Needs Assessment Study for Market-driven Agricultural Technology Transfer and Commercialization by International Institute of Tropical Agriculture

Market-led Agricultural Technology Transfer and Commercialization Project

Rural Sector Enhancement Program

Needs Assessment Study for Market-driven Agricultural Technology Transfer and Commercialization in Abia State, Nigeria P.M. Kormawa, K.B. Kolawole, I. Azuogu, E.C. Okorii, and C.I. Ezedinma

c en

m -a 3: o ::s

..,

-C

:r-

en CD

..,-(1)

t/) ~

\\TA International Institute nf Tropical Agriruiture

IIIlIDD

-...,.'

~ '

United States Agency for International Development

Federal Republic of Nigeria

Needs Assessment Study for Market-driven Agricultural Technology Transfer and Commercialization in Abia State

P.M. Kormawa, K.B. Kolawole, I. Azuogu, E.C. Okorji and C.I. Ezedin ma

Coordinating Office Rural Sector Enhancement Program International Institute of Tropical Agriculture PMB 5320. Ibadan, Nigeria

October 2002

Funded by the United States Agency for International Development Abuja, Nigeria

Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to USAID for providing the funds for the execution of this study. We benefited immensely from the cooperation and assistance of Dr. E. Okoro, Project Manager, Ahia ADP, and all his staff, especially Mr Nwogu, Mr Batho, Engr. Odu, Ms Mary, and Ms Mercy. Out thanks also go to Dr Ingawa, head of Unit, Projects Coordinating Unit, and aU the staff of Agro-lndustrial Devdopment Unit of the Federal Department of Agriculture at Sheda, Ahuja. We sincerely hope that the contents of this document will be useful towards achieving a market-driven agricultural technology transfer and commercialization in Abia State and Nigeria in general.

Contents Acknowledgments .... ........... .............. ....................... ................................................

Acronyms and abbreviations.....................................................................................

Executive summary ..... ......... ............ ............... ....... ... ........ ............ ... ....... ... .. ....... ..... vii 1.

Introduction..... .............. ......... ......................................................................... Background and concept of the study............................................................... Terms of reference. ....... ......... ............. ...... ..... ...... .......... ............ ............ ........... Methodology ....... ......... ......... ..... .............. ........... ......... ............. ............ ...........

1 1 3 3

Priority major crops............................ ................ ................................ .............. Levels of production and demand............. .......... ......... .............. ............ ........... Technology of production, storage and processing and extent of adoption and utilization ... ........ ........... .......... ........... ........... ............. ........... Value added activities and availability of postharvest technologies .................... Market opportunities for processed products.................................................. .. Production cost and profitability of major crops. ........ .. .................... .. ......... .. ... Investments outlay in agroprocessing ventures............ ......................................

5 5 8 11 14 15 26

Factors influencing the effective implementation of market-driven technology transfer and commercialization in Abia State ......... .. ......... ... ........ ... Technology of production ........... ............. ...... .... ............ ....... .......... .... .......... .. . Postharvest activities at the farm level... ........... ....................... .. ........................ Private sector involvement in technology transfer and commercialization ......... Market opportunities and infrastructure.............. ............................................. Microcredit and credit support facilities ........................................................... Farmer empowerment .... .. ..................... ............. ......... .. ......... ............ ............. . Policy instability ...... .......... .... ........ ............ ..... ...... ........ .......... ................ .......... Adequacy of institutional support......... .............. ..............................................

34 34 35 36 37 37 37 38 38

Appropriate intervention framework ................. .. ............................................. The role and responsibility of stakeholders in RUSEP .... ....... ............. ... ........... Policies and institutional support....................... . .............................................. Commercialization of input and outputs markets............................................. Human capital development. ....... ............. ........... .......... ........ .... ....... ..... .......... Market information system .......... ....... ...... ........... ......... ............. ........ .... .......... Future outlook and trends in input and product prices, availability. and demand. ....... ....... ........ ..... ........... ......... ............. ............ ..........

39 39 43 44 45 45 46

5. Summary and conclusion ................................................................................... 47

References ................................................................................................................ 49 Annexes .................................................................................................................... 1. Weather statistics... ........ ............... ............ .......... ........ ..... .......... ........... ............. 2. Distribution offarmlands to ministries/parastatals............................................. 3. Investment outlay for farm-gate level processing................................................ 4. Investment outlay for cottage level processing............................................... ..... 5. Database 1. Private sector agribusinesses.... ......... .............. ............ .......... ......... ............... 2. Public sector agribusinesses.......................................................................... 3. Agricultural technology generation/dissemination ....................................... 4. Rural finance (credit)................................. .................................................. 5. Summary of fabricators by LGA.................................................................. 6. Women in Agriculture (WIA) processor groups........................................... 7. Registered women's groups in Abia State...................................................... 8. Summary of groupslassociarions/cooperarives/women's groups by LGA....... 9. Summary of processors by LGA...................................................................

50 50 52 53 58 67 68 68 68 69 69 70 72 72

Figures 1. The RUSEP environment .................................................................................. 40 2. The RUSEP implementation framework ........................................................... 41

Tables 1. Criteria adopted in selection of the major crops. ................................................

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23 . 24. 25. 26.

Criteria for seIeaion of study sites .......... ............ ........... ............. ............ ...... ..... Area planted (000 ha) and yield (tfha) for selected crops ................................... Level of production and demand for selected crops ........................................... Seed planting material distribution.................................................................... Levels of fertilizer supply and demand (OOO t), 1999-2001 ............................... Available processing technologies by crop in Nigeria.......................................... Wholesale and retail market prices for industrially processed products............... Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for yam enterprise (ha), 2001..................... Cost-returns analysis for yam flour produaion ............ ........... .............. ............ Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for cassava enterprise (ha), 2001................. Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for gari production (from cassava tubers), 2001 .... .. ........... .............................................................. Cost-returns analysis for gari production (cottage level), 2001 .......................... Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for cassavita production from gari, 2001...... Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for cassava Rour (unfermented) production, 2001 .............................................................................................. Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for cassava chips production, 200 1............. Cost-returns analysis for dry cassava mash production (cottage level), 2001...... Cost-returns analysis for starch production (cottage level), 2001.. ..................... Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for rice enterprise (ha) , 2001 ...................... Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for paddy rice processing milled rice, farm-gate level, 2001) .. ....................................... ........ .................... Cost-returns analysis for rice processing (milled rice, cottage level), 2001 ......... Cost-returns analysis for plantain enterprise production (ha), 2001 .................. Cost-returns analysis for plantain flour production (cottage level) , 2001........... Summary sheet for profitability of enterprises ................... ... ....................... ....... Summary table of investment outlay for farm-gate processing ........................... Summary table ofinvestmenr outlay for cottage industry level..........................

6 6 7 7 8 9 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

Acronyms and abbreviations ADlATN ADP AIDV

BEA BCR BEF CB CBO CRIN ECOWAS FIIRO FRIN ICRISAT

IFAD IITA ILRI LGA MIS MDATTC NAFDAC NARDB NCAM NCR! NGO NRCRl NSS OAU PCU PME PRODA PTD

REFILS RID RTEP

RRIN SAFGRAD SMS SON STRC TFC TR-TC TR-TVC USAID WARDA WIA

Accelerated Dissemination of Improved Agricultural Technolog.v in Nigeria Agricultural Development Program Agro-Industrial Development Unit block extension agent benefir-cost ratio break-even factor cooking banana community-based organizations Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria Economic Community of West African States Federal Institute ofIndustrial Research, Oshodi Forestry Research Institute of Nigeria International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics International Fund for Agricultural Development International Institute of Tropical Agriculture International Livestock Research Institute local government area market information system market-driven agricultural technology transfer and commercialization National Food and Drugs Administration and Control Nigerian Agricultural and Rural Development Bank National Center for Agricultural Mechanization National Cereals Research Institute nongovernmental organization National Root Crops Research Institute National Seed Service Organization of African Unity Projects Coordinating Unit Project Monitoring and Evaluation Projects Development Agency Postharvest Technology Department Research-Extension-Farmer-Input-Linkage System Rural Institutions Department Root and Tuber Expansion Program Rubber Research Institute of Nigeria Semi-Arid Food Grains Research and Development Project subject matter specialists Standards Organization of Nigeria Scientific and Technical Research Commission [Oral fixed cost [Otal revenue minus total cost total revenue minus total variable cost United States Agency for International Development West Africa Rice Development Association Women in Agriculture

Executive summary RUSEP is the latest attempt by the Federal Government of Nigeria to alleviate poverty through the transfer of market-driven agricultural technology to farmers and the commercialization of agriculture in selected states in Nigeria. Through this project, employment would be generated through enhanced agricultural enterprises. Abia State in the southeast was chosen as one of the pilot states. The needs assessment study provides information on existing and available improved technologies and level of commercialization of agriculture in the rural communities. The constraints to commercialization and adoption of market-driven technologies were identified and recommendations were made towards the effective implementation of the project. The report would be useful in the implementation of the pilot project which has a life span of 18 months. Yam, cassava, rice. and plantain were selected as priority major crops, taking into consideration their potential adaptability to commercial processing capability, socioeconomic and cultural significance, as well as their comparative advantage in terms of production and consumption in various processed forms . Yam and plantain flour were found (0 be the most profitable processed products for the study area. Plantain and cooking banana flour are new. emerging products with a high future market-driven potential. Similarly, certain criteria were also used (0 select the sites, namely, Bende local government area (LGA) and Ukwa East or West LGA. Yam and rice are produced mostly in Bende LGA while plantain and cooking banana are produced mostly in Ukwa East and West LGA. Although all the crops selected are widely grown with improved varieties, there would be an added value, if the farmers or group of farmers were able to process their produce. Consequently. emphasis is placed on processing in the report. Presently, gaps exist in the production of various agricultural technologies, such as in minisett seed yam, agrochemicals, and fertilizers. There is a weak emphasis on the dissemination of processing technologies; poor linkages exist between farmers and various stakeholders in the farming enterprise; there is policy instability and inadequate institutional support, as wdl as a lack of market opportunities and infrastructure, microcredit and credit support facilities. For the success of market-driven technology transfer and commercialization of agriculture, there should be a state government policy in favor of agriculture, such as the encouragement of research and development of improved technologies on a continuous and sustainable basis and dissemination of results. Government should make microcredit available through support to farmers' groups, commercialization of inputs and output markers, train the stakeholders, and ensure a sound market information system.

vii

1 Introduction Background and concept of the study Nigeria has substantial economic potential in its agricultural sector, especially in agroprocessing for the large domestic and regional markets. The country has both public and private sectOrs actively involved in agriculture, and the country is the seventh-largest petroleum exporter in the world. Yet the country's social and economic development remains far below what was, and is expected. Over the past 20 years, per capita incomes have declined from approximately U5$1200 in the 19805 to about US$300 in 1999 (World Bank 2000). In addition, Nigeria's social indicators have fallen well below the average for all developing countries. For instance, 70% of the population are below the US$lI day poverty line (World Bank 2000). Life expectancy is only 53 years (ADB 1999); adult literacy is also low at 43% (ADB 1999), while the infant mortality rate is as high as 74 per 1000 live births. Data from the Federal Office for Statistics (FOS 1999) indicate that poverty levels in the country have been on the increase since 1986. Detailed analysis of the poverty situation in Nigeria revealed that most of the poor are working in the agricultural sector and reside in rural areas. Studies in Nigeria (D'Situa and Bysmouth 1994) and elsewhere (World Bank 2000) have traced an evident linkage between poverty and agricultural sector performance. Therefore, improvements in performance of the agticultural sector can have far-reaching beneficial implications for food security, income enhancement, and poverty reduction. Despite the importance of agriculture in Nigeria in terms of employment creation, its potential for contributing to economic growth is far from being fully exploited. The sector's importance has moved inversely with the rise and fall in oil revenue. Over the past years, the agricultural sector has been characterized by low and declining growth rates. The average annual growth rate of added value attributable to the agricultural sector declined from 3.3% in the 1980s to 2.9% in the 1990s (World Bank 2000). Inappropriate macroeconomic and sector policies perpetuated by 15 years of military ru{e and mismanagement have had a negative impact not only on agriculture but also on the entice economy. The direct intervention of government in the agricultural sector was a major disincentive for private sector investment. Major investment opportunities have been identified since the advent of a democratically elected government in 1999. However, due to the depth and degree of poverty and raised expectations for quick improvements in the livelihoods of the general populace, the emerging democracy will be threatened if visible changes in the economic situation of Nigerians are not achieved. Amongst other sectors, agriculture

offers an immediate opportunity for enhanced employment creation, income gei1eration, and consequently poverty reduction targeted at small and medium-scale farmers who account for more than 80% of the farming population in Nigeria. In the agricultural sector, the development and transfer of market- and demand-driven technology for the commercialization of agriculture is one vehicle to make possible a shift from subsistence (0 market-oriented production. New technologies for transforming smallholder agriculture are available through the research activities of 17 national agricultural research institutes and four international research institutes (UTA, WARDA, ICRISAT, and ILRI) that have over the years developed improved technologies and germplasm adapted to production conditions in Nigeria. Yet, at the micro level, various factors have constrained adoption of these technologies including poor access to inputs, agricultural finance, and information, inadequate agroprocessing facilities and marketing arrangements for products. In addition, most of the technologies were developed with a view to increasing production without targeting or clearly identifYing market opportunities or determining their projected rate of return to investment. Following democratic elections in 1999, the government is implementing market-supportive reforms that will in the long run have a positive impact on the agricultural sector. However, in the period prior to agricultural market liberalization and the abolition of government-controlled commodity boards, market (price) information was provided by parastatals. Yet market information services remain scanty, untimely, and not widely disseminated, making the agricultural planning and business decision-making process very difficult. There is, therefore, a clear need to develop an efficient market information system (MIS) that will link input suppliers with farmers on the one hand and farmers with output markets on the other, allowing a free flow of information on prices (inputs and outputs) and market opportunities. The strategy being proposed for this project contributes to poverty alleviation by focusing on improved production and the productivity of targeted commodities with well-established market opportunities and potential for employment generation through the development of more market-oriented agriculture. These opportunities will be initiated through the provi.sion of effective and efficient linkages between markets and production. Good communication with and responsiveness to market forces will be the guiding principles for activities proposed in the project. This is expected to benefit all members of the rural community, particularly women and children. and urban or rural-based microentrepreneurs and agribusinesses. The goal of the project is to help sustain democratic government in Nigeria through the alleviation of poverty by generating employment opportunities and wealth creation through stimulating market-oriented agricultural production and productivity. The purpose of the project is to test a strategy at state level to improve and develop market-driven agricultural production and to generate employment through the enhancement, or creation, of rural agricultural enterprises in designated areas in Nigeria.

Terms of reference This study was set up in Abia State with the following terms of reference: 1. Identify the most likdy areas and crops where technology transfer and commercialization could be achieved. 2. Identify the types of technology and the level of adoption in terms of downstream activities (storage, processing, etc.) as they affect the major crops of interest. 3. Assess the profitability of the identified crops at farm level and market level. 4. Identify the constraints militating against market-driven agriculture (e.g., technology, infrastructure, input supply situation, and output market). a. Produce a database of private sector agribusinesses and others involved in the generation and dissemination of agricultural technologies, formal and informal institutes, rural and microfinancial institutes, farmer groups, and viable and credible nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to identify key potential stakeholders. b. Examine the role of existing functional farmer associations, community-based organizations (CBOs) including women's groups, and donor agencies, and propose their future roles in the devdopment and transfer of market-driven technologies. 6. Examine the level of private sector involvement in terms of input supply and output market and propose ways to encourage greater private sector participation in inputs and Output market development. 7. Assess the present situation of MIS and suggest ways to develop a more comprehensive MIS that can link producers, processors, and the end-users of agricultural products including NGOs and other organizations within and outside the state. 8. Identify training needs for producers, entrepreneurs, etc., in support of marketdriven technology transfer and commercialization in agriculture.

