Agric. sci. dev., Vol(3), No (12), December, 2014. pp.

387-389

TI Journals

ISSN:

Agriculture Science Developments

2306-7527

www.tijournals.com

Copyright 2014. All rights reserved for TI Journals.

Democratic Dividends, as Perceived by Farmers in Ebonyi State

(A Case Study of Agricultural Sub-side)
Ernest Ituma Ogba
Department of Technology and Vocational Education, Agric Education Unit, Ebonyi State University, P.M.B. 053, Abakaliki, Nigeria.

Ominyi Samuel Eze *

Department of Technology and Vocational Education, Agric Education Unit, Ebonyi State University, P.M.B. 053, Abakaliki, Nigeria.
*Corresponding author: ominyieze@yahoo.com

Keywords

Abstract

Democratic
Dividends
Perceived
Farmers
Agricultural Sub-sidy

The study focused on the perception of farmers on agricultural sub-sidy as a democratic dividends, in Ebonyi State.
The area of the study is Ebonyi State of Nigeria. Ebonyi is one of the states in the South-East of Nigeria. The
design of the study is descriptive survey design. The population for the study is 673 farmers in Ebonyi State. The
sample for the study was one hundred and eighty farmers (180) drawn from five farming areas, (Rice farmers,
cassava farmers, piggery farmers, maize farmers, fish farmers). The researchers developed an instrument called
democratic dividend in Ebonyi as perceived by farmers in agricultural sub-sidy questionnaire. (DDEPFASSQ). The
instrument was validated by three experts, one in measurement and evaluation in the department of science
Education and two in technology and vocational education in agricultural Education of the Faculty of Education,
Ebonyi State university-Nigeria. The internal consistency of the instrument was tested using crown back Alpha
reliability coefficient, which yielded 0.76. That was good enough for the study. The instruments were administered
on the farmers with the help of two Research Assistants. The data collected was analyzed using yes and No, simple
percentage that expresses the value of yes and No from the responding farmers. The result revealed that agricultural
sub-sidy is not given to five farming areas (Rice farmers, cassava farmers, piggery farmers, maize farmers, fish
farmers) in Ebonyi State. Majority of the respondents maintain that they have not experienced any of the sub-sidy.
It revealed that governments have not been giving enough supports to farmers with the needed sub-sidy for more
food production in the state. It was recommended that government should give farmers needed assistant in the area
of Agricultural sub-sidy as dividends of democracy to improve their level of production.

Introduction
The primary function of any Government is to provide the essential needs of his citizenry to ensure the full development of their potential. The
provision of such essential need brings their view point to full participation in the government policy, all over the world. The citizen
participation in terms of benefits is the reason why democracy may be regarded as the best government that allows citizen to actualize their
potentials and opportunities. Democracy expresses freedom and sustains societal progress and development (Abdulahim, (2008). Nwankwo
(2007), maintain that democratic government put in place things that will benefit individuals and group rather than limiting progress and
opportunities in the society with their authorities. Ajayi (2009) explained democracy as the open polity which is accessible to the entire
citizenry. In the context of this work, the researchers view democracy as institutional arrangement for arriving at political decision in which
leaders acquire power to decide for others. This implies that democracy has dividends. According to Danjuma, (2008), dividends are the element
that hold, sustain, and justify democracy. In his view, dividends attract the electorate to follow and participate fully during the electioneering
campaign with the view that dividends of the democracy will reach them when their candidate of interest wins the election. Mohamedu, (2005)
explained dividends as good things which democracy will attract to the individuals, groups and society in general. In the same vein Nweke
(2005), described dividend as the infrastructural development, Agricultural support (Sub-sidy) Electricity, roads, hospital among others.
Democratic dividends in the context of this study implies money and other items which are granted to the farmers by the government or to the
agricultural sectors in general that assist farmers to boost agricultural production. Ohakwe (2009), see dividends as financial support which
democracy normally attract to agricultural sector to produce more food to feed her citizenry. In the view of Ademola, (2006) many past
democractic government in Nigeria had made empty announcements, in radio and television on dividends of Democracy given to the farmers, in
terms of sub-sidy to boost production in agriculture. In the same vein Ayodele (2006), explained that agricultural sectors have suffered a lot,
because of government failures to give sub-sidy to farmers in different areas of agriculture. The sub-sidy like finance, chemicals, improved
seeds, fertilizers, livestock, seedlings, equipment and Machineries among others to the farmers. Furthermore, Ogba, (2009) maintain that over
85% of food consumed and fiber crops needed in domestic industries are produced by the farmers. He stress that farmers need not to be
abandoned, frustrated in terms of agricultural sub-sidy to produce more food for the country. In another development, Njoku, (2007) stated that
farmers in Nigeria is over 80 million out of 141 million recorded in the 2006 Census figure. However, farmers in Ebonyi State in particular,
being an agrarian community as well as the food basket of the Nation, are well over twenty four thousand. It is based on this premise that the
researchers were motivated to investigate how the democratic dividends, as perceived by farmers in agricultural sub-sidy in Ebonyi State is
being implemented by government.

