production in Takai Local
Government Area of Kano State. The specific objectives were to describe the socio-economic
characteristics of sorghum farmers that influence output of sorghum in the study area, estimate the
costs and returns from producing sorghum in the study area, determine the technical, allocative,
and economic efficiency of sorghum production, and identify the constraints militating against
sorghum production to reach its full capacity. Primary data were used for this study and these data
were collected with the aid of structured questionnaire administered to the farmers. A multi-stage
and purposive sampling technique was employed for this study where the first stage involved the
purposive selection of four (4) villages out of the ten (10) district communities existing in the study
area. The villages include Birnin Bako, Langwami, Sakwaya, and Takai. They were purposively
selected based on concentration and intensity of sorghum farmers. The second stage involves the
purposive selection of 2 farmer’s cooperative each in the selected villages. The last stage involves
the random selection of 233 farmers where 70 farmers were sampled for the study. The data
collected were analyzed by the used of descriptive statistics, gross margin analysis and stochastic
frontier production model.
The results of the socio-economic characteristics revealed that majority of the sampled farmers
(80%) were male and only 20% were found to be female, about 83% of sorghum farmers in the
study area were married and this indicated the level responsibility, only 10% and 7.1% of the
farmers are found to be single and widow respectively. For the level of education, most of the
sampled farmers (60%) had no formal education, only 40% of them had either primary secondary
or tertiary education. Larger portion of the farmers (44.3%) of the farmers acquired their land
through inheritance, 25.7% acquired land through purchase and the remaining 30% acquired land
either renting or borrowing. As a benefit of being in a cooperative society, about 31.4% of the
sampled farmers sourced their improved sorghum seeds through farmers’ cooperative but the
majority (47.1%) of the sampled farmers sourced their sorghum seeds from their previous year’s
harvest which is one of the reasons for the moderate yield because the seeds are not fresh. Few
farmers (21.4%) sourced their CSR–01 seed from research outlets and marketplaces. For the type
of labour employed, the result indicated that 51.4% of the sampled farmers used hired labor while
45
about 48.6% employed family labour. High percentage of the farmers (62.9%) had no contact with
an extension agent, only few (39.1%) had extension contact on either weekly, monthly or yearly
with the percentage frequency of visitation of about 18.6%, 27.1%, and 54.3% respectively. The
result revealed the estimated mean age of the sorghum farmers to be 45.24 with an average
household population of 10 individuals indicating their high productive age brackets and a
moderate number of mouths to feed. Improved sorghum (CSR–01) is farmed on an average of 2.72
hectare of land with an estimated average yield of 1,695.50kilogram equivalent to 1.7 tonnes per
hectare approximately. All the sampled sorghum farmers (100%) are members of certain farmers’
cooperative with an estimated mean of 7.27 years of farming experience.
The results of the Farm budget analysis revealed an average total variable cost of farming sorghum
CSR–01 to be ₦503,497.3 with an estimated gross return of ₦1,020,656.98 which gives a gross
margin of ₦517,159.68 for 2.62ha. The rate of return to investment was estimated to be ₦2.03
indicating that for every ₦1 invested a sum of ₦1.03 will be realized as profit. The results also
indicate the high solvency of improved sorghum farming enterprise by the value of operation farm
ratio which was estimated to be 0.49 in the ratio of 0 to 1.
The Stochastic Frontier Production Analysis which estimated Maximum Likelihood of Technical,
Allocative and Economic Efficiency of improved sorghum farmers, indicated that there is a
significant level of inefficiency among the sampled farmers as illustrated by the coefficients of
variable inputs in technical and allocative efficiency estimates. The result on Technical efficiency
have revealed that the coefficients of farm size, quantity of seed and fertilizer were found to be
positively and significantly related to sorghum outputs at different probability level. For the
technical inefficiency model, the coefficients of farmer’s age, years of formal education, farming
experience and credit access were negatively and significantly related to outputs at 1% probability
level which implies that an increase in the level of the above named variables will reduce technical
inefficiency and increase productivity. The result on Allocative efficiency have revealed that all
the coefficients of independent variables of the SCFM conform to a priori expectation, as all the
estimated coefficients were found to be positive with the coefficients of seed and fertilizer been
significant at 1% probability level. For the cost inefficiency model, the coefficients of farmers’
age, years of formal education, farming experience, access to credits and years of formal education
