MAIZE INNOVATION SYSTEM IN NORTH CENTRAL NIGERIA

ABSTRACT

The  study  examined  maize  innovation  system  in  north  central,  Nigeria.  The  specific objectives were to: describe policies, acts and initiatives in maize innovation system, examine the technological capabilities of selected key actors in maize innovation system, examine the levels of linkage existing among the key actors, identify constraints in maize innovation system and identify strategies for improving maize innovation system in the study area. The study was carried out in north central , Nigeria. Specifically, Kwara, Kogi and Benue States of Nigeria constituted the population for the study. A total sample size of one hundred and fifty-six (156) respondents constituted the sample size for the study.  Data for the study were collected through structured questionnaire and pre-tested interview schedule. Data were presented as percentage, mean and standard deviation. While factor analysis with loading of0.4 and above was used to analyze constraints to maize innovation. The review of agricultural programmes, policies, acts and initiatives in maize innovation system  revealed  unsteady growth rate, low investment, weak linkage and lack of continuity. Technological and investment capabilities in equipment (9.9 %) and human resource (53.3 %) were found to be low among maize innovation actors. The linkage mechanism that were frequently used by the respondents  were  joint  planning  meeting  ( x =2.2),  exchange of resources  ( x =2.2), joint training ( x =2.2), joint workshop/seminars ( x =2.2), memoranda of understanding ( x =2.0), joint  programming  and  priority  setting  ( x =2.0)  and  joint  research  among  stake  holders ( x =2.0).The results also revealed strong linkage between technology transfer agents and educators ( x = 2.7), policy makers and farmers ( x =2.5), researchers and educators ( x =2.0), educators and technology transfer ( x =2.0). A weak linkage was recorded among farmers and policy  makers  ( x =1.7),  educators  ( x =1.6),  technology  transfer  agents  ( x =1.6)  and researchers ( x =1.4). The linkage mechanism that were frequently used by the respondents were joint planning meeting ( x =2.2), exchange of resources ( x =2.2), joint training ( x =2.2), joint workshop/seminars ( x =2.2), memoranda of understanding ( x =2.0), joint programming and  priority  setting  ( x =2.0)  and  joint  research  among  stake  holders  ( x =2.0).Factors constraining maize innovation were policy/organizational related factors -poor information flow (0.817) and weak public- private sector collaboration (0.779), manpower related factors

– poor extension network (0.768), low mobility of experts (professionals) (0.673) and poor

motivation of staff (0.647), financial/marketing related factors include complex process of agricultural budgeting for research (0.728), lack of information on market (0.551) and poor access to credit (0.532 ) while institutional related factors were bureaucracy (0.679) and farmers’ conservatism (0.476). The major strategies for improving maize innovation include formation of maize cooperative society ( x =2.6), access to communication facilities (internet and  mobile  phones)  ( x =2.6),  adoption  of  improved  maize  varieties  ( x =2.6),  improved funding on maize research ( x =2.6), better marketing channel/networks ( x =2.6), improved labour  saving  devices  ( x =2.6),  regular  visit  and  training  by  extension  agents  ( x =2.5), improved working conditions for innovation actors ( x =2.6) and adoption of improved pest management  control  strategies  ( x =2.4).  The  study  recommend  strong  linkage  between research  ,university  and  enterprise,  increase  in  investment  in  human  and  non-human resources, enlightment programmes on the roles of actors in maize innovation system, strengthening professional associations such as maize association of Nigeria (MAN), formulation of policies and enactment of legal and regulatory mechanism favourable to maize production and improvement on value and addition  for scaling up of maize in meeting the rising feed demands and becoming an exporter crop.

CHAPTER ONE

1.0   INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background information

Maize (Zea mays L.) is a member of the grass family (gramineae) (Oladejo and Adetunji, 2012). Maize is native to America; it was exported to Europe where it spread to France, Italy, and all of Southeastern Europe and Northern Africa (Lance and Garren, 2002). It was first introduced to West Africa by the Portuguese in the 10th century and later Nigeria (Oladejo and Adetunji, 2012 ; FAO, 2013; Peter , Juan and Maria , 2014) .

