Beta Fulltext view is in preview — article structure may vary. Browse all articles
Contents
Food Science & Nutrition Technology Research Article 15 min read

Effects of Crop Farmers’-Pastoralists’ Conflicts on Agricultural Extension Practice and Services Delivery in South - East, Nigeria

Ajaero JO* and Aminu GO*
* Corresponding author
ISSN: 2574-2701  10.23880/fsnt-16000269  Received: May 03, 2021  Published: May 15, 2021
  views
 30 references
 4 tables
PDF
Keywords
Agriculture Conflict Extension Service Pastoralists Crop Farmers
Abstract

Conflicts disrupt every economic activities of man including extension activities. This study investigates the effects of Crop farmer/pastoralist conflicts on agricultural extension practices and services delivery in South east, Nigeria. The specific objectives were to examine perceived extension practices and services in the area; identify causes of crop farmer/ pastoralists’ conflicts in the area and determine perceived effects of conflicts on agricultural extension services delivery in the study area. A total 452 workers was purposively selected for the study. Percentage, mean and standard deviation were used to analyze the data collected with the aid of questionnaire and interview (oral). The results showed that the extension workers educate rural farmers with a mean (M) response of 3.60, training farmers on new practices (M=3.68), organize demonstrations (M=3.43), keep record of visits (M=3.40), conduct needs assessments (M=3.30), organize extension campaigns(M=3.42) among others. The causes of conflicts include disagreement over access to land and use of water with 88.5% and 87.8% responses respectively, ownership/right to land (100%), right to use water (94.6%), migration (84.9%), lack of respect for traditional authority with 88.9%. Conflicts disrupts extension practices and services delivery by limiting the cooperative activities of farmers used by extension workers (M=2.87), prevents acquisition of training by extension workers (M=2.87), destroys knowledge transmission channels (M=2.87), makes programme monitoring difficult (M=2.91), delays completion of extension work (M=3.41), leads to abduction of extension workers (M=3.15) and disrupts extension work plan (M=3.19).

Introduction

Expansion schooling is a social science that recquires alluring changes complex human conduct. In rustic settings, augmentation administrations are answerable for engaging ranchers Hellin [1] for joint learning and aggregate activity Höckert & Ljung [2] for battling provincial neediness and food uncertainty through innovation move, supporting country grown-up picking up, helping ranchers in critical thinking and getting ranchers effectively associated with the rural information and data framework [3]. Through persistent expansion mediations and utilizations of different strategies and approaches in augmentation programs, the ideal change in human activities is conceivable. The comparative recorded perspectives were shared by van der Ban and Hawkins that the objectives of horticultural augmentation included moving data from the worldwide information base and from nearby examination to ranchers, empowering them to explain their own objectives and potential outcomes, instructing them on the best way to settle on better choices, and invigorating attractive agrarian turn of events.

Accordingly augmentation administrations give human resources upgrading inputs, including data streams that can improve provincial government assistance—a significant result since a long time ago perceived in the advancement exchange [4]. Further, the way of thinking of expansion work doesn’t restrict to instruct ranchers with respect to imaginative advances, yet additionally illuminating to perceive the interesting circumstance that thwarts the method of selection of various advances by the cultivating networks. In this manner, it is significant for expansion warning staff to get responsible for refereeing among ranchers [5]. Agrarian expansion plays a featuring job in farming and country advancement consequently is viewed as an approach apparatus for advancing the security and nature of horticultural items [6].

Rural augmentation administration conveyance has assumed a huge part in improving agrarian creation in Nigeria through arrangement of data on improved procedures of creation. Farming expansion assumes a vital part in guaranteeing the mindfulness and resulting appropriation of improved innovations utilizing different augmentation instructing strategies. This will improve efficiency and increase the living expectations of the ranchers who are the significant recipients [7]. Despite the fact that there stays a dominance of limited scope ranchers in Nigeria, the appropriation of improved procedures of cultivating keeps on affecting decidedly on farming. In the course of the most recent thirty years for example, interests in horticultural expansion exercises by governments and unfamiliar accomplices have yielded eminent profits for the ranchers and the country everywhere [8]. Disregarding all the positive effect recorded by agrarian expansion throughout the long term, everything isn’t well with horticultural creation and, for sure, augmentation administration conveyance in Nigeria. Indeed, cultivating and expansion keep on confronting overwhelming difficulties that require critical consideration.

