The Potential of Soybeans in Nigeria and the Results of An IITA Survey in two Principal Production Areas (Benue .State and Zonkwa-Abuja)
H.C. Knipscheer and Peter Ay
Discussion Paper No. 1/82
Agricultural Economics INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TROPICAL AGRICULTURE PMB 5320 Oyo Road Ibadan, Nigeria
THE PO!ENTIAL OF sOYBEmS IN NIGERIA AND THE RESULTS OF AN IITA SURVEY IN TWO PRINCIPAL PRODUCTION AREAS (BENUE STATE Morn ZONKWA-ABUJ A)
H.C. Knipscheer and Peter Ay
Agricultural Economics Farming Systems Program
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TROPICAL AGRICULTURE
IBADAN, NIGERIA 1982
Abstract At present, soybeans are a minor crop in Nigeria, grown r.!ainly .in two limited production areas by smallholders. primarily
Because they are marketed
traough local channe13, information is scarce ana existing
data unreliable and erratic. T.~
potential for greater soybean production in Nigeria exists,
especially if
ti~
increasing amount of soybean meal imported tor
poultry feed is considered.
Furthermore, local use of soybeans as
substitutes for other legumes (such as locust bean in the producti on
of local food flavour in
~raditional
"daddawa" or local "maggi") and as a suppl ement
dishes for human consumption indicates an increased
production potential. Results of an IITA survey conducted during july and August 1980, in the SbO~1
t~路o
main Nigerian
gr~'ing
areas -- Benue State and Zonkwa-JllJuja
the general picture of a sorghu;n-based cropping system in which
soybeans (intercropped
[t;i
th sorghum or somet:ines l.tal ze) appear for hlo
to three years at the end of a four to five-year culti\rati on period before the land is left fallow. '. Only a minority of farmers seJ.1 part of their production to marketing boards.
Prices on
are more than double the official minimum price.
~1e
local
~arket
Increasing demand
Eor animal feeds and food processing indicates an increasing potential Eor soybean production in Nigeria whi ch should influence research and policy decisions in agricultural
production.
2
Introduction At present, soybeans account for more than half o f
production of oil seeds. one third.
the totel l .. c rld
Two decades ago their share was only abou t
Horeover, recent developments show that the importance of
soybeans is still increasing. in the world market:
T,.;o soy products have maj or importance
soyoil for human consuJilpticn and soymeal for
animal feeds. Nigeria 1s importing both products, usually meals for the ex p anding poultry industry.
Domestic production of soybeans in Nigeria depends They sell nearly all of their total production
mainly on smallholders.
on local markets for human consump tion.
Two maj or prod uct ion areas exist
in Benue State and in the Zonkwa-Abuja area (Figure 1) , holders' production refer to these areas (Soybean~
survey;
Data on srnall-
which we.re selected for the IITA
are grown also in other Nigerian regions,
the smallholdings and local
~arketing,
production figures a:.:,:;!
A similar situationexists for other West Afrjcan
t!stimates.
i3ec.ause 0 f ;JIl~..: '
l o芦gl1
cOl" ~路~"i ~s
whele smallholders are the main producer!::. Proposed large s c ale pn.ju ctio n schemes in Ghana and th e Ivory Coast
plus the support given by
the Nigerian government to large s caJe: i.:oopera-
tive farming. show official interest in the development of West Africa.
HO\vever~
Nigerian government
i~;
fixed
at
in
the minimum price for this product fixed by the far
below t h e price sffiiilih olders can receive on ..
local markets.
s oyb ea~ s
-
The minimum price in Jur:e 1981 (D a ily Times, June ::9) was
HlS5 per
m~tric
ton (about 2t;O US dollars).
This level is
comparable to the expor t prices of the largest producer in the wo r ld -the United States -- where the average 1979/1980 pr i .> per met i:ic t ori .
~'i as
260 do} lars
But in early 1981, this price had rie-en to more than
300 dollars (Foreign Agriculture Circu.!ar, February 1981 and March, 1981).
3
Sokoto
•
Gusau
•
Xano
•
Me.1duguri
•
Ikenne •
Ijebu
Umuabia
•
M4jor production
area.
•
Potentia1 area. of production Sites o£ past and ongoing eX!1arimente
?ig.l. Map of Nigeria. showing major areae o~ eoybe~ ~i tee of past and present experiments
:rr oouction, potenti.a.l. !I.reas and
4
IITA survey data show tha": during 1980 rHgerian t>"t!.allholders in
the main production al.-eas received bet\oleen N200 and 14300 (320 to 48;J dollars) per metric ton of soybeans.
Several l·;igeria!'l c .i lmills
advertised that they would p urchase soybeans "-bove the official but below prices on the local narkets.
~hese
p~ice
f .l '.J ..i.r.as indicate tha",;:
more !.::nowlt: dge on the potential for soybean produ ct. ion in Nigeri a is nec\':!:s$i'! ry to plan research priorities and niake policy decisions fa:!: i~ler:lentat.i.on.
To assess potential soybean production and marketing in Nigeria, dat:a on anir.tal fee&-; .'ire used \v:"lere soybean , products are mainly
j:!tr= o rted.
P.t present,
h~/ever,
nearl y all the: soy:bean prod.uction by
farmers in Nigeris is seld. ,f or human consumption. stuC'.l deals
aft e~
.:l!'lQ
\'ii th
the :f.'::;>" 'se n t
srna ll~ ';;:: l ders
I
Anothe r part of the
system in
til€CWQ
extracting the scyoiI is directly processed into
supplernerats {inc.l.\;, ding
been produced.
speciu~
principal
prot~in
substitutes
::.I.];"!Y f ood for chUx':t's: n with aUergies
But t11e ,' ( ; r':n~dt.l. cts have h,1d little 71;z':::-keting S1..\ l: c o, ,
because it is r:\ore
~(>;; nomical
and easier to produce the real chickens,
cattle and turkeys by feeding ther. with so}·bea.'"l me .til. At present the market for soybean!3 i 3 U~€
pri ~ ~, ;': :.,
:i."::
:~epen dent
on the
of soybean me,,,; for livestock feeding. -"':1'11is has also influen ce on
the lagerian situation where increasing quantities of feed stuffs are
impoL-te d . r,:~elJ ld
policy •
The potential and the developl;k '.J.t. of ti'lis ma rket in
;-:i.q3~:i. a
be o.." \nsidered ilnportant factor in ·m y a gricul t ural developT"!l.ent
5
2. 2.1
15>0rtance of soybean products in the !hgerian context, Soybean r.teal and its substitutes Protein concentrates form a substantial part of feed stuffs which
are being imported by Nigeria at increasing rates. as oilseeds I fishmeal, and meat offal meal.
They ax'e grouped
Fi~hmeal
originates
principally from Peru and Chile, and rapid expansion of production of this product is unlikely.
Sinilar to the meal made out of
~eat
offal,
fishmeal is mainly a by-product of the fish/food processing industry . Production of these by-products depends on the demand for the main product3 to which these by-products are linked.
They form only
a minor part of the market for protein concentrates.
Therefore,
variations in consumption and production of oilseed products determine this market. oilseeds.
Table 1 shows the world production of the most important
soybeans have a relatively lower oil content and a higher
meal content than other oilseeds (Table 2). In addition to the higher meal content, soy!::>eans nav", Gi. h. ::, q h crude protein content in their meal compared with other oil r.1cals/cakes (Table 3) and provide amuch larger quantity of crude protein per metric ton than any other oilseed (Table 4). 2.1.1
soybean meal and its price Demand for soybean meal is determined by its price in relation to
other protein sources.
As can be expected, the prices of all the
protein concentrates move up and down together, signifying the large degree of substitution bet"leen t!'lese produc"ts (Figure 2).