Maize occupies approximately 24% of farmland in Africa, which is more than any other staple crop, and is a food crop accounting for 73% and 64% of the total demand in Eastern and Southern Africa and Western and Central Africa, respectively   (Macauley & Ramadjita ,  (2014);  International  Plant  Biotechnology  Outreach,  (2017) .  Nigeria is  the second largest maize producer in Africa, after South Africa, with an estimated 10.79 million MT  produced  in  2014  (FAOSTAT,  2014).    The  top  20  countries  involved    in  maize production include: South Africa, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Malawi, Kenya, Zambia, Uganda, Ghana, Mozambique, Cameroon, Mali, Burkina Faso, Benin, DRC, Angola, Zimbabwe, Togo, and Cote d’Ivoire, account for 96% of the total maize production in sub- Saharan Africa (SSA) (Macauley & Ramadjita , 2014). Maize yield have increased only marginally  over  the last  2  decades.  Most  of the increase  in  production  has  come  from expansion in the area harvested rather than from increases yield (Agricultural Transformation Agenda (ATA) (2011).

Africa is a minor producer of maize accounting for only 7% of global production (Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA), 2009). Most of the maize produced and consumed in Africa comes from small holder rural farms (Isah, Samuel, Makama and Kiresm , 2015 ) .The major problem for maize production in Africa is very low yield: maize yields in

Africa have stagnated at around 2 tons/hectare/year resulting in the need for Africa to import more than 20% of the required maize from non-African countries. There is a large variation in production yield between the different areas for instance  yield is approximately 10.7 tons/hectare/year in the United States of America (USA), 7.73 tons/hectare/year in Egypt,

4.54 tons/hectare/ year in South Africa , 3.42 tons/hectare/year in Ethiopia (Kostandini, GLa

& Zhe , 2015) . The yield situation is worse in other Africa in countries with yields of less than 2 tons/hectare/year which is still far below the global average yield of maize (~5 t/ha) and considerably below the 4.4-5.4 t/ha on-farm trial results of improved varieties under optimal inputs and improved management conditions undertaken by International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) /International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) within sub-Sahara Africa (Smale, Byerlee and Jayne, 2011) . Production of maize takes place under difficult conditions such as poor skills, low yielding varieties, in adequate access to yield enhancing inputs such as fertilizer and improved seeds; inadequate finance by producers and variable climatic and environmental conditions  (FARA et al, 2009). There are also heavily post harvest losses due to poor storage and processing facilities. This condition and technologies has made Africa a net importer of maize. In Nigeria, maize is the third most important cereal crop after sorghum and millet

(Ojo and Imoudu , 2000: United States Agency for International Development (USAID),

2010; Isah, Samuel, Makama and Kiresm , 2015). The North Central Zone (NZC) is the major maize producing zone in Nigeria where yield potential is much higher than other producing  zones  (Ismaila,  Gana,  Tswanya  and  Dogara  (2010)  ;  Cadoni  and  Angelucci, ( 2013) ; Drought Tolerant Maize for Africa (DTMA), 2014). The environmental conditions required for maize cultivation are superior in the north central zone with high incident of solar radiation, less incidence of biotic stresses and natural dryness at time of harvest (Kim, Fajemisin, Fakorede and Iken, 1993; Amudalat, 2015).

Maize is an important target crop in Nigeria based on the following factors: firstly, maize can be easily prepared into a variety of meals and this accounts for about 65% of the total daily caloric intake of rural people; secondly, the rising income realizable from the production of maize; thirdly, ease of transportation, processing and marketing and fourthly, easy to grow as sole crop or intercropped with other crops (Akinbode, 2010; Agricultural Transformation Agenda (ATA), 2011; Amudalat, 2015).

Maize is an important food and feed crop in Nigeria and remains an important crop for rural food security (Ademiluyi, 2014). In industrialized countries, maize is largely used as livestock feed and as raw materials for industrial products, while in developing countries, it is mainly used for human consumption (Aye and Mungatana, 2010). In sub-Saharan Africa, maize is a staple food for an estimated 50% of the population (USAID, 2010). Maize, also serve as an important sources of carbohydrate, protein, iron, vitamin B, and minerals (IITA, 2012). Theoretically, less food is produced than required by most households in Nigeria. Thus, there is often a demand–supply gap in maize arising from low productivity(Aye, 2011). The  need  for  increase  in  maize  production  would  require  either  increase  in  input  use especially acreage expansion, improvement in resource and or technological change derived from use of new technologies” (Aye, 2011).