A significant however fairly disregarded test of augmentation is the issue related with public contentions. Expanding dissatisfaction and impoverishment of ranchers occasioned by perpetual and broad homestead plot obliteration and the following unpleasant contentions are disintegrating the additions of augmentation endeavors. This is an issue for agrarian augmentation administration conveyance on the grounds that a definitive goal of rural expansion is the improvement of expectations for everyday comforts of cultivating families [5]. Mutual struggle alludes to clashes between non-state bunches that are coordinated along a common collective personality. Struggle alludes to the way that the gatherings need to oversee some contested and saw inseparable asset, like a land parcel or neighborhood political force. The gatherings included are non-state gatherings. This implies that neither one of the actors controls the state, albeit the state may be included as a significant supporting entertainer in a common struggle. The entertainers might be towns, ethnic gatherings, strict gatherings or self-protection civilian armies among others.

Clashes over admittance to land keep on propagating destitution among famers and block rural turn of events and food security in Nigeria [9]. Chikaire, et al. [10] uncovered that common contentions have intense impact on rural yield, costs of produce, promoting and dissemination of agrarian items, horticultural expansion exercises, rural credit openings, transportation costs, work supply and ranch pay of ranchers. Different elements have been recognized as answerable for shared struggles in the nation relying upon the financial and international conditions at that point. For the most part Alimba [11] distinguished financial, social, political, biological and pioneer factors as the fundamental reasons for public struggles in Nigeria.

Thinking about the impact of contention on individuals and their homestead, it turns out to be certain that once the ranchers are dislodged also, their territory deserted, the expansion activity endures an extraordinary arrangement as there is essentially nothing left for the augmentation specialist to chip away at. The expansions specialists are frequently at go across street between their work and steadfastness to the networks, towns, fellow and people who are in struggle where the specialists work. It isn’t clear what the impacts of common conflict emergencies are on the exercises of expansion specialist in Southeast States. Therefore; there is a hole in information. It is against this foundation that this examination will in general explore experimentally the circumstance in Southeast concerning the impact of shared clash on augmentation or extension specialist execution of their jobs. The broad objective of the study was to determine the effect of communal conflict on extension agents operations in Southeast. The specific objectives of the study includes to:

  1. Identify major causes of crop farmers/pastoralist conflicts in Southeast, Nigeria;
  2. Determine current extension advise/practices carried out by the extension staff in Southast; and
  3. Describe perceived effects of conflicts on extension services delivery.

Methodology

The study was carried out in Southeast Agro-ecological zone. The Southeast agro-ecological zone of Nigeria is comprised of five states namely, Imo, Anambra, Abia, Enugu and Ebonyi States. The zone has the National Root Crops Research Institute at Umudike, Umuahia, Abia State.as its agriculture headquarters. It is the home of the Igbo speaking people of Nigeria. It is located within latitudes 4° 47‟ 35‟‟N and 7° 7‟ 44‟‟N, and longitudes 7° 54‟ 26‟E and 8° 27‟ 10‟E in the tropical rain forest zone of Nigeria, with mean maximum temperature of 27oC, and total annual rainfall exceeding 2500mm [12]. The region is largely agrarian and there is thus much dependence on land resources, due to its dense population averaged to about 1000 people/Km2. This dependence on land has led to the over use of the land resources in the region, leading to the farming of agricultural lands annually.