were negatively and significantly related with the cost inefficiency at 5% level of probability.
Finally, the results on SFA revealed the technical efficiency estimates ranges from 25.4% to 91.2%
46
with a mean technical efficiency of 66.2% among the sampled farmers. Allocative efficiency
estimates ranges from 23.6% to 95.7% with an average efficiency of 76.3% among the
respondents. The results also revealed the minimum and maximum economic efficiency of the
sampled sorghum farmers to be 6.7% and 87.3% respectively, with a mean economic efficiency
of 52.8% among the sampled sorghum farmers. Thus, the results on SFA affirmed that inefficiency
among the sampled sorghum farmers in the study area is dominated by economic efficiency.
For the constraints militating against sorghum farming in the study area was ranked according its
severity, high cost of chemical fertilizer was ranked first with 84.3%, incidents of pest and diseases
was ranked second with 77.1%, inadequate extension visits was ranked third with 72.9%, lack of
adequate access to credit facilities was ranked fourth with 67.1%, lack of adequate access to
improved sorghum CSR–01 seed was ranked fifth with 58.6%, lack of adequate infrastructural
development was ranked sixth with 50.0%, high cost of hired labour was ranked seventh with
40.6%, and high cost of transportation was ranked eighth with 31.0%.
5.2 CONCLUSION
Sorghum is one of the most important cereal foods in the world and the staple food of millions of
people. The production of improved sorghum CSR–01 in the study area was found to be profitable
and this has the potential of contributing to improved livelihoods of the farmers. This means that
adoption and usage of the improved sorghum CSR–01 variety should be promoted as a way
alleviating poverty and increasing the food security of the farmers. The study also concluded that
farmers’ socio-economic characteristics have significant influences on their level of output, hence
change agents in the study area should be trained to understand the factors influencing the under-
utilization of most of these inputs for proper utilization and to avoid wastage of resources.
The Stochastic Frontier Analysis affirmed that the mean technical, allocative and economic
efficiency of 66.2%, 76.3% and 52.8% respectively for improved sorghum farmers across the study
area indicated that the farmers are not operating on the production frontier (100% efficiency), so
the study concluded that substantial potentials exist for increasing the level of sorghum production
even with the farmer’s current available technology and resources. The study reveals that farmer’s
age, years of formal education, years of experience and access to credits positively and
significantly influence technical, allocative and economic efficiency of sorghum farming.
47
The constraints militating against the production of improved sorghum CSR–01 in the study area
must be addressed if the existing low-yielding sorghum production systems are to be transformed
into higher yielding and sustainable production systems.
5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are made based on the findings of this research work.
1. There is the need for sustainable input supply policy that will ensure availability, affordability
and timely delivery of agricultural inputs especially seeds of improved sorghum cultivars for
better sorghum production in the study area.
2. Farmers should be encouraged to produce the improved sorghum varieties through special
and adequate training programmes on production techniques and better crop management
including proper disease and pest control for efficient productivity.
3. Given that the cost of chemical fertilizer and incidents of pest/diseases as the most important
factors militating against sorghum production, so I suggest that government through its
agricultural policy should provide fertilizer subsidy grants and also provide means of tackling
the devastating effects of pest such as the striga etc. through Integrated Pest Management and
Control. Also farmers should be encouraged to adopt the use of resistant varieties to reduce
the effects of pests and diseases.
4. Inadequate extension service delivery was found to be one of the major constraints to sorghum
farming, I suggest that governments and its institutions such as the National Agricultural
Extension and Liaison Services (NAELS) to as the matter of urgency recruits and train
adequate number of extension and change agents that will at least meet the ratio of 1:500 (that
is one extension agent to five hundred and farmers) in order to enhance effective extension
service delivery which in turns improve productivity.
5. Given that access to credit facilities and improved sorghum seed varieties were significantly
determinant of technical efficiency, I recommend that farmers should through their
cooperatives or associations make arrangement for loans from commercial banks and access
improve seeds directly from the research institutes. Also, the research institutes like ICRISAT,
IAR-ABU, and IITA among others should establish their research outlets across the study
area to make it easier for the farmers to access the improved sorghum seed without too much
stress.
48