Methodology The study area Abia State lies berween longitudes 7 째00' and 8 째O'E and latitudes 4 045' and 6 017' N in the south-eastern part of Nigeria. The climate is tropical and humid all the year round. The rainy season, from March to October, is bimodal with a 2-week break (in rainfall) in August. The dry season occurs from November to February. The mean annual rainfall ranges from 2000 mm to 2500 mm with the southern areas receiving more than the northern areas. Temperatures are constantly high with annual daily maximum about 31 DC and minimum about 22 dc. Relative humidity is always high and highest at the height of the rains and lowest during the harmattan months of December-February. High ranges of humidity (80 to 87%) occur during the rainy season. Monthly weather statistics from January 1999 to September 2001 are presented in annex 1. The vegetation is predominantly lowland rain forest. But human activity (bush burning, cultivation, and planting) has been so intense that most of the forests have become degraded. The general land-use pattern is subsistence cultivation with the attendant bush fallow system,

The major arable crops grown are cassava, yam, rice, plantain/banana, maize, melon, sweetpotato. cowpea, pineapple. and vegetables such as te/foiria, okro, pepper, and tomatoes. Farm landholdings in the state range from 0.3 ha to 1 ha. Major tree crops include oil palm, cocoa, Irvingea gabonensis, kola, rubber, citrus. coconut. mango and guava. Ocher farming activities include sheep and goat rearing. poultry and rabbit keeping. homestead fish farming, bee keeping, snail farming, and off-farm activities. especially processing and utilization. There are other private sector extension services such as the oil companies but are these limited to their areas of oil exploration. The population was estimated at 2297978 in 1991. The population density is about 364 persons/km 2 with 63% in agricultural production. The average household size is about six persons per family. The ratio of extension agents to farm families is 1:1490 as 212 extension agents cover 315 910 farm families. This ratio is still above the ratio of 1: 1000 recommended by the World Bank. The State government has a positive attitude towards agriculture. For instance, 127 ha were allocated to its various ministries and parastatals for agricultural production (Annex 2). This has also created awareness of the importance of agriculture amongst the citizenry. One research institute (National Root Crops Research Institute. NRCRI) and the Michael Opara University of Agriculture are sited within the state. There are also substations of the National Cereals Research Institute (NCRI), Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria (CRIN), Rubber Research Institute of Nigeria (RRlN), and Forestry Research Instirute of Nigeria (FRIN). Data c:oflec:tion method

A team of four multidisciplinary scientists collected data for this study over a period of seven days using a rapid rural appraisal technique. First, the agricultural development program (Abia ADP) was visited to seek field survey assistance. Other data were also obtained from the ADP. Field visits were made to villages and cities. Various farmers, farmer groups, cottage industries, and agroindustries were visited at Bende, Umuahia North, Umuahia South, Ohafia, and UIcwa West LGAs. Fabricators of processing machines were visited at Aba, a major commercial city. Markets were visited at Umuahia, the stare capital. Samples of existing processed products were purchased in urban markets. The choice of sites visited was informed by the predominance of crops selected for the study, yam, cassava, rice, and plantain/banana, in order of importance. Informal interviews were used to obtain information on existing processing technologies at the rural farm level, on processed food demand and production costs at farm and market levels, on types of existing production and storage technologies both at the farm-gate and cottage levels. The data collected during the field visits informed the estimates on profitability of farm production, farm-gate processing and cottage (processing) enterprises for different products at 2001 ptices.

2 Priority major crops Yam, cassava, rice, and plantain/banana were selected as the most important arable crops of interest. The selection was based on their potential adaptability to commercial processing capability. socioeconomic and cultural significance, as well as comparative advantage in terms of production and consumption of the crops in various processed forms (Table 1). Location of pilot plants for the RUSEP project in Abia State will depend on the crop that is selected. proximity of the site to urban markets, and expected quick returns on investment within three years. Other important factors are level of production and processing, accessibility, and number of groups/associations (Table 2). If the selection is rice and/or yam as the crop(s) of interest for commercialization, then the plant has to be located at Bende LGA, located about 15 ken to Umuahia. If the choice is cassava and/or plantain, it has co be located at Ukwa East or West LGAs. The Ukwa LGAs are located within 10 km of Aba, a major commercial center. This city also has a lot of local fabricators and artisans, ensuring a good market-oriented environment.

Levels of production and demand Yam Farmers produce yam allover Abia State. The land area allocated to yam enterprise decreased slightly from 34 980 ha in 1999 to 34 280 ha in 2000 but increased to 37 708 ha in 200 L Yield/ha increased between 1999 and 2000 but decreased slightly in 2001 (Table 3). The production-demand situation over the period 1999-200 1 is shown in Table 4. The demand for yam far outweighs its supply, hence the existence of a deficit in the availability of yam tubers over the study period. Dealers brought in yam from Ogbaru (Anambra State), Zakibiam (Benue State), and Ogoja (Cross River State) to complement local production. Demand is rising through cultivation of more hectarage and greater use of improved yam varieties and technologies, which are presently available. The demand for yam is expected to increase further with the development of the yam processing technology that is envisaged in this study. Cassava Cassava is also produced allover the state. The land area allocated to the cassava production declined from 29 700 ha in 1999 to 24286 ha in 2000 but increased slightly to 27 143 ha in 2001. The yield of cassava, although relatively high, decreased over the period (Table 3) despite the existence of many improved cassava varieties. The demand for cassava tubers 5

increased over me period while production decreased from 857228 (in 1999 to 550 591 ( in 2000 and 605 650 ( in 2001. Almough mere was a surplus of 14 930 t in 1999, deficits in 2000 and 2001 were substantially high (Table 4). Table 1. Criteria adopted in selection of the major crops.

Average production

SINo. l.

2. 3.

4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

1999-2001 ('000 t)

Crops

Maize

72.767 13.224 0.120 67 l.l 56 Yam 409.707 Groundnut 0.308 Vegetables (Te/fairia) 2.705 Tomatoes 0.243 Plantain/Banana 403.833 Rice Cowpea Cassava

Average land area cultivated No. of major Socio1999-2001 processed economIc ('000 ha) products index Ranlcing

5.971 18.994 0.127 27.043 35.656 0.175 0.269 0.226 13.137

2 2 1 2

2 I

2 2

1 2

3 6 2 1 8 7

9 4

Table 2. Criteria for selection of study sites.

No. of farmer groups Availability Accessiproduction processing in area of market bility

Level of

SINo.

LGA

1. Aba North Aba South Arochukwu Bende Ikwuano Isiala Ngwa N Isiala Ngwa S 8. Isuikwuato 9. ObiNgwa 10. Ohafia 11. Osisioma 12. Ugwunabo 13. Ukwa East 14. Ukwa West 15. Umuahia North 16. Umuahia South 17. Umunneochi

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

2 2 2 4 4 2 2 2 2 2

3 2 4 4 2 2 2

Level of 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 2 1 3 2 2 3 3 1 2 2

4 7 6 22 4 10 3 16 6 14 3 2 20 20 18 14

4 4 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2

3 3 3 3 2

4 4 2

3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 4

3 4 4 2

Total

17 20 14 35 13 16

Ranking

9 8 11

12 10

2l)

14 7 13 6 15 16 3 2 -4

25 8

23 12 24 10 9 33 34

Table 3. Area planted (000 hal and yield (tlha) for selected crops In Abia State. Crops Yam Cassava Rice Plantain

Area/yield Area (000 ha) Yield (uha) Area (000 ha) Yield (uha) Area (000 ha) Yield (uha) Area (000 ha) Yield (uha

1999

34.98 1l.629 29.70 28.693 8,420 2.50 19.104 2l.001

2000

2001

34.280 11.702 24.286 22.671 9.567 2.71 19.745 21.530

37.708 11.170 27.143 22.313 8.994 2.67 20.267 2l.6

Production location State-wide State-wide BendeLGA Ukwa East and Uk\va West LGA

Table 4. Level of production and demand for selected crops in Abia State. 2000 2001 1999 Crops Production Demand Balance Production Demand Balance Production Demand Balance (t) (t) (t)

Yam 406.73 465.761 -58.938 401.145 479.753 -78.530 Cassava 857.228 842.248 +14.930 550.591 867.519 -316.928 12.567 74.958 -62.331 Rice 15.156 72.776 -57.620 Plamain 401.263 285.279 +115.984 425.099 293.837 +131.262

421.202 494.126 -72.924 605.650 893.545 -287.835 11.939 77.207 -65.268 431.764 302.652 +129.112

The surplus in cassava output in 1999 led to a decline in production in 2000 and 200 1. There was, therefore, an excess demand for cassava in the year 2000 and 2001 because farmers had cut back on production due to the glut in the previous year, increased. labor coses, and export to Europe as cattle feed. The excess demand has led to increase in prices for gari, a major processed cassava product in 2001. Cassava production has to be increased. significantly to meet the expected further rise in demand for cassava and cassava products for domestic and industrial uses following the implementation of the RUSEP project.

R;ce Rice in the study area is grown mostly in Bende LGA. The land area allocated to rice production increased from 8420 ha to 9567 ha in 2000 but decreased slightly to 8994 ha in 2001. Yield of rice was below 3 uha (Table 3), even though evidence (Ezedinma in press; Ogunremi et aI. 2000) from the study area indicates that a paddy yield above 5 t/ha is feasible under intensive (double rice) cropping without fertilizer or an improved water management system. The demand for rice has consistently outweighed its supply (Table 4). This emphasizes the need. for increased production through the use of improved rice seeds, double cropping, and fertilizer application, among others. The demand for rice is expected. to increase further with the creation of more rice products through agroprocessing for domestic consumption. industria{ uses, and possible export.

Plantain/Banana Plantain and banana are grown allover the state but mostly in two LGAs, Ukwa East and Ukwa West. The land area allocated to plantain/banana enterprises increased from 19 104 ha in 1999 to 19745 ha in 2000 and 20267 ha in 2001. Yieldlha increased only marginally over the period (Table 3) . Although the demand for plantain/banana is rising, the level of production rises higher than demand, leaving a surplus of 11 5984 t in 1999, 13 1262 tin 2000, and 129 112 tin 2001. Plantain/banana are moved to neighboring Slates and beyond. The perishable nature of this product accounts for the huge losses reported by farmers, a situation that would be averted or significantly reduced if some output is processed to other products (Bakes, Bour, juice, etc.) that are less perishable.

Technology of production, storage and processing and extent of adoption and utilization Production technologies The use of improved planting varieties is widespread for all the selected crops. Improved cassava varieties cultivated by farmers include NR8082, NR8083, and TMS30572. The yarn varieties include Obiaoturugo, Nwaopoko, and Akuru. As many as eight cultivars of yam are grown. The yam minisett technology is a common input technology practiced by farmers. Improved rice varieties include FAR044 (Sipi), IR-5, Suakoko-8, Cisadane, FARO-IS, and BG 90-2. FARO 44 is currently being disseminated by the extension agency while farmers are abandoning BG90-2 in some areas because of low yield. Swamp rice production is the dominant production system. Attempts to introduce upland rice production met with some problems. Improved plantain varieties include Pira14, Pita 17, and Pita 3. Cooking banana varieties include Cardaba, Bluggoe, and Fuggamoe. Yields of cooking banana are generally higher than yields of plantain and dessert banana but adoption of the crop is slow. Abia ADP obtains seeds and seedlings from UTA, NRCRI, NSS, and Premier Seeds and distributes these to the farmers (Table 5). The seed supply situation, however, is poor and grossly inadequate for the 315 910 farm families covered by extension department. There is an independent seed supply agency (Abia Agro-Input Company Ltd.) in the state. Table 5. Seed/planting material distribution.

Crop

2000

2001

1,000

750

2,500

10,000 250 500 4,000

15,000 500 600 4,000 120 kg

25,000 1,000 1,500

1999

Cassava stem cuttings NR8082/NR8083 (in bundles) Seed yam CORN 006 - Nwaopoko and DRN 010 Obiaoturugo) (setts) Rice seeds FARO-44 (SIPI) kg Plantain/Banana: suckers setts Maize seeds (TZSR)

60 kg

250 kg

Table 6. levels of fertilizer supply and demand (000 t) in Abia State,1999-2001.

Year 1999 2000 2001

Production 180.0 90.0 2580.0

Demand

Balance

198.983 207.776 227.160

-117.776

-18.982 +2,352.833

However, the agency is placed under the Ministry of Agriculture and the bureaucracy inherent in the Ministry has stunted its acrivitie5. It would have been more appropriate to privarize the agency rather than allow it to exist within state paraphernalia. Intercropping is a major crop production system and new technologies are energetically disseminated. Improved intercropping technologies include yam-maize-ClSsava-melon (in single alternate rows) which has attained 45% adoption over the past three years of its dissemination. The yam minisett-maize followed by cowpea has attained 75% adoption. Other selected intercrop technologies disseminated by extension include late season cassava-maize--cowpea intererop (60% adoption) and cassava-maize-sweetpotato (55%). fertilizer is an important modern farm input which enhances the attainment of porential yields of crops. In order to encourage fertilizer use by farmers, Nigerian governments have had to put policies and programs in place. Incidentally, these have nor achieved the desired results as this all-important farm input is grossly underutilized by farmers (Okorji and Ayichi 2000). Despite the awareness created by the ADP about fertilizer, the rate of use was estimated at about 15 rlha on the average. This derives from rhe fact that fertilizer is usually scarce, due to low procurement, poor distribmion arrangements, and presently it is used as a political tool. Table 6 shows the levels of fertilizer supply and demand in the state over the period 1999 to 2001, There was a deficit in supply in 1999 and 2000 A large surplus in 2001 has not translated into increased usage/ha, as fertilizer is still not adequately provided. Data on agroprocessing and storage activities were very scanty. No meaningful studies had been carried out and the few data obtained were from the agroprocessing officer, the Women in Agriculture (WIA), and the visits to a few locations that were possible within the time frame. It has long been confirmed (Nweke et al. 1988; Nweke 1994) that the cost-saving advantage of yield-increasing agricultural technology in Nigeria may not translate into sustainable output if there is no matching cost-saving technology at the processing stage.

