![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
UFDC Home |
myUFDC Home | Help | ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Full Citation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Full Text | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 STRATEGY AND PROCESS FOR CHANGING 2 AGRICULTURE IN RURAL NIGERIAI ,? THE BADEKU EXPERIENCE.1 j by s J. A. EKPERE 6 Introduction: 7 Agriculture is still a major sector of the Nigerian economy a notwithstanding the present heavy reliance on petroleum as the primary 9 and most important source of foreign exchange earnings. Agriculture 10 provides gainful employment for over 70 percent of the population, food it and raw materials for the nation as well as capital accumulation for 12 inVe5tment in the nOn-agricultural sector of the economy. For a number 13 of years, the emphasis of Niger-ia's agricultural policy makers 14 was focused on export cash crop production. Agricultural research 1s institutions also invested large sums of money and time in cash crop 16 improvement and production. In recent times however, several factors 17 including high cost of food, urban congestion and inflation has led to is a reversal of this policy. A new dimension to the present situation 1.Paper presented at the Conference or! "Developing Economies in 20 Agrarian Regions: a Search for Methodology" held at the Rockefeller Foundation Conference Centre, Bellagio, Italy, Aug. 4-6, 1976. *Dr. J. A. Ekpere is Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Agricultural Extension 22 Services, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. 23 **The Expanded Pilot Project on Rural Development is organized and supervised by the Department of Agricultural Extension Services 24 with aCtiVe participation of other departments in the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ibadan. 25 The Contribution of Dr. A. U. Patel, Co-chairman, Mrs. C. E. Williams (Home Economics), Dr.(Mrs.) A. 0yemade (Health), Dr. W. C. Weidemann (Marketing and Adaptive Trials) and Mr. R. C. Matthewm~an (Livestock) in the preparation of this paper is highly appreciated. Professors S. 0. 01ayide and L. F. Miller have provided A 7530-2 1 -OiY-4 746 guidance and support for this project. A231 iin Nigeria is a renewed concern for the rural areas and those who live 2 there. In the absence of proven research on how to do a better job of a helping our rural population, it became necessary to initiate action research 4 programmes to try new strategies at getting the job done and accumulating 5 experience. The pilot; project on rural development is one attempt in this 6 direction. 7 General Description of Project 8 The "Pilot Project on Rural Development" is an expansion of the "Badeku 9 Village Development" supervised by the department of agricultural economics io and extension(1) with the cooperation of other departments in the Faculty of 11 Agriculture and Forestry. The project was started in 1970 in one village, 12 Badeku, and expanded in 1973 to 18 villages, and 26 villages in 1974.~ This 13 year, there are 30 villages participating in the programme. 14 DUring the firSt three years of the project, it was reliably demonstrated is that the strategy of operation has immense value for the rapid improvement in is traditional agriculture. However, a programme for agricultural improvement 17 will have limited impact if it does not: cover a sufficiently extensive area. is The project was therefore expanded in 1973 to test that the techniques and 19 procedures used successfully in Badeku can be reproduced with full confidence 20 through a normal extension approach in a group of villages. 21 Badeku, the original village in which the project was initiated is located 22 in a rUral COmmunity in the rain-forest area of 0yo State(1 in Nigeria, 17 23 mileS from the University of Ibadan campus. The expanded project, however, 24 COvers two ecological areas. The Egbeda (Badeku) unit of 19 villages is (1) Now separate Departments of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Extension Services. A284 7530-21-029-4746 1 located in the rain forest zone and the Fashola unit of 11 villages in the 2 derived Savannah zone. 3 The general objective of the project is.to enhance rural development by 4 using the concept of area and regional planning, community involvement, active 5 participation, and agriculture (primary production) as the medium for generating 6 rural awareness, commitment and action. 7 The specific objectives are: 8 1. To create an innovative area. The idea being that the villages should 9 serve as a testing ground to see how quickly and permanently 10 technological changes in agriculture, health, nutrition and women 1i welfare activities could be achieved, keeping in mind that these 12 ChangeS, institutional and organizationaT procedures are reproducible 13 in other parts of the country. 