6. From the wise saying “Good intensions are not good enough” so I suggest that formulation of
good policies by the government are not enough, but the implementation of such policies
should be encouraged in order to boost development.
7. Lastly, I recommend that the government and all other stakeholders concern should lay more
emphases on conducting project works that will facilitate the adoption and proper utilization
of this sorghum variety and that industries like the Nigerian Brewing Plc. among its likes such
facilate the buy-back activities so as to make farmers more willing to produce with the
assurance that their products have an established market.
5.4 CONTRIBUTION OF THE STUDY TO KNOWLEDGE
The findings of this study has contributed the following to knowledge:
1. The study found out that the socio-economic characteristics of the sorghum farmers such as
age, sex, marital status, household size and level of education among others have influence
over their level of outputs.
2. The study revealed that the improved sorghum CSR–01 production in the study area is
profitable with gross margin of ₦517,159.68 and for every ₦1 invested, a return of ₦1.03 is
realized as profit, despites the identified constraints that militate against its production.
3. The study affirmed that on average sampled sorghum farmers in the study area operate on
66.2%, 76.3% and 52.8% of technical, allocative and economic efficiency of respectively,
which indicated that the farmers are not operating on the production frontier, that they are
not 100% efficient. The study reveals that farmer’s age, years of formal education, years of
experience and access to credits positively and significantly influence technical, allocative
and economic efficiency of sorghum farming.
4. The study also exposed that high cost of chemical fertilizer, incidents of pests and diseases,
inadequate access to extension services, lack of access to credits facilities and improved seed
cultivars, inadequate infrastructures and high cost of labor as the constraints militating
against the production of improved sorghum CSR–01 in the study area and are ranked based
on their severity.
49
REFERENCES
A. B Obilana, A.T. (2005): “Economic Importance of Sorghum”, Lagos State Polytechnic, Public
Lecture Series, 2:1-27.
Abalu, G.I.O (1986): “Marketing of Agricultural produce, which way forward”. A seminar
presentation on the integrated rural development organized by directorate of food, roads
and rural infrastracture, Dodon barrack Lagos state, Nigeria.
Abdulmajid Tahir Dori (2017): “Economic Analysis of Small Scale Maize Production for
Livelihood Sustainance in Borno State” an published Msc. Thesis on Agricultural
Economics (Livelihood and Natural Resource Economics). Department of Agricultural
economics and extension, faculty of agriculture.
Agbo, C. I. (1978). “An Appraisal of the Impact of Operation Feed the Nation Scheme on
Traditional and Non-farming Institutions in Kaduna and Plateau States of Nigeria”.
Unpublished M. Sc. Thesis Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, A. B.
U., Zaria.
Ahmed, B., Ogungbile, A. O. and Olukosi, J. O. (1996). “Economics of
Nitrogen Use on Maize”, Samaru Journal for Agric”. Research Vol. 54 (1). Pp. 144
Ajibefun, I. A. and Abdul Kadri, A. O. (1999): “An Investigation of Technical Inefficiency of
Production of Farmers Under the National Directorate of Employment in Ondo State,
Nigeria”. Applied Economic Letters, 6, 111-114. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group,
United Kingdom, UK.
Akinyoade A, Ekumankama O, Uche C. The use of local raw materialsin beer brewing: Heineken
in Nigeria. J Institute of Brewing 2016; 122:682–92. doi:10.1002/jib.383.
Archibong, E. J., Onuora, V. C., Usoegbu, O., Ezemba, C. C. (June, 2015): Research article on
“MASHING STUDIES OF TWO (2) IMPROVED SORGHUM VARIETIES (SK5912
AND CSR01) USING CRUDE ENZYME EXTRACT FROM ASPERGILLUS SYDOWII”
Volume 4, Issue 08, 113-125.
Dept. of Applied Microbiology & Brewing, Faculty of Biosciences, Nnamdi Azikiwe
University, Awka, Nigeria.
Article Received on: 04 June 2015
Revised on: 25 June 2015
Accepted on: 13 July 2015.
A. L Mustapha Ph.D and U. angulu (2020): lecture note on “Agricultural Policy and
Development” AEE5208. Department of Agricultural
Economics and Extension, Bayero University, Kano.
Alimi, T. (2000). Resource-use Efficiency in Food production in Oyo State of Nigeria. Journal of
Agriculture and Environment, Vol. 1 pp.1–7. Usman Danfodio University, Sokoto.
Alimi Amina (2015): “Economic Analysis of Maize (Zea maise) in Bunkure L.G area of Kano
state”. An unpublished undergraduate project submitted to the Department of Agricultural
Economics And Extension, Faculty of Agriculture, Bayero University, Kano, in Partial
Fulfilment of the Requirement for the Award of the Bachelor Degree in Agriculture.
Ayinde, I.A, Okuneye, P.A., Momoh, S. and Aromolaran A.B. (2007): Socio economic factors
affecting insecticide use in cowpea production in Kano State, proceeding of the 9th annual
conference of the Nigeria Association of Agricultural Economists (NAAE), held at
Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, 5th-8thNovember, 2: 449-456.
50
Bakary Kaddy Sulayman Sanyang (2014) “Evaluation of Technical, Allocative and Economic