Statement of the Problem

The nature and dispensing of democratic dividends by successive governments on agricultural sub-sidy to the farmers has long been marked with
complete failure and disappointment. This ugly situation was highlighted by the minister of Finance and the coordinating minister for the
economy Dr. Ngozi Okonjo Iwwuala during her briefing on the performance of government in different Areas of the economy at the centenary
night in Abuja on 1st march 2014, (centenary night ceremony march 2014). She pointed out the level of scandal perpetrated by officials of past
governments on the distribution of fertilizers as an Agricultural subsidy to farmers, which the present government has made tremendous progress
in addressing. Since farmers produce the bulk of food consumed in Ebonyi and Nigeria in general, the dividends of democracy on agricultural
sub-sidy need to have impacted more on food production in Ebonyi State. The situation is that we rely on importation of most staple food items

Itume Ernest Ogba, Ominyi Samuel Eze *

388

Agriculture Science Developments Vol(3), No (12), December, 2014.

like rice, wheat, maize, and others. The much dependent on importation of these essential food items seem to suggest that government is not
doing enough in the area of encouraging farmers to produce more in the way of giving them Agricultural sub-sidy as dividends of democracy in
the state. This situation calls for empirical investigation, hence the choice of this study to ascertain the level of democratic dividend in
agricultural sub-sidy on five farming areas in Ebonyi State.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to ascertain the democratic dividends, in Ebonyi as perceived by farmers on agricultural sub-sidy.
Specifically, the study tends to quantify the perception of farmers in five farming areas:
1. Rice farming area,
2. Cassava farming area,
3. Fishery farming area,
4. Piggery farming area,
5. Poultry farming area.

Methodology
One research question sub-divided into five farming areas guided the study. The study was carried out in Ebonyi State of Nigeria. Ebonyi state is
one of the states in the South East of the country. The design of the study was descriptive survey that collects, analyze and describe data about a
given population (Eze, 2009). In the opinion of Owens (2002) survey research design is that in which the same information is gathered from an
unbiased representative group of interest. The population for the study was 673 farmers, while the sample for the study is 180 farmers that were
randomly selected in five farming areas. 36 farmers were selected in each of the five farming areas in Ebonyi State. The researchers developed
an instrument called democratic dividend in Ebonyi State as perceived by farmers in agricultural sub-sidy Questionnaire,(DDEPFASSQ). The
instrument was divided into five farming areas. The instrument was face validated by three experts, one in measurement and evaluation in the
department of Science Education and two in Agricultural Education unity in the Department of Technology and Vocational Education, of Ebonyi
State University. The instrument was trial tested and was considered appropriate for the study. The instruments have sections. (Section A E,
indicating the five farming areas, involving 25 item statements. The instrument was administered on the farmers with the help of two research
assistants. The data collected was analyzed using simple percentages.
Yes and No responses were used to determine the availability or non-availability of Agricultural sub sidy to farmers as democracy dividends in
Ebonyi State.

Results
The results of the study were obtained from the research questions answered through the data collected and analyzed as presented in table 1
below:
Research Question 1
Do farmers in Ebonyi State benefit from agricultural sub-sidy as dividends of Domocracy in Rice farming, Cassava farming, Fishery, Piggery,
and Poultry farming areas?
The data for answering the research question were presented in table 1
Table 1. Percentage response as Perceived by Farmers on Agricultural Sub-Sidy in five farming Areas in Ebonyi State.
S/N
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5

