LINKAGES IN AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION GENERATION AND ADOPTION FOR PROMOTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IN THE SOUTH-SOUTH, NIGERIA

Abstract

The need to supply sufficient food and fibre to satisfy the ever increasing population is one of the greatest challenges facing government at all levels in Nigeria. To this end, government establish agricultural research institutes, departments, colleges and universities of agriculture to generate and teach farmers, practices and systems meant to boast agricultural production.  In spite of the long history of agricultural research and the fast increasing number of agricultural research institutes and colleges/universities of agriculture, coupled with the large volume of information/innovation resulting from enhanced research efforts, agricultural production has remained largely at subsistent level. The innovations generated are either not adopted or inappropriately adopted with severe environmental consequences. This study was carried out to investigate the linkages in agricultural innovation generation and adoption for promotion of environmental quality. Seven research questions were answered while seven related null hypotheses were formulated and tested at 0.05 level of significance. The descriptive survey research design was adopted for the study. Proportionate random and purposive sampling techniques were used to select 329 respondents. A 117 item structured questionnaire developed from the literature reviewed was used to collect data from the respondents. Each of the structured questionnaire items was assigned four response options of strongly agree, agree, disagree and strongly disagree. The questionnaire items were face validated by three experts. The reliability data was collected from 20 respondents outside the area of study and a reliability coefficient of 0.82 was obtained using the cronbach alpha reliability test. The findings revealed poor/weak linkages among agencies involved in agricultural innovation generation and adoption. Fifteen constraints to linkages were identified to include inappropriate government policy, inequality and gap in qualification and salary scale, weak legal and policy framework for linkages, poor attitude and low morale of some agencies, poor logistics support, lack of incentives for linkage activities, lack of trust and confidence among agencies and inadequate well trained personnel in some agencies. Seven strategies for enhancing linkages were identified which include entrenching linkage mandates in policies establishing each agencies, making formal arrangements for linkage activities, organizing orientation on linkage activities, building linkage leadership in administration and promoting joint priority setting, planning, implementation and evaluation of research and training projects among others. The findings also revealed low level of adoption of environment friendly agricultural innovations. Eighteen obstacles to adoption of environment friendly innovations were identified to include high labour requirement, low level of education of farmers, low economic potentials and profitability of environment friendly agricultural practices, lack of clear and reliable information among others, while sixteen measures to promote adoption were identified to include provision of material inputs required for adoption, making application procedures simple and easy, enhancing technical skills and capacity of farmers among others. Based on the findings of the study, it was recommended among others that linkage mandate should be formalized in policies establishing the agencies and massive education and enlightenment of farmers and the general public on the economic potential and profitability of environment friendly agricultural practices should be embarked upon.

                                                  CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

The supply of sufficient food and fibre to satisfy the ever increasing population is the greatest challenge of government at all levels in Nigeria. Globally, agricultural production is seen as being central to the overall wellbeing of the populace. The commanding position of the agricultural sector in Nigeria is manifested in its dominant share of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), employing more than 70% of the active labour force and generating about 88% of non-oil foreign exchange earnings (Eboh, 2003). In 2009, the agricultural sector contributed about 41.84% of Nigeria’s GDP and provided employment for about 70% of the workforce (Corporate Agriculture, 2012). The annual contribution of the agricultural sector to the Nigeria’s GDP stands at 35% and employment of about 70 – 75% of the working population annually (Osinowo, 2012). Therefore the challenge for African countries and Nigeria in particular, is how to increase agricultural production and rural incomes without irreparably damaging the natural resource base upon which agricultural production rest.

To achieve this, government sets up various agencies, institutions, agricultural universities, and extension agencies to generate and circulate innovations needed by stakeholders. Of these agencies, agricultural research institutes (ARI), agricultural education and training (AET) institutions and agricultural extension agencies (AEA) play crucial roles in generating and circulating information about agricultural production to farmers.

The ultimate aim of all applied agricultural research is to increase agricultural production and improve the standard of living of farmers through the generation of innovations and technologies related to agriculture. These innovations are arrived at through careful experiments conducted by agricultural researchers domiciled in agricultural research institutes as well as in departments, faculties and colleges/ universities of agriculture across the country. Presently, there are twenty two (22) research institutes in Nigeria, each with a specific mandate in crop, animal or commodity and fields of activity (Voh, 1999) and twenty three (23) faculties of agriculture and veterinary medicine across Nigerian universities and the International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan (Voh, 1999). These research efforts give rise to a body of knowledge, technologies, practices and systems which form the basis for innovations related to agriculture and environmental management.