6
The price explosion in the world market in 1973 was caused by a combination of rapid increase in soybean meal use and a limited supply of protein concentrates in general .
When the U.s. government
subsequently ordered an embargo on the exports of soybean meal, market prices in the rest of the world went \,.i1d.
This showed the
inelastic nature of world demand for protein concentrates.
Table 1:
~rld
production of oilseeds (1000 metric tons)
1960
1973
1979/80*
Cotton seed
19,579
25,272
25,014
Groundnuts
13,.824
17,021
17,670
Copra
3,299
3,968
4,707
Linseed
3,.123
2,502
2,667
Palm kernel
1,029
1,259
1,382
Rape seed
3,783
7,045
10,180
Sesame seed
1~528
1,970
1,764
28,710
57,310
93,362
6,107
10,932
15,267
Oilseed
Soybeans Sunflower seed Source:
*
Beyer, p. 37 Preliminary data, Foreign Agriculture Circular, FOP 1-81, USDA, Wlshington, D.C.
7
Table 2:
Average meal content of oilseeds
Oilseed
Meal content
Cotton seed
46.5
Groundnut (unpealed)
39.0
Gl"c,mdnut (pealed)
54.0
Copra
36.0
Linseed
65.0
Palm kernel
53.0
Rape
seed
60.0
Sesame seed
49.5
Soybeans
79.5
Sunflower seeds
50.5
(!is)
8
Protein content of protein concentrates according to different sources
Table 3:
Literature source
Beyer 1977
Protein source meal/cake
Houck e " a.• 1972
%
Hoffmeyer 1971
crude protein by weight
Soybean
45
42-50
45
Cott.er;
39
36-43
4 ,)
49
45-56
SO
Sunflower seed
40
37-38
42
Linsee.d
34
32-- 39
3S
Copra
21
22
21
23
20
Palm kernel Rapeseed
33
Sesame seed
40 65
Animal
meal
Skim-mi lk powde r
33
60-73
65 50-65 33
- - -"..__._-"_._._-----------------------------
Cl ollE'.r
p~r
met~ie
ton
9
I"
.. ,.
---._. _,.. . . ...... C." " ••,,, ____ __
.,
~"
_ _ _ _ ' I f UAllIII.AI.
.
_1~4
._"_~.ll.lIU.u
,,,
_. _. _. _. _ ""II'ltli 1 IllUA L
...'
Zit ...
.. . .,
~. •
,..-' "jt.."/ "
",,-
Ji'"
~
...
,"
,,.,
I 1,7 I
••
1 f I " '-". I
I
72 1~ 7/ 46 Pig.2. World me.rkgt prices of p:::oote .i n conce n.tratee ~rom ~960 to 1975. (Zourc4: Eeyer,1977)
,i L
I
.,SA.
10
Table 4:
Quantity crude
prot:~in
per metric tons of oilseed
Crop
Quantity crude protein (kg per ~etric ton) •
Cot ton see ci
181
Groundnut (unpealed)
195
Groundnut (pealed)
210
Copra
76
Linseed
228
ilaltl kernel
106
Rape
seed
198
Sesame seed
19B
Soybeans
358
202
Because the prices in Figur$ 2 are calcl:. J. F. ted on a frotein equivalent
bases~
metric ton
~rotein
several :lJ:ll>::'rtant
coILcl1.1s;.i. ons
ca.!' be drawn.
Prices per
equivalent of all oilseed meals are nore or less
equal but, in general prices of fishmeal are a bit higher due to the large quantity of methionine -- a product.
very
SC8:t.ce
anin.l:::l
Prices of sCtyDaan meal also generally carry a small premium
over other seed meals/cakes because of its favorable profile.
acid in t.ile
amino acid
Soybean meal has a high content of lysine and a fairly high
content of methiodine. contains 6.4\ lysine
and
For
ex~le,
the crude protein of soybean meal
1.4% methiodine; the protein of groundnut
11 oilcake contains only 3.4% lysine and 1.1% nethiod.1.11e; for fishmeal these
(i~'Ures
are 8.1\ and 3% respectively (Vachel , 1974Âť.
A
comparison
of the relative prices of groundnut meal, soybean meal, and fishmeal between 1960 and 1975 shows that
~
protein equivalents there were,
on the average, a 30-50\ premium for fishmeal over groundnut meal and a 10-20'
Pit(~l!J.um
of soybean meal
OVer
groundnut meal.
Relative prices
are listed in Table 5.
Table 5:
Relative prices for graundnut cake, fismneal, and soybean meal (1960-1975
Proetin ,Dr.-ice index
Prote in
%
Meal/cake price i r,dex
Groundnut cake
100
50
100
FishJneal
140
65
182
Soybean meal
115
45
104
E'J:ot.~. t he '.:;,,~
oLse!l:vat i o:1.s, the price far s oybean meal in Nigeria,
should be equal or sliqhtly higher than the price for groundnu t cake. Comparing protein value, it should be
expec~ed
that a feed mill CQuid
pay nearly twice the price for iishmeal compared w1 til 'F,:)undnut cake. Personal
interv ~.('Ows
in June 1981 showed that groundnut cake so \. d at
Ibadan for N320 and fishrneal for N640 which confims the hypothesized price relations.
12
2.2.1
Derived demand for soybean meal The demand for protein concentrates (oilmealsicakes, fishmeal, and
other meals of animal origin) is derived from the demand for livestock products.
In Nigeria, the most commercialized livestock production
is the poultry sector for which the major part of the Nigerian-produced livestock feed is used.
The size of the commercial poultry sector
is therefore the main determinant of the demand for protein concentrates (soybean meal) in Nigeria.
Table 6 shows the amount of protein
concentrates that was needed for the commercial production of Nigerian poultry meat and eggs in 1978.
In calculating these figures, several
important assumptions based on different sources are made.
Table 6:
Estimated poultry protein feed units (~tric tons of crude protein) for commercial poultry production in Nigeria (1978).
Poultry meat production total Commercial poultry
meat production
Poultry protein feed units Egg production total
165,000 33,000 13,900 (a) 150,000
Commercial egg production
60,000
Egg protein feed units
26,400 (b)
Total poultry feed units (crude protein)
40,300
(a+b)
13
Table
7~
Utilization of Nigerian oilcakes in 1978*
Meal
Crude protein**
Groundnut cake
31,638
15,819
PalJD kernel cake
20,981
4,196
Cotton seed cake
3,600
1,440
Coconut cake
3,500
735
59,719
22,190
Total
Source: FAC, unpublished figures (1981). See Table 3.
'*
*'*
First it was assumed that the commercialized share of the poultry meat sector in 1978 was 20l and in the egg producing sector 40%.
Furthermore,
it was assumed that the protein nutrient requirements for poultry products in Nigeria were equal to those in Europe路 and the U.S.
This
implies the required input of 0.44 metric tons of crude protein for each metric ton of commercially produced e99s and 0.42 metric ton crude protein for each metric ton of commericlly produced chicken meat (Knipscheer, 1979). In 1978, Nigeria produced about 385,000 metric tons of livestock feed
70\ of which was for poultry (Adegeye, 1981).
Hith the protein
content of standard poultry feed of about 16\, the utilization of crude protein amounted to 385,000 x .70 x .16
=
43,120 metric tons.
This
figure is consistent with the total poultry feed units derived in Table 6
~O,300
metric tons) which
confi~s
the reliability of the
14 livestock feed production figures of about 385 , 000 metric tons .
the same protein content figure for total livestock for poultry feed
Q,.6'} , the use of 385,000 x 0.16
f~ed
=
Asswning
as used above
616,000 metric
tons of crude protein is derived . As Table 7 shows, only 36% of this amount was covered b::l
from Nigerian origin.