In addressing agriculture and food production, initial efforts of public sector have been on investment in research and development which was established on the consensus that the application of science and technology is responsible for the transformation required to propel the agricultural sector (Daudu, 2008). This realization was that public research and extension institutions are projected as the sole source of innovation/knowledge necessary to trigger development in the agricultural sector and maize production (Daudu, 2008). The reforms and changes in knowledge structure of agriculture in the last two decades indicated that  the  traditional  agricultural  research  and  extension  system  alone  cannot  sufficiently

address the challenges of the new trends in food production (Daudu, 2008). The innovation systems approach suggests that innovation systems theory and practice can contribute substantially to the scaling-up of maize, thus making innovation as a central strategy to achieve economic, social, and environmental goals in the agricultural sector (Hellin, et al,

2014). A systems approach is needed in which innovation is  the result of a process of networking, interactive learning, and negotiation among a heterogeneous set of actors including public sector (Hall, 2006 and Leewis, 2010).

Innovation system approach thus, offers a holistic and multi-disciplinary approach to innovation and processes by incorporating all the actors or agents in production, harvesting and post- harvest for agricultural development. (Faturoti, 2007; Daudu , 2008; Dimelu and Emodi, 2012). Innovation system paradigm, however views innovation as a social process, requiring the convergence of many sources of knowledge and skills usually in the form of a network (Nigel, Pyka, Ahrweiler, 2001). According to Clark, Hall, & Naik (2003) innovation system consists of major social actors/ organizations that affect the revealing, acknowledgement, generation and diffusion of technical and institutional knowledge over time; including the interactive learning that characterized the whole process and institutions that govern the interaction and processes. Innovation provides a useful framework for the collaboration of actors/stake holders in innovation system through a network focused on bringing new products, processes and forms of organization in to use (Madukwe and Obiora, 2012). Innovation system emphasizes the need to nurture the demand for knowledge and technologies among a range of actors/stakeholders including farmers, researchers, extension workers, policy makers, private sector, companies, entrepreneurs, agro processors, non- governmental agencies and other organizations (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2013)

Agricultural innovation typically arises through dynamic interaction among the multitude of actors involved in growing, processing, packaging, distributing and consuming or otherwise using agricultural products (World Bank, 2012). The agricultural innovation systems approach emphasizes a stronger link of knowledge systems (research, extension, education) with market and other actors in the supply chains as well as with those in broader policy environment. This system changes how research is done, with a shift in focus from research output productivity to the use and adoption of technologies being generated by research as well as to how those technologies are helping to solve the problems of farmers and to alleviate the constraints of supply chain actors (Catherine, Suresh, Aliyu and Baba, 2010).

To meet the needs of agricultural innovations, the educational institutes, at higher and vocational level have to offer more relevant subject matter including biotechnology, ICT, agric-business, administration, marketing, policy analysis, international trade, law and intellectual  property  rights  (Danne,  2010).  According  to  Lundvall  (1992),  learning  is important in innovation system because it is a key element in binding the whole system together. Learning thus plays a major role in the development of the system, whilst forming the key element in its connectivity. Research organizations equally, plays important role in agricultural organization, but they are not the essential drivers of the process (Technical Centre  for  Agricultural  and  Rural  Cooperation  (CTA),  2008).  The  essential  drivers  are political will, (enabling policies), adequate resources and infrastructure, leadership and facilitation,  stake  holders  linkage  and  interaction,  private  sector  involvements,  common vision, partnership /alliances and shared learning (Danne, Francis,  Oliveros,  & Bolo, 2009; Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), 2011).

An innovation system consists of a web of dynamic interactions among researchers, extension agents, equipment manufacturers, input suppliers, farmers, traders, and processors

(Hall et al. 2005).   Innovation system actors primarily involved in technology generation, dissemination and utilization in Nigeria include:   research sub-system which generate knowledge (research institutes and universities at national and international level); policy sub-system are made up of agencies usually at public sectors providing infrastructure, legislation, resources. They function as regulatory agencies and provide the policy direction for the system. Relevant policy agencies in maize innovation include (Federal Department of Agriculture (FDA), National Agricultural Research System (NARS), National Agricultural Service Commission (NASC), National Seed Service (NSS) and National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration Control (NAFDAC) (Faturoti, Madukwe, Igbokwe and Agwu,

2010). The agricultural innovation transfer sub-system involved public and private sectors in extension/advisory services. In addition, several non-government organizations (religion and farmers organizations), national and international organizations and private agro-business firms implement one form of agricultural extension service or the other. Agencies responsible for technology transfer within the system include (Agricultural Development Project (ADP), Community Based Organizations (CBOs), National Agricultural Extension Research Liaison Service  (NAERLS)  and  non-  governmental  organizations  (NGOs)  (Dimelu  and  Emodi,

2012). Enterprise sub-system includes consumers, agro-processors, transporters and traders or marketers which undertake all marketing related activities and provide the utility aspect of the technology (OECD, 2013). The farmers’ sub-system consists of (farmers and their associations) were the end users of innovation. These actors identified were key players in maize innovation and are important in the development of behavioural patterns that make organizations and policies sensitive to achieve goals (Ashley and Carney, 1999).