Agricultural development depends on innovation. Innovation is a major source of improved productivity, competitiveness and economic growth throughout advanced and emerging economies, and plays an important role in creating jobs, generating income, alleviating poverty, and driving social development. Continuous innovation is necessary if farmers, agribusinesses, and even nations are to cope, compete, and thrive in the midst of changes in agriculture and economy. An innovation has been defined by Hall (2006) as new creations of social and economic significance. They may be brand new, but are more often combinations of existing elements. For Hall and Dijman (2006), the concept of innovation is a search for development, adaptation, imitation and adoption of technologies that are new to a specific context. It is a process that involves continuous interaction among stakeholders. There must be continuous learning for innovations to take place and the opportunity to learn depend on the degree and type of interactions among the different enterprises, organizations and related sectors as well as institutional behaviours which determine the extent and rate at which information and knowledge are produced, transferred and utilized (CTA, 2005). It is a process by which farmers and farms accept and use agricultural technologies and services that are new to them.

Innovation implies something new. This newness indicates to some extent, a strangeness of the idea (Adekoya and Tologbonse, 2011). All technologies, ideas and practices have origins and would be treated as innovation in a domain until its popularity is overwhelming. Innovation therefore will be taken to include agricultural practices, technologies and systems that are new to farmers or not familiar practice in a geographical area. To be termed innovation, the use of this knowledge has to be novel to the farmer or firm, neighbors, and competitors, but not necessarily new globally. Innovation and technology may be taken as synonyms (Rogers, 1995; Van den ban and Hawkins, 1996). Such innovations could be mechanical (tractor and other mechanical equipment), biological (new seed variety), chemical (fertilizers, pesticides and other agro chemicals), agronomic (new management practices and systems), biotechnological (gene modification), or informational (computer technologies). They could also be yield-increasing, cost-reducing, quality enhancing, risk-reducing, environmental protection increasing and shelf-life enhancing.

Once innovations are evolved, it becomes the responsibility of the agricultural extension agency to communicate same to end-users. End-users as used in this study do not only refer to farmers, but all stakeholders: government, agricultural policy makers, non-governmental organizations, financial institutions; including agricultural educators who need to incorporate the innovations into the curriculum and delivery system of Agricultural Education and Training (AET); and those who directly or indirectly are involved in agricultural policy planning, execution and implementation as well as extension agencies who are expected to have  regular contacts with farmers. To facilitate monitoring and guide from the agricultural extension agency, farmers are expected to register with the extension agency. Farmers who are registered with the agricultural extension agency are called Registered Contact Farmers (RCF), and are normally the target of extension agents and programmes.

The aim of agricultural extension is to promote agricultural development by providing information on improved production technologies and helping farmers with their adoption as well as communicating farmers’ problems to research institutions for solution. According to World Bank (2013), agricultural extension provides critical access to the knowledge and information that rural people need to increase the productivity and sustainability of their production systems, and thus improve the quality of their lives and livelihoods. Osinem (2008) mentioned the objectives of agricultural extension to include raising the standard of living of people by raising their productivity; disseminating research results, information or practical experience so that they will accept and put it into practice; finding solutions to farmers’ problems; developing leaders among farmers; and helping farmers in decision making as well as teaching them environmental management practices. Laogun (2011) summarized the task of the extension worker to include bringing knowledge of improved methods in farming that will make their work less arduous, more productive and more profitable to farmers; to develop in them new skills and abilities; and to develop in them new attitudes and ideas, to discard ancient superstitions and replace them with scientific attitude. Success in the discharge of its task would require that the extension worker be an integral component of the generation process of such innovation. The level of success recorded in the dissemination process results in the adoption or non adoption of innovations by farmers, with varying effects on the wellbeing of both man and the state of the environment.