,~;, Jcakes
The deficit has to be offset by .t.mpor':",s of protein
concentrates - - mainly fishrneal and soybean meal.
Import figures for these
items are not available, but prc';o::<:,ional figures for imported animal feed by the FederaJ Office of Statistics (l974路,.1977 } indicate a huge increase
of imported animal feeds (presumably high p rotein feed) during these three years.
This trend appears to be
cont1.~~LLlt :;;
in Nigeria, as well
iSI :":
in other Afr j.c an countries. Nigeria at least in the short-run will depend on
j.~'l creasi!"i'7
of prott;;.',l,;o concentl:ates of which soybean meal i s the
,;.j;~.,p;)~,;:t3
most important on the world r2a.cket ~ .1.3
wng-te~ ___trend
in
r.rab l~
I} .
t::'i~ demar.~~:L.!or SOY~!'搂'~~..
:S;:&
To assess long-te rn; trends of food consunr:)tion a simple fO l.'mula is
uSed~
l:.r: .+ sl11
110f
=
Df
=
p.
=
Population
J
=
Income
e:
=-
income elasticity of tr.'." demand for food
This formula in
~~rds
Demand for food
means the change in food demand is dependent
on the change in population plus the product of Lhe change in tim:",':'7 ~ . ts demand elasticity.
incomf~
15 For food products, the income elasticity (e) is generally between zero and one.
Staple foods have a relatively lew or in some cases even a negati'J€
i r.com€ elasticity, while more special foodst uffs
(such as vegetables and above
all, meat) have relative high incane elasticities. was
t~h own
meat .
the
In t .he p:LE!vious section it
how the demand for soybean :lleal is derived from thE' d.emand for poultry
Given the difference in income elasticitl.es of food staples and meat,
derr~d
for meat product is expected to increase more rapidly than the demar.j
for foed staples.
Therefore, the direct l i nk of soybeans to meat p l.oduction
lIakes the potEntial for their cuI ti vat ion Lr ighter than yam. for example, wIli ch are a staplefood.
Comparably, cassava and maize could face a rf31atively
higher increase in demand since both crops can have outletw to the foon market. The demand for soybean meal is further stimulated by the trend to largescale poultry fanns. cial
liVE~ stock
Assumi ng that poultri is the major determinant of commer-
feed demand for urban areas, the general d emand maa·el is
ui(:x1i ned a.s follows:
l\Dcp
Apu +
£p
~l
Demand c otrmercial population
Dcp pu
Urb cl:)t population
1
lncane
Income elasticity of the demand
fOl:: f; <;. ~ltry
produ9ts Elasticities of the rate of :'.ncrease of urban population vary from 4.6% (OSDA. 19 80 } to 6.3%
iY~:· r1d
Bank, 1979).
Estimates for the incCDle growth rate ~rld
Vcl..l:Y
Here a rate of 5.4% is assumed. O 'fe r
a bronde r range from 2%
Bank, 1979) and 4% (AGERP, 1978) to 6.3% (IFPRI, 1977).
overest.imat.ing a deficit in protein concentrates of 2' is maint.ained. can be obtained
f~:com
I
To avoid
the conserv..-l ':.i..,e figure
Data on incane elasti;:;ities for food items in Ni.;:re d a several sources, incl.uding the (Federal Office of
16 statistics (1966), FAD (1967), Olayide (1973) Simmons and. WJrld lank (1979).
f r nm 0 . 65 to 1. 03 and
U976),
IFPRI (1977),
E'or poultry products, the income elasticities range ~l~l·"' :rage
0 .9 .
I I TA' s estimate of the yearly
j .. crease
in
the demand for canmercial poultry is as follows:
5.4' + (0.9 x 2)%
=
7.2%
This estimate is hig.h er than the World Bmk':3 esti mat_E! for the
increase in demand for _a ll poultry products (conmercial and household p:coduct.:i..on) of 5. U per year. for
cot'ill~erCi3l
paul t%1' and 5.1 % for all poultry) indicates the processing
c~ercialization
and sp¢ci alization of
demand for Frotein ~o a~sess aSS'l..i;:;.'! ~··~ :: j (Ions
(2)
The difference between the two figures (7.2%
concent~ates
th~
poultry sector to which the
is related .
the potential demand for soybean meal, the following
are made:
Q)
no
incr~ase
in gro-u ndnut oil and cake production
an increase of palmoi l/c:ak<: pr-o d ,1;:::titm 'o f :3 .4\ which would be ne cessary
to keep up with the
and (3)
incre a~K
of the demand for palIuoil Obrld
an increase of fishmeal supply of 5\ and
8,
Ban k~
1979)
p resent share of only
20\ soybean meal in the supply :;;;. [ f,::d _,;,-L, <.::,:..-.centrates (in protein equiva-
lents), as oppos eu 'Cc. for palm kernel
calH~,
~iJ%
for
f:~ <:,; :" !.!" " "' ~.
r
50'1, far groundnut cake, a nd
These assumptions lead to an estimates
supply of protein shown in Table 8.
Hr~
i :: ,c;~ ease
of
Tn€.: :soybean meeil supply in Nigeria
would have to increase nearly 30\ per ye ar t o keep up with a 7.2% increase
of demand 1\;;·:;;- p :::-otein concentrates.
Even if these assumptions
a~ ;;
r e laxed
in one way or another, a continuou s growth of---'the pooJ t.ry sector in Nigeria cannot take place without a huge increase in the soybean meal supply.
17
soyb~n..~!~
2.2
and its .s~:s.~.~,!:~ ~1\eal
During the past five years, soybean of soybeans and soybean oil only 37%.
provided 63% of the value
The degree of sUbstitution between
the different vegetable oiis (g:cou:ndnut. oil, pallnoil, coconut oil, soybean oil, etc.) is not as large as in the case of c路L lseed ,:;akes or meals. During the past decennium, Nigeria has changed from a vegetable oil exporting country to an importing country. illustrate this develop;'!:l!:m t \il'ld also indicate
Tables 8 and 10 : :~'; ,:,
potenti""l ci
s(J~ir.x,:"m
oil as a supplement for Nigerian's vegetable oil deficit. The import figures for soybean oil iT,
of
market for 6 0 i 000 HI~;
.'TIE~t :::.~.c:
indic<~ te
tons of sOyb.F :W Ct ::. I
<.
that there is already .:1\ crushing effi ciency
oil frorn soybeans would !toean a production possibility of 333,000
i.,
tnetric tons of soybeans for oil processing f ::;:'.::.rn I'iigi:ri ... area econanically IlIOst suited is north C5: there are ob"rioU<.> J.y
2r~'<>
capacities of
as thr:" grc'Ilmdnut p roduction
2.2.1
~0l-~
i;~.; ~~ 1: ""g:.ant
~:h e
scurces.
r ,,~_ n forest.
oil extracting in
or
The
In addi tiun, gr(.)"und:l1.~ '::.d lls
de c l~<C! <~ ~.;inq.
oil and its price
Observing the price trends 3.nd y :;i CE.
oilseeds commonly
gro~l
r~laticnships
amon~
the
b~u
in Nigeria -- groundnut and palm oil -- the
potent i al price for soybean oil can be assessed. decades, groundnut product ion has Ct?en
de c~.i. ning
During the
p "f 路~.
two
from an annual average
of 960,000 metric ten s during the 1960 to 330,000 in the 1970s (FAD, unpublished figures, 19B1).
also to prier. developments.
This was partly due to disease problems and
18 Table 8:
Estimated required annual increments in supply of protein concentrates in Nigeria
Share
%
Required annual supply increase %
Groundnut cake
50
0
(50)
Fishmeal
20
5
(21)
Palm kernel cake
10
3.6
(10.36)
Soybean meal
20
29.2
(25.84)
100
7.2
Total
Table 9:
(107.2)
Production, fmport and export of the major vegetable oils in Nigeria (metric tons).