Efficiency of Rice Producers: A Case Study in Central River Region North & South of the
Gambian Republic” being a thesis Submitted to the Department of Agricultural Economics,
Agri-business and Extension, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY IN
AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Faculty of Agriculture College of Agriculture and
Natural Resources NOVEMBER, 2014.
B. Chijioke, A.Makurdi, (2009); “Marketing of Agricultural Produce among Rural Farm
Households in Nigeria: The Case of Sorghum Marketing in Benue State” unpublished Msc.
Thesis Department of Agricultural Economics University of Agriculture, Makurdi.
Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN (2003): Annual Report and statistical bulletin, showing rate of
national import and export for food and cash crops, DECEMBER, 2003.
Dodon daji, S.D, (2015): “Economics of Dry season onion production and marketing in Sokoto
and Kebbi states. An unpublished Ph.D
dissertation, department of agricultural
economics and extension. Usmanu Danfodio
University, Sokoto.
DAFAF, Republic Of South Africa (March, 2010) “Sorghum Production Guideline” Printed and
Published by: Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.
Compiled by: Directorate Plant Production in collaboration with the ARC
Design and layout by: Directorate Agricultural Information Services.
Daneji MI, (2020): lecture note on Diffusion of Innovation, AEE5204. By Prof. M. I Daneji Ph.D,
2020. Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Bayero University, Kano.
Elisabetta Fiorentino, Alexander Karmaan and Michael Koetta, (2005): “the cost efficiency of
German banks: a comparison of SFA and DEA. Being a discussion paper series 2 on
banking and finantial studies at the Deutsche Bundes Bank (Euro System)
No. 10/2006: ISBN: 3 – 86558 – 219 – 2.
Elumah LO,Shobayo P. Performance Analysis of Nigerian Brewery Industry. Binus Bus Rev
2018; 9:47. doi:10.21512/bbr.v9i1.4047
Fadama (iii) project, 2011: third national Fadama development project on Agricultural production
and productivity. “Introduction of improved seed varieties to the Northern states of Nigeria.
FAOSTAT (2020): Food and Agricultural organization statistical database: “world sorghum
production statistics; retrieved from:
http://faostat.fao.org/sorghum-profile
FAOSTAT (2019): Food and Agricultural organization statistical database; “world sorghum
production trend” retrieved from http://faostat.fao.org/en/#data
FAO (2014) FAO Statistical database. Available online: http://faostat.fao.org/ Farias JRB, Sans
LMA, Zullo J. Jr. (2012) Agro Meteorology and Sorghum Production. Journal available
online: www.wmo.ch/pages/prog/wcp/agm/gamp/documents/chap 13G-draft, pp 4-9.
FAO (2001): Food and Agricultural Organizations Rome: The origin and distribution of sorghum
USDA Agricultural Research Units, USA. Pp 98-109.
F.Z. Buhari (2020): “Evaluation of Phytic acid contents on sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) genotype
and its relation to seeds micronutrients, Phosphorous uptake and used efficiency toward
improving nutrients availability in the Dryland” being a proposal saminar submitted to the
dept. of Agronomy, Bayero University, Kano.
51
FMARD (2018) “Agricultural transformation agenda”: we will grow Nigeria’s Agricultural
sectors Draft for discussion and executive summary. Abuja Nigeria. Federal ministry of
Agriculture and rural development, 2011. Viewed at: Google scholar.
Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Abuja, Nigeria. Agricultural
Transformation Implementation Council (2011). “Sorghum Transformation Strategy,
Technical Report”. March, 2011.
Google updates; google satellite map (Takai); Obtained from
http://www.maplandia.com/nigeria/kano/takai on January 20, 2020.
Gaviglio Anna, Rosalia Filippini, Fabio Albino M., Maria Elena Marestocotti and Eugenio
Demartini (2021): “Technical Efficiency and Productivity of farms: a peri-urban case
study analysis in Italy” being an article of Agricultural and Food Economics, April 2021.
Retrieved from: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/350356207
Gourichon H., 2013. “Analysis of incentives and disincentives for sorghum in Nigeria”. Technical
notes series, MAFAP, FAO, Rome. For more information: www.fao.org/mafap
ICRISAT, India 2007. “Industrial utilization of sorghum in India”. Internal journal on
commercialized sorghum production retrieved from the original PDF on 2012/02/08.
Retrieved 2012/23/08.
ICRISAT. The grain sorghum. ICRISAT n.d. http://www.icrisat.org/impacts/impact-
stories/Icrisat-impacts-58.htm (accessed July 5, 2019).
ICRISAT Annual Report 2013; “International Crop Research Institude for Semi-Arid Tropic,
Patancheru, India” Pp 56. ISBN 1017-9933
ICRISAT, (2016); “Connecting farmers with the Sorghum value chain in Nigeria” Sorghum
innovation platform, june 2016. Kano state.
Idiong, C. I., Onyenweaku, E.C., Domian, I. A. and Susan, B. O. (2007) A Stochastic Frontier
Analysis of Technical Efficiency in Swamp and Upland Rice Production System in Cross
River State Nigeria. Med-well Agricultural Journal 2(2): 299 –305.
Idiong, I.C (2007). Estimation of Farm Level Technical Efficiency in Small Scale Swamp Rice
Production in Cross Rivers State, Nigeria: A stochastic frontier approach. World Journal