Cassava Cassava is processed mostly at the farm-gate level into gari or odorless Jufo, wet and dry Ilbacha. A very little quantity is processed into flour. The machinery available are cassava graters, dewatering presses, and fryers. The cassava graters are powered by 6.0 hp diesel engines. Indicatioru are that they are efficient and require very little maintenance. It should be mentioned that some women groups use "kitchen wonder" (a manual grater with different grating sizes) and the flat kitchen grater. The graters are fairly spread our across 9

the state, especially in the urban areas and their suburbs. In Ukwa East and West LGAs, the grating machines are mounted on pushcarts and moved from one place to anomer to service customers (gari processors) in the rural villages. Hired processors, i.e., those who provide a service to farmers/other processors own most of the cassava graters wim a limited number controlled by women's groups. The cassava dewatering presses found in the state are the screw-press type that could take a maximum of two 50 kg bags of cassava mash at a time. These presses are of low efficiency and take about 24 hours to dewater cassava mash. Except for occasional greasing, very little maintenance is required for me cassava press. Sticks are still used to dewater cassava in some rural areas. The most common gan fryers are me aluminum fryers that are about 30 em in diameter. They are considered to be affordable, durable, and efficient, but of very low capacity. They are adaptable to farm-gate processing but inefficient for cottage industry processing. There is little or no farm-gate processing for yam. Rice

Rice is harvested, sun dried, and some quantity is milled for sale. The rest is stored and milled as me need arises. The machines available for rice processing are prime movers, parboilers, and hullers. Parboiling is carried out with oil drums of about 90 kg capacity that are adaptable to farm-gate processing but may not be efficient for cottage level industrial processing. The method employed leaves room for the production of/ow quality rice. The prime movers for rice processing are mosdy of21.5 hp, which drives a huller of 250 kg/hr capacity that could produce 2. 5 of rice per day. These machines are imported and expensive but very efficient and reliable. The rice processing machines are fairly spread out and are located mainly in the rice producing areas. There is very little destoning of milled rice. Plantain/Banana

Plantain/banana are harvested green and sold in the community outlets. Minimal quantities are processed into plantain flour, banana flour (from cooking banana), and plantain flakes. The processing machines utilized for plantain and banana are still at artisanallevels. These are the kitchen knives, graters, and manual grinders. Grated material is dried by being spread in the sun for one or two days. The Abia ADP has a total of 38 block extension agents (BEAs) and three subject matter specialists (SMS) within WIA supervising the BMs. There are a total of 67 women's groups that have been constituted in the three operational zones of the ADP. The WIA, working with the BEAs, organize the women into groups/cooperatives, link mem with credit facilities, and encourage them co be self-reliant, through commercialization of production, processing, preservation, and utilization activities. So far, they have been able to teach the women's groups some processing methods in cassava, plantain, maize, cocoyam, sweetpotaro, and soy-based food production. The women's groups that were interviewed confirmed that they own a group farm, conduct processing activities together, and sell their products in urban and rural markets. The profits are channeled towards offering scholarships to deserving students of the community and taking on other community-related projects. They are handicapped by 10

lack of capital, absence of processing and storage facilities, lack of knowledge of modern business techniques, and inability to produce appreciable volumes that would <ranslare to high profit and income. The WIA program has achieved 75% adoption level for household (farm-gate) cassava flour processing, 65% for odorless cassavafofo, 55% for cassava chips, 65% for plantain/ cooking banana flour, and 75% for plantain flakes. Little or no effort has been made to disseminate yam and rice flour processing at the farm-gate level by the extension program. Some poor quality rice flour was found in the urban markets. This suggests that badly parboiled rice and milled rice were ground into flour, as they could not be sold as whole grain rice. The source is also from within the state. While extension of these processed products creates awareness on their utilization. there is need to move beyond the household level to the cottage industry level. Storage technology It was evident during the srudy that storage activities are very low. There was no indication that fresh cassava. plantain, and banana were stored. Yam is stored in barns even though the underground storage technology has been found to be economically superior and efficient (Ezeike and Okorji 2000). This technology has not been extended to farmers in the state. Rice that is not immediately milled is stored and milled as the need arises. Storage of paddy rice is sometimes extended co the next farming season when it is sold to pay for labor and other farm commitments. Some of the storage is targeted towards taking advantage ofhigher prices during the off-season periods. Itinerant traders buy up and store paddy or milled rice during the harvest season. when prices are lowest, and sell during the off-season. Industrial and domestic utilization of end products Industrial utilization of the identified crops was limited. However. an industrial maize flour-processing factory (Mitchelson Nigeria Ltd., Umuegwu. Afugiri, PO Box 270. Umuahia), exists within the state. The factory produces Vitalin pure maize meal chat has very low patronage in terms of sales. A visit to the factory to ascertain whether the processing line could be adapted to rice or yam flour processing was inconclusive as the managing direcrorwas away. However, it was confirmed that substantial modifications have to be made before the company can handle the processing of rice and yam. thereby taking advantage of their high production volume in the state. Similarly, farmers may have to produce specific rice or yam varieties that will give the required Rour quality and consistency.

Value added activities and availability of postharvest technologies Cassava has seemingly limitless applications and has been appropriately christened the "wonder crop." In modified and unmodified starch forms, cassava has a wide range of applications. Some cassava producing countries have perfected the use of cassava derivatives as men tioned below. â&#x20AC;˘ Products eaten directly as in cooked food, starch. custard, gllri,fofo. cassavita, tapioca. etc.

• • • •

Thickeners as in soups, baby foods, sauces, gravies. etc. Fillers as in soups, pills, etc. Binders to consolidate the product mass and prevent it from drying out during cooking, as in sausages and pressed meat. Stabilizers to utilize the high water-holding capacity characteristic of starch, as III Ice cream.

As indicated above, cassava plays a prominent role in the food industry. The major advantages are its unique properties and lower cost compared to other competing starch-based crops. lts industrial utilization has become prominent in the following specialized groupings: • Bakery, as a constituent in composite flour in bread, biscuit, cakes, noodles, etc. • Confectioneries in the manufacturing of candy, jelly beans, toffees, hard and soft gums, etc. • Canned fruits and jams, where the partial replacemenr of sucrose by dextrose is achieved. This helps to maintain the desired percentage of solids in the product without excessive sweetness. • Monosodium glutamate (MSG), used in powder or crystalline form as a flavoring agent in foods such as meats, vegetables, sauces, and gravies, etc. • Commercial caramel as a coloring agent for foods, confectionery, liquor, etc. Cassava is also utilized as an industrial raw material in the nonfood subsector and processed into the following products: • Starch • Chips • Adhesives, remoisturizing gums, etc. • Dextrin-soluble gummy polysaccharides used in the manufacturing of paper, textiles, etc. • Particle boards, made from cassava stems • Dried yeast • Animal feeds, utilizing cassava roots, leaves, stems, as feed constituents • Ethanol • Pharmaceuticals, in the production of pills, tablets, ~rups, etc. Yam processing is, however, limited to the production of elubo, yam chips and flakes, and pounded yam flour. Some research institutes are currently conducting studies on yam utilization and it is hoped that a lot of interesting products will be identified. Many products of rice have been identified. They include flour, crisps, flakes, puffed rice, rice pudding, laundry starch, cosmetics, rice wine, beer, and spirits. The processes of achieving high quality products are available and could be sourced locally and from international research institutes. Processing of plantain and banana has been researched and many products have been identified. These include plantain and cooking banana Rours, plantain and cooking banana chips, plantain/banana flakes, banana wine. and banana flavoring.

Table 7. Available processing technologies by crop in Nigeria.

Cassava 路Grating machine Rasping machine "Dewatering presses Chipping machine Fiber sifter "Tray fryer Chipping/grating/slicing machine Mechanical dryer Reversible flow dryer "Hammer mill Combination mill Sedimentation tanks *Drying platform Raised drying plarform

Yarn Dicing machine Parboiler Dryer Hammer mill Rice "Parboiler Dryer *Huller Desroner Precleaner Plantain and banana Chipping machine Slicing machine Dryer Deep fryer

*Available processing technologies in urban and rural areas of Ahia State.

While some of these producrs could be produced at the farm-gate level through valueadded processing, most of them can be adapted to cottage and industrial level processing. Analysis indicates that most of the value-added processing enterprises at the farm-gate and cottage industry levels are viable. The list of processing technologies is presented in Table 7 above for the selected crops in Abia State but at the time of report, only about 30% of the listed processing machines are available. The resr are yer to be exrended to fabricators and proceS5ors. There is, therefore. a potential market for equipment fabrication. This will also add to employment generation and income. Mosr of the identified products of the target crops are in dry form. The packaging requirements are simple and do not require complicated technology. These packaging technologies exist and could be acquired when needed Farm-gate storage structures designed to score the products of the identified crops are available. Well-dried products can be stored in simple stores or warehouses for shorr periods before markering. Rice, especially in paddy form, can be stored in scorage bins developed by Crop Storage Unit (CSU) ranging from 175 kg oil drums to 10 r capacity bin srructures. The aggregation of processed products is necessary to achieve bulking into volumes that would be amactive to industrial end-users. It is therefore desirable that collection centers are established. The farm-gate and cottage level processors should be encouraged (0 aggregate rheir production in the product-specific collection centers. Communities can develop their communiry storage structures as rhe rotal cost ouday can be borne more easily by groups.

Table 8. Wholesale and retail market prices for industrially processed products in Abia State.

Product

Unit

Poundo yam Vita rice Bils instant plantain flour GET plantain flour Vitalina pure maize meal Diatec soymeal

2kg 2kg 1kg 800 g 10 kg 1kg

Retail price (N) 400 400 400 430

550 300

Wholesale price (N) 300 300 300 300 500 200

Market opportunities for processed products A visit to the urban markets revealed thar there is a preference for rice, yam, and plantain flours. These products exist in properly packaged forms in urban markets but are produced outside the state. For instance, Vita Rice flour is manufactured by Pokobros Foods and Chemical Industries ltd. located at Plot PI Harbor Industrial Layout, off Atani Road, PO Box lO,OOOI, Onitsha, Nigeria. Endy's Poundo yam flour is produced by U-Best Rour mills (A Division ofU-Best Industries Ltd.) 83 Isolo Road Mushin, Lagos, Nigeria. This company also ex:ports its products through its distributors in Italy (Emelson African Market, Rome Italy) and USA (Emerald Inc. 8044 Euclid Avenue Kansas City, Missouri, 64132- USA). Two brand names of plantain flour were found in the market. Bil's instant plantain flour is manufactured by Bejide Industries Ltd. 2/6 Oni-Bejide Street, off Murphy Akins Avenue, Hercules Bus-stop after Toyin Bus-stop, Iju Ishaga, Agege, Lagos. This facrory also manufactures ground rice, pounded yarn Bour,fofo flour, bean flour and dietetic products. GET Hygienic products, Plot 216, TransAmadi Industrial Layout, PO Box 11858, Port Harcourt. manufactures GET plantain ÂŁlour also GET corn flour, GET bean flour, GET yam flour, and GET rice meal. Will mark (La Cuisson) Nigeria Ltd., located at 21-23 Paul Avenue Yokoyo, Ojodu-Ikeja Lagos, PO Box 74956, Victoria. Island, Lagos, manufactures Diatec soymeal. Cotrage level milling (using grinders) of rice into flour exists but the product is of very poor quality. Ie should be observed that Umuahia has a retail market for these products. The major wholesale (distributors) market for the above-mentioned products is located at Market Rd., Aba, Abia State. Retail prices and unit weights for these sampled commodities are presented in Table 8 above. The existence of properly processed and well-packaged products in the urban markets indicates that there are opportunities for yam, rice, plantain, and cassava flours in the domestic market. However, the prices may be prohibitive for the low-income class. For instance, the price of packaged Pouncio yam is N200/kg while 1 kg of fresh yam tuber that might be considered a substitute is N60. Similarly. packaged Vita rice flour is sold for N200fkg while milled rice is N52/kg. The local rice flour also found in the urban market is N 1OO/kg. The price margins between industrially packaged flours anci fresh, semiprocessed (e.g., milled rice) or locally processed food products are too wide. It was observed that the 14

hotels and restaurants patronize the industrially processed food products. This is where the market exists. Patronage of such food products by the local citizenry may require a change in their food habits and tastes/preferences. But it is envisaged that as (he people become urbanized and the ciries more cosmopolitan, there is likely to be a shift towards quick and easy-co-cook foods. Manufacturers located at Onitsha. Lagos, and Port Harcourt produced the processed Hours found in Abia State. One factory in Umuahia processes maize Hour that has a low demand. We could not find out whether management could switch to rice or yam Hour for which it has a comparative advantage. Where a proper arrangement exists between. for example, rice or yam farmers and the manufacturers in the state, the industrial market for the identified products can be fulJy exploited by farmers. The industrial market for ethanol and starch (from cassava) has remained largely untapped. In the case of export. a major market exists for industrially processed foods in the ECOWAS region. Presently gan is exported (smuggled) across the border to Benin Republic. Togo, and Cameroon. It was. however. not possible to ascertain the source of the gari. There has also been an increase in the export of cassava chips from the country.

Production cost and profitability of major crops The production costs and profitability of major crops and their processed products in the State are presented in Tables 9 to 23. based on annual cost and returns. All estimates on depreciation on machinery, tools. and implements are based on the straight-line method. Yam and yam products

The cost and returns from one hectare of yam enterprise are shown in Table 9. Revenue realized from an output of 12 t, given an average price ofN60.00/kg. amounts to N720 000.00. The variable costs account for about 85% of toral cost with the cost of yam sects accounting for about 59%. The most expensive activities are labor for harvesting (20.52%) and weeding (16.73. Fixed costs account for 15.34% total costs, indicating the rdative low level of technology adopted in production of the enterprise.The gross margin/ha was N402 000 while net return/ha was N363, 116. A benefit-cost ratio of2.02: 1 was realized. These indicate that yam enterprise production is highly profitable. Much higher values would be achieved if yield/ha were increased through the mass adoption of the yam minisett technological package in which yield rates as high as 24 t/ha have been achieved. Yam flour: Yam tubers can be processed into Rour. The cost and returns involved are shown in Table 10. About 4.8 t of Rour is realizable from 12 t of tubers. The revenue, given the unit price of N270/kg of flour amounts to N 1 296 000. The most important variable cose: item is yam tubers, which account for about 83.3% of total cost, while fixed costs account for about 15.3%. A net return ofN431 620 would be achieved by processing 12 t of yam tubers into Hour. A benefit-cost ratio of 1.5:1 is attainable under the level of technology used. Although this figure is lower for yam enterprise production (2.02:1) the net relUrn from yam Hour enterprise is higher than that for yam, indicating that some value is added in processing of tubers into Rour. Both enterprises are highly pro'fitable. 15

Table 9. Cost-retums analysis (profitability) for yam enterprise (ha). 2001.

Output

Unit price (N)

Unit

Value (N)

Percentage

Revenue

Yam Variable costs Yam sects Labor: Land clearing Land preparation Planting First weeding Second weeding Staking Harvesting Stakes Tocal variable cost

12,000

3,500

60.00

Fixed cost Depreciation of farm tools and implements Land rent Opportunity cost of capital (10%) Total fixed cost Total cost Gross margin Net returns Benefit-cost ratio

720,000.00 210,000.00 15,000.00 25,000.00 5,000.00 20,000.00 15,000.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 8,000.00 318,000.00

58.84 4.20 7.00 lAO 5.60 4.20 2.80 2.80 2.24 89.10

2,440.00 400.00 32,444.00 35,280.00

0.69 1.12 9.09 10.90

356,884.00 402,000.00 363,116.00 2.02:1

100.00

Break-even facror 3201.4 kg of yam Hour

Cassava and cassava products

The cost and returns analysis for cassava enterprise products indicates that a net revenue of N26 350/ha was realized while the gross margin was N40 100 (Table 11). Labor is the most important costly item in cassava production especially for harvesting (20.52%), while cassava stems rank second, accounting for 20.07% of the total cost of production. Much higher returns can be obtained with such improved higher yielding cassava varieties as NR 8082 and NR 8083 with recorded yield rates of about 28 tJha or more. Cassava enterprise has a bene6t-<ost ratio of 1.29: I, which also indicates that the enterprise is profitable.

Gari: Cassava tubers are processed into various products including gllri, cassava ÂŁlour, chips, and mash, all of which add value to cassava tubers. Table 12 shows the profitability of gari production in the study area. About 3.24 t of gar; valued at N162 000 is realized from processing of 12 t of cassava tubers. The values of gross margin (N57200) and net return (N30 880) are higher for gari than cassava, indicating (hat 16

value is added in processing tubers into gari. The most important variable input in the enterprise is the cassava tubers, which account for about 13.12% of the total cost. Fixed costs for gar; production at the farm-gate level are relatively low. Gari production is a dominant value-added activity in Abia State. The cost and returns for gar; production at the cottage level are shown in Table 13. Production at this level is fairly capital-intensive as shown by the relatively high fixed costs. A greater volume of output is also required to break even. This notwithstanding, the enterprise is profitable and ensures the production of adequate quantities ofgari to meet the rising demand for domestic consumption, industrial uses, and export. Table 10. Cost-returns analysis for yam flour production.