1961/65
1973
1980
590.000
675.000
Palm 011 production
666,000
Palm 011 exports
140,000
Palm oil imports
140,859
Groundnut oil production
103,07:3
148,390
70,703
110,796
Groundnut 011 exports Groundnut oil imports Source:
FAO, unpublished figures. *Preliminary estimate.
23 20,000* 82 , 844
4,000>1:
19
Table 10:
Imp orts of soybe an oil in Nigeria (metric tons)
1977
70,777
1978
61,900
1979
50,000
--------1980
60,000*
----------.------
FAO, unpublished figures, 1981.
Source;
*Prcliminary estimate.
'tl:.ble 11:
...........
Ee timated requi i: ,·: d annua l :t ncremer.:::::::: in supp ly of vegetable oils in Nigeria •
"._--_._ -------------
--..
. .. . ... .........
Reql.d ::·t:d
;.mmi. ~ll
supply
% . ~------
-~---
Palm oil
75
3.6
Groundnut oil
10
o
7
16
Soybean oil Other vegetable oils .....
~.-
Total
... --
ir.crease
.......... "
a .. -------_. 100
4.2
(77 .7)
(10) (8 .1)
20
In the early 19608, the official price for groundnuts per weight unit was 1.99
t~es
Northern Nigeria. to as low as 0.94.
the price of sorghum -- the main food staple in During the 19706 this price relationship had fallen But on the local markets, groundnuts maintained
their relative value.
During this same period, the price of groundnut in
Northern Nigerian markets was 2.13 the price of sorghum (annual price average, Zaria, Kaduna State).
Consequently, the export of groundnut
products has decreased radically from 510,885 metric tons of groundnuts and
159.5 metric tons of groundnut cake in 1970 to zero 1n 1978. now imports groundnut cake.
Nigeria
Groundnut processing facilities in Northern
NIgeria at present are uoder utilized and some even deserted. The export of another oilseed -- palm kernel -- also decreased from
181.9 metric tons in 1970 to 41 in 1978.
A recent USAlD/USDA report
(1980) estimates that this trend will continue and predicts huge imports of food products io 1990 to meet domestic demand. During the period 1974/75-1978/79. the price for vegetable oil (palm 011) 1n Lagos increased from 38 to 99 kobo per beer bottle increase of 261%.
an
During 1974/75, the price of palm oil (the major
vegetable oil in Southern Nigeria) was still 0.52 -- the price of groundnut oil.
During 1978-1979, however, the prices were virtually equal (98 kobo).
This illustrates the reversal of a surplus paJm oil
eC '~:lomy
palm oil economy where locally-produced palm oil reached
to a deficit
the same level
as that of the north "imported" substitutes. Although it appears that the high demand for vegetable oils during the past few years has nullified any premium for groundnut oil over palm oil in local markets, Nigerian import figures (FAO unpublished data. 1981)
21 indicated that imported groundnut oil still can:ied a 20% premium over soybean oil gr.oundm~,::
~hich
oiL
would mean that soybean oil is about 70% t h8 r rL::e oth~ r
On the
h and,
us
f~)r
export fig :'ll:-es
0-::
1979/S0 US DA,
1981) show that pd.ces for exported soybean eil and pe anut oil were
virtually equal ($ 620 and $600 per metric ton). 2.2.2
The
lo~&::tenn
trend in the demand f or
sc.Y.2~a!!_
oil
The J ong-tenn demand for soybean oil has been estimated by thesame method described in section 2.1.3.
Howeve r
~
the
d t:m;~~; d
f or soybean
oil is not restricted to urban areas and is not derived from any other producl.
Almual population growth in Nigeria is e s t imated to be :1:1., and income at 2%.
Estimates of the income 81,1sticities for vegetab le oil i n Nigeria
vary fran .49 to O. n
(f""deral Off:lr ',!: of Statistics, 1966; FAO, 1967 t
Olay:i.de , 19 73; Simmons, 1976; IFPRI, 1977; World Bank, 19 7 9 >_ of 0.6 i t, assumed.
Thus, the yearly increase in the
dem a~-id
He t -e a -' ) iJl: lle
f(~ :·-:-
yp./?: etable
oil is estimated to be: D veg.
en -
'3%
(0 •. (
;It
2)' :. %
=.
4.2i~
Again, assuming a stagnant grollr.d:m.1.t o:U production increase of palm eil production of
vegeta't:l .... d J .
i~:::
'[abIes 9 and 10.
d>::);:Jonstrat ed.
3 , ~7,.
;,\,',<:;
do ),:;"~ :d.y
an increasing need for supplEmeDtary
Table 11 is based on the: lO u pply figures of
Vegetable nils from sou !'ce G < .bel: t h an paLTJI.
oil~
groundnut
oil, and soybean oil are assumed to 03Il,.-:;· unt to 8% of the present supply with a growth rate of 5%.
This gives an :i.n.c:.ce ase of 16% ,:;'IlU':.l::: l1.y f o r soybean oil.
22 2.3
Soybean asfoed
2.3.1
.
Nutritional value of soybeans
The major importance of soybealls for food can be related to their high protein content -- about 40% of the total dry matter (Steyn, 1977). Based on chemical analysts, soybean protein compares to hen's egg protein in most of the components (Faryna, 1978, See Table 12).
Compared with
other legumes, soybeans have the highest protein content and also a very high digestive nutrient percentage. 20% is suitable for special diets.
An unsaturated fat content of about
Also soybeans
have a high lysine
content compared with other sources of plant protein but rates relatively poor in sulphur amino acids.
However, when used in combination with
cereals which have a higher concentration of sulphur/amino acids. the nutrition value compares favorably
with all components of animal protein.
The traditional practices in Nigerian diets to combine vegetables and cereals or vegetables and root crops already has this combination. Compared with other protein sources, soybeans are very cheap_ Faryna (1978) presented these cost
equival~nts
for other proteins:
Eggs
â&#x20AC;˘
30 tillles more expensive than soybeans
Beef
=
15 times more expensi\;-~ than soybeans 9 times more expensive than soybeans 3 times more expensive than soybeans
Milk
..
Cowpeas
=
Soybeans do not play a major part in human nutrition in spite of these obvious advantages for two reasons: value, it is necessary
to get the full nutritional
to process soybeans, and they have problems
related to their flavor and flavor stability (Wolf/Cowan. 1977).
23
Table 12:
Amino acid patterns for soybeans and hen's egg protein (Mg/G Total E.A.A.).
Amino acids
Soybean flour*
Egg protein
161
125
Total sulphur amono acids
74
107
Methionine-sulphur amono acid
37
61
Cystine-sulphate amono acid
37
46
Tryptophan
30
31
Threoqine
101
99
Isoleucine
119
129
Leucine
181
172
Phenylalanine
117
114
Valine
126
141
Tyrosine
91
81
Protein score
68
100
Lysine
Sources:
Rackis, J.J. and co-workers, 1961 Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, 1965 Based on total sulphur contaioing ~ino acids
24 ? urthermore, for huma.11. consumption they need to be boiled and
In Ulany Asian countries
fennented.
which have had a long experie.nce
with soybean processing, a large number of different dishes and products are used.
To assess t he potential of soybeans for human.
the Nigerian
situation~
co n ~.;mnptioo
in
it is essential to look at existing traditional
food sources for which soybeans can supplement or be substituted. 2.3.2
Soybean as a substitute
In Northern Nigeria, women produce food flavor out of locust beans by fermenting.
This 'tu:卤.ddawa" or local 11111aggill is a high value protein
source which is increasingly produced with cheaper soybeans,
The
processing of aoybeans consists of several steps, including the removal of the seedcoats, two hours of boiling, and a fermentation period of two days.