of Agricultural Science. 3(5): 653-658.
IFPRI, M.Nwafor (2010). “A 2006 Social Accounting Matrix for Nigeria: Methodology and
Results, Nigeria Strategy Support Program” An International Journal vol. (9)(2). Pp. 221
IAR/ABU, Institute for Agricultural Research, Ahmadu Bello University, Samaru, Zaria, Northern
Nigeria, D. L. Curtis. The Races of Sorghum in Nigeria: their Distribution and Relative
Importance. JOURNAL VOL. 4
INTSORMIL, "Transfer of Sorghum, Millet Production, Processing and Marketing Technologies
in Mali Quarterly Report April 1, – June 30, 2010" (2010). USAID Mali Mission Awards.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/intsormilusaidmali/19
Jongur, A.U. (2006) “Economic Analysis of Masakwa Sorghum Production in Yola South LGA,
Adamawa State, Nigeria”. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, submitted to the School of
Postgraduate Studies, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, in partial fulfillment of the
requirement for the Award of degree of Doctorate in Agricultural Economics, department
of agricultural economics and rural sociology, faculty of Agriculture. Pp. 40-45.
Khanderkey M.D, Mustafizur Rahman, Iqibaal Hossain, and Fadious Alam (1993): “Resource use
efficency in HYV, Boro paddy production in some selected areas of Brahman baria district,
Bangaledash” Journal of Agricultural Economics XVI, 149:57
52
J.M Jibrin, A.B. Mohammed, M.I Daneji, A.H Wudil, M.A Hussain, & I.B Mohammed (Sept.
2016): “Economic of On-Farm Sorghum-Legume Strip Cropping System in Kano State” A
journal of Agriculture and sustainability. Vol. 7, Number 1, 2017. Pp. 99-113.
Muhammad, Halliru (2015): “Determinants Of Inputs Demand And Adoption Of Grain Legumes
And Associated Technologies Of N2africa In Kano State, Nigeria” A Dissertation
Submitted to the Department of Agricultural Economics And Extension, Faculty of
Agriculture, Bayero University, Kano, In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement for the
Award of the Degree of Masters in Agricultural Economics (Livelihood and Resource
Economics).
Manyong, V. Ikpi, A. Olayemi, J. Yusuf, S. Omonona, B. Okoruwa, and Idachaba (2005):
Agriculture in Nigeria “Identifying oportunities for increased commercialization and
Investment” (p. 190). Ibadan: IITA.
Merriam-Webster dictionary, 1828 lnc. Reviced edition @2021: definition of words.
www.merriam-webster.com
NAERLS (2014): “A report on adopted village concept for Agricultural Technology transfer”
National Agricultural Extension and Liason Services. A.B.U Zaria. NAERLS Experiance.
NBPLC Sorghum brochure 2014: “Enhancing the sorghum value chain” issued by Cooperate
Affairs Dept., Nigeria Brewing Plc. Published on the journey to support commercial
Production of sorghum in Nigeria. 2014
N. Dercas, and A. Liakatas (2017); “Water and radiation effects on sweet sorghum productivity”,
Journal of Water Resources Management, Vol. 21, no. 9, Pp. 1585-1600.
National Population Commission (NPC 2006). Official Gazette, data for the 2006 population
census carried out in Nigeria. Volume 96(2): 32.
Njoku, J.E. (1991). “Factors Influencing the Adoption of Improved Oil Palm Production
Technologies by Smallholders in Imo State of Nigeria”. In Appropriate Agricultural
Technologies for Resource-Poor Farmers. Olukosi, J.O., Ogungbile, A.O. and
Kalu, B.A. (eds.), Proceedings of the National Farming Systems Research Network
Workshop held at Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria. August, 1991. Pp. 14-16. A paper
presented at the National Conference, Federal University Of Agriculture, Benue, (1991)
Oladeji, B.S., Irinkoyenikan, O.A., Gbadamos, O.S., Ibironke, S.I., Akanbi, C.T., and Taiwo, K.A
(2016), “Comparative analysis of physico-chemical properties and aminoacid profile of
tree tropical sorghum cultivars in Nigeria”, Nutrition and Food Science. Vol. 46, No. 5 pp
695-704.
Obinne (2011) Administration and Programme Planning in Extension ARD507: Guide Course:
Developer/Writer: Department of Agric. Extension & Communication, University of
Agriculture, Makurdi, Nigeria. NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA.
O. Ojo, Ikpi, G.U., Jenyo-Oni, S.O and Akinyemi (2007): Plankton distribution and diversity; a
case study of Obubra campus, CRSUT, Calabar. Journal of agriculture, forestry and social
sciences. Sept. 2007. \
Olufemi James AYODELE (2016): “Economic Analysis of Irrigated Rice Production in Kura
Local Government Area of Kano State, Nigeria”. A Thesis Submitted to the School Of
Postgraduate Studies, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, in partial Fulfillment of the
Requirement for the Award of Degree of Masters Of Science in Agricultural Economics.
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Faculty of Agriculture,
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
53
Oluwatayo, I.B. (2009); Vulnerability to poverty among households in ruralk communities in
Nigeria. Published Phd thesis, VDM Verlag, Dr. Muller Aktienge sells chaft and co., KG
Germany 1143pp. ISBN: 978-3-693-20291-5.
Olukosi J. O., Isitor, S. U. and Ode, M. O. (2007). “Introduction to Agricultural Marketing”;
Principles and Application. 3rd Edition. G. U. Publisher, Abuja, Nigeria. Pp. 47 –57.
Olukosi, J. O. and Erhabor, P. O. (1988). Introduction to AgriculturalProduction Economics,