Output Revenue Yam Variable costs Yam tubers Packing/washing Chipping Drying Milling Transportation Packaging Fuel, water, etc. Total variable cost

4,800

Unit

Unit price (N)

Value (N)

270

1,296,000

12,000

Percentage

720,000 2,000 2,000 1,000 2,400 2,000 1,200 1,200 731,000

83.30 0.23 0.23 0.12

Fixed cost Processing shed Prime mover slicing/chipping machine Mechanical dryer Hammer mill Sealing machine Consultation cost Opportunity cost of capital Total fixed cost

6,000 12,000 18,000 4,000 4,000 10,000 78,580 132,580

0.69 1.39 2.08 0.46 0.46 1.16 9.09 15.34

Total cost Gross margin Net returns Benefit-a>st ratio

864,380 564,200 431,620 1.50:1

100

60.0

Break-even faclor3201.4 kg of yam flour.

0.23 0.14 0.14 84.66

Table 11. Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for cassava enteprise (ha), 2001.

Output Revenue Cassava Cassava stems

Unit

12,000

200

Bundle

Unit price (N)

8.00 100.00 Total revenue

Value (N)

Percentage

96.000.00 20,000.00 116,000.00

Variable costs Cassava stems Land clearing Land preparation Planting Weeding Fertilizer application Harvesting Fertilizer Total variable cost

18,000.00 5,000.00 8,000.00 2,000.00 15,000.00 3,000.00 18,400.00 6,000.00 75,900.00

Fixed cost Depreciation of farm tools and implements Land rent Opportunity cost of capital (I 0%) Total fixed cost Total cost

1,600.00 4,000 .00 8,150.00 13,750.00 89,650.00

Gross margin Net returns Benefit-cost ratio

40,100.00 26,350.00 1.29: 1

20.07 5.57 8.92 2.79 16.73 3.35 20.52 6.69 84.66 1.78 9.09

4.49 15.34 100

Cassavita: Further value can still be added to gan by milling gari granules into fine Rour known as cassavita. The cost and returns analysis for cassavita production is shown in Table 14. The net return realized from processing 3.24 t of cassavita was N96 300 and the benefit--cost ratio was 2.74: 1. These values are comparatively higher than those for a gar; enterprise. The enterprise is fairly capital-intensive, and calls for financial support. The processing technology for cassavita exists at the Agroindusrrial Development Unit of the Federal Department of Agriculture. There is need to disseminate this technology in the study area. Cassava Hour: Table 15 presents the costs and returns for unfermented cassava flour enterprise in Abia State. About 5.4 t of cassava flour are produced from 12 t of tubers. This amounts to N216 000. Cassava tubers account for about 50% of total cost while fixed cost accounts for about 45%. Net return is only N25, 810 while BCR is 1.14: 1. Profitability is relatively low when compared with gan and cassavita enterprises.

Table 12. Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for gar; production (from cassava tubers).

Output

Unit

Unit price (N)

Value (N)

3240

50.00

162,000.00

8.00

96,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 1,200.00 600.00 104,800.00

13.21 1.53 0.76 1.53 1.53 0.92 0.46 79.93

6,000.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 400.00 11 ,920.00

4.58 3.05 3.05 0.30 9.09

26,320.00 131 ,120.00 57,200.00 30,880.00 1.24:1

20.07 100

Percentage

Revenue

Gari

Variable costs Cassava tubers 12,000 Peeling/washing Grating Pressing Frying Fuel, etc. Dewatering and packaging bags Total variable cost Fixed cost Depreciation of processing shed Presser Fryer Containers and knives Opportunity cost per capital (10%) Total fixed cost Total cost Gross margin (TR-TVC) Net returns (TR-TC) Benefit-cost ratio Break-even factor: 2622.4 kg of gan.

Cassava flour production at the farm-gate level is minimal as other cassava products are preferred in the study area. At the cottage level, an output level of 4.755 t of flour or 10.566 t of tubers is required by this enterprise to break even. Cassava chips: This product is not very popular in the state, although there is some production at the farm-gate level. The costs and returns involved in chips production at the cottage level is shown in Table 16. About 7.2 t of chips will be produced from 12 t of tubers. When valued at the unit price ofN20/kg, this amounts to N144 000. The variable cost accounts for about 47.3% with tubers alone contributing 44.8%, while the fixed costs account for about 52.7%. Hence production of this enterprise is capital-intensive. The enterprise based on net-rerum value of -N70, 280.00 is not profitable, at least for the level of production undertaken. Break-even analysis shows that at least about 10.714 t of chips (17.857 t of cassava) were to be produced to break even. 19

Table 13. Cost-returns analysis for

Output

gar; production (cottage level), 2001. Value (N)

Unit

Unit price (N)

50.00

162,000.00

8.00

96,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 600.00 600.00 400.00

60.00 1.26 0.63 0.63 0.63 1.26 0.38 0.38 0.25

104,600.00

66.03

6,000.00 6,000.00 4,000.00 3,500.00 4,000.00 400.00 15,500.00 14,400.00 53 ,800.00

3.79 3.79 2.53 2.21 2.25 0.25 9.47 9.09 33.97

158,400.00 57,400.00 3,600.00 L.02:1

100.00

Percentage

Revenue 3.240 Variable costs Cassava tubers 12.000 Peeling and washing Gracing Pressing Sieving Frying Dewatering and packaging bags Fuel, water, etc. Maintenance of processing machine Total variable Fixed cost Depreciation of processing shed Prime mover Grater Mechanical sifter Press Containers, peeling knives. etc. Installation costs Opportunity costs (l0%) Total fixed costs Total cost Gross margin Net returns Benefit-cost ratio Break路even faclOr: 3, 168 kg ofgari.

Dry cassava mash: This enterprise is not produced at the farm-gate level but it has potential for industrial uses. The costs and returns analysis for the production of dry cassava mash is shown in Table 17. An output of 4.2 t of dry cassava mash valued at N231 000 is realizable from 12 t of tubers. Cassava tubers constitute the main variable cost item, accounting for about 48% of total cost, while fixed costs account for about 46. 1%. The net returns realizable from the en terprise are N31 240. while the benefit-cost ratio is 1.16:1. The enterprise is profitable. About 3.632 t of dry cassava mash has to be produced to break even. Starch: This is an important cassava product with a fairly high demand in the industrial sector. Its production at the farm-gate level is. however, minimal. The costs and returns analysis for starch production at the cottage level is shown in Table 18. About N244 800

Table 14. Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for cassavita production (from gan).

2001. Unit price (N)

Output

Unit

3,240

100.00

324,000.00

8.00

96,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 1,200.00 600.00 4,800.00 109,600.00

42.16 0.88 0.44 0.88 0.88 0.53 0.26 2.11 48.13

30,000.00 12,000.00 4000.00 7000.00 4000.00 4000.00 400.00 12000.00 4000.00 20,000.00 20,700.00

13.17 5.27 1.76 3.07 1.76 1.76 0.18 5.27 l.76 8.78 9.09

Total fixed cost

118,100.00

51.87

Total cost Gross margin (TR-TVC) Net returns (TR-TC) Benefit-<:ost ratio

227,700.00 214,400.00 96300.00 2.74:1

100.00

Revenue Garivita

Variable costs Cassava tubers 12,000 Peeling/washing Grating Pressing Frying Fuel, etc. Dewatering and packaging bags Milling Total variable cost Fixed cost Depreciation of processing shed Prime mover Grinder Mechanical sifter Press Tray fryer Containers and peeling knives Mill Electric sealing machine Installation cost Opportunity COSt per capital (I 0%)

Value (N)

Percentage

Break-even faeror: 1181 kg of =avira or 4374 kg of cassava tubers.

will be realized from an output of 2.04 t of starch. Cassava tubers are the major variable input, accounting for about 40.3% of total cost. The fixed inputs account for about 56.6%, indicating that the enterprise is fairly capital-intensive. The net revenue realizable is only N6760 and the benefit-<:ost ratio is 1.03:1 at the level of production undertaken. The break-even Output level is 1.984 t. Higher net returns will be realized if the .producrion level is significantly increased. 21

Table 15. Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for cassava flour (unfermented). production. 2001.

Revenue Cassava Variable costs Cassava tubers Peding/washing Grating Pressing Frying Sieving Milling Total variable cost

Unit

Unit price (N)

Value (N)

5,400

40.00

216,000.00

12,000

8.00

96,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 800.00 800.00 2.400.00 105,600.00

50.48 1.05 0.53 1.05 0.42 0.42 1.26 55.21

6,000.00 12.000.00 4,000.00 3,500.00 3,000.00 400.00 15,000.00 20,000.00 17,290.00

3.15 6.31 2.lO 1.84 1.58 0.21 7.89 10.52 9.09

85,190.00

44.79

190.190.00 111,000.00 25.810.00 1.14: 1

100.00

Fixed cost Depreciation of processing shed Prime mover Grater Press Clog beaker Drying slab Containers and peeling knives Combination mill Installation cost Opportunity cost per capital (lO%) Total hxed cost Total cost Gross margin (TR-TVC) Net returns (TR- TC) Benefit-cost ratio Break~\'~n

Percentage

Output

factor = 4754.8 kg of flour or 10566.2 kg of tubers.

Rice and rice products The costs and returns analysis for the production of one ha of rice enterprise is shown in Table 19 where N 100 000 is realized from an output of 5.0 t of rice paddy. Fertilizer input accounted for about 7% of total cost, indicating that the resource input was not adequately applied. Labor costs accounted for over 70% of total cost. implying that the enterprise is labor-intensive. The gross margin/ha is N47 500 while the net return/ha is N37 365. The benefit-cost ratio is 1.60: 1. These figures indicate that a rice enterprise is profitable in the study area .,~

........

Table 16. Cost-returns analysis (profitability) for cassava chips production, 2001.

Revenue Cassava chips Variable costs Cassava tuber Peeling/washing Chipping Drying Packing bags Fuel, water, etc. Total variable cost

Output

Unil

Unil price (N)

7,200

20.00

~44,000.00

12,000

8.00

96,000.00 2,000.00 800.00 800.00 600.00 1,200.00 101,400.00

44.80 0.93 0.37 0.37 0.28 0.56 47.32

30,000.00 10,000.00 12,000.00 3,000.00 18,000.00 400.00 20,000.00 19,480.00 112,880.00 214,280.00 42,600.00 -70,280.00 0.67:1

14.00 4.67 5.60 1.40 8.40 0.19 9.33 9.09 52.68 100.00

Fixed cost Depreciation of processing shed Motorized chipping machine Electric motor Drying plant Mechanical dryer Containers, peeling knives, erc. Installation cost Opportunity cost per capital (10%) Total fixed cost Total cost Gross margin (TR-TVC) Net returns (TR-TC) Benefit-cost ratio

Value (N)

Percentage

Break-even nctor: 10714 kg of chips = 17856.7 kg of tubers.

Milled Rice: Paddy rice is processed into milled rice in the study area. Table 20 shows the costs and returns of paddy rice processing into milled rice at farm-gate level. Paddy rice accounts for about 71 % of the tOlal cost of production, while the fixed costs account for about 10.8%. Rice processing al this level is not very capital-intensive. The revenue from 4.25 t of milled rice is N221 000. The net return is N80 200 while the benefit-cost ratio is 1.57:1. The enterprise is profitable. Net return is higher under milled rice than paddy rice enterprise, indicating that some value is added through the processing activity. At the farm-gate level, an output of about 2.708 t of milled rice is required to break even. At the cottage level, however, the fixed costs account for about 42.4% of total cost of production and rhe net return is only N500.00 for the ompudevd considered, i.e., 4.25 r of milled rice (Table 21).

Table 17. Cost-f'etums analysis for dry cassava mash production (cottage level),

2001.

Unit price (N)

Value (N)

Output

Unit

4,200

55.00

231,000.00

8.00

96,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 600.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 107,600.00

48.06 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 1.00

Fixed cost Depreciation of processing shed Prime mover slicing Grater Press Drying slab Conrainers, peeling knives, etc. Insrallation cost Opportunity cost of capital (10%) Total fixed cost Total cost

30,000.00 12,000.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 3,000.00 1,000.00 20,000.00 18,160.00 92,160.00 199,760.00

15.02 6.00 2.00 2.00 1.50 0.50 10.01 3.63

Gross margin (TR-TVC) Net returns (TR-TC) Benefit-cost ratio

123,400.00 31,240.00 1.08:1

Percentage

Revenue Variable costs Cassava tubers 12,000 Packing/washing Grating Pressing Packing bags Maintenance of processing machine Drying Transportation Total variable cost

Break-even facror: 3632.0 kg of dry

C3SSaV2

100.00

mash.

The benefit-cost ratio is almost unity at this output level. A higher return will be realized if the level of production is significantly increased. Moreover, the rising demand for rice produces for domestic and industrial uses calls for increased production of the enterprise. Plantain and plantain products

The costs and returns analysis for one hecrare of plantain enterprise is shown in Table 22. About N270 000 is realized from an output of21.6 t of plantain. Plantain suckers are the most important variable cost item, accounting for about 44% of total COSt followed by 22% for the cost of land preparation.

Table 18. Cosl-retums analysis for starch production (cottage level), 2001.

Unit price (N)

Output

Unit

Value (N)

2,040 Variable cost 12,000 Cassava tubers Peeling and washing Disintegration of tubers Starch mill extraction Dewatering Packing bags Drying Fuel, water. etc. Milling Total variable cost

120.00

244,800

8.00

96.000 2.000 800 800 400 600 800 1,200 800 103,400

40.33 0.84 0.34 0.34 0.17 0.25 0.34 0.08 0.34 43.44

30,000 12,000 10,000 12,000 2,000 4,000 3,000 20,000 20,000 21,640 134,640 238,040 141,400 6,240 1.03:1

12.60 5.04 4.20 5.04 0.84

Percentage

Revenue

Fixed cost Depreciation of processing shed Prime mover Rasper Starch mill extraccor Sedimentation tanks Dewatering press Collapsible sun-drying platforms Mechanical dryer Instructor cost Opportunity cost of capital (10%) Total fixed cost Total cost Gross margin (TR-TVC) Net returns (TR-TC) Benefit-cost ratio

1.68

1.26 8.40 8.40 9.09 56.56 100.00

Break-even factor = 1,984 kg of starch or 11,670.6 kg of tubers.

Gross margin/ha of plantain enterprise was N180 000 while the net return was N163 916. The benefit-cosr ratio was 2.5S:1.These figures indicate that plantain enterprise production is highly profitable. Plantain flour: There is little or no plantain flour production at the farm-gate level in the study area. The costs and returns analysis for plantain flour production at the cottage level is shown in Table 23. About N972 000 is realizable from 6.48 t of plantain flour. Fresh plantain accounts for about 74% of total cost of production.

Table 19. Cost-returns analysis for (profitability) for rice enterprise (ha,. 2001.

Output

Unit

Unit price (N)

Value (N)

20.00

100,000.00

40.00 20.00

2,000.00 4,500.00 12,000.00 3,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 8,000.00 5,000.00 8,000.00 52,500.00

Percentage

Revenue Rice

5,000

Variable costs

N 50 kg Fertilizer 150 kg Labor: Clearing, packing and tilling Nursery preparation Transplanting Fertilizer application Weeding Bird scaring Harvesting Total variable cost Rice seeds

Fixed cost Depreciation of farm tools and implements Land rent Opportunity cost of capital (I 0%) Total fixed cost

440.00 4,000.00 5,694.00 10.134 62,634.00 47,500.00 37,366.00 1.60:1

Total cost Gross margin Netrerurns Benefit-<ost ratio

3.19 7.18 19.16 4.79 7.98 7.98 12.77 7.98 12.77 83.82 0.70 6.39 9.09 16.18 100.00

The fixed inputs account for about 24% of total cost, indicating that the enterprise is not very capital-intensive and hence can be afforded by many farmers or groups of farmers. The net return from the enterprise is N608 780 and the benefit-cost ratio is 2.68: 1. These indicate that plantain flour is a very profitable enterprise, with a significant amount of added value. A summary sheet showing the profitabiliry of all the enterprises enumerated above is presented in Table 24 below.