Innovation adoption has been explained by Feder, Just and Zilberman (1985) as the degree of use of an innovation in long run equilibrium when a farmer has full information about the innovation and its potentials. Rogers (1995) sees innovation adoption as a decision to make full use of an innovation or technology as the best course of action available.  Vanden Ban and Hawkins (1996) describe adoption of an innovation as the decision of an individual or group to use or apply an innovation. It describes the realization of farmers’ decision to apply an innovation in the production process. The proper adoption of an innovation is expected to bring about improvements in the wellbeing of the farmer expressed in terms of increased yield and better living standard due to improvement in feeding and income status. For the environment, it is expressed in terms of sustainability in the use of environmental resources. This however is dependent on the environment friendliness of the adopted practice.

An environment friendly agricultural practice or system is one that is resource conserving, socially supportive, commercially competitive, and environmentally sound (Amalu, 1998). Altieri (1991) is of the view that an environment friendly agricultural practice must provide long term sustained yields through the use of ecologically sound management technologies. The concept of environment friendly agriculture has been used synonymously with sustainable agriculture and often taken to mean low external input farming. It challenges farmers to think about the consequences of agricultural practices, as well as the functioning and interactions of agricultural systems (Horringan, Lawrence and Walker, 2002).

The concept of sustainable agriculture is more frequently defined using its three components or aims: environmental health, economic profitability, and social and economic equity. The environmental component refers to the promotion of environmental quality including protection and improving soil quality, reducing dependence on non renewable resources and minimizing adverse effects of agriculture on safety, wildlife, water quality and other environmental resources (Sustainable Agricultural Research and Education (Sustainable Agricultural Research and Education (SARE), 2003). Environment friendly agriculture could thus be seen as a component of sustainable agriculture which improves the environment and natural resources upon which agriculture depends. It encompasses environmental sustainability by emphasizing the efficient use of on farm resources, non renewable resources and integration of biological cycles.

An environment friendly agricultural practice or system promotes environmental quality which is the relative capacity of an environment to satisfy the needs or wants of an individual or society. It means the balance of nature being composed of animals, plants, natural resources and man-made objects which are for the benefit and subsistence of mankind and the sustenance of human beings and nature (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA), 2006). SEPA (2006) established sixteen indicators of environmental quality based on five fundamental principles; promotion of human health, preservation of biological diversity, preservation of cultural heritage assets, preservation of long – term production capacity of ecosystems, and wise management of natural resources. The sixteen indicators are reduced climate impact, clean air, natural acidification only, a non-toxic environment, a protective ozone layer, a safe radiation environment, zero eutrophication, flourishing lakes and good streams, good quality groundwater, a balance marine environment, flourishing coastal areas and archipelagos. Others include thriving wetlands, sustainable forests, a varied agricultural landscape, a magnificent mountain landscape, a good built environment, and a rich diversity of plant and animal life.

The rate of adoption, non adoption, appropriateness or inappropriateness of adoption of agricultural innovations and technologies determine the health of these factors. Unfortunately, low rate of adoption and inappropriate application of innovations (Madukwe and Ozor, 2004) have often being the case with Nigerian farmers resulting in persistent low agricultural production and continual environmental degradation. The low rate of adoption becomes more manifest when it involves the adoption of practices that discourage the use of high external inputs. This situation has often been blamed on poor/ weak linkages among agencies involved in agricultural innovation generation, dissemination and adoption. Kaimowitze (1990) noted that poor linkages in information creation and use are responsible for the slow rate of adoption and inappropriate application of new agricultural techniques by farmers in the sub-region. Obibuaku and Madukwe (1992) working on the institutional framework for the transfer of agricultural technology to resource poor farmers in Nigeria reported that agricultural extension institutions are uncoordinated and improperly linked with the tenets of agricultural development.

The existence of poor coordination and linkage mechanisms in innovation generation and adoption has become a recurrent problem (Madukwe, 2008). Havelock (1986) described linkage as communication and working relationship established between two or more organizations pursuing commonly shared objectives in order to have regular contact and improved productivity; while Eponou (1991) described it as any structural or managerial device or procedure used to facilitate the interconnectedness of the tasks of technology generation, transfer and utilization. Linkage would therefore mean the evolution of a clearly defined institutional arrangement which provide for regular contact among researchers, scientists, extension professionals and agricultural education institutions to solve problems faced by farmers and to develop a package of recommendations that will enhance agricultural production and enrich the curriculum of instruction in agricultural education and training institutions as well as mitigate adverse effects of farm practices on the environment. Linkage is the interaction between agricultural research scientists, agricultural extension workers, farmers and agricultural education and training lecturers as key components of the agricultural innovation system.