University Press, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
Olukosi, J. O. and Erhabor, P. O. (1987). Introduction to Farm Management Principles and
Application. Agitab Publishers Limited, Zaria. 112.
Olorunsanya, E. (2009) Economic Analysis of Soybean Production in Kwara State, North Central
Nigeria Global Approaches to Extension Practice (GAEP), vol. 5, no. 2, 2009
Ohen S. Final report on assessment of the adoption level of two (2) open pollinated varieties –
CSR-01 & CSR-02 amongst sorghum farmers in Northern Nigeria. 2018.
Oyewole, S. O. (2012): “Analysis of Income Diversification Strategies and Food Security Status
of Farmers in Oyo state of Nigeria”. Thesis Submitted to the Department of Agricultural
Economics and Rural Sociology. Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria.
Rahman, S.A, Ajayi, F.A. and Gabriel, T. (2005). Technical Efficiency in Sorghum-Based
Cropping Systems in Soba LGA of Kaduna state, Nigeria. Journal of Research in Science
and Management, Vol. 3(1): Pp. 100-104.
Schubert K, Mason J. Cost-Benefit Analysis of USAID/Nigeria’s MARKETS II Program.
Washington, DC: 2015.
Seun Akinloye Oladeji (2014) “Economic Analysis Of Sorghum-Based Cropping Systems In
Garko Local Government Area of Kano State, Nigeria” An Msc thesis submitted to the
School of Postgraduate Studies, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, in partial fulfillment of
the requirement for the Award of degree of Masters of science in Agricultural Economics,
department of agricultural economics and rural sociology, faculty of Agriculture. March,
2014.
Shaib, B., Adamu, A., and Bakshi, J.S. (1999). Nigerian Agricultural Strategy Research Plan:
1996 - 2010. Africa Book Builders Limited, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Sorghum Value Chain in Nigeria (Explorative Studies): being a research report prepared by:
Akinyinka Akinyoade, Agnieszka Kazimierczuk, Ogbuagu Ekumankama, Toyesa Agbaje,
Ton Diatz. Octorber, 2020. Retrieved from: http://the nounproject.com
Sorghum Production Guidelines: March, 2010. Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.
Republic of South Korea. Obtainable: Resource Center, Directorate of Agricultural
Information Services. Private bag X144. PRETORIA. 00001
Stanger, A.M.J (2000), Home based business marginality: A review of home based business
performance and its determinant. School of commerce Research paper series 18(3):17
Trichopoulou, A., Naska, A. and Costacou, T. (2002). Disparities in Food Habits across Europe.
Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 61: 553–558.
Uwakah, C.T. (1983). “The role of Agricultural Extension in Agricultural Development in
Nigeria.”Proceedings of the Training workshop on Rural Agricultural Extension held at
NRCRI, Umudike,Pp. 29-37.
Tanko, L. and Opara, C. (2010). “Measurement of the Technical Efficiency in sorghum Production
in Kano state, Nigeria. Proceedings of the 44th Annual Conference of Agricultural Society
of Nigeria, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomosho, Nigeria on 18th- 20th
October, 2010.
54
T.T Bello, (2019); “Arable crop production” lecture note. Department of Agronomy, faculty of
Agriculture, Bayero University Kano.
Tosan Fregene Ph.D: Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Management University of Ibadan,
Nigeria. Being a lecture note on “DIFFUSION AND ADOPTION OF INNOVATIONS,
ARD503” Course Developer/Writer Dr. Tosan Fregene, National Open University of
Nigeria, (NOUN).
R. M, Sani, R. Haruna and S. Sirajo (2013): “Economics Of Sorghum (Sorghum Bicolar, L)
Production In Bauchi Local Government Area of Bauchi state, Nigeria”. Invited paper
presented at 4th international conference of the African Association of Agricultural
Economics, Hammanet Tunisia. At Abubakar Tafawa Balewa university Bauchi. Sept. 22,
2013.
USAID/MARKET Project (i); Maximizing Agricultural revenue and key enterprises in targeted
sites i and ii (market i and ii); prohect dated: April 2012 to August 2017.
http://www.nigeriamarkets.org
UNDP. 1999. Human development report,. Theme: “globalization and economic integrastion”.
Retrieved from; http:www.hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-1999
USDA (2019), “World Agricultural Production; World Sorghum Production level 2019/2020”
cited from: http://www.worldagriculturalproduction.com/crops/sorghum.aspx
USDA, FAO, NBS; (2012): “world sorghum crop statistics” Trends of sorghum production in the
world.
Wikipedia search engine: Origin and distribution of sorghum, scientific classification and
identified sorghum cultivars. Retrieved: www.en.m.wikipedia.org
Yusuf, O., Adebayor, C.O and Sani (2010); “Economic evaluation of improved maize variety
production in Sabon Gari Local Government Area of Kaduna state” Unpublished Thesis
to the Department Of Agricultural Economics Ahmadu Bello University Zaria.
Yusuf, O., Olukosi, J.O and Ugbabe (2007): “Resource efficiency in eguisi melon production
under sole and mixed cropping system in Okehi Local Government Area of Kogi state,
Nigeria. An internal journal of agricultural research , Keffi. 3(1) vol. 9(1). Pp. 111
World Bank|TRADINGECONOMICS.COM: “World Bank Development Indicators” July, 2021.