Investments outlay in agroprocessing ventures In addition to the production cost and profitability analysis already presented, an agroindustrial investment analysis based on the improved and efficient processing technologies was carried out for farm-gate and cottage level processing enterprises.

Table 20. Cost-retums analysis (profitability) for paddy rice processing (milled rice, farm-gate level), 2001.

Output Revenue Milled rice

4,250

Unit price (N)

Unit

52.00

Value (N)

Percentage

221,000.00

Variable costs Packaging, drying, and bagging Wood and water Milling (70 x 150) Rice seeds, (5000 )( 20) paddy

10,000.00 5,000.00 10,570.00 100,000.00

7.50 71.02

Toral variable cost

125,570.00

89.18

Fixed cost Depreciation of farm tools and implements Opportunity cost of capital (l0%) Total fixed cost Total cost Gross margin Net returns Benefit-cost ratio

2,430.00 12,800.00 15,230.00 140,800.00 95,430.00 80,200.00 1.57:1

7.10

355

1.73 9.09 10.82 100.00

Break-even fucror: 2707.7 kg of milled rice.

The summaries of the analysis are presented in Table 25 for farm-gate analysis and Table 26 for the cottage industries. For further details, see annex III. At the farm-gate level, production of odorless fofo, plantain/banana flour, and plantain flakes was found to be very profitable. Production of cassava mash and milled rice was found to be profitable, while production of chips, starch, chips, unfermented cassava flour, and gari was found to be unprofitable. At the cottage industry level, investment in the production of cassava mash, cassavita, and pounded yam flour was found to be profitable while that of starch was marginally profitable. Investment in the production of cassava chips, unfermented flour, and gari was however, found to be unprofitable. Plantain flour production at the cottage level was considered to be very profitable. The apparent lack of profit in some cassava products could be attributed to the low prices offered by local industrial end-users and the international market. These tables are important in order to indicate the level of capital outlay that may be required for the purchase. installation, and maintenance of the machinery. The initial capital can be sourced from Banks such as the National Agricultural Cooperative and Rural Development Bank and insurance cover provided by the National Agricultural Insurance Company. These institutions exist in the study area. 2.7

Table 21. Cost-returns analysis for rice processing (milled rice; cottage level), 2001.

Output

Unit

Unit price (N)

Value (N)

4.250

52.00

221.000

20.00

10.000 7.000 10.000 3,000 1.500 2.500 1,500 1,000 127,000

45 .35 3.17 4.76 1.36 0.68 1.13 0.68 0.45 57.60

20,000 12,000 2,000 6,000 1,000 12,000 10,000 1,000 20,000 1,000 8,500 93,500 220,500 94,000 500 1.00:1

9.07 5.44 0.91 2.72 0.45 5.44 4.54 0.45 9.07 0.45 3.85 42.40 100.00

Percentage

Revenue Variable costs (500) Rice paddy Parboiling. drying Milling Destoning Bagging Transportation Fuel, water, etc. Maintenance of machine Total variable cost

Fixed cost Processing shade Prime mover Parboiler, oil-driven Drying slab Tarpaulin

Mill Destoner Bagging machine Installation cost Soaking vats Opportunity cost of capital Total fixed cost Total cost Gross margin Net returns Benefit-<.:ost ratio Break-even facror: 4240.4 kg of milled rice

The linkage between potential investors (processors) and financial institutions is the weakest point in the chain within the agricultural sector. While the initial capital for investment in agroprocessing machinery is large relative to the rural investor's resource base, a strong linkage structure has to be developed to enable the processors avail themselves of the loan services that are available in the banks.

Table 22. Cost-returns analysis for plantain enterprise production (ha). 2001.

Oucput

Unit

Unit price (N)

21,600

12.50

Variable costs Land clearing Land preparation and burning Planting Fertilizer (4 bags) Weeding Harvesting Suckers Total variable cost Fixed cost Reposition: for farm implements Land rent Opportunity cost of capital (10%) Total fixed cost Total cost Gross margin (T R-TVC) Net returns (TR-TC) Benefit-cost ratio

Value (N)

Percentage

270,000 10,000 20,000 2,000 6,000 2,000 8,000 2,000 40,000 90,000

9.43 18.85 1.88 5.66 1.88 7.54 1.88 37.71 84.84

2,440 4,000 9,644 16,084

2.30 3.77 9.09 15.16

106,084 180,000 163,916 2.55:1

100.00

While existing processing technologies are usually operated on a service charge basis, investor attitudes need to be refocused towards a market-oriented behavior by encouraging product processing and marketing of agricultural produce in the State at the cottage level. This can be done through organizing and training the various farmers' groups, cooperatives, and women's groups that abound in the study area.

Table 23. Cost-returns analysis for plantain flour production (cottage level), 2001.

Output

Unit

Unit price (N)

Value (N)

6,480

150.00

972,000

21,600

12.5

270,000 1,500 600 600 400 2,000 600 500 276,200

74.33 0.41 0.17 0.]7 0.11 0.55 0.]7 0.]4 76.04

6,000 12,000 18,000 4,000 4,000 10,000 32,020 87,020 363,220 695 ,800 608,780 2.68 :1

l.65 3.30 4.96 1.10 1.10 3.09 9.09 23.96 100.00

Percentage

Revenue Variable costs Fresh plantain Peeling Chipping Drying Milling Transportation Packaging Fuel, water, etc. Total variable cost

Fixed cost Processing shade Prime mover slicing/dipping machine Dryer (mechanical) Hammer mill Scaling machine Installation cost Opportunity cost of capital (10%) Total fixed cost Total cost Gross margin (TR-1VC) Net returns (TR-TC) Benefit-cost ratio Break-even factor. 2421 .5 kg of plantain Hour.

Table 24. Summary sheet for profitability of enterprises.

Scale of 路IVC

TFC

720.000

318.000

38.884

356.884

402.00

4.8 t 1.296.000 I ha 116.000 12.0 [ 3.240 t 162.000 162,000 3.24 t

731.000 75.900

132.580 13.750

864.380 89.650

564.200 40.100

104,800 104.600

26.320 53.800

131,120 158.400

57.200 57.400

3.24 [

324,000

109,600

118,100

227,700

214,400

5.4 t

216,000

105.000

85.190

190,190

11,000

7.2 [

144,000

101 ,400

112.880

214,280

42.600

4.2 [

231,000

107,600

92,160

199.760

123,400

2.04 I 4.25 t 4.25 I I ha

244,800 100.000 221 ,000 221.000 270.000

103,400 52,500 125,570 127.000 90,000

134.640 10.134 15,230 93.500 16.084

238.040 62.634 140,800 220.500 106.084

141,400 47.500 95,430 94.000 180,000

6.48t

972.000

276,200

87,020

363,220

695,800

SINo. Crop

Enrerprise

operatiun

Unit

Yam Yam Hour

farm-gate

I ha

Yam

Farm-gate cottage

Cassava

Farm-gate

Gari

Farm-gate Cottage Farm路gate Cottage Farm-gate

Cassavita Cassava Hour

Cunage

Cassava chips

Dry cassava mash Search 3.

Rice

Plantain

Rice Milled rice Plantain Plantain Rour

Farm-gate Cottage Farm-gate Cottage Farm-gate

Conage Fatm-gate Farm-gate Conog< Farm-gate

I h.

Farm-gate

Cottage

Tabla 25. Summary table of Investment outlay for farm..gate processing.

SINo. Product

Vol I~

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. B. 9.

Chips Starch Odorless fofo Unformentcd cassava flour Dry mash Milled rice Plantain/cooking banana /lour Plantain /lakes Can

RAw material

Capacity (t/day)

Fixed cost (N)

Variable cost Net return Benefit-cost (N) (N) ratio R

Cassava Cassava Cassava

0.3 0.3 0.3

66,000.00 60,000.00 54,000.00

6,200.00 6,200.00 6,500.00

-3866 -260 9446

0.38:1 0.96:1 2.44:1

No No Hi

Cassava Cassava Paddy rice Plantain/cooking hanana Plantain Cassava

0.3 0.3 0.2

51 ,000.00 5\,000.00 46,000.00

6,300.00 6,100.00 7,600.00

-1951 449 1\94

0.69:1 1.07:1 1.16:1

No M Pr

0.2 0.2 0.5

58,000.00 54,000.00 55,300.00

3,500.00 3,600.00 7.B50.00

6942 10346 - 1905.3

2.95:1 3.83:1 0.76:1

Hi Hi N

Tlble 26. Summary table of Invesbnent outlay for cottage Industry level.

SINo. Product

......

I. 2. 3.

5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Raw material

Chips Starch Mash Unfermented Aour Cassavita Rice Gllri

Pounded y.un flour Plamain flour

Cassava Cassava Cassava Cassava Cassava Paddy rice Cassava

Yam Plantain

Capacity (tlday) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.5 2.5 2.0 0.5 1.0

Fixed cost (N) 459,000.00 665,000.00 320,000.00 441,000.00 146,000.00 1,005,000.00 325.000.00 628,000.00 320,000.00

Variable COSt

Ner return

(N)

ratio

Rem

-19,522.22 6,627.45 14,876.19 9,559.26 14,861.11 294.12 35,432.10 44,960.42 93.947.53

0.67:1 1.03: 1 1.16:1 1.14:1 1.42:1 1.00:1 1.02:1 1.50:1 2.68:1

Not p Marg Profit Profit Profit Break Marg Profit Highl

37,600.00 36,100.00 37,200.00 40.500.00 30,800.00 62,600.00 38.400.00 35,100.00 17.400.00

Benefir-<:ost

3 Factors influencing the effective implementation of market-driven agricultural technology transfer and commercialization in Abia State Technology of production Presently, there exists within the state agricultural sector a strong Research-ExtensionFarmer-Input-Linkage System (REFILS) with a strong bias towards the development and dissemination of improved crop varieties. But gaps exist in the production of improved seeds. For instance, seed yam is a major cost item in the yam enterprise. This is because the adoption of minisett technology in the study area is low. Investment in seed yam production has been found to be profitable in the state. Seed production technology transfer in Abia State is very weak, especially for cassava, yam, and rice (Table 5). There is a weak delivery of seeds to the rural areas due in part to the collapse of the ADP farm agro-service centers located in the rural areas. There is also the paucity of funds to support the ADP and the National Seed Service in order to increase the multiplication of seeds through their out-growers and contact farmers. The agro-input company in the state exists as an appendage of the Ministry of Agriculture and is bogged down by bureaucracy. Weeding is another major production consrraint. Farmers limit the use of herbicides because they are usually imported and so expensive. RUSEP project can work best within the ADP structure. The relationship between leadership of rheAbiaADP and the State government is very cordial. The Project Manager to the ADP is very dynamic and has attracted several projects to the study area. These include the Root and Tuber Expansion Program (RTEP) funded by IFAD, Accelerated Dissemination of Improved Agricultural Technology in Nigeria (ADIATN) funded by USAID, and rhe West African Small Grants Program in technology transfer and commercialization, funded by OAU/STRC/SAFGRAD. However, it was observed within the ADP structure char rhe working relationship does not flow between the Projecr staff (who are not pensionable) and Ministry staff (who are pensionable). The Ministry staff who are seconded to the AD P find it difficult to communicate with the Project staff since their own loyalty appears to be to the Ministry and not to the ADP. Similarly, the postharvest unit of the ADP is subsumed under the Engineering Department. The focus of the Department is on civil and mechanical work, and this is at variance with the extension of postharvest technologies. The processing component of the ADP has, therefore, been very weak and this is evident in the low uptake of the improved

processing technologies that are available. Although there is a relatively good farm familyextension agent ratio, it was observed that retired civil servants could be used: as auxiliary extension agents to further improve the farm family-extension agent ratio. The capacity of the fabricators visited during the study to produce agroprocessing machines of high efficiency and durable quality was considered to be average. The fabricators source the prime movers and machine components from the scrap market and the finishing leaves a lot to be desired. The processing machines may not last, since some of the components, especially the bearings and prime movers, are sometimes already worn out. Finally, the ADP staff lack transport mobility and this has greatly reduced their productivity. While the ADP has tried to reduce its extension agent-farm family ratio (from 1:3204 in 2000 to 1: 1490 in 2001) the absence of funds has led to a declining focus in training and the development of human resources.

Postharvest activities at the farm level In general, there is a very weak emphasis on the dissemination of processing technologies within the agricultural sector. Significant losses occur at the farm-gate due to lack of processing and storage facilities. Meanwhile IlTA, AIDU, FIIRO, NCAM, PRODA, and other research and development institutions for agroprocessing machines have developed a range of simple and efficient small-scale processing equipment. Due to the weakness in technological transfer, these processing machines have remained largely with research institutes. The prototypes have not been commercialized, although this could have made them available in large numbers at affordable prices. Furthermore, linkages between farmer groups and credie institutions are poor. Gaps exist in terms of information regarding the availability of affordable processing machines for small-scale processors at the rural level. Fabrication expenise has increased but the replication of amenable technologies is lacking because of the scarcity of some raw materials, especially flat sheets, angles, and channels. Fabricators presently source these materials from the scrap marker. The scrap market is a limited resource. Recourse to the steel industry is nor forthcoming as they presently produce iron and not flat sheets. Even where the required materials exisr, they are quite expensive. Similarly there is an absence of commercialization of machine prototypes! equipment designed at the research centers. Farm-gate processing lacks standards and grading, consequently, high quality products from the major crops are lacking. Specific constraints also exist in processing on a crop-by-crop basis. Cassava: Most of the processing done presently at the farm-gate produces foods that supply the local markets. Very little has been done to encourage the processing of cassava into nonfood products such as cassava chips, ethanol, starch, and flour. There is a high demand for these products as industrial raw materials for the production of ethanol, animal feeds, food, industrial starch, confectionery, etc. For example, in ethanol utilization, the estimated local input is only 5%. The rest is imported. Cassava chips have found to be a veritable: source of raw material for the production of ethanol.

Yam: People generally prefer to consume yam fresh. Yam, however, does not store well and a lot oflosses are recorded in storage. Losses could be reduced through processing yam tubers into flour for pounded yam. The technology for processing yam tubers can be applied at the cottage industry level. The identified in-ground storage, which has been reported to be efficient, should be extended to the farmers to enable them store yam varieties that do well in storage. Plantain and banana: Plantain and banana deteriorate rapidly after ripening and therefore are marketed and consumed fresh with very litrle of the crop being processed into flour. With the increase in the percentage of diabetic patients, the demand for plantain and banana Hour has risen sharply. Consumption by healthy individuals is also on the increase. There is also remarkable activity in the processing of plantain to fried chips. These are very popular with travelers who consume them as snacks. The processing machines required for conversion of plantain and banana to flour are simple and available. Processing is possible both at the farm-gate and cottage levels. Rice: The quality of local rice has been considered to be lower than that of imported rice because of poor parboiling methods and the absence of mechanical dryers and destoners. Improved rice quality starts with the variety planted and the associated cultural practices employed in the production at the field level. It is desirable that varieties suitable for specific end-user requirements are cropped in contiguous areas, which are then aggregated to meet the volume required by the end-users. This will encourage the processing of a single variety within a wide area instead of a mixture of varieties as happens in Abia State presemly. A typical example is the production of rice flour that must be odorless, pure white in color, and of a consistent fine texture that customers want. The State government installed a huge rice-processing (milling) plant in Arochukwu LGA to serve the rice-processing farmers. This machine has never been operated for one day. While government's efforts to provide processing interventions originate from the desire to institute improvements in commercial activities, experience has shown that such enterprises are poorly managed and are either stillborn or collapse after a short period. It is therefore desirable for government to provide the enabling environment for the commercial activities to thrive and leave the running of the enterprises to the private sector.