After fermenting, the product is pounded and sun-dried for
marketing. Melon seed ("egus i") is of major importance for Ni~c:;c路 i an vegetable soups.
The price has risen continously in recent years which increases
the chances for soybeans to spread as a substitute.
described this use for the Koros two decades ago. and ground to a coarse paste which L ; well
(; ( ; (',ked
YUWA (1964) Soybeans are de husked
to resemble "e>gusi" in
texture and taste. Of greatex importance for the Nigerian situation could be the increased use of soybean milk, especially
fl.::; ;;i "'Te~ning
food.
Protein
reqUirements are highe s t during the rapid growth period of children. At present, the protein demand for a large number 路..:f children is not met even in the villages where vegetable protein 1.13 available.
Soybeans
could fill paxt of the gap if the processing is understood and the milk boiled before use.
After soaking the beans, the seedcoat is removed and
25 soybeans are ground to a fine paste which is strained through preferably
il
clo th
7l.ylon which is already used for other food processing and
available in local markets (Faryna, 1978). The taste of soybean milk can be improved if sugar and other flavoring ingridents are added.
It differs from the taste of cow milk
which is not a major component of local food in kno~~
the problem of substituting a not be too difficult.
Ni2.~ria.
Therefore,
and introduced food source should
Young children are the main target group who do
not as yet have relatively strong and unchangeable food preferences.
2.3.3 20ybeans as a supplement Soybeans are used as supplement in two basic forms -- paste and flour.
In many Nigerian dishes, one of them can be added to increase
the nutritional valu'f:;.
Be cause of the ':l' mount of labor involved in
prepara tion, f ai r ly large quantities should be prepared at one time. Soaking the beans for about 12 hours ",ttll dehuskir~
easier.
a mill to
f!
Dchusked
fine paste.
b~~ns
::1
change of water makes t 'hc
are ground on a grinding stone or in
For flour preparation, soybâ&#x201A;Ź M~, ;; are boiled for
about 30 minutes before soaking them for 12 ,to 14 hours.
'f h e
.
see~:~8
dehusked ana dried before gr.inding or milling. According to Faryna, some Nigerians have recently developed a method of soaking the beans for about term soaking in co1.G
'w ~t t;: :: .
t~n
minutes in boiling water before 10ng-
Th ::l.s is meant to improve the flavor.
Soybean mi lk, pastf : c. and f lour can be added to porridges.
locally-us~d p3lJS
and
In "Alele" or "Moi moit1. soybeans can, s upplement or
substitute for cowpeas ,
In same dishes, a mixture with cowpeas is
necespary because of t he binding qual! ties 0f cov,'p eas ~ paate () : flour
26 can be added to soups used.either with cereals or tuber crops.
The
preparation of soybean patties, together with egg or meat and several compete favorable
~:lth
the traditional food.
As sweet snack
foods, soybean paste and flour can supplement or substitute more expensive ingredients.
Soybean
flour pancakes and high-protein soy
biscuits are already locally prepared. It is possible to improve the nutritional value of bread by adding soyflour.
Locally-produced soyflour could reduce the dependence on
imported wheat flour which at the moment is the main basis for increased bread production in Nigeria. The already estblished local market indicates expansion possibilities for Nigerian farmers' production.
The expansion possibilities may be
highest in areas where soybeans can be used as a substitute for established food varieties. 3.
Soybean crop and farming system
3.1 General Faryna quotes Ezedinma (1965) who gives '. 1908 as the year of the first planting of soybean in NIgeria. Moor Plantation in Ibadan.
Experi,ments were conducted at
Twenty years later, a successful trial was
reported from the Samaru Agricultural Research Station.
Soybeans
originated in Asia, and several quotations (Probst/Judd, 1973) describe a 5,OOO-year period of soybean cultivation.
However, Hymowitz, who did
intensive origin research of soybean variteies, dates the domestication of this crop back to about the 11th century B.C.
He locates it in
North China from where the product spread over other Asian countries.
27
3.2
Data on smallholder production in Nigeria Official information on the soybean production in Nigeria is errati c
and unreliable.
Records are available on the purchases of the Nigerian
Marketing Board for export.
They give 3 t OOO metric tons for each of the
years from 1976 to 1979 (compaz-e Table 13). 1981 Nigerian production of about
unpublished data.
75~OOO
FAO estimates for the total
metric tons are based on
Nigerian sources (Ashaye et al., INTSOY, 1975;
Faryna. 1978) named two main production areas Abuja-Zonkwa area.
Thirty far,,'lers in the Zonkwa area and 36 in the
Benue are a were selected for interviews. 45 minutes) .
production.
Benue State and the
(Each interview lasted about
The aim was to collect general information on soybean Therefore, less emphasis was given to representative sampling.
To have easy and rapid access to villages the existing contacts of local office rs (MANR*) were sought, and the selection of farmers was done with their cooperation.
Yield figu.:eswere not recorded because such high i nputs. surveyed area: 667
tl :l i.:. a
collection reqUires
Different sources indicate these soybean yi elds in t h e 400 to 700 kg/ha (Feder,'11 Office of Statistics, 1977),
kg/ha (750 kg/oa (Federal Office of Statistics, 1977), 667 kg/ha
(Federal Offic e of Strl tistics, 1979), 368 kg/ha (FAO, 1919); 600 kg/ha (Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA}; 330-1090 (.'lv. 70 9) kg/ha
(Phillips, 1916) and 600 kg/ha (INTSOY, 1975). For the survey, more or less standard methods wE"!ra followe d a ccording to Williams (1976); Delgado (1979); Norman et aI, 1979) and Atayi et al, 1980) .
They arrange their data under similar headings.
Obserlations
are grouped around di fi erelYt production factors stlch as land . labor. *Ministry of Agriculture and
Nat~!ral
Resources
28
Table 13:
Yearly quantities purchased by the Nigeria Marketing Board for export (100 metric tons).
1972
4(1)
1973
1 (1)
1974
1(1) (2)
1975
1(1) (2)
1976
3(2)
1977
3(2)
1978
3(2)
1979
3(2)
(1)
Source:
Foreign Agricultural Circular, Oilseeds and Products FOP4-路;i Sl April 1978, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
(2)
Source:
Soya Bluebook 1900, American Soybean Association.
29 (labor calendar availability, utilization). capital (paid and non-~aid inputs) cultivation practices (intercropping, rotation), and utilization method ;;, (hOt's choid processing and marketing).
3.2 . 1 Land Soybean farmers grow soybeans mainly on upland fields which are available in larger areas.
The number of plots t-lith soybeans in the
Zonkwa area averages 1.5 per: 拢ai:"lrie'i:
G.:.:..ci
in Benue State 2.4.
The higher
input data per farmer in Benue Stat 2 suggest larger soybean farms in
rhis production area, The periods be.tw路eerl in Zonkwa about 5 years.
t'-i"~
fallow averaged 4 years in
Benu~
State,
The average farmer gro\.,':; 2 to 3 crops of
soybeans in successive years (See Table 14).
Soybean is rarely
cultivated during the first year after fallow.
The rotation after
fnllow near.ly always starts with yam in Benue State and with sorghum
(guinea corn) in the Zonkwa area. The second
ye~n
with guinea corn nnd
soybeaIls appear ~3ornetimes
) :<:'1.
the rotation
with maize.
of~en
intercropped
The picture is a sorghun-
based cI'opping system in which sorghum/soybeans appear for 2-3 yp.ars at the end of
.3
4-5 year cultivation period.
The majority of farmers use on l y i'. <c:d Farmers who
us~d
h c(~X. y,;g
for land preparation.
tractors (about one out of five in the sample) hired
them mostly fran the government at MB.20 per hectare.
Plant influe~\,::ing
ti~j.cix~g tl~p
of the plants.