14 2.. To provide a laboratory type situation for concerned staff and they is students of the Faculty and University, in which~can study, observe 16 and participate in rural development. 17 3. To provide a link between concerned research workers of the University, is other agencies and the rural people for whom they work. It is 19 anticipated that the project should make it possible for researchers 20 to COme into closer contact with rural people, enabling them to better 21 understand rural problems and reaction. This will aid in the 22 organization of more relevant research more directly applicable to the 23 problems of rural agriculture and development. 24 4. To provide a basis for promoting local initiative, self-reliance, 25 confidence, and participa-tive involvement in the planning and implementation of rural development programmes. A284 7530-21-029-4746 1 The Plan of Action 2 The plan of action for achieving the specific objectives enunciated 3 above included: 4 1. Selection of the project area with due cognizance for s (a) Size of village and population 6 (b) Nearness to the University of Ibadan campus 7 (c) All season accessibility by road a and 9 (d) Receptivity to change and extension staff by most of the io villagers ii 2. Situation analysis through a bench mark survey to determine the i2 socio-economic and agricultural status of the community 13 3. Formulating a development programme with the village representatives 14 and is 4. Implementation of the programme through village commitment, local 16 OrganiZations and other government agencies. 17 The Situation is The operationalization of an integrated rural development strategy in iv this area was conceived on a thorough knowledge of the situation. This was 20 achieved through a socio-economic survey undertaken in Badeku in 1970 and 21 20 villages (including Badeku resurvey) in 1974. Almost all heads of 22 hOUSehold were interviewed using a structured pre-tested questionnaire. 23 In a few cases, an open-ended instrument was used to obtain in-depth data 24 On Some important issues. 25 The major emphasis in the survey was on A284 7530-21-029-4746 1. Demographic conditions and social organization 2 population, history, culture, socio-political structure, age, 3 male-female ratio, marital status, etc. 4 2. Natural environment location, climate, soil, water and 5 vegetation resources, land use patterns, ownership, etc. 6 3. Infra-structure water supply, roads, communication (postal ) 7 systems, health, education, trade, industry (local and cottage), 8 etc. 9 4. Occupational structure employment, main and subsidiary sources 10 of income, etc. 11 5. Agriculture and related activities land and labour availability, 12 crops grown and cropping systems (sequence) and production, livestock, 13 USe of improved technology, markets, etc. 14 The population of the 20 villages surveyed was 6,367, of which 6,075 is (1,124 farm families) and 292 (60 families) were from the Egbeda and Fashola is units respectively. The average family size was 5.40 in the Egbeda unit and 17 4.87 in the Fashola area. Of the total population, 22 percent in Egbeda and is 18 percent in the Fashola area were non-resident, 52 percent of which were 19 sons. This was an indication that a large proportion of the young people were 20 migrating frOm the rural areas of this State. 21 The predominating religious belief in both areas~ is Islam, practiced by 22 78 percent Of the population. Christians make up 20 percent of the population 23 in Egbeda and 12 percent in Fashola. 24 In both areas, 24.5 percent of the heads of household have more than one 25 Wi fe In the FaShola area, 80 percent of the population have no formal A284 7S30-21-029-4746 i education, and of the 20 percent that does, it was either of a religious nature 2 Or only a few years of primary education. In the Egbeda area, 60 percent of a the population have no formal school education. The population is predominantly 4 Yoruba speaking and relatively more males than females have formal education. 5 Over 90 percent of the population in both areas are farmers (primary 6 occupation). Most of this proportion 60 percent and 42 percent in Fashola 7 and Egbeda areas respectively are full time farmers i.e., they derive all or 8 most of their income from agriculture. Important subsidiary occupation include 9 hunting, trading, carpentry masonry, palm wine tapping, tailoring, bicycle io repairing and blacksmithing. 