The population of the study consists of all Extension Agents (EAs) of the 5 States ADPs. Due to the small number of the EAs in the 5 states, all were sample (Table 1). Data collected with questionnaire were analyzed using descriptive statistics. This includes the use of percentages presented in frequency distribution table to achieve objective 1. While the remaining objectives, 2 and 3 were achieved on a four point likert-type scale of strongly agree, agree, disagree and strongly disagree on a four point weighting scale of 4,3,2 and 1. The weighted index was added to give 10 divided by 4 to give 2.50. Any value less than 2.50 was not accepted while a value of 2.5 and above was taken as positive.

Major causes*Frequencypercentage
AbiaDisagreement over access to Land40088.5
AnambraDisagreement over the use of water39787.8
EbonyiOwnership /right to Land452100
EnuguRight of use to land water42894.6
ImoSevere droughts/climate

Table 2: Number of EAs in the 5 States [13-15].

Results and Discussions

Major Causes of Crop Farmer/Pastoralist Conflicts in the Study Area

Table 2 shows the causes of crop farmer/pastoralist conflicts in the area. Among the causes are disagreement over access to land with 88.5% response, disagreement over the use of water (87.8%), ownership/right to land (100%), severe drought/climate change (95.1%), migration (84.9%) and lack of respect for traditional authority (88.9%). This is in line with above research findings of Braukämper [16] ranchers and pastoralist in numerous regions and various nations make their vocation inside the equivalent geological, political, and socio-social conditions which might be described by asset shortage or political disparity [17]. Rancher pastoralist clashes have been related with the contention of land asset utilize exacerbated by diminishing assets [18]. A few specialists have connected this emergency to the hypothesis of eco-brutality [19], where natural elements and abuse of scant assets prompts struggle and savagery. This may clarify the lessening touching assets (land, field and so on) and helpless administration of existing eating saves [20] as blamable.

Also, the populace is dynamic and truly expanding contrasted with land that is moderately static. The populace development pace of Nigeria each year is 3.2% [21]. Along these lines, an ever increasing number of individuals will keep on contending over land. Different specialists [22, 23, 24] relate the reasons for struggle to the worldwide environmental change and the fighting desertification and aridity that has diminished arable and touching grounds, constraining pastoralist to move southwards looking for field for their animals. Environment change induced precipitation moving examples/sum and desertification lessens crop terrains, and ranchers need to follow these examples, prompting cover on brushing lands. The Fulbe herders in Nigeria, for instance are confronted with quickly evaporating grass, driving them to change from the Bunaji steers breed, which relies upon grass, to the Sokoto Gudali, which promptly peruses [25].

Major causes*Frequencypercentage
AbiaDisagreement over access to Land40088.5
AnambraDisagreement over the use of water39787.8
EbonyiOwnership /right to Land452100
EnuguRight of use to land water42894.6
ImoSevere droughts/climate change43095.1
Migration38484.9
Lack of respect for traditional authority40288.9

Table 1: Major causes of crop farmer -Pastoralist Conflicts. *multiple responses

Current Extension Practices/Services Rendered

Extension staff renders an avalanche of services numerous to mention. Table 3 revealed these services based on a mean (M) response of 2.50 and above. They include education of rural farmers (M=3.60), training farmers on new practices (M=3.68). help farmers identify their production problems (M=3.73), expose farmers to opportunities for farm improvement (M=3.69), linking farmers to credit points (M=3.44), conducting needs assessments (M=3.30), promotes needs and problems (M=3.32), conduct community forums (M=3.41), organize farmer field schools (M=3.23), conduct interviews/surveys (M=3.33), conduct focus group discussions (M=3.61), write extension evaluation report(M =3.18) organize extension campaigns (M=3.42) keeping records of farm visits (M=3.40), linking farmers to input agencies (M=3.25), dissemination of timely information to farmers (M=3.18) among many others.