101.' soybeans varied greatly.
The maj or factor
3[::o.d.ng was weed control which is related to accessibj.lity
30
3.2.2.
Labor
Measurement of actual -labor utilization data is time-consuming and tedious work.
Therefore, farmers were asked to compare labor use i
0:1.'
soybeans with labor use for other more popular crops for which labor utilization data were fairly well known.
Table 14:
Distribution of farmers according to the number of years soybeans were successvely planted on the same land
Zonkwa
Benue
Total
%
1
year
4
4
8
12
2
years
17
9
26
39
3
"
9
11
20
30
4
"
4
4
6
5
"
2
2
3
6
"
1
1
2
4
4
6
1
1
2
30"
36
66
100
2,;16
2.80
2.6
Continuous cropping
N/A Total
Average number of years:
31
In this area sorghum and groundnuts can serve as benchmark crops as data on labor are colle路cted in
other
studies ,~
Norman (1972; Th orton
(1973); Parker (1978); Norman et aI, (1976), Heys et
a~.,
Williams (1980); and by World Bank and other sources.
(1977);
Labor utilization
data for the savanna zone could be derived from them (See Table 15). The farmer was asked to rank sorghum, groundnut, and soybeans according to their labor requirement per activity.
A short description of this
method is given in Appendix 1. Soybean required less labor than did groundnuts for planting and weeding. as well as harvesting.
Soybean are generally weedeo once .
]>1("
land preparatiun activity was erroneously ommitted :i.n the questionnaire. Based on data from the benchmark crops, it is estimated to be abour 25% (42 man days).
With other operations such as fertilizer and insecticide
application and bird scaring, the total amount of labor used can be estimal;c;(t in absolut.e and relative figures (Table 15).
The fertilizing
figur:: for the Zonkwa region (9.0 man-days/ha) ccr,1,p;;.res well with the incidental data from Nor!uan, et a1 (l9l 6) ccrap::' l c;:! f or groundnut fertilization (10.4 man-days/ha). The relative labor utilization per activity derived by the i~omparative
method corresponds well with the-celative figures that are
directly derived from famers' response t o actual labor input. by this method.
th.~'
question regarding their
The latter figures support the result
obtain ~d
***
,'n~
17.51
5.94
4.45
cry
0.333
0.424
0.364
O. lOt)
0.045
0.091
Actually the relative tabor utilization for planting, _'1eeding and harvesting amounted to only 65.3% of the total labor input into soybeans: additionally 25% (42 manrlays) were used for land clearing. G (about 7 mandays) fertilizing, 0.5% for Insecticides application and 2.9% for bird scaring (aol7rpa1'e Tab l.e 16).
Mandays/ha
utilization data
Probabi1ity distribution of soybean I~bor requirements P(a<y>u) P{b<y>l1) .
Erroneously the land preparation activity was ommitted in the questionnaire
Direct from questionnaires.
(2)
*
Derived by the comparative method.
100.0*** 100.0***
47.0
30.9
22. I
%
(2)
utilization
(1)
78***
85
46
Total
44.9
35
40
16
Harves t i n9
35.9
28
29
20
Weeding
19.2
rrmulays/ha (f) % 11
Soybean labor
Results of comparative method soybean labor
15
16
10
Benchmark crops sopghum groundnut (a)** (b)**
Planting*
Operation
Table 15
0.97
1.43
1. 10
0.27
O. II
0.23
Standardized normal random vari ab Ie Za Zb
N
w
33
Table 16:
Combined labor utilization data for soybean cultivation in Zonkwa and Benue areas
Relative labor utilization Operation
%
Man days
Planting, weeding, harvesting
65.3
78
Land preparation
25.3
30
Fertilizer application
6.0
7
Insecticide application
0.5
1
Bird scaring
2.9
3
100.0
119
Total labor
It is also possible to calculate the stand and deviation (0) that is associated with estimates of II as an indication of the accuracy of the results.
For example, Table. 15 shows that the estimate of labor
utilization for planting is more accurate than
th~t
for harvesting.
Because the labor requirements for harvesting are dependent on yield, a larger variation in the labor utilization of this operation was expected. Table 17 shows the relative importance of different labor sources (family, hired. and community) per operation for the two regions.
The
larger farmers in Benue State use about half their labor from sources outsi<le the family.
Land preparation is the operation for which most
Harvesting
Bi rd scaring
Weedin9
Fert. app 1.
Planting
Land clearing
January
February
Figure 3
March
,.
April
•
•
.,
i
....--------4
•
May June July August September
Labor calendar for soybean production in Nigeria
34
October
..
November
..
December
35 l abor is hired .. of labor. in
For t hi:':' Zonkwa farmers, the family is the main source
I he. main difference in labor use between the regions lies
~ hc ;:¡,<::!: .~I.'e
labor utilization for harvesting (Zonkwa region 24.9%
compared with 37.3% in Benue State).
Differences may be explained
by different seed maturation . T~ !~~;.elbo r
2.
c alendar for soybean production is presented in Figure
In Benue State, where the rainy season starts about one week earlier
than in the Zonkwa region, the timing of the different operations is therefore more variable.
Sometimes planting is delayed to mi.n.imize
rain at flowering.
3.2.3
Other inputs
~~
It was indicated in preliminary interviews that seed can still
germ.m ate after 1-2 years in storage. germinati on p r';;;blems do exist:.
The main survey showed that
FarmerG i n Benue State reported an averag,,:
loss of abo!!! 12r ::;.ec au.';;:, of poor gernd n.,,:tion. Bin~ :'1..~.nd
than 50/; was lost.
de(!ay of seeds
poor getmJnation results in both regions. Benue area).
However, in Zonkwa more
W(,1",.:, i1i'v';n
(Al .~f)
.,13 reasons for
lack of rain in the
Nearly one-third of the farmers replant part or a :U of
their lo st soy beans , All farmers in the sample expect one were. far..iliar with only one variety.
Farmers in Benue State used their own home grown s "",I. but in
the Zonkwa region
ab ;~:\; 1:
one third of the interviewed farmers bought their
seed at the local market .
This is probably ... elated to a rapid expans ion
of soybean production which was mâ&#x201A;Ź:n', :; c ne. d in interviews in that a r ea. The average amoun l: of .seed p l anted around Zonkwa in 1979 was 14.6 mudus (l
mudu ~"
about 1 kg ) .
farmer in 1980.
This increased to an average of 23.2 mudus p,:;'
For farmers in Benue State the relative increase was
36
smaller: from 99.6 mudus to 106.2 mudus.
More than half of the total
sample (58%) reported an increased production over the past five years while one third (32%) reported a decrease. fermented
The production of the
"Daddawa" or "maggi" was given as an important reason for
the increase in the Zonkwa area.
Expansion of cash income in Benue
was mentioned as a prime reason which confirms the impression that soybean production in Benue State is more market-oriented. Fertilizer: soybeans.
Most of the sample farmers (92%) applied fertilizer on the More than half of the users applied single super phosphate;
20% compound fertilizer (15-15-15) and the remaining 28% super sulphate and urea.
Both government suppliers and the local market are important
fertilizer sources. Table 17:
Different labor sources by operation and by region (B â&#x20AC;˘ Benue State; z¡ Zonkwa Region) in their relative importance (percent of total labor input).
Family Region
Hired
Z
Z B
B
Total
.Community
B
Z
3.4
24.4
26.2
25.3
1.0
0.5 0.4
11.2
15.3
13.2
0.1
0.3
0.3 0.3
7.6
6.0
3.1
6.0
1.3 1.8
4.4 19.8 0.4
22.1
21.0
0.5
0.5
_.kS ..