1i The vegetation in the Egbeda area is mostly rain forest with temperatures 12 ranging from 70oF 90oF ( OC- OC) most of thle year. The annual rainfall of 13 40"-60" peaks in June and October, The dry season is between December and 14 March. The major crops are (26%/ of cultivated area), oil palm (12%), is Kola nuts (12%), citrus (12%), cassava(12%), yam (7%), maize (7%), cocoyam- is (3%~), and beans (0.3%)() Mixed cropping is widely practiced in both food 17 and export/cash crop production. 1s The Fashola area, by contrast, is primarily a derived savannah vegetation 19 area with open woodland and tall perennial grasses. It experiences an annual 20 pafnfall Of about 45 inches within 78-100 rainy days between May and October. 21 The ared iS ecologically ideal for food crop production and most of the 22 COnventional export tree crops of the State are absent in this area. The major 23 CrOps are yam (40% of the cultivated area), cassava (30%) and maize (15%).(1) 24 Other minor food crops in this area include cocoyams, beans (cowpeas), 25 vegetables, etc. The average land holding in this area is 14.78 acres, half Patel, A. U. and 01ayide, S. 0. "Report on the Badeku Expanded Project on Rural Development." A284 7530-21-029-4746 1 of which is usually under fallow with the other half carrying crops. Each 2 piece Of land is usually actively cropped for 3-4 years before reverting to 3 a 5-10 years fallow. Although most of the farmers may be classified as 4 Small Holders, 16 percent of the farmers own 42 percent of the cultivable area. At the time of the survey, all farm operations are performed by human labour. 7Livestock 8 In the Egbeda area, 80 percent of the households owned poultry, 60 percent 9 keep goats and 40% owned some sheep. The mean livestock size w~as 21 chickens, 10 6 goats and 4 sheep. In the Fashola area, 70 percent, 50 percent and 30 11 percent of the households owned poultry, goats and sheep with a mean of 12 22 chickens, 5 goats and 6 sheep per household. Most of the livestock is is managed under the free-range system. About 4 percent of the household used 1J deep litter, 0.6 percent used pre-mixed feed and 1.0 percent have adopted is improved poultry. Some farmers in the Fashola area owned cattle, but management is and husbandry is done by fulani who are employed specifically for this purpose. 17 Cattle is reared mainly for meat, less for milk and rarely used as a source of is farm power. 19 Farmer-Rural Development Worker Contact 20 The results of the bench mark survey showed that even though a large 21 proportion of those interviewed have heard of government programmes for rural 22 development, very few of them have actually had contact with government 23 functionaires or benefitted directly from their services. 241 The table below shows different levels of contact between respondents 25 and rural development workers. A284 7530-21-029-4746 Table 1. Farmer-Rural Development Waorker Contact 2 Farmer ResponSe 3 Category of Rural Gone to/Asked Development Worker Know of Himi Met Him his Advice 1. Agric. Extension Worker 78 57 35 2. Agric. Credit Assistant 49 25 16 3. Rural Health Worker 68 50 25 4. Adult Education Teacher 51 36 25 5. Community Development Worker 28 12 8 1Source of Information 2 Even though radio ownership was low in the project area, radi-o 3 listenership and exposure was quite high. It was by far the most important s source of information, used by 84 percent of the farmers in Egbeda and 5 60 percent of the respondents in the Fashola area. The next important 6 extension information transfer method was method demonstration to which 7 52 percent and 25 percent; of farmers respectively in the two areas have been 8 exposed. Agricultural shows and local language newspapers were minor sources 9 of agricultural information. ro Group Identification and Participation i Several farmers (75 percent of the population in Egbeda and 10 percent 2 in FaShola area) are members of cooperatives. ~But more important in thesE 3 villages is active participation in informal traditional groups. About S60 percent of the farmers in Egbeda area and 46 percent of those in Fashola s area belong to some kind of informal group either for mutual farm help or A284 7530-21-029-746 i credit purposes. These groups were quite active and mnet very regularly to 2 assist members with their several problems. 