Agricultural education and training, according to World Bank (2013), has a major role as the creator of capacity and supplier of the human resources necessary to enable rural people to increase agricultural productivity and the sustainability of their farming systems. Absent of this, the ability of rural people to improve their quality of live and livelihoods will be compromised.  Agricultural education and training (AET) refer to the process of imparting knowledge, skills and attitudes in agriculture to learners (Osinem, 2008), the purpose of which is to enable rural producers to realize higher returns on labour and investments. It is instruction about crop production, livestock management, soil and water conservation and various other aspects of agriculture. This can be done through farmer training or by educating extension staff, developing researchers or building the technical capacities of producer organizations and input suppliers. Ukonze and Olaitan (2010) defined agricultural education as a programme designed for equipping students with competency (knowledge, skills and attitudes) in different areas of agriculture to enable them impart same to learners in school. Wikipedia (2010) defined agricultural education as an instruction about crop production, livestock management, soil conservation and water management among others. Agricultural Education and Training (AET) has three primary target audiences: farmers (subsistence and commercial), extensionists and farmer service personnel (private and public), and tertiary level teachers and researchers. These audiences are reached through different levels and types of AET, ranging from informal farmer training to middle level agricultural colleges that prepare farm managers and extension specialists to post graduate faculties of agriculture where researchers are trained.

AET is offered at various levels ranging from departments of agricultural education in colleges of education, departments/units of agricultural education in faculties of education and faculties of agriculture in universities. Universities are the apex AET institutions responsible for the training of agricultural specialists such as agricultural teachers/instructors, agricultural research scientists, soil and animal scientists, and other technical staff that occupy various positions in agricultural research institutes and other agricultural establishments. They produce manpower that impart knowledge at middle and lower level agricultural institutions as well as play active role in structuring the curriculum of other levels of AET. Thus, linkages between these apex AET institutions, agricultural extension and agricultural research institutes will translate to greater agricultural production as well as adoption of more environment friendly management practices.

Linkage of agricultural education and training with research institutions is either weak or nonexistent. To train a researcher, an extension staff, and farmer demands that universities must understand the activities of these groups of actor and have strong linkage with them. Universities in Nigeria are under the ministry of education, while the agricultural research institutes and extension are under a different ministry. In practice, there is no formal linkage between them. Similarly, there are no provisions for any linkage between the Ministry of Agriculture and universities. A study of linkages between Agricultural Development Project (ADP), an arm of the ministry of agriculture and the universities reported limited linkages and interactions (Madukwe and Eze, 1999; Uzoegbunam and Madukwe, 2005). It is therefore worrisome that the ministry of agriculture that is the main recipient of agricultural graduates has no linkage and interactions with universities that produce these graduates. It is very odd that a graduate would be expected to work in an establishment he knows nothing about throughout his period of training.

For innovations to realize their full potentials, and for agricultural education and training graduates to continue to remain relevant in the areas for which they were trained, effective linkage must be fostered among the agencies and their personnel to form an integral system. Agricultural research institutes, agricultural extension agencies, farmers and agricultural education and training institutions which are key components of the agricultural innovation system, must be adequately linked and collaborate in order to attain the individual objectives of the various agencies and the collective goal of the development of the agricultural sector. It has therefore become imperative to investigate linkages in agricultural innovation generation and adoption for more sustainable agricultural production.

Statement of the Problem

In spite of the long history of agricultural research in Nigeria and the fast increasing number of research institutes and colleges/ universities of agriculture in Nigeria, agricultural production remains largely at subsistence level with increasing environmental problems. Whereas her population increased at an annual growth rate of between 3% and 3.32%, total food production rose by an average of not more than1.03% per annum between 1990 and 2000 (Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), 2002). As a result, large chunks of foreign exchange earnings that would have been used for infrastructural development and executing capital projects are annually being expended on food importation, thus increasing the poverty level of the citizens.

