Determinants of Income Diversification Strategies among Rice Farming Households in Nigeria: Evidence from GHS Panel-Data

References

[1] Ahmed, M.T., Bhandari, H., Goroncillo, P.U., Quicoy, C.B, and Carnaje, G.P- Factors affecting the extent of Rural Livelihood Diversification in Selected Areas of Bangladesh. Journal of Agriculture, 16(1): 7- 21.2018.

[2] Akinyemi, M., Olayinka, J. A., Junaidu, M., Ekpa, D., Bodaga, T., and Ibrahim, U. M,- The Determinants of Livelihood Income Diversification Among Rural Farming Households in Osun State, Nigeria. FUDMA Journal of Sciences (FJS), 5(2), 79–84, 2021. Crossref

[3] Arega, D.A., Manyong, V.M., Omanya, G., Mignouna, H.D., Bokanga, M. Odhiambo, G.D- Smallholder Marketed Surplus and Input Use under Transactions Costs: Maize Supply and Fertilizer Demand in Kenya, 2018.

[4] Bitrus, A.,. Sulumbe, I. M and Ibrahim, A- Analysis of Rice Productivity among Beneficiaries of Anchor Borrowers Programme in Adamawa State, Nigeria: Data Envelopment Analysis Approach. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, 38(11): 34-44.2020. Crossref

[5] Food and Agriculture Organisation - The State of Food security and Nutrition in the world 2020.

[6] Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, 2020.

[7] Food and Agriculture Organisation. “Nigeria at a glance” http://www.fao.org/Nigeria/fao-in- Nigeria-at-a-glance/en/.food security responses and recovery in the SADC region: A case of the 2002 food report.2020

[8] Gani, B.S, Olayemi, J. K and Inoni, O.E.- Livelihood Diversification Strategies and Food Insecurity Status of Rural Farming Households in North-Eastern Nigeria. Economics of Agriculture, 66(1): 281-295,2019. Crossref

[9] Gebru, G.W., Ichoku, H.E., and Philip O.E- Determinants of Livelihood Diversification Strategies in Eastern Tigray Region of Ethiopia. Agriculture and Food Security, 7:62.2018.

[10] Iraoya, A.O., and Isinika. A.C- Rural Livelihood Diversification in Nigeria: Implications for Labour Supply and Income Generation. Journal of Management, Economics, and Industrial Organization, 4(3): 64-74.2020

[11] Kamwi, J.M., Chirwa, P.W., Graz, F.P., Manda, S.O., Mosimane, A. W, and Kätsch, J. M- Livelihood activities and skills in Rural areas of the Zambezi region, Namibia: Implications for Policy and Poverty Reduction. Afr.J. Food Agric. Nutr. Dev., 18(1):13074-13094. 2018. Crossref

[12] Kennedy, G., Burlingame, B, and Nguyen - Nutrient impact assessment of rice in major rice-consuming countries: Review articles. FAO.org2020

[13] KPMG - KPMG Transparency Report, 2019

[14] Masanori, M., Abu, H., Saifu, Islam, S. T- Mobile Phones, income diversification, and poverty reduction in rural Bangladesh. SSRN Electronic Journal . https://