Section A: Rice Farmer item statement

The policy of given rice farmers agricultural sub-sidy is very effective in Ebonyi (Tractor Hiring)
Registered farmers receive agric sub-sidy.(equipment)
Equal number of agricultural sub-sidy is given to all the registered rice farmers (Chemicals).
There is no lay down, policy on agricultural sub-sidy to rice farmers(Fertilizer Distribution)
No rice farmer have received agricultural sub-sidy from government (improved rice variety)
Section B: Cassava Farmers
The best cassava farmer for the year receive special agricultural sub-sidy( Tractor)
The issuance of agricultural sub-sidy to cassava farmer is not noticeable in Ebonyi. (Fertilizer)
The government action on agricultural sub-sidy to cassava farmers favour the masses. (Improved cassava cuttings.
The issuance of agricultural sub-sidy to cassava farmers by ministry of agriculture is biased decision. (Finance)
Agricultural sub-sidy to cassava farmer is radio and television announcement without reality.
Section C: Fishery Farmers:
Politicians benefit from agricultural sub-sidy in fishery production (fingerling fish)
All fish farmers benefit from agric sub-sidy equally without biased.
Government have no policy on fishery sub-sidy (feeds)
Fishery farmers do not get money from government as sub-sidy(finance)
Fishery farmers have no association to approach government for any sub-sidy (improved stock).
Section D: Piggery farmers
Piggery farmers do not receive agric sub-sidy in the state (improved stock)
Ministry of agriculture has no policy in agric sub-sidy in piggery production (House project)
Politician may decide to issue agric sub-sidy to their members only (Feeds).
Political differences have reduced agricultural sub-sidy to nonmembers of their party (finance)
Piggery farmers is not in the programme of government so farmers sponsor their farm.
Section E: Poultry Farmers
Poultry farmers do not receive agricultural sub-sidy from government in Ebonyi (livestock )
Agricultural sub-sidy in poultry farming do not exist in Ebonyi. (Housing Finance)
Poultry farmers have no association to approach, government on agricultural sub-sidy (feed)
Government budget do not accommodate agric sub-sidy (drugs and supplements)
Poultry farmers interest in agric sub-sidy is denied because of injustice

YF
20
5
10
2
10
YF
3
10
8
172
176
YF
150
15
168
170
168
YF
5
15
14
146
155
YF
160
165
170
156
160

Key=N=number of respondents, Yf=yesfrequency responses, Nf=nofrequency responses, Y%=Yespercentage responses, N%=Nopercentage responses.

NF
160
175
170
178
170
NF
177
170
172
8
4
NF
30
165
12
10
12
NF
175
165
166
34
25
NF
20
5
10
24
20

Y%
11.1
2.7
5.6
1.1
5.6
Y%
1.7
5.6
4.4
95
97.8
Y%
83.3
8.3
93.3
94.4
93.3
Y%
2.7
8.3
7.8
81.1
86.1
Y%
8.9
91.7
97.2
86.7
88.8

N%
88.8
97.2
94.4
98.8
94.4
N%
98.3
94.4.
95.6
4.4
2.2
N%
16.6
91.7
6.7
5.6
6.7
N%
97.2
91.7
92.2
18.9
13.9
N%
11.1
2.7
5.6
13.3
11.1

389

Democratic Dividends, as Perceived by Farmers in Ebonyi State (A Case Study of Agricultural Sub-side)
Agriculture Science Developments Vol(3), No (12), December, 2014.

The data on section A, item 1 show that 160 respondents representing 88.8% indicated that there is no effective policy in Ebonyi State for giving
farmers Agricultural sub-sidy through tractor hiring. Items 2 also show 170 respondents representing 94% who indicated that registered Farmers
do not even receive subsidy especially in respect of supply of Agricultural Equipment. Data on item 4 indicated that there is no lay down policy
on Agricultural subsidy on Fertilizer distribution in the State
The data shown on table 1 revealed that agricultural sub-sidy is not given in five farming areas in Ebonyi State. Data reveal that majority
maintain that they have not experienced any agricultural sub-sidy. It revealed that government has not been supporting farmers with the needed
sub-sidy as democratic dividend for more food production in the state. This implies that farmers were abandoned, and denied of Agriculturalsub-sidy in five farming areas even as the media houses make noise about democratic dividends to farmers in the state.