Z
Land preparation
7.7
22.6
13.3
3.4
Planting
7.8
13.9
3.9
Fert. preparation Weeding
4.0
7.0
15.4
14.3
Insect appl.
0.4
0.5
Bird scaring Harvesting
2.4
3.4
0.1
16.7
15.3
19.4
2.8
Total
53.4
77.2
39.9
13.5
Mean
Operation:
2.5 37.3
3.4
2.9
24.9
31.1
6.7 9.3 100.0
100.0
100.0
1. 2 6.8
37 Government stations, however, supply large amounts at low prices t o onl y a few farmers (Table 18). farmers.
From observations, they are the more prosperous
The smaller farmers have to buy their fertilizer mostly at the
local market at higher prices.
In Benue State, fertilizer i s generally
applied by top dressing and broadcasting is a common practice. Zonkwa it is said to be mostly incorporated in the soil.
I~
Hanure is not
used in either region. Insecticides:
A minority of the surveyed farmers (11%) applied
insecticides on their soybean fields. to seed dressing before planting.
The use of insecticides is limited
Aldrex T is generally the br and bought
from local dealers (Benue State) as well as from the Government (Zonkt.a). The average application in the Zonkwa region is 7 packets per farmer and in Benue State 36 packets. 3.2.4
The average cost per packet amounts to H4.
Problems
Farmers in the survey mentioned pest control and economic inputs as their most
~portant
problems.
Birds
(~l%),
rat (39%), ants (17%),
insects (15%) and chickens (15%) were the pest problems most often mentioned.
Approximately two-thirds of the farmers complained about
poor soybean marketing facilities. 3.2.5
Harvesting and utilization The average sample farmer in Zonkwa area produced about 8.5 bags
(about 850 kg) of soybeans per
(no~a l )
year, in Benue State 34 bags.
38
Table 18:
Average fertilizer prices (N/bag) and quantities purchased (No~ bags) by source and type.
Source
Government
Type
Quantity price
Super phosphate Compound (15-15-15) Super sulphate
Local market
% Farmers
Quantity price
% Farmers
9.6
1. 70
24
9.7
3.87
2S
90.7
2.67
5
3.5
6.33
18
9.5
2.38
6
3.4
5.56
17
0
2.1
7.00
17
Urea
Nearly all respondents reported shattering losses during harve sting. Figure 4 shows which quarter of the year soybeans are sold. (86%)
stor~
Nost farmers
before selling and the average farmer sells the last part
of his soybeans up to 6.5 months after harvesting.
Storage is nearly
ah,,'ays done in sacks in dry places. Losses by rats are reported to be the main problem during storage. Of the farmers surveyed, nearly all in the Zonkwa region (93%) and one-third in Benue State (31%) eat soybean "!'!laggi" daily.
Respec tively
27% and 3% of the farmers reported that they eat fried and cooked soybeans. Kafanchan is the nost: important processing and marketing centre for fermented soybean "dadda\"a" in Nigeria. prices.
This is reflected by producers f
During the period of the survey (October-November 1980), Zonkwa
farmers reported prices of )f30 per bag (100 kg), while Benue farmers received only M20.
The distance Kafanchan - Zonkwa is about 40 km but
Kafanchan-Gboko (Benue State) is about 400 km.
Traders from as far as
Sokato, Haiduguri, Niger, and Tc.had come to Kafanchan to buy soybean "daddar,va".
Substitution of soybeans for locust beans is reported in
Upper Volta (Swanson, 1979).
39
Fig. 4:
Percent of farmers marketing soybeans i!l three month sequences of th e year
5~
n
!
I
Perc ent of
f.armers
I
40-\
.
1
~ ...,n
~. .._ .- -1
~u-~
I
1---. ' ~1 ! 1--.--l I
1
I
L
'.
_
Jan-Mar
I.
..........:. ... _
,
I
-- .. .
. .1.. .........." .. . .... '
Apr-Jun
I
.
I
\.
1 , ,1 ' _ .-\4-_.---..~
Jul-Sept
Oct -Dec
40 Only 9% of the farmers (all from Benue State) sold their soybeans production to the government or cooperatives.
During the survey, the
Groundnut Narketing Board bought soybeans for only Nl3S per ton but the farmers may have had other advantages such as a cheap fertilizer supply.
The use of soybean for animal feeds is virtually unknown
among the soybean producers. an increasing number of
~il
Nevertheless, there are indications that mills in Northern Nigeria are seeking to
buy soybeans for processing. CONCLUSION The potential of soybean production in Nigeria is much greater than presently recognized by officials and research programs.
Soybean
meal for animal feeds, mainly for the poultry industry, are being imported in increasing quantities.
At the same time, potenti.8.l ex ists
for substituting soybeans for a variety of traditional human food products and dishes and/or using them as supplements. Soybeans need special processing to use value both for human food and animal feeds.
t~eir
full nutritional
Therefore, research programs
should also focus on processing possibilities under Nigerian conditions. Because most of the production comes from smallholders, their production systems have to be understood in ordel.' to provide optimal improvement inputs.
Several efforts already have been undertaken to
increase soybean research in Nigeria. recognition and coordination.
These efforts need more official
Even though the nation lacks sufficient
data on soybean development and production, the basis for greater production exists ,-,lith increasing demand on one hand and on the other hand production experience of local farmers in the two main production areas.
41
The comparative method for the c ol1ecti.on of labor utilization for soybeans During the survey. farmer were asked to c.ompare the labor utilization for the secondary crop with that for the two principal crops (data known from the literature), assuming a plot of equal size for each of the crops. ~ '2!condary
Each farmer ranked the one two principal crops (sorghum and requ iJ:e.rn o:::c ts.
crop (soybeans) and the
groundn ~ t)
according to their labor
The dervied advantaget: were assumed to reflect the
probability that the labor1:;;;qui.l:ell;..: nts of crop A were high or thar. those of crop B.
l o v~ r
A se(; m:d ';:..:y ie distribuition wi th an unknown
mean (ll) and an unkno~rn. variance
2 (0 ).
r'igure 5
dl 0WS
the h'lpothetical
distrubution of farmers according to t hc Lr ranki n.;; :: of labor requirement:;;. The shaded parts in Figure 5 a l:. â&#x201A;Ź: t1-: e percentages of fanners that consider the labor require:l ÂŁnts of the secondary crop ( y ) lOVJer than that of crop A (expec.ted value = a), and hig'rlLr ;;:;tal:. '::i-!:! t of crop B
(expected value
= b).
The
ass~ptioi1
of u r..;r;r.a l d istri!xlt"jon a llows
the use of the Z-statistic.s where Z is the stnndardizcd nannal random vnriable: v ,-11 .!.
probability
p (Yl<Yll)
which is as s ociated with the
42
Figure
5~
Frequency distribution of surveyed farmers according to labor requirements (y ~ N [~, 6 2 J).
inpu~
Labor use by activity (fill out table) FAMILY
no. of
Activity
people
no . of days
LABCU R S 00 RCE HIRED no. of no. of
people
days
Land prep_
Planting Ferti lizing Weeding Applying
inse cticide Bird scaring Harvesting (Explain "other"
Figure 2:
Example of labor record
(one-visi ~
su ~vey)
OTHEl<
no. of people
no. of day s
43
=
In Figure 2, ZA
-
~
a, where ZA is associated
~ith
the
a probability of farmers j udging the labor requirements of the secondary crop lower than that of crop A.
From the percentage of f armers ranking
the labor input of crop y lower than that of crop A, this p robabilit y can be estimated.
value for ZA'
This probability in turn provides the a s so ciated
Analogously, the value of
~ can be derived.
=
ZB
a
The whole point of the analys is shO\vs tha t:
z
=
+ Z (a) B
(b)
A
In this equation the unknmYn a has cancelled out.
The estimation of
~
per activity provides absolute figures for the
labor requirements of the secondary crop.
