Determinants to cooperative societies access to government agricultural inputs intervention program in Anambra State, Nigeria.

Published 25-01-2023
Section Research Articles

Authors

  • E V Uloh Federal College of Education, Eha –Amufu
  • S I Ume Federal College of Agriculture Ishiagu
  • D I Nwose Ebonyi State College of Education
  • A C Onyeke Federal College of Education, Eha –Amufu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7770/safer.v11i1.2299

Abstract

The determinant factors to cooperative societies access to government agricultural production intervention programs in Anambra State, Nigeria. Multi stage random sampling techniquewas used to select one hundred and twentycooperative societiesfor detailed study. Primary data were obtained through use of structured questionnaireand informal or oral interview of the respondents. Percentageresponses,Logistic regression and Factor analysis models were employed to address the objectives of the study. The result of the socioeconomic characteristics showsthat most of the respondents were youthful(57.5%), males (54.2%) married(66.7%), educated(93.3%), experiencedin farming (70%) and had poor extension to services(66.7%).On the result of the cooperative type and sources of income showsthat most of the respondents were members of multipurpose, thrift(75%)and savings(66.7%), followed by production(63.3%)and marketing cooperatives(57.6%). The sources of income for the respondents were loan(74%), levies(66.7%),registrations(63.3%), sales(51.7%).The result of the benefits of cooperative to the members waseducational and training (75%),easily access to credit (73.3%), access to farm input (70%), improved farm output(66.7%), improved livelihood(65%)and addedvalue to agricultural product(56.7%). Besides, the farm inputs intervention available to the farmers were access to land(81.7%), fertilizer (75%),loan(65%),cassava cutting(64.2%), tractor services (58.3%) and storage equipment(53.3%).Additionally the farmers’ socioeconomic characteristics that affected their access to government agricultural inputs and interventions were household size, extension services, educational of the respondents, off farm income and membership of organization. The constraints to cooperative activities were poor government support (0.406), poor education and training(0.403), corruption(0.422), lack of membership commitment(0.432), over-control and regulation by government(0.407), lack of clear guide and involvement in politics(0.441). The following recommendations were proffered; thereis need to enhance farmers’ access to credit from formal institution at low interest rate, needto expose the farmers to educational programsand improve farmers’ access to improved farm inputs at reduced or subsidized costs.