Private sector involvement in technology transfer and commercialization Private sector involvement in technology transfer and commercialization is low. For instance, Shell Petroleum Nigeria and Agip Green River projects exist in the southern parr of the state. They engage actively in extension and seed multiplication and distribution as well as encouraging agroprocessing but these activities are limited to their area of operation within the state.

Market opportunities and infrastructure The market is not organized to the advantage of the small farmer. However, market groups exist and can be organized for distributive trade. These marketing groups are vital for the distribution of products between the producer and the consumer. The RUSEP project cannot do without organized market groups, especially at the wholesale level. The state government has made an impressive effort at road construction. Market stalls are available. However, despite these improvements in rural infrastructure, cases of glut in output were reported in some inaccessible areas, especially at the peak of the rainy season. Electricity supply is unstable but likely to improve. Market opportunities exist especially in the yarn, rice, and plantain flour business. This area has remained largely untapped, perhaps due to brand bias, lack of awareness, and the food habits of the people who prefer to ear food produced from raw materials. But with the rapid urbanization in the state this trend in food habits may not be sustainable. Input and outputs markets Major inputs include seeds, fertilizer, and agrochemicals. Farmers obtain seeds mainly from their own stock. Mix-ups at the farm level make it difficult for farmers to obtain pure seed stock. The agricultural input supply company is not effective. Private sector participation in the supply of inputs is also very low. Fertilizer supply has turned out to be a political issue rather than an agricultural input. There is also poor linkage between farmers and end-users> especially industrial processors.

Microcredit and credit support facilities Microcredit institutions abound but there is little awareness on the part of farmers and processors about available financial institutions and requirements on how to obtain credit facilities for their enterprises. These credit institutions emphasize group lending but prevailing collateral requirements are discouraging to the farmers and would-be investors. Many farmer groups are not registered, due to poor linkages> and this inhibits assistance to them. The rural institutional department within the ADP structure is supposed to provide the linkage but because of the problems enumerated earlier, especially funding> this function has been ineffective. The capital outlay required co invest in postharvest technologies may be prohibitive for one farmer at the cottage leveL Hence there is a serious need for linkage with credit institutions.

Farmer empowerment Farmer empowerment through education, finance, awareness, expertise, and linkages has been generally poor. The ability of the respective agencies to discharge their mandate has been ineffective due to poor funding and policy shifts.

Policy instability Agricultural policy has done very little to encourage farmers/processors to invest in postharvest technologies. Abia State has, however, emphasized agricultural production and marketing at the ministerial and farm level with the construction of rural roads and allocation of 127 ha farmland to ministries and parastatals. This is an improvement from the military era that paid lip-service to agriculture and encouraged its present state of decay. Input, market, and credit policies are not effectively enforced. Of significant importance is the inability of the Federal Government to stem the devaluation of the naira. Government has placed duties on imported commodities, such as rice, but these are not effectively enforced by the relevant agencies.

Adequacy of institutional support There is an insufficient supply of quality raw materials. This is due to poor linkages between agroindustries and producers. The cost of production within Nigeria is high compared [0 imports. This is particularly true for rice. Poor quality output exists. as there is no standardization to allow quality control at the supply level. Institutional support is unable to assist with aggregating output. A major gap in Nigeria's agriculture is the absence of a market information system. This has made it impossible for farmers and industries to be directly linked through legal production contracts. Adding to this problem is the fact that agroindustries and the private sector have not been innovative enough to induce changes in tastes and preferences by promoting new products. It should be noted that organizations such as the Standards Organization of Nigeria (SON) and National Food and Drugs Administration and Control (NAFDAC) were set up to maintain the standards and quality of manufactured (and imported) food and drugs in Nigeria. These agencies are relevant to the processing of food that may be generated by the RUSEP project.

4 Appropriate intervention framework The successful introduction of market-driven technologies and commercialization of agriculture in Abia State may be slow and uneven if left entirely to market forces. Information Hows and linkages are critical in rapid technological change (especially processing technologies) and demand-driven agricultura1 development (Fig. 1). Stakeholders, especiaJlyat the state and community levels. require a change from nonmarket subsistence behavior to increased market relations. Controls on the quality and consistency of supply and demand of agricultural input, power-intensive technologies, and outputs are required to ensure efficiency in Nigeria's agricultura1 sector. An appropriate interaction framework is needed to achieve the desired benefits of the RUSEP project.

The role and responsibility of stakeholders in RUSEP Figure 2 provides an organogram of the RUSEP implementation framework. The levels of operation are indicated on the left-hand side of the diagram. Of primary emphasis in this diagram is information flow from borrom to top, top to borrom, and between stakeholders. The roles and responsibilities of stakeholders are as follows: Internationa1 Institute ofTropical Agriculture (IITA) - Source and administer project budget - Act as overall coordinator of the project The Projects Coordinating Unit (PCU) - Encourage ADP to strengthen rural institutions department, project monitoring and evaJuation, and postharvest technology departments - Provide staff suppon as and when needed to the RUSEP project Maintain a comprehensive supervision mission of the ADP through its regional offices Agro-Industrial Development Unit (AIDU) Locate processing machine prototypes from national and international agencies and research institutes Transfer machine prototypes designed by fabricators for replication Ensme that appropriate machine specifications are met Advise government to ensure that an adequate supply of specialized machine components is available (e.g., burners, electrical heating elements) Advise ADP on strengthening the PTD

NAR9 ~

IARC,: NBO.:

m~tional agricultural research systems IntQmatk>na1 agricultural research centers noogovernll'l9fltal organizations

Figure 1. The RUSEP environment

T: FOs:

tachnology box or shelf

farmer organizations

S&FSI: support and fina ncial S8 Production: of food and rtJw mat&rial$ Proc::••• lrIg: transformation Ifl~ value

[:]

Lllvel

International

Nation

State

AOP PME (MIS)

RID

WIA

PTO

LocaVCo mmunity

Cottage proce'sor.! and group processor.!

--------..

Farmers/growers farm-gate

processors

Agrk:uIIurai DevOlOpmorIt Program

illS:

AlDU :

Agro-Industrial Development Unit

PCV:

ES:

ext.naion 881"Ytce

!'ME:

ADP:

Figure 2. The RUSEP Implementation framework.

--------..

mar1<at information aystem projects Coordinating Unit Projoct Monitoring and EvaMitlon

Agroindustrialist

PTC:

F'oslhllMlol Tec

RID:

RurallnltilUtions

WIA:

Women in Agricul

Advise RUSEP on the establishment of pilot projects on newly developed processing plants within areas of comparative advantage Evaluate performance of processing enterprises in collaboration with ADP Agricultural Devdopment Program (ADP) Implement RUSEP Create and empower a PTD Generate data for MIS Assist farmer groups, processors, and women's groups in the development of viable enterprises Ensure the establishment of farmer, women, processor and cooperative groups Provide linkages between farmers' and women's groups and credit/financial institutions, fabricators, and private and public agricultural input production enterprises Strengthen linkages between farmers and processors/agroindustries through contractual agreements to facilitate the production of quality raw materials Provide extension and training services to farmer organizations, processors, and cooperatives on improved technology and management Strengthen linkage with PCU and AIDU Moniror and evaluate its activities periodically Financial Institutions Provide microcredit and loans to farmers, organizations, women's groups, processors, and cooperatives (Community banks, National Agricultural and Rural Development Bank) Create awareness and insure agroprocessing enterprises (National Agricultural Insurance Company, NAIC) Local/Community Participation Link cottage processors, farmer groups/producers, and agroindusuialists Facilitate formation of farmer groups and intergroup lending Search for microcredit/loans and improved inputs (e.g., fertilizer, seeds, agrochemicals, implements) Participate in seed multiplication (on a contract or community basis) Search for markets for their produce (through contract arrangements where necessary) Institutional mechanisms on project evaluation and monitoring Institutional mechanisms are to be established for monitoring, coordinating, and managing project activities through: A Project Technical Committee involving key stakeholders to provide guiddines and oversight on project implementation . (This already exists.) UTA, PCU and AIDU to monitor the implementation of projects at the state level

The ADP in collaboration with the LGA to monitor implementation at the community level Linkages with NAFDAC and SON to ensure processing machine standards and product quality

Policies and institutional support Research and Development

Encourage research and development of improved (marketable) technologies on a continuous and sustainabJe basis Encourage the dissemination of research findings Extension

Extension programs, particularly by the ADP, should shift focus to tackle specific problems with measurable indices of performance for each expert extension agent. Focus should be on postharvest technology capaciry development and market information system. This can he achieved through: Improved extension: ratio at least one extension agent to 500 farmers. Provision of vehicles and motorbikes; State government should be encouraged to fund. Provision of funds in a sustainable and timely manner to the ADP. Creation of a PTD separated from Engineering Services Department ADP should be allowed to operate with minimal interference from government and other agencies. Effective supervision of ADP staff especially extension staff by project management Permanent tenure appoinrments for ADP staff Finance

Government should direct the CSN to enforce and monitor the approved provision on interest rates for agricultural loans Government should enforce the existing rural banking policy Farmer groups and organizations should be encouraged to save a certain percentage of their income with banks (NARDS and CB) Farmers and farmers' groups should be trained to build their own capital, locate capital for investment, and service their operations Market information system

Abia State should establish and maintain a local MIS Unit The PCU should coordinate MIS at the national level Government should ensure that infrastructure facilities that will enable effective participation in agribusiness are put in place (e.g., roads, electricity, telecommunications, and water)

Tariffs should be reduced on educational equipment (computers) and subsidies given to enable replacements and upgrading to be cheaper Postharvest technology development A technology policy towards agroprocessing and agribusiness should focus on: Providing scalable technologies and maintaining a national design capacity Integrating screening and design tasks into a viable institutional framework Ensuring a steady supply of agroprocessing machinery inputs and specialized machine components. The completion of Ajaokuta Steel Rolling Mill will be a desired goal towards achieving this aim. Strengthening the capacities of AlDU, NCAM, CSU, and other institutions for agroprocessing and storage facilities development Promotion of private sector involvement To minimiz.e the activities of middlemen, farmers/processors should be encouraged to form themselves into groups. This would enable them to aggregate their produce in collection centers to quantities and qualities that would be attractive to individual end-users. This emphasis is to create new marketing arrangements and improve farmer income. Farmers' groups, associations, cooperatives, and processors should be encouraged to enter into contractual agreements with inputs suppliers and industrial end-users ro improve market opportunities, secure the provision of quality products and services, reduce transaction costs, and foster accountability at the rural communif)' level Farmers' groups and otganizations should be made to establish storage infrastructure in order to improve their income and reduce distress sales

Commercialization of inputs and outputs markets Minimize government involvement in direct seed acquisition , production, multiplication and marketing Increase private sector participation in agricultural input multiplication and dissemination of improved seeds and processing technologies Establish and promote a community approach to seed multiplication Create awareness on input availability, costs, characteristics. and agroecological suitability Create an enabling environment for market demand for food, animal feed and other agroindustrial products, especially at the export level, i.e., the West African subregion and the export processing zones Improve linkages rhrough price information and dissemination to stabilize domestic demand, reduce production costs and inflation, and encourage rural agribusiness entrepreneurship

Human capital development In order to achieve the objectives of RUSEP and ensure the ultimate beneltts ~ the rueal. level, the following training needs are required by various stakeholders. Farmers, producers, and cottage processors require training in: Business enterprise management Operation, maintenance, and other rechnologr management practices Primary processing steps for various producrs Book keeping and rudimentary management accounting Registrarion procedure with standards organization of Nigeria Acquisition of loans and enterprise establishment Criteria for processing machine selection and acquisition to ensure quality and availability Inputs suppliers Training needs for inputs suppliers (e.g., fertilizerlagrochemical importers, dimibutors and retailers, certified seed producers and markets, contract producers) will be in the form of seminars to sensitize them on the RUSEP project and the requirements of inputs by agroecological environments in Nigeria. Training needs for support staff Training for extension agents and ADP staff is needed in the following areas: Management of extension services Training methods and presentation skills Basic computer application Technical report writing Small and medium-scale entrepreneurial development skills in food processing sector Women leadership, organization, and management in groups Management and organization of groups and cooperatives induction Scripr wriring and presentation skills through rhe electronic media Communication techniques in extension Effective extension supervision methods Collective marketing and contractual arrangements Information on institutional organizations (e.g., NAFDAC, SON) taxes, tariffi. duties, health and environmental laws, required to establish agroprocessing industries

Market information system IITA should produce a national listing of all industrial end-users of agricultural produ.:ts and develop a system of monitoring crops and industrial raw materials requiremenn;, and link end-users with the stare MIS that will connect local processors. It will also provide and update information on commodity prices, fanner groups/organizations. and processor groups with their commodity specializations, farm family land holding per capita, household size and composition, household food consumption in urban and rural areas, market demand for inputs and outputs, etc., with the assistance of the ADPs and PCU.

MIS should be able to provide information through national and state television and radio programs on latest research innovations, input prices and sources, output markets and prices, processor and industrial end-user needs and locations within the state and country. MIS should provide information on group bulking centers for stored products and market.

Future outlook for trends in input and product prices, availability, and demand If all the above intervention and policy objectives listed above are put in place, inputs such as fertilizer, seed, agrochemicals, and postharvest technologies suggested to be private sector-driven will be readily available at competitive prices. Formation of groups will stimulate efficient production of agroindustrial raw materials for the domestic and export market as well as improve direct marketing by farmers and their income. The expected MIS and stakeholder linkages will facilitate efficient mobility of produce and products between farmers, processors, and industrial end-users and perhaps lead to the development of a viable and efficient market, especially for agroindustrial raw materials and produce. Due to expected value-added activities, competition and the ability to store products over longer periods would guarantee price stability in food and agroindustrial products.

5 Summary and conclusion This study was conducted in Abia State to assess the needs of the rural sector with a view to testing a strategy for improving and developing market-driven agricultural production and to generate employment through the creation and enhancement of rural expertise. The study was carried out in November 2001 with a survey by a team of multidisciplinary scientists. A rapid nual appraisal technique was used to collect information from rural and urban areas. Farmers, farmer groups, women groups, processors, fabricators, and agroindustrialislS were interviewed during the study. Rural and urban markets were also visited. The study identified four priority crops of commercial and market potentials with a wide range of processing possibilities at both the farm-gate and cottage levels. These crops are, in order of importance, yam, cassava, rice, and plantain/banana. The selection criteria for these crops were based on area of production, production levels, and economic characteristics such as relative importance with respect to revenue generation, social status, and culrural significance. The study identified three LGAs, Bende, Ukwa East, and Ukwa West, where a pilot study for the RUSEP project could be sited. The criteria for site selection are based on the comparative advantage of selected crops, level of processing, number of farmer and women groups, accessibility, and availability of markets (e.g., proximity to urban centers). Levels of production and demand, area planted, and yield for each crop were determined for the period 1999 to 200 1. The study shows that improved technologies such as fertilizer and improved seeds are used in the production of these crops but demand far outstrips supply. Processing technologies also exist but are used at the farm-gate level for a fee. These technologies include cassava graters, cassava press, rice hullers, mills (for rice and flour processing). Storage facilities were almost nonexistent, except for rice and yam. Market opportunities exist for the identified crops at the domestic, industrial, and export markers. Profitability analyses were carried for each of the identified crops and their value-added opportunities were determined at the farm-gate and cottage levels. Yarn flour. plantain flour, cassavita, and milled rice were found to be profitable at the cottage level. Production of plantain and yam was very profitable at the farm-gate level. Investment outlay for processing machinery and equipment for the selected crops and produClS indicate chac yam flour, plantain flour, cassavita, and rice would yield high benefit cost ratios at the cottage level. Constraints militating against effective implementation of the project were identified. These include production and postharvest constraints, input and output markets and infrastructure, private sector involvement, credit/financial support, turner empowerment, policy and institutional support.