Rural extension administrations, likewise called augmentation, are for the most part the various exercises that give the data and administrations required and requested by ranchers and different entertainers in rustic settings to help them in building up their own specialized, hierarchical, and the board abilities and practices to improve their jobs and prosperity” [26]. Augmentation laborers have some normal jobs: teaching ranchers and makers so the ranchers/ makers can help themselves; connecting ranchers/makers with research-based data to improve farming creation, profitability, handling and advertising of horticultural labor and products. Horticultural augmentation (otherwise called farming warning administrations) assumes an essential part in boosting agrarian profitability, expanding food security, improving rustic livelihoods, and advancing agribusiness as a motor of favorable to poor monetary development.

MeanSD
Education of rural farmers3.60.67
Training farmers on new practices3.680.62
Organizing demonstration3.430.77
Linking farmers to input agencies3.250.84
Keeping records of farm visit3.40.74
Dissemination of timely information to farmers3.181.06
Creating awareness on possible new technique3.390.74
Teach farmers to improve the quality of living3.280.65
Formation/organization of farmer groups3.430.72
Help farmers identify their production problem3.730.79
Expose farmers to opportunities for farm improvement 2.692.691.07
Linking farmers to credit points3.440.75
Facilitating feedback from farmers2.71.04
Conduct needs assessments3.31.07
Conduct community forums3.410.74
Prioritize needs & problems3.320.9
Organize farmer field schools3.230.67
Organize field days with farmers2.910.24
Write field reports2.610.89
Conduct Interviews/surveys3.330.72
Conduct focus group discussions3.610.72
Write extension evaluation reports3.70.06
Share results and impact3.290.78
Make effective presentations of results3.181.08
Organize extension champions3.420.74

Table 3: Extension Practice/Services Rendered. Mean 2.50 accepted

Effects of Crop farmers/Pastoralists’ Conflicts on Agricultural Extension Practices/Delivery

No meaningful economic activities can occur in a situation of chaos and unrest. The same is true of extension practices and services delivery in the event of communal conflicts involving crop farmers, pastoralists and other stake holders. Table 4 showed that conflicts limits the cooperative activities of (M=2.68), prevents adoption of improved technologies (M=3.25), stops continued use of adopted technologies (M=3.05), withdrawal of extension services/ methods (M=3.74), makes programme planning difficult (M=2.91), delays/prevents programme evaluation (M=3.60), disrupts agents work plan (M=3.19), hinders project execution/implementation (M=2.92), brings dissatisfactions among staff (M=3.01), delays completion of extension work (M=3.41), reduces/limits turnover of extension work (M=2.87), abduction/kidnapping of extension personnel (M=3.15), and possible death of extension personnel (M=2.83).

This result corroborates the findings of Bolarinwa & Oyeyinka [27], Kimenyi, et al. [28], Adelakun, et al. [29] who found that availability of extension services like number of visits per extension agent, number of contact with farmers, training of contact farmers and demonstrations on small plots (Management Training Plots) to teach the farmer new techniques and practices which enable them to compare the results of the old and new practices as well as adoption of improved technologies by both crop and livestock farmers and continued use of adopted technologies were greatly affected during conflict situation.

Robertson & Steve [30] detailed that unending asset based struggles have unfavorably influenced the powerful conveyance of augmentation administrations likewise specialists, which thusly decreased ranchers’ degree of use of advances around there. The creators further expressed that expansion specialists are upset by clashes of different sizes which make it hard to complete augmentation administrations like the quantity of visits per expansion specialist, number of contact with rancher gatherings, preparing of contact ranchers and exhibitions on little plots or the executives preparing plots (MTPs) to show the rancher new strategies and practices which empower them to analyze the consequences of the old and new practices were extraordinarily influenced during struggle circumstance. In a comparative turn of events, Adelakun, et al. [29] demonstrated that the impact of contention on accessibility of expansion administrations, appropriation of improved advancements by both yield and animals ranchers and proceeded with utilization of embraced advances was serious. Kimenyi, et al. [28] expressed that agrarian expansion organizations and foundations like the Agricultural Development Programs (ADPs) and examination establishments that help the horticultural area are additionally influenced during the contention circumstances. Clashes may have constrained a large portion of these organizations (government offices, ADPs and exploration establishments) to decrease their exercises like field preliminaries and observing among others to insignificant capacities, migrate to zones where assaults are negligible or dropped a few exercises.