Research institutes develop innovations meant to boast agricultural production, raise per capita food availability and mitigate adverse environmental impact of agricultural production.  Low rate of adoption and inappropriate application of such innovations have become the order of the day with dire environmental consequences. This scenario has often been blamed on a number of factors including lack of material inputs, low literacy level of farmers, inadequate capital resources among others, with little or no reference made to linkages among agricultural research institutes, agricultural extension agencies, and agricultural education and training institutions who are regarded as the tripod of agricultural innovation generation and farmers who are main end users of agricultural innovations. Weak linkages result in distortions and gaps in innovation creation and utilization largely due to lack of understanding of innovations by end users. Innovations thus become less relevant to end-users as it no longer address production problems, leading to waste of useful resources in conducting researches that would not contribute to sustainable agricultural production. Consequently, low rate of adoption, inappropriate application of innovations, low agricultural productivity and continual environmental degradation become common feature, with agricultural education imparting knowledge not directed to production problems of rural farmers and not in consonance with labour market demands.

Agricultural education and training produce graduates who are expected to take up leadership positions in research institutes, extension agencies and other agro related organizations, but weak linkage with AET will therefore lead to a situation where instructions given in AET institutions are not in consonance with developments in the world of work. This will result in reduced productivity of agricultural graduates and increased unemployment rate. Lack of effective linkage will reduce the ability of various agencies to attain the individual goals of the agencies and the collective goals of the agricultural sector, making it necessary to investigate linkages in agricultural innovation generation and adoption and effects on the environment.

Purpose of the Study

The overall purpose of this study was to determine linkages in agricultural innovation generation and adoption for promotion of environmental quality. Specifically, the study was designed to;

1. identify mechanisms employed by agencies involved in agricultural innovation generation and adoption for linkage;
2. identify constraints to effective linkages in agricultural innovation generation and adoption;
3. identify strategies for enhancing linkages among agencies involved in the generation and adoption of environment friendly agricultural innovations;
4. determine the extent of adoption of environment friendly agricultural innovations  by farmers;
5. ascertain the ways environment friendly agricultural practices promote  environmental quality;
6. identify obstacles to the adoption of environment friendly agricultural innovations by farmers; and
7. identify measures that could promote the adoption of environment friendly innovations by farmers;

Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will be of significant benefit to a number of individuals, agencies, organizations and institutions.  These include agricultural research scientists, agricultural extension workers, the research institutes, the extension agency, farmers and environmentalists, agricultural education and training teachers/lecturers, ministry of environment, curriculum planners, and non-governmental organizations, the researcher and students.

The findings on the constraints to effective linkages and strategies for enhancing linkages in agricultural innovation generation will be of tremendous benefits to agricultural research scientists.  The information generated by this study will help research scientists in establishing a link with farmers to give them better understanding of the socio economic and environmental conditions under which farmers operate. This will ensure that research problems are designed based on identified needs of farmers and thus make research more demand driven. Establishing linkage liaison desk in each of the agencies that will coordinate linkage activities and arrange regular meetings, workshops, seminars, and jointly plan, implement and evaluate programmes and activities of various agencies will help in establishing the necessary link. Also, instituting special inducement and incentives for linkage activities could help in this regards.

For the extension worker whose main responsibility is disseminating information about agricultural innovation and practices to farmers and helping them with adoption, the finding provides a better understanding of the innovations they are to promote through broad-based interaction with research scientists. The findings on the mechanisms for enhancing linkages and the accompanying recommendations when adopted will go a long way to provide for a more robust relationship between extension and research agencies. Grey areas are better clarified and problems resolved before returning to face farmers. This interaction will foster greater returns on investment in research and extension. This will be made possible when various agencies regularly meet and share ideas about agricultural technologies, systems and practices. Such opportunity will come when they jointly participate in the research process; jointly organize demonstration of research results (new practices) among others.

For agricultural education and training, linkage with research and extension will contribute to the development and utilization of a more dynamic curriculum that will focus on current issues in agricultural production. The products of AET will benefit from combined training as they will be exposed to experiences in the world of work. This will go a long way to reduce the discrepancy between skills acquired in schools and skill needs in industry. New developments from other agencies will be regularly injected into the curriculum of agricultural instruction through joint training of staff and students by all agencies. Students spend some time with the research institutes and the extension agencies for practical work before returning to the universities.