The study recommends, amongst others, the creation and empowerment of a postharvest technology department within the ADP and the involvement of the Agro-Industrial Development Unit as a key stakeholder in the project at the national level. Capacity building at state and local levels, development of a national MIS network, and strong linkages between all stakeholders in the project are also recommended.

References ADB (Mrican Development Bank). 1999. African Development Report 1999. Oxford University Press. Oxford, UK. D'Situa, E. and K. Bysmouth. 1994. Poveny alleviation through agricultural projects. ED[ Seminar Report No. 30. Ezedinma, C.I. 2001. Economic evaluation and prospects for double rice crop production in the humid forest inland valley ecosystem of southeastern Nigeria. Tropicuhura 19(4): 161-165. FOS (Federal Office of Statistics). 1999. Poverty and agriculturaJ sector in Nigeria. FOS. Ahuja, Nigeria. ~weke,

Er. 1994. Processing potentials for cassava production growth in sub-Saharan Africa, COSCA Working Paper No. 11. Collaborative Study of Cassava in Africa, IITA. Ibadan, Nigeria.

Nweke F.r., H.e. Ezumah, and D.S .e. Spencer. 1988. Cropping system and agroeconomic performance of improved cassava in a humid forest ecosystem. RCMP Research Monograph No.2, Resource and Crop Management Program, IITA, [badan, Nigeria. Ogunremi, L.T.â&#x20AC;˘ C.I. Ezedinma, S. Ethan. A.T. Melifonwu, G .O. Amaugo, J.e. Obiefuna, and L.N . Edochie. 2000. Second season cropping at the CFC/SPIRIVWA Project Site, Ozu Abarn, Eastern Nigeria: Evaluation of rice varieties performance under poor water control in the valley bottom. A publication of the Inland Valley Consortium, Nigeria Coordinating Unit (IVC-NCU) presented at the IVC Annual Workshop, WARDA, Bouake, Cote d'Ivoire. April 2000. Okorji, E.C. and G.O.1. Ezeike. 2000. The economics of yarn tuber storage under the modern (underdeveloped) and traditional (yam barns) storage technologies, Agroscience Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Nigeria, Nsukka 2( 1): 11-2l. Okorji, E.C. and D. Ayichi. 2001. Impact of subsidy removal on fertilizer consumption in Nigeria: implications for agricultural growth. African Economic Research Consortium (AERC) , Nairobi, Kenya. World Bank. 2000. World Bank Development Repon 2000/2001. Attacking poverty. World Bank, Washington, DC, USA

Annex 1 Weather statistics January-September 2001

Month Jan

Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug

Sep

Rainfall (mm) Temperature (QC) Relative humidity (%) Sunshine Radiation Evaporation (Mis) (mm) Amount Days Max Min 09000GMT 1500GMT (Hrs) 0.0 7.8 175.9 224.1 194.3 522.5 273.5 179.0 317.2

0 1 8 13 17 16 17 24 23

20 22 23 23 23 23

33 35 34 32 32 30 29 28 29

22 22 22

61 74

77 82% 82% 84% 86% 88% 85%

6.2

35 58 67% 70% 76% 76% 82% 82%

4.9 5.1 6.1

5.7 4 .6 2 .5

1.4 2.5

4.4 5.5 4.9

5.4 4.8 3.0 2 .0 1.3 2.0

3.7 4 .5 3.7 2.5 2.2 2.2 1.8 1.5 1.7

Weather statistics 2000

Month

Rainfall (mm) Temperature (QC) Relative humidity (%) Sunshine Radiation Evaporation (mm) Amount Days Max Min 09000GMT 1500GMT (Hrs) (Mis)

14.08 02.00 00.09 OLOO Mar 13.06 04.00 Apr 164.05 13.00 May 153.06 14.00 jun 265.05 20.00 265 .02 21.00 jui 216.09 16.00 Aug 277.05 23.00 288 .04 19.00 Sep Nov 7507 03.00 Dec 03 .08 02.00 Total 1673.74 138.00 Mean 139.5 11 .5 Corrected mean 140 12 Jan

Feb

33.00 34 .00 23.00 33.00 32.00 31.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 31.00 33.00 32.00 372.00 31.00

23.00 22.00 35.00 24.00 24.00 23.00 23.00 24 .00 24.00 24.00 25.00 21.00 292.00 24.33

145% 72.5%

46% 45% 46%

82% 63%

04.07 04 .02 04.04 05.01 05.06 04.09 02.06 02.02 03.00 03.03 05 .06 05 .09 46.55 3.879

03.03 05.06 05 .01 04 .06 04.02 03.03 01.06 01 .07 02.03 03 .02 04. 04 04.00 39.43 3.29 3

02.09 04.06 03.09 03.01 02.08 02.03 01.07 01.09 02.00 01.08 02.03 03.01 26.64 2.22 2

Weather statistics 1999

Month

Rainfall (mm) Amount Days 6.5

Temperature (0C) Max Min

66.7 114.4 321.2 296.6 284.4 382.2 395.3 433.4 116.0 6.0

26 6 3

30 33 32 34 33 30 31 29.6 29.3 29.6 31 35

Tota] 2422.7 Mean 201.9 Corrected mean 202

151 .0 12.6 13

377.5 31.45 32

Jan Feb Mar

Apr May Jun Jul

Aug Sep Nov Dec

6 9 18

22 18 18

Relative humidity (%) Sunshine (Hrs) 09000GMT IS00GMT

20 22 22 25 23 23 23 22.3 22.4 22.4 23 20

68 33 75 73 82 85 87

26 16 26 30 33 29

22 23 23 25 24 24 23

268.1 22.34 22

561.0 46.75 47

210.0 17.5 18

181.0 15.08 15

Annex 2 Distribution of farmlands to ministries/parastatals SINo. I. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16

17 18 19.

20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

Ministry

Location

Agric and Rural Development Finance Works. Housing and Transport Education Women Affairs Public Utilities Petroleum Commerce and Industries Lands. Survey/Vnion Development Information Health Human Resources Spons and Social Development E;wironmenc. Solid Minerals and Cooperatives Local Government & Chieftaincy Affairs JusticelJudiciary Governmem House Head of Service SSG's SEMB SPEB Agricultural Development ASOPADEC BCA Civil Service Commission. Abia Newspapers Ltd. Total

Hectarage

Lodu Ndume Vlonna North Vlonna North Vlonna South Lodu Vlonna South Vlonna North Ozuitem Vlonna South Vlanna Nonh Vlanna Narth Ozuitem Vlonna North Vlonna North Vbani lbeku Vbani Ibeku Vbani Ibeku Vlanna North Lodu Vlonna North Vlonna North B.C.A. premises Vlonna South Abia N~vspapers premise

12 8 10

4 1/2 8 8

6 10

1/2 2 8

3 4

8 1

4 2 3 1 3

127

Annex 3 Investment outlay for farm..gate level processing 1.

Cassava chips production - Capacity: 0.3 t/day (wet tubers) Fixed costs N Processing shed 30,000.00 Manual chipping machine 20,000.00 Collapsible sun-drying platforms (x 4) 15,000.00 1,000.00 Containers, peeling knives, etc. Total fixed cost 66,000.00

Variable costs/day Cassava tubers Transportation Peeling/washing Chipping Drying Packaging bags Total variable cost

5,000.00 400.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 6,200.00

2. Cassava chips production - Capacity: 0.3 t/day (wet tubers) Fixed costs Processing shed 30,000.00 Manual shiner 1,000.00 Sedimentation tanks 2,000.00 Collapsible sun-d.rying platforms 2) 10,000.00 Containers, peeling knives , etc. 10,000.00 Total fixed cost 60,000.00

Variable costs/day Cassava tubers Transportation Peeling/washing Grating Sieving Dewatering Drying Dewatering and packaging bags Total variable cost

5,000.00 400.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 200.00 100.00 6,200.00

Annex 3 contd.

Odorless JuJu production - Capacity: 0.3 tJday (wet tubers) N Fixed costs Processing shed 30,000.00 Steeping/fermentation tanks 2,000.00 Small press 10,000.00 Sieve 1,000.00 Collapsible sun-drying platforms (x 3) 10,000.00 Containers. peeling knives. etc. 1.000.00 Total fixed cost 54,000.00 Variable costs/day Cassava tubers Transportation Peeling/washing Steep ing/ fer men tation Sieving Dewatering Drying Milling Dewatering and packaging bags Total variable cost

5.000.00 400.00 200.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 200.00 100.00 200.00 6,500.00

Unfermented cassava flour production - Capacity: 0.3 t/day (Wet tubers) Fixed costs Processing shed 30,000.00 Press 10.000.00 Collapsible sun-drying platforms (x 3) 10,000.00 1,000.00 Containers, peeling knives, etc. 51,000.00 Total fixed cost Variable costs/day Cassava tubers Transportation Peeling/washing Grating Dewatering Drying Milling Dewatering and packaging bags Drying Milling Total variable cost

5,000.00 400.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 200.00 100.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 6,300.00

Annex 3 contd.

Dry cassava mash production - Capacity: 0.3 t/day {wet tubers) Fixed costs N Processing shed 30,000.00 10,000.00 Press 10,000.00 Collapsible sun-drying platforms (x 3) 1,000.00 Containers, peeling knives, etc. 51,000.00 Total fixed cost Variable costs/day Cassava tubers Transportation Peeling/washing Grating Dewatering Drying Dewatering and packaging bags Total variable cost

5,000.00 400.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 200.00 6,100.00

Rice processing (custom milling) production - Capacity: 0.2 t/day (paddy rice) Fixed costs 30,000.00 Processing shed Parboiling drums (x 2) 5,000.00 10,000.00 Drying slab 1,000.00 Containers 46,000.00 Total fixed cost Variable costsl day Rice paddy Parboiling Drying Milling Packaging bags Total variable cost

6,000.00 1,000.00 200.00 300.00 100.00 7,600.00

Plantain/cooking banana flour - Capacity: 0.2 {/day (fresh bunch) Fixed costs 30,000.00 Processing shed 20,000.00 Manual chipping machine Collapsible sun-drying platform (x 2) 7,000.00 1,000.00 Peeling knives, containers, etc. 58,000.00 Total fixed cost

Annex 3 contd.

N 2,500.00 200.00 100.00 200.00 200.00 300.00 3,500.00

Variable costs!day Plantain/ cooking banana Peeling Chipping Drying Milling Packaging bags Total variable costs 8.

Plantain Rakes - Capacity: 0 .2 t/day (fresh bunch) Fixed costs Processing shed Manual chipping machine Deep fryer Peeling knives, containers, etc. Total fixed cost Variable costs! day Plantain Peeling Slicing Flavors Frying Packaging materials Packaging (labor) Total variable cost

30,000.00 20,000.00 3,000.00 1,000.00 54,000.00

2,500.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 300.00 200.00 200.00 3,600.00

Annex 3 contd. Commercialty-oriented household processing of cassava to gari (farm路gate level) Location: Abia State Capacity: 0.4 t (fresh tubers) Product: Gari Output/day: 100 kg/day Fixed costs Processing shed Press Man ual sifter Aluminum fryer Containers, peeling knives, etc. Installation cost To(al fixed cost Operating and maintenance cost/day Cassava tubers Transportation Peeling and washing Grating (for a fee) Pressing Sieving and frying Dewatering and packaging bags Fuel, water, etc. Total operating costs

US$

N 30,000.00 20,000.00 300.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 55,300.00

460.83

6,400.00 400.00 200.00 100.00 200.00 200.00 150.00 200.00 7,850.00

=;>

65.42

Annex 4 Investment outlay for cottage level processing

1. Cassava processing into cassava mash Location: Product Name: Capacity: Outpur/day:

Abia State Dry cassava mash 2.0 tlday (wet tubers) 500 kg (0.5)

Fixed costs Processing shed Prime mover (6hp diesel engine) Grater Press 2} Drying slab Containers, peding knives, ere. Installation costs Total fixed costs

N 150,000.00 60,000.00 20,000.00 40,000.00 30,000.00 5,000.00 15,000.00 320,000.00

c::;>

2,666.67

Operating and maintenance cost/day Cassava tubers (2.0 () Transportation costs Peeling and washing labor Grating Pressing labor Packaging bags Maintenance of processing machines Drying Total operating and maintenance cost/day

32,000.00 2,000.00 1,600.00 200.00 400.00 2,000.00 200.00 400.00 307,200.00

c::;>

310.00

US$1.00

N120.00

US$

2. Cassava processing into unfennented flour Location: Abia State Product: High quality unfermented cassava flour Capacity: 2.0 r/day (wet rubers) Outputlday: 740 kg (0.74) Fixed costs Processing shed Prime mover (6hp diesel engine) Grater Press (x 2) Cold breaker Drying slab 2) Containers. peeling knives. etc. Combination mill Installation costs Total fixed cost

Operating and maintenance cost/day Cassava tubers Transportation costs Peeling and washing labor Grating Pressing Drying Sieving Dewatering and packaging bags Fuel, water, etc. Maintenance of processing machines Milling Total operating and maintenance costs US$I.OO = N120.00

US$

N 150,000.00 60,000.00 20,000.00 40,000.00 35,000.00 30,000.00 5,000.00 75.000.00 26.000.00 415.000.00

=Â˘>

3,485.33

32.000.00 2.000.00 1.600.00 200.00 400.00 800.00 400.00 2.000.00 500.00 200.00 400.00 54.900.00

=Â˘>

457.50

3. Cassava processing into chips Location: Abia State Product: Cassava chips 2.0 Capacity: Output/day: 700 kg (0.7 t)/day Fixed costs Processing shed Motorized chipping machine (Electric motor Petrol engine) Drying platform (x 2) Mechanical fryer Containers, peeling knives, etc. Installation costs (petrol engine) Installation costs (electric motor) Total fixed cost (petrol engine) Total fixed cost (electric motor) Operating and maintenance cost/day Cassava tubers Transportation Peeling and washing Chipping Drying Packaging bags Fuel, water, etc. Maintenance of processing machines Total operating and maintenance costs US$l.OO

N120.00

N US$ 150,000.00 50,000.00 65,000.00 30,000.00 160,000.00 5,000.00 25,000.00 24,000.00 435,500.00 =Â˘> 3,629.17 419,000.00 3,49] .67

32,000.00 2,000.00 1,600.00 200.00 800.00 300.00 500.00 200.00 37,600.00

=Â˘>

313.33

4. Cassava processing into gllTi Location: Abia State Product: gari Capacity: 2.0 t/day (wet tubers) Output/dar: 600 kg/day Fixed costs Processing shed Prime mover (type and power rating: 6hp lister engine) Grater Mechanical sifter Press (x 2) Containers, peeling knives, etc. Installation costS Total fixed costs

Operating and maintenance cost/day Cassava tubers (2) Transportation Peeling and washing labor Grating {labor} Pressing (labor) Sieving (labor) Frying Dewatering and packaging bags Fuel, water, etc. Maintenance of processing machines Total operating and maintenance costs US$I .00

N 150,000.00 60,000.00 20,000.00 35,000.00 40,000.00 5,000.00 15,500.00 310,000.00

32,000.00 2,000.00 1,600.00 200.00 400.00 400.00 800.00 300.00 500.00 200.00 38,400.00

N 120.00

uss

S> 2,583.33

320.00

5. Cassava processing into cassavita Location: Product: Capacity: Output/day:

Abia State High quality cassavita 0.5 tfday (gari) 0.5 t/day

Fixed costs Processing shed

Mill Elecrric sealing machine (x 4) Tray fryer x 2 Installation costs Total fixed cost Operating and maintenance cost/ day Gari Transportation costs Sieving (labor) Frying (labor) Packaging bags Packaging and sealing Fuel, water, etc. Mill Maintenance of processing machines Total operating and maintenance costs CS$l.OO - N120.00

N 30,000.00 60,000.00 16,000.00 40,000.00 20,000.00 146,000.00

3,905.00

25 ,000.00 2,000.00 400.00 200.00 1,500.00 800.00 200.00 400.00 200.00 30,800 .00

256.67

US$

6. Rice processing (miUing) Location: Ahia State Product: High quality milled rice Capacity: 2.5 t Iday (paddy) Output/day: 1.625 dday Fixed costs Processing shed Prime mover (type and power rating) lister 21.5hp Parboiler (250 kg batch) Drying slab (x 2) Tarpaulins Mill Destoner Bagging machine Soaking vats Installation costs (at 10% ofTFC) Total fixed cost

Operating and maintenance cost/day Rice paddy Transportation Parboiling and drying Milling Destoning Bagging Fuel, water, etc. Security Maintenance Total operating and maintenance cost/day US$ 1.00 = N120.00

US$

200,000.00 300,000.00 40,000.00 60,000.00 5,000.00 200,000.00 100,000.00 30,000.00 5,000.00 70,500.00 1,006,000.00

8,375 .00

50,000.00 2,500.00 7,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 250.00 500.00 100.00 250.00 62,000.00

521.67

7. Plantain BoW" production Location: Abia State Capacity: 1.0 t/day N 60,000.00 20,000.00 160,000.00 60,000.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 320,000.00

Fixed costs Processing shed Prime mover Chipping/slicing machine (x 2) Dryer Hammer mill Sealing machine Installation cost Variable cost Fresh plantain Transportation Peeling Chipping Drying Milling Packaging Fuel, water, etc.