MeanSD
Limits the cooperation activities2.681.53
Limits availability of extension worker resource2.740.64
Prevents acquisition of training by extension2.871.09
Prevents the motivation needed by extension2.940.73
Destroys knowledge transmission channels2.841.14
Stops continual use of adopted technologies3.051.2
Prevents adoption of improved technologies3.20.67
Withdrawal of extension services/methods3.740.96
Makes programme monitoring difficult2.910.81
Delays/prevent programme evaluation3.60.71
Disrupts agents work plan3.190.67
Extension worker/staff may abandon work3.181.01
Hinder project execution implementation2.921.03
Brings dissatisfaction among staff3.010.84
Delays completion of extension work3.410.77
Reduces/limit turnover of extension work2.840.8
Abduction of extension personnel3.151.04
Possible Death of extension personnel2.831.02

Table 4: Effects on Agricultural Extension Practices/Delivery. Mean 2.50 accepted

Conclusion

Extension remains the only way through which agriculture could be beneficial to the rural poor. Its education and teaching nature helps improve the farmers. Conflicts hinder the smooth operation of extension personnel who transfers the knowledge. The agents are hindered by conflicts of various magnitudes which make it difficult to carry out extension services. Ending these conflicts will mean ensuring food security. The study revealed that Extension Agents perceived communal conflicts to have high effects on their job performance as it prevents them from going about and carrying out their normal duty. Government should adopt policies that would tackle the causes and occurrence of communal conflicts in communities in the country so as to reduce the effect of the conflicts on timeliness, effectiveness, efficiency, targeting and usefulness of extension services.