Retrieved from; https://tradingeconomics.com/nigeria/sorghum-production-metric-tons-wb-data
55
APPENDIX I:
FARMER RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE
BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO.
FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS AND EXTENSION
Dear Respondents;
My name is SULAIMAN ABUBAKAR ABDULLAHI, I am a level 500 student of the above
named institution with the registration number AGR/15/AGR/00018, from the department of
Agricultural Economics and Extension. I am conducting a research study on a topic
“ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF IMPROVED SORGHUM (CSR-01) PRODUCTION IN
TAKAI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA”.
Please you are requested to kindly responds to all the questions as the information would be used
confidentially for academic purpose only. You are expected to tick the appropriate option where
necessary and fill up the blank spaces as the case maybe, thank you.
Questionnaire I.D:
Name of Respondent/Farmer:…………………....................................……………...........
L.G.A:............................Ward:..................................Village:.................................. ............
Phone number:........................................................... Date:..................................................
SECTION A: SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESPONDENT
1. Age of farmer (years):....................................................................................... ...........
2. Gender: a. Male [ ] b. Female [ ]
3. Marital status: a. Single [ ] b. Married [ ] c. Divorced [ ] d.
Widow [ ]
4. Household size (number):...............................................................................................
5. Household land (ha):.......................................................................................................
6. Educational status: a. Non-formal [ ] b. Primary [ ] c. Secondary [ ] d. Tertiary [ ] e.
Others [specify].............................................................................................................
7. For how long have you being into sorghum CSR-01 farming (years):.............................
8. Land size devoted to sorghum CSR-01 farming (ha)..........................................................
9. Do you have access to extension services? Yes [ ] No [ ]
10. If yes, how often did they visit you? a. Daily [ ] b. Weekly [ ] c. Monthly [ ] d.
Annually [ ]
11. Do you belongs to any farmers’ cooperative group/society? Yes [ ] No [ ]
12. If yes, how long have you been in the cooperative group/society
(years):..................................................................................................................................
13. What is (are) the benefit(s) you derived from cooperative participation? a. Access to
credits [ ] b. access to improved seed [ ] c. Skills and knowledge [ ] d. Others
(specify)...............................................................................................................................
14. What was the sourced of capital for the production of sorghum CSR-01 variety during the
last growing season? a. Personal savings [ ] b. Donations from family/friends [ ] c.
Bank loan [ ] d. Inheritance [ ] e. Others
(specify)...............................................................................................................................
15. What was the sourced of your sorghum CSR-01 seeds? a. Market [ ] b. Farmers’ cooperative
group [ ] c. Research outlet [ ] d. Others (specify)..................................
16. Is there availability of infrastructure in your area? Yes [ ] No [ ]
56
17. If yes, what type of infrastructure is available? a. Access road [ ] b. Market [ ] c.
Water [ ] d. Postharvest machines [ ] e. Others (specify)...............................
SECTION B: COST AND RETURN FOR CSR-01 SORGHUM PRODUCTION
INPUTS USED:
18. Kindly indicate the ownership type of land you cultivate: a. Purchased [ ] b. Rented [ ]
c. Borrowed d. Inherited [ ] e. Others (specify)..........................................................
19. If rented, how much do you pay for every hectare per production season (₦).......................
20. What are the variable inputs used in the production of sorghum CSR-01 and their cost?
S/N VARIABLES QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
(kg/liter) (₦) (₦)
1. Seeds (CSR-01 variety)
2. Chemical Fertilizers
1. NPK
2. Urea
3. SSP
3. Organic manure
4. Herbicide
5. Pesticide
LABOR USED
21. Which type of labor is used in the production of sorghum CSR-01 and the cost?
a. Family labor [ ] b. Hired labor [ ]
Farm Operations Hired labor Family labor
S/N No. of Unit No. of Unit
laborers cost/laborer laborers cost/laborer
(₦) (₦)
1. Land preparations
2. Ridging
3. Planting/sowing
4. Fertilizer application
5. Weeding
5. Chemical application
6. Harvesting
7. Threshing/Dehusking
8. Bagging/Packaging
9. Transportation
57
FARM OUTPUTS AND INCOME LEVEL
22. Please provide information on sorghum harvest (output) as follows:
S/N Output Type Total Quantity of Total Unit Total
Output/ha Quantity of Price/kg (N)
(Kg) Output (N)
Sold
(Kg)
1. CSR-01 variety
2. By products
(kai-kayi)
SECTION C: CONSTRAINTS/CHALLENGIES ASSOCIATED WITH CSR-01