From this absolute fi gures
(mandays per hectare), the relative importance of the labor re quirements per activity can be derived.
These re.lative valu es , in turn. s houl d
be compared \dch 'vith relat.ive values that 路 are found else,,,here in the
field survey I,b en farmers were asked to estimate t he nUP.lber of days they worked on the secondary crop.
question.
Figure 5
shO\~s
the composition of th::'s
As the plot size is unknown, onl y relative labor
per activity can be derived from the answers.
IJ t i.1L~<.llion
The comparison of the
absolute figures and the relative figures provide a validity norm this comparat.ive approac h .
l~f
44 REFERENCES
Adegeye, A.J. "Nigerian Poultry Industry Scrambles to Close P rf)tpi I~ Gap" . Intenlational Agricul tur:,1 Development, l'larch, 1981 AGREP
('vorld Bank). TO\~ ards Greater Food Securit y for Niged c: AGREP Division Working Paper No. 13, 1978.
American Soybean Associati oa .
"Soya
Blue b oo~:
80", Loui.s , 1 98(J
Atayi, E.A. and H.C. Knipscheer. "Survey of Foodcrop Fanning System in t he 'ZAPI-ESI Came roon". lEA/ONAREST, 1 98 0 .
Beyer, V.
"Der '-;'eltmarkt fur Eiweissf uttermittel." Agrarmarkt, Studien Heft 25, Verlag Paul Par cy, Eamburg, 1977 .
Delgado, C.L. "The Southern Fulani Farming System in Upper Volta: A ~lode1 for Integration of Crop and Livestock Product:iol1 i i i the west African Savanna." African Rural Economy Pa ;)(; r, No. 21 Michi gan State, 1979. Emechbe, A.H.
The Promi.se and Problems of Soybe2.ns in the Sav an n3 Z Oll.e Proceedings of the Fir s t ~ational Meeting of Nig~rian Soybean Scientists, Institute of Agricultural Research and Training. Ibadan, 1980.
of Nigeria.
FAO
FAO
"Agricultura]. Commodities for 1975 vol. 11
andJtH~5.
If
Romei.'j6 7,
1979 Productior. _._~< 路~, ("book, Rome
Faryn a , l; . .]. :'Soybeans in the Nigerian Diet" (Udofia, ad.). Agricultu ra l Extension Research :Li.a.i..s o!! St::Lvicl~ S, Ahrna<1l1 3ellml University, Nay 1978.
Federal Office of Statistics. "Expenditures Elasticities of the Demand of Household Consumer Good s. " Lagos, 1966. Federal Office of Statistics. "Rural Econol!lic Survey, 1977/78. Agricultural Survey Unie, Lagos, 1979. Hays, H.H. and A.K. Raheja. "Economics of Scle Crop Co-v;pea Production in Nigeria at the Fanner' s Leve : Using Improved Prac U , :路路 ~'. " Samaru Research Bulletin 286, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, 1977.
45
Phillips, T.A.
An Agricultural Notebook.
Longman,
Ibadan, 197 6 .
Probst, A.H. and Ludd, R.W. Origin, U.S. History and Development, and World Distribution. Caldwell, B.E. (ed.): Soybeans Agronomy No. 16. Wisconsin, 1973. Scott, W.O. and Aldrich, S.R. 1970. Stey, W.R.
!1~fodern
Soybean Producti on l1 •
I llin o i s
"Agricultural Research Impact on Soybeans. Special Report 1977. Agricul t ural and Home Economics Expe riment Station. Iowa State University.
Simmons, E.B. "Rural Household Exp enditures .in Three Village s of Zaria Province, l'lay 197 0-July 1971. "Samaru Nisce llaneous Paper, 56. Ahmadu Bello University. Swanson, R.A. "Gourmantche Agriculture t t B.A.E.P., Fada N. Gornms, 1979.
•
Part 11.
Thorton, D.S. Agriculture in South East Ghana." No. 12, University of Reading, 1973.
USDA, Foreign Agriculture Circulars. Washington, D.C .• 1980-81.
Do cumen t No .8.
Development Study
FOP 1-81 and FOP 26-80,
USDA/uSAID. "Food Problems and Prospects in Sub-Saharan Af rica: The Decade of the 1980 I S . II \yashingt 011 , D. C. 1980. USDA/AID
"Food Problems and Prospects in Sub-S ah a ran Afri ca." USADA, International Economic s Di vis i on. \,'ash i ngt on, 1980.
Vachel, J.P. "Use of Sub s titute Pr odu c ts in Lives tock Feeding." Internal Infonnation on Agriculture. No. 130. Commis si on of the European Communities , }lay. 1974. Wolf t W.J. and Cowan, J.C.
Soybeans as a Food Source.
London , 1971.
Williams, L. B. "Benchmark Survey for Sorghum. II Lenchma rk Surveys o f Three Crops in Nigeria Wheat! ~lillet and Sorghum (e di ted) by H.C. Knipscheer, K.H. Benz and F. H. Khadr, IlTA/:-.IAFPP, Ibadan, 1980. World Bank
"Nigerian Agricul tural Se ctor Review." Re port No . 2181-UN1, West African Projects Dep a rtmen t, Agricultural Divi s ion. J une, 1979.
46
Hepmowitz, T. On the Domestication of the Soybean. 408-421.
Econ. Bot. 24:
Hoffmeyer, M. "Die Voraussicht1iche Entwick1ung der Internationalen Folegen fur die Geneinschait. n Hittei1unge.n uber di e Landwirtchaft Nr. 26, Commission of the European Communit i es July, 1979. Houck, J.P. and J.S, Mann. "Analysis of Domestic and Foreign Demand for U. S. Soybe an and Soybe an P roduc ts. " Te chnical Bu lIe tin 256, Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Minnesota, 1968. IFPRI
"Food Needs of Developing Countries: Projections of Pr oduction and Consumption in 1990. II Research Report No.3, 1977.
ILCA
liThe Nigerian Econol!lY, Agriculture and Livestock Sector. 1I ILCA Bulletin No.6, Dec. 1979.
INTSOY
IISoybean Production, Protection and Utilization. t1 INTS0Y Series No.6, University of Illinois~ Harch, 1975.
INTSOY
"A Program for
Soybean Development in Ghana.路 1
t-larch, 19 77.
Knipscheer, H.C. "Rural Retai l Prices (1979-1980) of Naj or Foodcrops in South West Nigeria". Agricultural Economics Information Bulletin, No. 2/81, IITA, May , 1981. Knipscheer, H.C. "Soybean Fanning Systems in West Africa: The Case of Smallholder! s Production in ~igeria." Mimeo, rITA, 1981. Knipscheer, H. C. and L.D. Hi 11. "The Demand for Soybean Meal by the EEe: an Econometric Model". Agricultural Economics Research Report, University of Illinois (in press). Norman, A.G. Soybean Physio1o~y, Agronony and Dt ilizatiol1. San Francisco, London, 1978. Norman,
Ne, .. York,
D.I~.
"A Economic Study of Thr ee Village:.. in Zaria Province~ 2. Input-output Study (Test)." Sarnaru Miscellaneous Paper. No. 32, Ahmadu Bello Univer s it y , Zaria, 1972.
Noman, D.W., J.C. Fine., A.D. Goddard., F.J. Kroeker and D.N. Proyor. riA Socio-economic Survey of Three Villages in the Sokato Close Settled Zone. 1I Samaru Hiscellaneous Paper No. 64, Ahmadu Bello Universit y , Zaria, 1976. Parker, R.N. ItThe Feasibility of Some Small-Scale Development Pr ojects in the Light of a COIlL1lunity's Socia-Economic Structure. II Unpublished y.:. Sc. Thesis, Universit y of Reading. 1973.