3 Response to Agricultural Technology 4 The level of knowledge and use of new and improved agricultural technology 5 in both areas of the project is shown in Table 2. Farmers in Egbeda area have 6 heard and actually applied most of the on-going agricultural recommendations. a Table 2. Response to Agricultural Technology 1973 Survey o Percentage of Farmers Who Have Heard of it Used it 1 Practice 2 Egbeda Fashola Egbeda Fashola Unit Unit Unit Unit 4 Fertilizers 89 95 17 16 5 Improved Seed (maize) 95 94 22 14 6 Improved Cocoa Variety 97 -18 7 Chemical Spraying of Cocoa 97 -47 a Improved Oil Palm Variety 93 -3- 9 Improved Cassava Variety 90 22 2 0 o Improved Kolanut Variety 87 1 Improved Citrus Variety 78 3 Improved Cowpea Variety 75 13 13 1 Insecticide for farm storage 85 16 10 6 Ch-emical Sprvay Ejn Naize Farm 85 37 26 4 4 GOVt. Credit and Loan Utilization 90 67 2 4 5 Govt. Tractor Hire 69 62 1 2 Crop not grown in the Fasho'la area. A2'j 75oo-21-o29-':Ms i Public Health and Environmental Sanitation 2 The result of a special health survey undertaken (in Badeku village 3 only) indicated that 6 percent of the households used sanitary pots, 10 4 percent used pit latrines and 84 percent deficated indiscriminately in the bush, a practice considered hazardous to public health by only 8 percent of b the population. About 5 percent knew that drinking water from highly 7 polluted sources could cause cholera. About 92 percent of the women 8 attend ante-natal clinic in the local health centre, but only 11 percent of them were delivered of their babies there. The others had their babies at io home attended mostly by traditional midwives. A high proportion of the 11 children have never been immunized against tuberculosis, poliomyelitis , 12 measles, smallpox, diphtheria, whooping cough or tetanus. There is high 13 infantile mortality,; over 25 percent of the children dying before their 44 fourth birthday. Blood samples from farmers revealed incidence of malaria is parasites and micro fl ora Stool specimen showed a high infection of both is hookworm and ascaris. A detailed physical examination of 150 farmers showed 17 a high incidence of dental carries and gingivitis which occurred in 40 and is 52 percent respectively within the sample. 19 Programme for Rural Intervention 2o The result of the bench mark survey provided basic information for a better 21 understanding of the limiting structures in Badeku and other project villages. 22 Through a process of continuous dialogue with the village leadership, a 23 programme of rural change and improvement was to be evolved, using 24 agriculture (farming)) as the medium for entry into the community. The emphasis 25 Wa 10' --- 0ugbile 1. 0yemade, A. and D. 0. / "Rural Health Activities" paper presented at the workshop on Rural Development projects in N~igeria, Ibadan, April 26-30, 1976. A284 7530-21-029-4746 1 1. Improved maize seed utilization in the production process 2 2. Fertilizer campaign 3 3. Introduction of new crops adaptive biological technology 4 4. Labour saving devices s 5. Expansion of farm loan and credit use 6 6. Improved maize storage and marketing 7 7. Livestock production management and improvement a 8. Water supply other infra-structure and services 9 9. HUman nUtritiOn io 10. Women welfare community centre and income generating activities 11 11. Public health and sanitation 12 12. Group action and !a 13. Rural education consciousness raising and rural awareness 14 programme which was to span all the activities listed above. 15 Strategy for action 16 The success of any programnme depends on a well organized body of knowledge 17 and strategy of action. The basic theoretical formulation applied in this 1.a project derives from two major parameters: "Equilibrium-Disequilibrium and =SZ 19 Clientele Participation-Non participation" in programme decision and implementa- 20 tion. The parameter; equilibrium-disequilibrium is relevant in the context 21 Of rural Nigeria where communities have their systems and forces well7 balanced 22 and neutralized that a state of near perfect equilibrium exists. The rural 23 farmer endures a passive existence in a situation which he is incapable of 24 changing. Based on past experience, he is over-cautious of technological, 25 structural and institutional innovations from external sources. Under such A284 7530-21-029-4716 conditions, programmes of rural intervention are more likely to succeed if a state of guided disequilibrium is created. Equilibrium Was'tage Dissatisfaction Clientele Participation Stagnation Fatalism Cl ientele Non-participation Progress Satisfaction Progress Resentment ,, Fig. 1. Parameters of The, Strategy for Rural Developm-fent*; ia The second parameter of clientele participation non-participation 1, is even more important considering the bureaucratic nature of government 20 ministries having responsibility for agricultural development and rural 21 improvement in Nigeria. Burdened by the legacy of colonial rule, the 22 Nigerian agricultural administration is characterized by centralization or 23 clientele non-participation at different levels. Farmers as a client group not 2j of government have probably received adequate attention in the conventional 2, public administration. The administrators have made very little effort to *Based on A. U. Patel's conceptualization. A284 7530-21 029-4746 disequilibrium 1 identify themselves with rural people and their problems. Consequently, 2 the latter view their activities with distrust and suspicion.