{"title":"Welfare benefits associated with access to agricultural extension services in Nigeria","authors":"Toyib Aremu, Travis W. Reynolds","doi":"10.1007/s12571-023-01428-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Improving the agricultural productivity and welfare of rural farming households is important for many governments, especially in low- and middle-income countries like Nigeria, where agriculture plays an important role in the economy. Increasing access to agricultural extension is often suggested as a way to raise farmer productivity and incomes. However, empirical estimations of the causal impact of agricultural extension services in Nigeria are few, especially those that address internal and external validity concerns. Improved estimation of the effectiveness of agricultural extension can support evidence-informed decision-making by agricultural policymakers. In this study we used three waves of the Nigerian General Household Survey to advance understanding of the factors associated with farmers’ use of agricultural extension services, and to examine how receiving extension support might improve welfare among rural farm households in Nigeria. Through random effects regression with endogenous treatment effects, we found that asset ownership, use of inorganic fertiliser, and access to credit were positively associated with the use of extension services. We also found positive associations between use of extension services and household food security and assets. Receiving agricultural extension service was associated with a 16% reduction in food insecurity and a 64% increase in household assets. Further disaggregating extension services by the type of advice obtained showed positive associations with welfare outcomes for households that received advice on new seeds and fertiliser, but mixed results for those who received advice on animal care and marketing. Receiving advice on new seed varieties and fertilisers was associated with a 12–15% reduction in food insecurity and a 92–113% increase in household assets. Our findings add to the body of evidence that suggests enhancing farmers’ access to extension can improve the welfare of farmers. Government policy needs to consider factors that limit or promote farmers’ access to agricultural extension services, so that Nigerian farmers can equitably benefit from the potential welfare gains associated with agricultural extension.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":567,"journal":{"name":"Food Security","volume":"16 2","pages":"295 - 320"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Security","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12571-023-01428-7","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Improving the agricultural productivity and welfare of rural farming households is important for many governments, especially in low- and middle-income countries like Nigeria, where agriculture plays an important role in the economy. Increasing access to agricultural extension is often suggested as a way to raise farmer productivity and incomes. However, empirical estimations of the causal impact of agricultural extension services in Nigeria are few, especially those that address internal and external validity concerns. Improved estimation of the effectiveness of agricultural extension can support evidence-informed decision-making by agricultural policymakers. In this study we used three waves of the Nigerian General Household Survey to advance understanding of the factors associated with farmers’ use of agricultural extension services, and to examine how receiving extension support might improve welfare among rural farm households in Nigeria. Through random effects regression with endogenous treatment effects, we found that asset ownership, use of inorganic fertiliser, and access to credit were positively associated with the use of extension services. We also found positive associations between use of extension services and household food security and assets. Receiving agricultural extension service was associated with a 16% reduction in food insecurity and a 64% increase in household assets. Further disaggregating extension services by the type of advice obtained showed positive associations with welfare outcomes for households that received advice on new seeds and fertiliser, but mixed results for those who received advice on animal care and marketing. Receiving advice on new seed varieties and fertilisers was associated with a 12–15% reduction in food insecurity and a 92–113% increase in household assets. Our findings add to the body of evidence that suggests enhancing farmers’ access to extension can improve the welfare of farmers. Government policy needs to consider factors that limit or promote farmers’ access to agricultural extension services, so that Nigerian farmers can equitably benefit from the potential welfare gains associated with agricultural extension.
期刊介绍:
Food Security is a wide audience, interdisciplinary, international journal dedicated to the procurement, access (economic and physical), and quality of food, in all its dimensions. Scales range from the individual to communities, and to the world food system. We strive to publish high-quality scientific articles, where quality includes, but is not limited to, the quality and clarity of text, and the validity of methods and approaches.
Food Security is the initiative of a distinguished international group of scientists from different disciplines who hold a deep concern for the challenge of global food security, together with a vision of the power of shared knowledge as a means of meeting that challenge. To address the challenge of global food security, the journal seeks to address the constraints - physical, biological and socio-economic - which not only limit food production but also the ability of people to access a healthy diet.
From this perspective, the journal covers the following areas:
Global food needs: the mismatch between population and the ability to provide adequate nutrition
Global food potential and global food production
Natural constraints to satisfying global food needs:
§ Climate, climate variability, and climate change
§ Desertification and flooding
§ Natural disasters
§ Soils, soil quality and threats to soils, edaphic and other abiotic constraints to production
§ Biotic constraints to production, pathogens, pests, and weeds in their effects on sustainable production
The sociological contexts of food production, access, quality, and consumption.
Nutrition, food quality and food safety.
Socio-political factors that impinge on the ability to satisfy global food needs:
§ Land, agricultural and food policy
§ International relations and trade
§ Access to food
§ Financial policy
§ Wars and ethnic unrest
Research policies and priorities to ensure food security in its various dimensions.