Assessment of Rural Farming Households WTP for Fertilizers and Agrochemicals in Kwawara State, Nigeria

Subject Areas : Environmental policy and management

Emmanuel Akinboboye Fadipe Ademoye ¹ , A.A., Adigun ² , Olayinka Animashaun Jubril ³

1 - Department of Agricultural Economics and Farm Management, University of Ilorin, PMB 1515, Ilorin, Nigeria
2 - Department of Agricultural Economics and Farm Management, University of Ilorin, PMB 1515, Ilorin, Nigeria
3 - Department of Agricultural Economics and Farm Management, University of Ilorin, PMB 1515, Ilorin, Nigeria

Received: 2013-11-16 Accepted : 2014-02-23 Published : 2014-06-01

Keywords: WTP, Agrochemicals, Fertilizers Contingent Valuation,

Abstract :

Given the specific geographic and spatial location of rural areas in developing countries, to bring agrochemical to the rural farming households, it is argued, may have to come at a cost over and above the normal price it is sold in market. To this end, this work focuses on the willingness of rural farming households to pay more than the mean average regional retail price for agrochemicals in Kwara state, North Central Nigeria. Questionnaire was administered to 100 randomly sampled in the two agricultural development zones (ADP) in the study area. Descriptive statistics and the Logistic Binary Regression model were fitted to examine factors that influence respondents’ decision to pay more than the prevailing average prices for access to agrochemicals in the study area. Findings indicated a high level of awareness of agrochemical use and modal responses to quantities used include: fertilizers (41-50Kg/ha), herbicides (<10liters/ha), and pesticides (<10liters/ha) on the cultivation of yam, cassava and maize, which were the dominant arable crops in the study area. About 90% of the respondents purchase agrochemicals from their personal savings and less than 10% of the respondents got their agrochemicals from other sources (governmental, developmental agencies, ADP and farmers’ cooperative). Furthermore, 88% (p<0.01) of the respondents indicate willingness to pay more than the current average price to have access to agrochemicals and the logistic regression reveals that level of education (P<0.01), had a positive relationship with respondents’ to willingness to pay more for agrochemicals in the study area. Recommendations were made towards encouraging expanded use of agrochemicals through enhanced marketing strategies that will facilitate contact of marketing agents to prospective customers located in the rural communities.

References:

1- Ayoola, G.B. (1990). The marketing of agriculturalpesticides in Nigeria workshop on the pesticidesIndustry in Nigeria, University of Ibadan, 6-8February 1990.

2- Banfi, S., Farsi, M., Filippini, M., & Jakob, M.(2008). Willingness to pay for energy-saving measuresin residential buildings, Energy Economics 30:503-506. [DOI via Crossref]

3- Boyle, K.J. (2003). Contingent valuation in practice.In A primer on nonmarket valuation. Edited byChamp, P.A., Boyle, K.J., Brown, T.C. Kluwer AcademicPublishers, Dordrecht. [DOI via Crossref]

4- Carson, R.T., & Hanemann, W.M. (2005). Contingentvaluation. In Handbook on EnvironmentalEconomics, Vol 2. Edited by Mäler, K.G., Vincent,J.R. North-Holland, Amsterdam.

5- Diener, A., Oââ‚‌â„¢Brien, B., & Gafni, A. (1998).Health care contingent valuation studies: a reviewand classification of the literature. Health Economics,7, 313ââ‚‌"326. [DOI via Crossref]

6- Irene, S. E. (2012). Assessing the factor of adoptionof agrochemicals by plantain farmers in Ghanausing the ASTI Analytical framework. Kpmg: Thegrowing importance of agrochemicals.

7- Krupnick, A., Alberini, A., Cropper, M., Simon,N., Oââ‚‌â„¢Brien, B., Goeree, R., & Heintzelman, M.(2002). Age, health and the willingness to pay formortality risk reductions: a contingent valuationstudy of Ontario residents, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,24(2),161ââ‚‌"186.

8- Lagat, J.K., Wangia, S.M., Njehia, B.K., & Ithinji,G.K. (2007). Environmental hazards African Agriculture:Factor influencing Application of agrochemicalsin Nakuru district, Kenya. In Advances inIntegrated Soil Fertility Management in Sub-SaharanAfrica:Challenges and Opportunities. Ed. A. Bationo.The Netherlands: Springer, 795- 804. [DOI via Crossref]

9- Lipscomb, C. (2011). Using contingent valuationto measure property value impacts. Journal of PropertyInvestment and Finance, 29, 448-459. [DOI via Crossref]

10- Lusk, J.L., & Hudson, D. (2004). Willingnessto-Pay estimates and their relevance to agribusinessdecision making. Review of Agricultural Economics,26(2), 152ââ‚‌"169. [DOI via Crossref]

11- Morris, M., Kelly, V.A., Kopicki, R.J., & Byerlee,D. (2007). Fertilizer use in Nigerian context.

12- Moser, C.M., & Barrett, C.B. (2003). The disappointingadoption dynamics of a yield- increasinglow external input technology: The Case of SRI inMadagascar. Journal of Agricultural Systems, 76(3),1085-1100. [DOI via Crossref]

13- Owusu-Bennoah, E., Anno-Nyako, F.O., Egyir,I.S., & Banful, B. (2007): Methodological framework:Analysing the agricultural science technologyand innovation (ASTI) Systems in ACP Countries.The Ghana Case Study on Plantains. Wageningen,the Netherlands: Technical Centre for Agriculturaland Rural Cooperation (CTA).

14- Thompson, E., Berger, M., Blomquist, G., &Allen, S. (2002). Valuing the arts: a contingent valuationapproach. Journal of Cultural Economics, 26,87ââ‚‌"113. [DOI via Crossref]

15- World Resources Institute. (2010). Agricultureand food searchable database. <http://earthtrends.wri.org/searchable_db/results.php?theme=8&years=& variable_ID=872&cID=&ccID=&years_rev=1>.Accessed May 10, 2010.

16- Zapata, S.D., Benavides, H.M., Carpio, C.E., &Willis, D.B. (2012). The economic value of basinprotection to improve the quality and reliability ofpotable water supply: The Case of Loja, Ecuador.Water Policy, 14, 1-13. [DOI via Crossref]