Results and Discussion

The result of the study revealed that rice farmers majority opinion is that agricultural sub-sidy policy have not been observed in terms of
hiring tractors, equipment, chemicals, fertilizer, and improved rice variety. This result confirm the study of Nweke (2008) who stress that
agricultural sub-sidy to rice farmers is only in radio and television stations than reality. That rice farmers do not benefit from the so called
government subsidy.
Section B: Cassava farmers maintain that agricultural sub-sidy on tractor hiring, improved cassava sticks, fertilizer, finance, or credit scheme
does not exist in cassava farming in Ebonyi State. This is in line with Abdulahim (2009) who maintained that cassava farmers were not assisted
in agricultural sub-sidy for more cassava production. That Farmers depend on their personal savings for their farming activities.
Section C: Fishery farmers: Fishery farmers confirmed with majority opinion that they do not benefit from government agricultural subsidy
rather; politicians are the people that benefit from such sub-sidy like fish fingerling, feed, and finance, improve stock, if such policy exist at all.
This is in line with the study of Odo (2005) who maintained that farmers are abandoned, and agricultural sub-sidy is not given to them, to
improve agricultural production in the state.
Section d: Piggery Farmers: Piggery farmers maintained that such dividends of democracy as agricultural sub-sidy has not been extended to
them Since improved stock, finance, feeds, housing project, drugs are gotten through self-sponsor by piggery farmers. This is in line with the
study of Njoku (2009) who revealed that piggery farmers depend on personal effort in the farming activities. That government has no policy of
assisting farmers to improve production in the state.
Section E: Poultry Farmers: Result indicate that the policy of agricultural sub-sidy has not been felt by poultry farmers in terms of livestock,
finance, Housing project, feed, drugs, additive among others. This study is in line with the study of Okonkwo (2010) who stressed that poultry
farmers depend on self-effort and do not experienced any agricultural sub-sidy from government which is the primary responsibility of the
ministry of agriculture.
This study have revealed that democratic dividends as agricultural sub-sidy do not impact on the five farming areas in Ebonyi State. This implies
that dividends of the polity have not imparted much on farming families for more food production in respect to agricultural sub-sidy in the five
farming areas in Ebonyi State.

Conclusion
The effective element of democratic dividends to farmers is the agricultural sub-sidy given to them by the government to ensure more food
production for her citizenry. The dividends as agricultural sub-sidy include fertilizer distribution to the farmers, improved livestock, improved
seeds and seedlings, feeds, drugs, feed additives, chemicals, tractor hiring, equipment distribution among others. When these and others are not
given to farmers to increase their production level, it implies the democratic dividend as agricultural sub-sidy has been denied from farmers.
Therefore, the government is not living to its expectation, and has abandoned farmers. Farmers should be given their deserved support to feed
the nation.

Recommendation
The researchers put forward the following recommendations
1.
That government should give farmers needed assistant to improve their level of production.
2.
That Non-governmental organization should assist them equally in distribution of fertilizers, seeds, and livestock, to the farmers.
3.
Farmers should pool their resources together to form co-operatives as ways of getting supports and savings

References
Abdulahim A.O. (2008). Democracy in Action Third Tier, Benue Gambo Press.
Abdulahim N.K. (2009). Implication of Agricultural Sub-sidy on Farmers Product in Nigerian. Kaduna, Gambo, Press.
Adam 2009). Agriculture and National Development Plan in Nigeria, Unpublished Manuscripts, Ministry of Agriculture, Mina, Eko Press.
Ademola, R.S. (2006). Food Security in Nigeria, Hand of Agriculture, Awka Zik Press.
Ajayi S.N. (2008) Financial and Sub-sidy Impact on Agricultural Sector. Ibadan, Lawal Press.
Ayodele, M. (2006). Self-Teaching Manual in Agriculture. Ibadan, Carlos Press.
Danjuma D. (2008). Democracy Dividends as Element of Polity. Koji, Sambo, Press .
Eze M. E. (2009). Agricultural Development in Sub-Africa. Awaka Zimba Press.
Mohamedu N. (2005). Element of Democracy in 21st Century. Benue, Muok Press.
Njoku, C.O. (2007). Development Policy And Analysis In Agriculture. Enugu, Noble Press.
Nwankwo B.O. (2007). Agricultural Policy And Financial Assistance On Food Production Sector. Unpublished Manuscript Ministry of Agriculture. Enugu.
Nweke (2005). Agriculture and Economic Empowerment in Nigeria, Awka, Sunku Publisher.
Nweke, S. (2008). Agricultural Sub-sidy, as Government Contribution to Food production, Unpublished Manuscript, Ministry of Agriculture, Cross River.
Odo M.O. (2005). A Handbook of Agricultural, Impact And Records. Aba, Campred Press.
Ogba, E.I. (2008). New Generation Agricultural Science For Secondary Schools, Enugu, Immaculate Publisher.
Ohakwe S.O. (2009). Nigerian Journey So Far in Polity. Awka, Sumo Press.
Okonkwo R.O. (2010). Agricultural Impact for National Development Journal of Agric. 5(2) 15-19.