[15] Rahman, A,- ‘Does Non-farm Income affect Food Security? Evidence from India. Journal of Development Studies, 56(6) 1190-1209.2019. Table 1.0: Factors affecting Income Diversification Strategies among Rice farming households in Nigeria Variables ONF Coef. Std.error OFF Coef. Std. error NFF Coef. Std. error Sex 0.047 0.398 2.302*** 0.355 2.415*** 0.326 Age -0.183 0.118 -0.218 0.131 -0.183 0.116 Marital status 2.515*** 0.507 -2.735*** 0.401 -2.534*** 0.356 Education 0.682 0.884 1.504*** 0.495 1.720*** 0.481 Household size 0.358* 0.211 0.364 0.231 0.356 0.209 Access to credit 0.677 0.519 0.960** 0.400 0.876*** 0.366 Remittance -0.664 0.499 -0.204 0.540 -0.661 0.479 Access to phone 2.115*** 0.381 -2.282*** 0.397 -2.108*** 0.367 Extension contact 1.927 1.551 1.721 1.239 1.92* 1.201 Membership of cooperatives 0.418 0.484 14.691*** 0.829 15.080*** 1.925 Farm-size -0.528** 0.236 0.525 0.245 -0.528** 0.236 Exposure to shocks -0.489** 0.221 0.496*** 0.146 0.489** 0.221 Geo-political zones -0.675*** 0.202 0.517*** 0.177 0.675*** 0.202 Constant 19.733 1213.06 -16.984*** 0.986 -18.661*** 0.910 Model Summary Obs = 646 Wald Chi2 (26) = 148.26., Prob>Chi2=0.0000., Log likelihood= -462.291 Source: Computed from GHS 2010-2016 Table 2.0: Marginal Effects obtained from the Panel MNL Model Variable ONF OFF NFF 114 155 377 Sex 0.102 0.020 0.082 Age -0.013 -0.005 -0.017 Marital status 0.148 -0.065 -0.083 Formal Education 0.011 0.056 0.045 Household size 0.025 -0.008 -0.017 Access to Credit 0.052 0.025 0.026 Phone 0.152 -0.054 -0.091 Remittance 0.038 -0.052 -0.091 Extension contacts 0.117 0.001 0.118 Membership of Cooperative 0.176 0.173 0.039 Exposure to shocks -0.032 0.019 0.050 Farm-size 0.041 -0.011 -0.029 Geo-political zone -0.043 0.064 0.107 Source: Computed from GHS 2010-2016 Data Set

@article{1722928,
      author = {Jonah Ikoku John, Salman Kabir Kayode},
      title = {Determinants of Income Diversification Strategies among Rice Farming Households in Nigeria: Evidence from GHS Panel-Data},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {3},
      pages = {1765-1772},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1722928.pdf},
      abstract = {Income diversification strategies which have the potential of  reducing food poverty among rice farming households  in Nigeria by broadening their income sources is low and  remain a major constraint to food security. This study addresses a critical methodological gap by analyzing actual  choices instead of relying on a continous generalized diversification index. It draws on nationally representative data from  the  Nigeria General Household Survey (2010/2011 and 2015/2016) Panel.  Information  extracted included age of household heads, household size , formal education  status, sex, marital status, access to credit, access to phone, access to remittances, extension contact, membership of cooperatives, farm-size, geo-political zones, income diversification strategies (on-farm, off-farm and non-farm activities), exposure to shocks, income and food expenditure. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and panel multinomial logit regression model. Results showed that 75.54% and 61.61% of the sample households were male in both periods,  with an average age of 45 years and 67.2% and 69.0% had formal education. Furthermore, majority of the households were married in both periods 68.11% and 60.68%, with a mean household size of 6 persons and farm-size of 0.2 ha. Majority had no access to credit, remittances, extension contact and cooperatives. Result of income diversification strategies showed that in 2010/2011, 28.2% , 23.2%, and 48.6% of the rice farming households  diversified into on-farm, off-farm, and non-farm activities and 7.1%, 24.8%, and 68.1% in 2015/2016. Access to phone (β=0.152) and being married (β=0.147) increased the probability of diversifying into on-farm activities, while access to credit (β=0.025) and membership of cooperatives (β=0.173) increased that of off-farm activities. Furthermore, formal education (β=0.045), exposure to shocks (β=0.051), and membership of cooperatives (β=0.004) increased the probability of diversifying into non-farm activities. Non-farm income diversification enhanced  reduction of food poverty among rice-farming households in Nigeria},
      keywords = {Income diversification Strategies, Food poverty , Rice farming households, Non-farm activity},
      month = {September},
  }