(1 3 Externally induced programmes of rural change have a higher chance of success 4 if a feeling of trust, openness and partnership is developed through a participative involvement. b Essentially, this model suggests that in a system at equilibrium, 7 clientele participation serves little purpose. It generates rhetorical a effusions and ideological wranglings which are wasteful and result in mass 9 di ssati sfa cti on On the other hand, clientele non-participation in a state of lo equilibrium results in fatalism, anomie and stagnation. Both cases suggest IT the need for disequilibrium in the induced development process. 12 In a dynamic situation, clientele-non participation is indicative of 13 allienation and dictatorial behaviour on part of the leadership. Such a 1? system breeds resentment even though it could lead to progress. However, is clientele participation within a system in disequilibrium enhances dialogue, 16 trust, confidence and understanding among all those involved in the development 17 process. Participation thus leads to progress and satisfaction. is Operational Processes 19 Based on the general development strategy described above, a more 20 specific process for improvement in rural living through change in agriculture 21 was evolved. As illustrated in Figure 2, this process involved eight steps: 22 Problem identification 23 determination of solution 24 adaptive trials (CyAl's javen 3 25 extension education (1) Op. Cit. Patel and 01ayide, P. 26 A284 7530-21-02Y-4746 1 legitimation 2 contractural services for trials by farmers 3 developing organization for planning and action 4 evaluation 5 As mentioned earlier, the bench mark survey provided a basis for G the identification of broad problems-through dialogue feith the T village leadership. The determination of solution to technical 8 problems was however undertaken through consultation with and 9 visits by agricultural scientists of specialist institutes and the 10 faculty of agriculture at the University of Ibadan. Problem Finding Adaptive Extension 12 *- - IdentificationJ~ Solution Trial Education 13 141 Organization services fo 15 I vlain fIDvlpn -otatr4iLgtmto for planning trial by 10 iiI and action I armers 17 Fig. 2 Paradigm of the process of change in agriculture. 18 Adaptive trial 19 Once a scientist thought that a solution based on sound research 20 was available to a problem, one or more adoptive trials were 21 conducted in a village on a small scale, The purpose of the adaptive 22 trials were to test: 23 1. the technical efficiency and ecological adaptability 24 of the research recommendation under village conditions. 25 2. assess the economic profitability of the new method. 1 3. Provide the extension assistant an opportunity 2 to leamn the new method and determine the reaction 3 of farmers. 4 4. Provide the scientist with an opportunity to 5 anticipate problems that could arise from the 6 application of the recommendations, and r 5. demonstration to farmers. 8 The agricultural scientist had primary responsibility for organ- '3 izing and establishing these adaptive trials with the project 10 extension assistants executing routine activities under his guidance. 11 So far, adaptive trials have been carried out on maize, sweet 12 potatoes, soybeans, cowpeas, adteueo ebcds 13 Extension Education 14 Farmers are educated using a variety of methods to convince 15 them of the superiority of innovations. The method used most often 10 is the village visit during which farmers are contacted individually. 17 The officials of indigenous village groups are educated in the 18 beginning and they in turn inform their members. 10 Beforeeach planting season, project assistants attend general 20 meetings of indigenous groups to discuss new recommendations and 21 their use. A two day training programme is arranged every alternate 22 year for leaders of village groups at the university campus. A 23 newsletter is published in Yoruba(1) every three months and 24 distributed free to farmers. Office calls by farmers are quite 25 important and representatives from three to five villages visit ITi-T Yoruba is the predominant local language. 1 the project staff every month for discussions on credit, market- 2 ing or guidance on technical problems. 