The findings on innovation adoption will be useful to extension agencies, government and farmers. For the extension agencies, knowledge of the factors that contribute to farmers’ decision to adopt or not to adopt an agricultural practice will enable him decide on the choice of dissemination method that are most suited to the characteristics of the farmers and the necessary materials that will promote adoption. The farmer will no doubt benefit from a more robust extension assistance which manifest in increased production and enhanced standard of living. The government which is saddled with the responsibility of formulating policies in all aspects of agricultural production will be better equipped in designing policies that will enhance adoption of environment friendly agricultural practices in particular and agricultural innovations in general. This will be made possible through an understanding of the reasons why farmers adopt or do not adopt innovations.

The findings on the contributions of environment friendly agricultural practices to promoting environmental quality will be useful to the ministry of environment, environmentalists, environment policy makers and environment based NGOs. These battle day in day out to ensure that environmental resources are not severely damaged through mans’ activities of which agricultural production is a major factor. Knowledge of environment friendly agricultural practices and their benefits will reduce over dependence on external inputs such as chemical fertilizers, insecticides and herbicides and greater reliance on practices that will promote the soil’s ability to renew its nutrients naturally. This will go a long way to save huge sums of public funds committed to the purchase of chemical inputs and combating accompanying environmental problems. This will be made possible through policies and legislations providing for integration of conventional agricultural practices with systems that rely on natural nutrient cycling to replenish lost soil nutrients.

For the researcher, it exposes him to the intricacies involved in sustainable management of agricultural resources, while to other researchers, it provides baseline information for further studies.

Research Questions

This study was guided by the following research questions;

1. What are the mechanisms employed by agencies involved in agricultural innovation generation and adoption for linkage?
2. What are the constraints to effective linkages in agricultural innovation generation and adoption?
3. What are the strategies for enhancing linkages among agencies involved in the generation and utilization of environment friendly agricultural innovations?
4. What is the extent of adoption of environment friendly agricultural practices by farmers?
5. In what ways do environment friendly agricultural practices promote environmental quality?
6. What are the obstacles to the adoption of environment friendly agricultural innovations?
7. What are the measures that could promote the adoption of environment friendly agricultural innovations by farmers?

Hypotheses

The study was guided by the following hypotheses which were tested at 0.05 level of significance;

1. Agricultural extension agents (AEA), agricultural research scientists (ARS) and agricultural education and training (AET) lecturers do not significantly differ in their mean ratings on the mechanisms employed for linkages by agencies involved in agricultural innovation generation and adoption.
2. Agricultural research scientists (ARS), agricultural education and training (AET) lecturers and agricultural extension agents (AEA) do not significantly differ in their mean ratings on the constraints to effective linkages in agricultural innovation generation and adoption.
3. Agricultural Research scientists, Agricultural Extension agents and Agricultural education and training lecturers do not significantly differ in their mean ratings on strategies for enhancing linkages among agencies involved in the generation and utilization of environment friendly agricultural innovations.
4. Registered Contact Farmers (RCF), agricultural extension agents and agricultural research scientists do not differ significantly in their mean ratings on the extent of adoption of environment friendly agricultural practices by farmers.
5. Agricultural extension agents, agricultural research scientists and agricultural education and training lecturers do not significantly differ in the mean ratings of their opinions on the ways environment friendly agricultural practices promote environmental quality.
6. Registered Contact Farmers, agricultural extension workers, agricultural research scientists and agricultural education and training lecturers do not differ significantly in their mean ratings on the obstacles to the adoption of environment friendly agricultural innovations by farmers.
7. Agricultural Research scientists, Agricultural education and training lecturers, Agricultural Extension agents and registered contact farmers do not differ significantly in their mean ratings on measures that could promote the adoption of environment friendly innovations by farmers.

Scope of the Study

This study was delimited to investigating linkages in agricultural innovation generation and adoption for promotion of environmental quality. Although the agricultural innovation system has many actors, only linkages between agricultural research institutes, agricultural extension agencies, agricultural education and training institutions, and farmers were considered. Only the adoption of environment friendly innovations was considered. Sustainable agriculture is described by three main components viz; environmental health, economic profitability, and social and economic equity; only the environmental health component is emphasized in this work hence, the emphasis on environment friendly agricultural practices.

The study was carried out within the six states in South-South Nigeria and Abia state in the South – East. Only the research institutes in the area were considered. The inclusion of Abia State was to enable the researcher include a research institute with mandate in arable crop as the two within the South – South both have mandates on permanent / tree crops only.

Related Project Topics :