1.2 Problem statement

In   spite   of   the   many   efforts   made   by   government   and   Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) in Nigeria, adoption of maize technologies by smallholder famers has not been very successful (USAID, 2010), Dusengemungu, Kibwika and Kyazz (2011) argued

that inadequate cooperation between key players in the agricultural sector limits the uptake of new  knowledge  and  technologies  by  farmers.  Agriculture  today  is  evolving  in  an environment of rapid  changes  in  technology; markets,  policies,  demography  and  natural environment. These challenges are putting demands on all sub-sectors around the agricultural sector to innovate and develop new ways of collaborating to generate knowledge and put it into use at the required pace (Danne, 2010). It has been contended that organizational and institutional problems need redress, rather than technical capacity per se (Byerlee, 1998; Byerlee and Alex, 1998; Woodhill, 2010). The Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) has argued that the root of the problem may be the way research is currently carried out (FARA, 2006). This call for change is not new. Chambers, Pacey and Thrupp, (1989) argues that the way agricultural research and extension are organized is a major reason why science is failing to improve the livelihood of the poor.

Innovation requires a much more interactive, dynamic and ultimately flexible process in which the sectors deal simultaneously with many conditions and complementary activities that go beyond the traditional domains of Research and Development (R&D) and extension, (World Bank, 2006).

Many maize technologies have been developed in national and international research stations but most of these are yet to be adopted by famers. This has led to a large yield gap between the researchers’ and the farmers’ fields (Ola, Marcelino and Nur, 2004 ;USAID, 2010).

The  problem  of  poor  production  has  been  attributed  to  weak  linkages,  existing between  research,  extension  and  farmers  (Oladele,  Sakagami,  &  Toriyama,  2006).  The present research-extension linkage scenario in the country has not been able to achieve the prescribed  goal  of  increasing  production  and  improving  the  quality  of  life  of  farmers (Oladele, 2010).

The  shift  towards  an  innovation  systems  orientation  was  precipitated  by  the realization that despite strong national research systems, agricultural productivity remained low as a result of farmers’ poor access to appropriate technologies, information, inputs, credit, markets and rural infrastructure (Sanginga,  Best, Chitsike,  Kaarla,  & Kirkby , 2004).

Despite strong national research system agricultural productivity remained low; many maize technologies in particular have been developed in research stations  are yet to be adopted by farmers as a result of inadequate cooperation between key players in agricultural sector. Despite release of new knowledge and uptake of technology by farmers there is therefore, need for organizational and institutional reform rather just technological capability.

The questions that come to mind are: (i) what are the policies, acts and initiatives that have been put in place to drive maize production? ((ii) what are the technological capabilities of these actors in maize innovation system? (iii) what are the levels of linkage existing between the key actors (iv) what are the constraints in maize innovation system? (v)  what are the strategies for improving maize innovation system?.

1.3       Purpose of the study

The broad objective of the study was to examine the maize innovation system in north central, Nigeria. Specifically, the study sought to:

i  describe policies, acts and initiatives in maize innovation system;

ii  examine  the  technological  capabilities  of  selected  key  actors  in  maize  innovation system;

iii  examine the levels of linkage existing between the key actors;

iv  determine constraints in maize innovation system and

v  identify strategies for improving maize innovation system.

1.4 Significance of the study

The information provided by this study will lead to strengthening of the technological capabilities among actors in maize innovation system. It will also help policy makers to identify  and  implement  possible  areas  of  intervention  leading  to  sustainable  maize production.

The study revealed collaboration among actors in innovation system by looking beyond scientific capabilities between maize farmers and other stake holders, thus assisting technology transfer actors in organizing relevant training and communicate best practices to maize innovation actors.

The findings of this study will be useful in strengthening linkages in maize innovation system. Furthermore, the study could help policy makers in creating enabling environment for improving maize value chain and increase investment. In addition, strategies emanating from this study will assist policy makers and other relevant agencies to alleviate major constraints in maize innovation system in the study area.  Finally, the result of this study will be of immense value to future researchers who may be interested in maize innovation system in Nigeria and elsewhere.

₦5,000.00 – DOWNLOAD FULL PROJECT DOWNLOAD FULL PROJECT Added to cart

---

---

---

---

Related Project Topics :