12,500.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 400.00 400.00 200.00 400.00 500.00

Total

17,400.00

8. Pounded yam flour production Location: Capacity:

Abia State 0.5 dday

Fixed costs Processing shed Dicing machine (manual) (x 2) Parboiling tank with heating arrangement Dryer Milling machine Ceiling machine (x 2) Knives, containers, etc. Installation cost

N 150,000.00 20,000.00 20,000.00 300,000.00 85,000.00 lO,OOO.OO 3,000.00 40,000.00 628,000.00

Variable costs Yam tubers Peeling and washing Dicing Parboiling Drying Milling Packaging and sealing Packaging materials Fuel, water, etc.

30,000.00 800.00 800.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 1,000.00 300.00 1,000.00

Total

35,100.00

9. Cassava starch production Location: Abia State Capacity: 2.0 t/day (wet tubers)

N 150,000.00 60,000.00 50,000.00 60,000.00 10,000.00 20,000.00 15,000.00 300,000.00 60,000.00 40,000.00 665,000.00

Fixed costs Processing shed Prime mover (6hp diesel engine) Rasper Starch milk extractor Sedimentation tanks Dewatering press Collapsible sun-drying platform (x 4) Mechanical fryer Hammer mill Installation costs Variable costs Cassava rubers Peeling and washing Disintegration of tubers Starch milk extractor Dewatering Drying Packagi ng bags Fuel, water, etc. Milling

32,000.00 1,600.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 600.00 300.00 800.00 200.00

Total

36,100.00

Annex 5 Database 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Private sector agribusinesses Public sector agribusinesses Agricultural technology generation/dissemination Rural finance (credit) Summary of fabricators by LGA Women in Agriculture (WlA) processor groups Registered women's groups in Abia State Summary of groupslassociations/cooperatives/women's group by LGA Summary of processors by LGA

Private sector agribusinesses

SINo.

Name

Addresses

Mitchelson Nigeria Ltd.

Ribaco Multipurpose Fanns

3. 4. 6. 7. 8.

Clems Agro-Service Investments Enyimba Farms ltd Rojomex enterprises Afoelimkpa Umuoba FMCS Ltd Sylvaco Processing Company

Ihechiowa Oil Palm Company

Umuegwu Okpuala, Afugiri PO Box 270, Umuahia Abia State. 088-222166 Km 5 Alaoji village, Aba-Ikot Ekpene Rd Aba, Ugwunagbo LGA 129 Aba-Owerri Rd, Umungasi, Aba Okpu Umoba Village Ohuru-Ndoki, Ukwa Umuoba Rd. Okpu Umobo Village No.1 Nwalozie Compd Off 79 Aba- Owerri Rd, Umugasi, Aba Obinto/Okpo, Arochukwu Rd, Arochukwu LGA No. 10 Arani Rd, Arochukwu Amankwu-Ututu, Arochukwu Opp Atani Rice Mill, Arochukwu Elugwunta Obayi Ovim Isuikwuato Ndi Uche Ogboko, Ozuitem, Bende LGA Nkporo, Ohafia LGA Umuabali Umuopara, Umuahia Okwute Isieke, Ibeku Umuahia Agbala Umuorarn Ohija, Umuahia Ossah, Ibeku Umuahia Catholic Secretariat, Mater Dei Cathedral, Umuahia Item Street, Umuahia Umuihe Umuopara, Umuahia

10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

Atili Achara Rice farmers Association Amankwu Women Group M.N Okorie Poultry Farms Interstock Farms Ltd Umuabasi Ukwu Fadama FMCS Ltd DMMM Catholic Multiple Farm Ltd Imebuogu Farms Sylvia MCS farms Poultry Farmers Coop Ossah Widow Cooperative Society Kolping Society Umuahia

21. 22.

Chris Nig Ltd Umuihe Umuopara Women Group

15.

Public sector agribusinesses Name

Address

Abia Rubber Company

Smallholder Oil Palm Project

Abia Oil Palm Company Ltd. Abia Agro-Input Company Abia Golden Chicken State Agric. Creelir Loans Board Abia Cashew Plantation Abia State ADP

Abia Agricultural Input Company

Amaeke Abam/Nchi Oji Aham, Arochukwu LGA clo Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Umuahia Nkporo Lame/Uzuakolo Umuahia 00 MARO, Umuahia Ogwe Ukwa West LGA doMARD Umuobarim Umumeochi LGA Okigwe-Umuahia Road, Ossah (opp. Coca Cola Depot, Umuahia) C/o MARO, Umuahia

SINo.

4. 5. 6. 7.

3. Agricultural technology generation/dissemination

SINo. Name l.

2. 3. 4.

5. 6.

Address

National Roor Crops Research Institute National Cereals Research Institute Forestry Research Institute Cocoa Research Institute National Land Conservation Research Institute Abia StateADP Michad Okpara University ofAgriculture

Urnudike, Umuahia Amakarna, Urnuahia Ahiaeke, Umuahia Bende, Bende LGA. Ahiaeke, Umuahia Umuahia-Okigwe Road, Ossah, Urn uahia Umudike, Umuahia

4. Rural finance (credit)

SINo. Name 1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6. 7.

Address

National Agric Cooperative Rural

Development Bank (former NACB) 140 Uwalaka Street, Umuahia Ogwumabiri Community Bank Ltd. Umuabia main market, Umuahia Urnuchukwu Community Bank Ltd Bende Road (opp. CPS) Urnuahia Awam na Ebo Community Bank Amawom Oboro Ikwuano LGA Umuariaga, Umudike, Umuahia Umuariaga Community Bank Obikabia, Isiala Ngwa South LGA. lsiala Ngwa Community Bank National Agricultural Insurance Company Umuabia

5. Summary of fabricators by local government area SINo.

No. of fabricators

LGA

Isuikwuato Urnunneochi Urnuahia North Ohafia Umuahia South Arochukwu Ugwunagbo Bende Aba North Aba South Isiala Ngwa North Isiala Ngwa South UkwaEast Ukwa West Osisiorna Ikwuano Obi Ngwa

3. 4. 5.

6. 7.

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

4 4 1 12

3 2 10路 10路 1 4

3 3 10 10路 10路

>These are fast growing big lownsfLGA Number of fabrica[ors may have ex==c:led the number qUOted ~ina 1997.

6. Women in Agriculture (WIA) processor groups

SINo. 1.

3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8.

9. 10.

Name

Address/LGA

Ihechiowa Women Group Arani Arochukwu W.lA. OrakwuAbam Amangwu Ohafia WIA AforWIA Asaga Awachi, WIA Ezi Nwanne Ugbo WIA Amuvi WIA Amaka Offia Ututu WIA

Ihechiowa, Arochukwu Arani, Arochukwu Ndi Oji Abam. Arochukwu Amangwu, Ohafia Afor. Arochukwu Asaga. Ohafia Ugbo Village, Arochukwu Amuvi, Arochukwu Amaka Offia Ututu. Arochukwu Idirna Abam, Arochukwu

Ohaeke Abam, ldirna

Abam

No. in group

Remarks

20 43 52

39 22 32 20 134 30 26

1997-1998

7. Registered women's groups in Abia State SINo.

Name

Umuda Women Group

Amachara Women Group

Ohiaya Women Group

Amafar Women Group Osodiemaku Women Group

7. 8. 9. 10. II.

12. 13. 14.

15. 16. 17. 18.

19.

20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

Umuelcm Women Group Umubioko Women Group Dorcas Society of Niger Laguru Multipurpose Cooperative Society Assemblies of God Women Group Out Ihunanya Women Group Assemblies of God Women Group Afugiri Women Group

Location

Block/Zone

Umuda Village Square,Umuahia Umuimeafo (Ukwuechi). Umuahia Ohiaya Primary School. Umuahia Amafar. Umuahia Umuawori Nsukwe, Ubakala Umuelem, Amahma Umubioko, Amakama Adventist, Umuogo Ubakala

Laguru Village Hall Assemblies of God, Nkpuke Amakama Umuochi Okaiuga, Nkwoegwu Assemblies of God Nkwoegwu Maternity. Umuegwu Okpala Umuakam Women Group Umuakam Village Square Okaiuga Umuosu Women Group Umuosu Village Square, Umuawa Alaoeha Oriendu Women Group Ubaha Oriendu Vlonna South Women Group Ulonna Farm Settlement Umuagu Ngolori Women Umuagu Market Square Group Umuhu Incomadinma Cooperative Nnono-oborn Society Obioma ldinoru Cooperative Society Nnono-obora Izundu Cooperarive Society Amaoba Ikpuru lkemba Cooperative Society Ndoro Chinyeremaka Cooperative Ohokobe Ndume Society N nebuihe Cooperative Society Ohokobe Ndume Ezinne Cooperative Society Ohokobe Ndume ldinoru Cooperative Society Ohokobe Ndume Ukedibugwu Women Group Urou=: lbeku

28 . Ossah Ahaba Women Group Ossah Uhabiri 29. Amaiyi Ahaba Women Group Amaiyi Isuikwuato

30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.

Agbor na-du Women Group Ahaba Thuma Women Group Ahaba Thuma Women Group Iheokwo-Ihenzu Women Group Umuasua Women Group I Umuasua Women Grnup II

Ohuhu South/Umuahia Zone

LGA Umuahia Umu.ahia South

OlokorofUbakaW Umuahia Zone

Umuahia Norm Umuahia South

Ohuhu North Umuahia Zone

Umuahia North

Ohuhu North Umuahia Zone

Umuahia Noreh

Ikwuaro Noreh Umuahia Zone

Ikwuaro

Umuahia Urbani Umuahia Zone

Umuahia North

Umuahia UrbanI Umuahia Zone

Umuahia North

Isuikwuato Ohana Zone

Isuikwuato

Isuikwuato Ohana Zone

Isuik'WUato

[hie Isukwuato Amahia Isu Ahaba Ehuma [hcokwo Isu Amangwu [su Amangwu Isu

Registered women's groups In Abia State (contd). SINo.

Name

36. Um\laSlla Women Group III 37. Otamkpa Women Group 38. Nsbdu Umunekwu Women Group I 39. Ngbdu Umundtwu Women Group II 40. Ngbdu Umunekwu Women Group III 4l. Ngbdu Umundtwu Women Group N 42. Ngbdu Umundtwu Women Group V 43. Amaba Women Group 44. Umuobiala Women Group Am.aekpu Obaba Women Group (Chinc:merc:) 46. AD.P. Women Farmm Groupl 47. Humaniwian Women Group 48. Army Bamck.s Women Group

Block/zoOl:

Location

LGA

Amangwu1m F.chide Otamkpa AJna,ro Mgbc:lu

•

Am2wo MgbeIu

Obanbba

1m Ohafia Zone

Ugwumu Umueubcte Ndiohia Umuobiala

Oha6aWestl Oha6aZOnC:

Ohana

45.

49. Asap Women Group 50. Uchc:oma Naptkpa Women Group 5l. 0g;uUru Women Group 52. Otuobi Women Group 53. Gari ~ Women Group 54. Amazu Women Group 55. Ndiwo 1m MbUllO Women Group 56. FJughu Women Group 57. Amurc: Women Group 58. Ndi:t:: Women Group en Women Group 59. Apex

60. 6l. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70.

71.

72. 73. 74. 75.

AJrwu Women Group Ujari Women Group Ndiakpo Women Group Umu~ Women Group UmlDOmgbo Women Group "Gc:orse Women Group Obioma Women Group Umunnc: Women Group Ezjuche Egbduowo Women Group Urana Women Group Ihunanya Umunwogu Women Group Umuokorogbu Umuakpara Women Group Jhic.lyi Women Gro<!: Umuimub Women roup Udobnma Women Group Amavo Women Group M

34 Hospital Road Arnaekpu No. 3 Court Rd. Ebc:rn Olub Hospital Rd. Arnadq>u Ohoafia Sc:rgc:nt Quarters Army bamcks Ebc:m Asap Obaba Umuorie Village 8ende

Bende/Ohafia Zone

Bende

Bc:ndcIoha6a Zone Nkpor.?'ObanaZonc

Bendt Ohana

Akpomrniri Bendc: uicgbu Bende AhiIN NtaIakwu Bende AmnuBendc Ndiwo ltumbuw 8ende FJugbuNkporo Amurc: Nkporo Ndi Agbor Nkporo Ium Ebti section, Osu-Abam

Arochukwu

AhamlOba6a Zone AbiribalOha6a Zone

Arochukwu Ohafia

ADwu Ujan Ndialcpo

Arochukwul Oha6aZone

Umu~

Umuwmgbo Ndi F.mc:rneAham Agborji Abiriba ;.trji Abiriba Nwosu's Compel Egbduowo &c's Naa: Uratta

Umlll1DCisclAba Zone

· Osisioma ·

Owari JJ»JAba Zone

&c's Paba: Umualcpara Hall Ihle-Um lbie-Um OwerriAba

::t:a

~Umudlukwu

8. Summary of groupsJassocfations/cooperativeslwomen's groups by local government area SINo.

LGA

Isukwuato

2. 3. 4.

Umunneochi Umuahia North Ohafia Umuahia South Arochukwu Ugwunagbo Bende Aba North Aba South Isiala Ngwa North IsiaIa Ngwa South Ukwa East Ukwa West Osisioma Ikwuano Obi Ngwa

5. 6. 7. 8.

9. 10.

II. 12.

13. 14.

15. 16. 17.

Groups! associations cooperatives

Women's groups

16 39

10 11

5 1

9 11

22 4 7 10 2

1 1 1 3 6

4 1

9. Summary of processors by local government area SINo.

LGA

No. of processors

Type of machine in use 4.5 HP Lister, 6Pl, millers 4.5 HP Lister, Indian 6Pl(INWLUX) . Yamaha 4.5 HP Lister. Millees 3HP India 6PI Electric Motor 6.3KVA

Common crop bting processed Cassava, grains Cassava, grains

Isukwuato

Umunneochi

17 9

Umuahia North

~o-

Ohaba Umuahia South

~o-

16 96 187

~o-

-do-do-do-

5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

13. 14.

15. 16. 17.

Arochukwu Ugwunagbo Bende Aha Nonh AbaSourh Isiala Ngwa NOM

~o-

4.5 HP Lister, Indian Luter 61 I millers - 3HP

lsiala Ngwa South UkwaEan Ukwa West Osisioma Ikwuano ObiNgwa

Cassava, cereals

Cassava. cereals