SORGHUM PRODUCTION
23. What are the major constraints undermining the production of CSR-01 in your area? (more
than one response is allowed)
a. Lack of access to improved sorghum (CSR-01) seeds [ ] b. High cost of chemical
fertilizer [ ] c. Low capital/credit access [ ] d. Incident of weeds, pest and diseases
[ ] e. Lack of access to extension services [ ] f. High cost of transportation [ ] g.
Lack of access to infrastructures [ ] h. Fluctuating market prices [ ] i. High cost
of hired-labor [ ] j. Others (specify)……………………………………………………...
…THANK YOU FORYOUR TIME
58

Complete Project PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Complete Project PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF IMPROVED

SORGHUM (CSR–01) PRODUCTION IN TAKAI

LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF KANO STATE,

SULAIMAN ABUBAKAR ABDULLAHI

SULAIMAN ABUBAKAR ABDULLAHI

A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF

of references were provided.

SULAIMAN ABUBAKAR ABDULLAHI (AGR/15/AGR/00018) have meets the regulations

for its contribution to knowledge and literary presentation.

Government of Kano-Nigeria” Prepared by SULAIMAN ABUBAKAR ABDULLAHI

governing the award of Bachelor Degree in Agriculture.

my wife and the coolness of my eye.

THANK YOU ALL AND MAY GOD BLESS...

Table 1: Scientific Classification of Sorghum

Table 2: Summary of the Sample Frame and Size of Sorghum farmers

Table 3a: Socio-economic Characteristics of Sorghum Farmers

Table 3b: Socio-economic Characteristics of Sorghum Farmers

Table 4: Average Costs and Return Analyses of Sorghum Farming

Table 5: Maximum Likelihood Estimate of Technical Efficiency of Sorghum Farmers

Table 6: Maximum Likelihood Estimate of Allocative Efficiency of Sorghum Farmers

Table 8: Constraints Militating against Sorghum Farming in the Study Area.

Figure 3: National Total Sorghum Production Statistics in Nigeria (2010 – 2020)

Figure 4: Regional Percentage Contribution to Sorghum Production in Nigeria, 2009 – 2010

Figure 5: Geographical Map indicating the Study Area

grande, S. brychopodum, S. laxiflorum, S. escarinatum among others.

Sourced: USDA, 2019.

Source: USDA, 2020

Sourced: Statista, 2020

Source: Field Survey, 2020.

3.4 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF SORGHUM FARMERS

quantitative variables respectively.

4.1.9 Age of Sorghum Farmer

***Significant at 1% (p<0.01), ** at 5% (p<0.05), * at 10% (p<0.10).

Source: Field Survey, 2021

SECTION C: CONSTRAINTS/CHALLENGIES ASSOCIATED WITH CSR-01

…THANK YOU FORYOUR TIME

You might also like

Significant at 1% (p<0.01), at 5% (p<0.05), at 10% (p<0.10).