3 Each indigenous group is encouraged to grow maize and other crops on group farms through group effort. These group farms are supervised more intensively by the project staff. Thus the group farms serve as an excellent training place for individual members. Legitimation Legitimation is achieved through indigenous groups at village level and the area planning councils at area level. Decisions 10 taken at both levels seem to have group approval and sanction. Also, adaptive trials are usually located on sites selected by the 12 group and/or village leader mad group members accept responsibility 10a for such decisions. 14 Contractual Services for trial by small farmers 15 It has been observed that even though farmers are convinced of 10the superiority of an innovation by observations on adaptive trials 17and further demonstrations, this did not: guarantee adoption. They 18 persisted with small scale trials on their farms and preferred 19 limited size purchase of essential inputs. 20 Under these conditions, the project arranged for the purchase 21 and distribution of inputs on a contractual basis on the understanding 22 that if the experiment succeeded, the villagers will sustain it 23 through their indigenous groups. The farmers willingly paid for 241 inputs and service charges. The process has been extremely useful 25 in helping the small farmers through a most critical stage in the 17 1 adoption decision process. Today the villages have major 2 responsibility for purchasing their inputs. 3 Developing organization for planning and action 41 The project had a very small staff and could hardly stretch 5 itself to satisfy the demands of the villages. It was therefore 6 necessary to develop organizations at village and area levels for 7 the purpose of coordination. At the village level were the 8 indigenous groups and at the area level, the area planning council. Both organizations provided the framework for planning and review 10 of problems and programmes. 11 Evaluation 12 The progress so far made in the project is shown in Table I. Even 13 though it may be too early t-o measure the impact of the project in these 141 areas, one thing is certain, that the farmers in the project villages 15; have now developed a sense of pride and confidence in their indigenous 10 groups as a basis for rural development. They now see themselves 17 as active participants in the activities that shape their reality 18 rather than passive consumers of government programmes and directives. 19 This of course, is the foundation of real change and self development. 20 The Mvinistry of Agriculture and Natural Resources has, through 21 this project, become more aware of some problems of agricultural admin- 22 istration, fertilizer and input distribution and marketing. 23 The agricultural credit institutions in the state have benefitted 24 from experiences of the project and are currently experimenting with 25 new credit policies for the small farmer. PROGRESS DTAB~ OF THE: BADEKU EXPANDED PROJECT Egbeda Unit Fashola Unit Items 1974 1975 1976*; 1974 1975 1976* 1.No. of villages 14 12 17 4 10 11 2. No. of indigenous groups 15 16 23 4 12 14 3. Maize acreage under group farms 107 72 87 63 147 169 4. Herbicides sprayed on maize (acres) 0 0 0 0 0 60 5. Insecticides sprayed on cowpeas (acres) 0 0 0 0 0 5 6. Use of fertilizers (in bags, each of 50 kg.) 15-15-15 0 380 110 0 296 324 25-10-0 0 190 50 0 148 200 21-0-0 100 0 110 100 0 324 T.S.P. 4-5 0 0 34 0 0 7. Loan given by Credit 2/ 2/ Corporation in N 4074 6729 3940 1908 6035 9380 8.Loan due in N Nil 3440 -Nil 275- 9. No. of demonstrations in agriculture: Maize 1 1 10 0 1 10 Cowpeas 3 1 -3 2 Limabeans 1 1 -0 0- Cassava 0 1 -0 1 Maize/Cassava 0 1 '1 0 0 1 pigeon peas 1 0 1 0 Sweet potatoes 2 0 -2 1- Fertilizer application 13 16 -4 10- *Till June, 1976 1/ Most of these dues are owed by only one group (Badeku) which received it: fo.r on-lending to members. This group has invested most of this amount in buying two vehicles, one for passenger pick-up and the other a truck. These vehicles serve the entire village. It also buys fertilizer for villagers. 2/ This loan includes only first instalment. Table 1 Egbedla Unit Fashola Unit Items 1974 1975 1976 1974 1975 1976 Herbicide 1 0 -0 - 10. No. of Women's Clubs 1 2 2 0 0 4 11. Women's cassava group farms 0 0 0 0 4 12. Construction of Community Hall by Women 0 0 1 0 0 13. Health activities: Demonstrations/1ectures on- wound treatment 0 0 4 0 0 1 Boiling drinking water 1 0 10 0 0 5 Breast feeding 0 2 8 0 1 2 Teeth Cleaning 0 2 4 0 0 2 Weaning of infants 0 4 4 0 0 2 Environmental sanitation 2 2 6 0 0 4 Care of umbilical cord 0 6 0 0 2 Causes of malnutrition 0 0 12 0 0 4 14. Meetings with native midwives 0 0 4 0 0 1 15. Vaccination: S.P. O 150 0 0 T.B. O 360 -0 0 D.P.T. O 160 26 0 0- Polio 0 166 26 0 0- B.C.G. O 0 599 0 0 Measles 0 0 92 0 0 16. No. of villagers trained on University campus: Farmers 46 5 -0 11 Youth 0 13 0- 17. No. of villagers on field-trip 188 55 -0 30 18. No. of youth clubs 1 4 4 0 1 1 19. No. of Area Planning Council Meetings 11 12 5 11 12 5 - 2- Egbeda Unit Fashola Unit Items 1974 1975 1976 1974 1975 1976 -3- No. of Home Economics Demonstrations: Maize recipe - -O -O Cowpea recipe Gbegiri Soup Problems ~Encountered 1. Local Leadership: The achievements of the project have not been without problems and hardship. Perhaps the biggest problem was that of developing local leadership and village level infra-structure and organization that could take up the responsibility for farm supplies, credit and marketing. 2. Technological and physical constraints The major crop of emphasis in both areas is maize. In the Egbeda area land availability and level of fertility is a major problem - particularly with minor elements such as zine, sulphur and magnesium. The land problem is being contained through continuous maize cropping and high corrective doses of fertilizer. In the Fashola area, weeds (Imperata cylinderica) is a major problem. This is presently being tackled with herbicide adaptive trials, demonstrations and use. 3. Labour Rural wage structures are least attractive to rural labour if and when such labour is ever available. It i~s now an observable phenomenon for migrant labour to bye pass farm work in favour of unskilled urban jobs even where the associated real wages are less than rural wages. Measures such as tractor ploughing and use of herbicides are being re- sorted to in order to solve the labour problem. 4. Institutional Constraints_ (a) Maize marketing has been a major source of concern. Usually, there is no ready market for new varieties of maize which rural home makers say is not suitable for the preparation of local diets. Those who are willing to try new varieties are usually prevented by perceived hazzard of insecticides applied to grains during storage. Not only does the ministry of agriculture buy maize through contractors but offers very low prices when it buys directly from farmers. Local maize users (feed companies) are substituting millet, sorghum and wheat bran for maize in their feed, consequently, there is low demand. (b) Inter-Agency Co-ordination The field and divisional staff of different development ministries usually do not meet to plan and implement a coordinated approach to rural development. Usually, government functionaries tend to work in isolation. The system of advisory committee, area planning council and village level indigenous groups developed within the project has helped with providing coordination and complementary support. (e) Supply of farm inputs The supply of fertilizer and other agricultural chemicals by accredited government agents continues to be a source of problem with specific reference to timely farm operations. Sometimes, fertilizers are sold in too large quantitities than the farmer needs or can afford. Tractor time and production credit usually reach the farmer too late to have the desired effect. The project continues to work closer with the relevant agencies to improve the input supply situation. Summary and Conclusions The pilot project on rural development discussed in this paper is essentially an action research aind service programme designed primarily to test how to plan and implement rural development programme with those affected cooperating. So far, the project has demonstrated that with the right type of leadership and ecologically adaptable technology, scientists, farmers and rural development workers will participate in the planning and execution of programmes for rural improvement . It is important that such a programme should be based on a thorough knowledge of the local situation and needs of the people. These should be a deliberate attempt to develop local organizations and institutions that could assume responsibility for further programming and action as the project winds up and moves on to duplicate its activities somewhere else. Problems will continue to arise, but a good project should anticipate such constraints and plan appropriate solutions as they occur. An essential philosophical premise of this approach to agrarian development in third world nations is that: its successful. replication around the country is necessary for the realization of its full benefit. Preliminary results from this project suggests that this is possible. |