References

  1. Hellin J (2012) Agricultural Extension, Collective Action and Innovation Systems: Lessons on Network Brokering from Peru and Mexico. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 18(2): 141-159.
  2. Höckert J, Ljung M (2013) Advisory Encounters Towards a Sustainable Farm Development—Interaction between Systems and Shared Lifeworlds. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 19(3): 291-309.
  3. Christoplos I (2010) Mobilizing the potential of rural and agricultural extension. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services.
  4. Adisa RS (2012) Land Use Conflict between Farmers and Herdsmen-Implications for Agricultural and Rural Development in Nigeria, Rural Development- Contemporary Issues and Practices.
  5. Adisa RS (2011) Management of farmerherdsmen conflicts in North-Central Nigeria: Implications for collaboration between agricultural extension Service and other stakeholders. Journal of International Agriculture and Extension Education 18(1): 60-72.
  6. Bonye SZ, Alfred KB, Jasaw GS (2012) Promoting community-based extension agents as an alternative approach to formal agricultural extension service delivery in Northern Ghana. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development 2(1): 76-95.
  7. Chukwone NA, Agwu AE (2005) Financing agricultural technology delivery in Nigeria: Would farmers be willing to pay. Journal of Extension Systems 22(2): 69-85.
  8. Saliu JO, Obinne PC, Audu SI (2009) Trends in agricultural extension services in Africa: Option for new approaches. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development 1(3): 71-76.
  9. Bruce JK, Boudreaux K (2013) Land and conflict: Land disputes and land conflicts. USAID Issue Briefs.
  10. Chikaire JU, Orusha JO, Irebuisi DC, Amanze PC, Asonye NC (2016) Communal clashes/conflicts: Bane of achieving food production and security among farming households in South-East, Nigeria. Journal of Food Science and Technology 3(2): 65-72.
  11. Alimba NC (2014) Probing the dynamics of communal conflict in northern Nigeria. African Research Review 8(1): 177-204.
  12. Ezemonye MN, Emeribe CN (2012) Rainfall erosivity in Southeastern Nigeria. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management (EJESM) 5(2): 112- 122.
  13. Arokoyo T (2007) ICTs application agricultural extension service delivery’. Proceedings of 12th Annual Conference Agricultural Extension Society of Nigeria, Maiduguri, Nigeria.
  14. FDAE (2013) A Survey of the Agricultural Extension Agents in the ADPs in Nigeria. Abuja, Nigeria: Federal Department of Agricultural Extension.
  15. FMARD (2015) National Agricultural Resilience Framework; A Report by the Advisory Committee on Agricultural Resilience in Nigeria; Jimmy Adegoke, Chidi Ibe and Adebisi Araba Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Abuja, Nigeria.
  16. Braukämper U (2000) Management of Conflicts over Pastures and Fields Among the Baggara Arabs of the Sudan Belt. Nomadic Peoples 4(1): 37-49.
  17. Bassett TJ (1988) The Political Ecology of Peasant- herder Conflicts on the Northern Ivory Coast. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 78(3): 453- 472.
  18. Blench R (2004) Natural Resource Conflicts North- Central Nigeria: A hand book and case studies CLE St. Ives 1: 164.
  19. Okoli AC, Atelhe GA (2014) Nomads against natives: A political ecology of Herder/Farmer conflicts in Nassarawa State, Nigeria. American International Journal of Contemporary Research 4(2): 76-88.
  20. Adisa RS (2011) Management of farmerherdsmen conflicts in North-Central Nigeria: Implications for collaboration between agricultural extension Service and other stakeholders. Journal of International Agriculture and Extension Education 18(1): 60-72.
  21. National Population Comission (2012) Nigeria over 167 million populations: implications and challenges. Accessed on 25th of January 2015.
  22. Okoli IC, Enyinnia AC, Elijah AG, Okoli CG (2014) Cattle management of pastoralist and conflict resolution strategies in the tropical humid rain forest zone of southern Nigeria. Journal of International Scientific Publications: Agriculture and Food 2: 16-19.
  23. Odoh SI, Chigozie CF (2012) Climate change and conflict in Nigeria: A theoretical and empirical examination of the worsening incidence of conflict between Fulani herdsmen and farmers in Northern Nigeria. Arabian Journal of Business Management Review 2(1): 110-124.
  24. Abbass IM (2012) No Retreat No Surrender: Conflict for Survival between Fulani Pastoralists and Farmers in Northern Nigeria. European Scientific Journal 8(1): 331- 346.
  25. FAO (2001) Pastoralism in the new millennium. Animal Production and Health Paper 150.
  26. Christoplos I, Kidd A (2000) Guide for monitoring, evaluation and joint analyses of pluralistic extension support. Lindau: Neuchâtel Group, pp: 24.
  27. Bolarinwa KK, Oyeyinka RA (2005) Communal conflicts impact on agricultural extension agents’ operations in Atisbo Local Government Area of Oyo State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension 8: 109-113.
  28. Kimenyi M, Adibe J, Djiré M, Jirgi AJ, Kergna A, et al. (2014) The impact of conflict and political instability on agricultural investments in Mali and Nigeria. Washington DC; Africa Growth Initiative, Working Paper 17, pp: 51.
  29. Adelakun OE, Adurogbangba B, Akinbile LA (2015) Socioeconomic Effects of Farmer-Pastoralist Conflict on Agricultural Extension Service Delivery in Oyo State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension (EJS) 19(2).
  30. Robertson A (2013) A new opportunity: Agricultural extension as a peace building tool. United States Institute of Peace.

Cite this article

BibTeX
APA
RIS
@article{ajaero2021,
  title   = {Effects of Crop Farmers’-Pastoralists’ Conflicts on Agricultural
Extension Practice and Services Delivery in South - East, Nigeria},
  author  = {Ajaero JO* and Aminu GO},
  journal = {Food Science & Nutrition Technology},
  year    = {2021},
  volume  = {6},
  number  = {3},
  doi     = {10.23880/fsnt-16000269}
}
Ajaero JO* and Aminu GO (2021). Effects of Crop Farmers’-Pastoralists’ Conflicts on Agricultural
Extension Practice and Services Delivery in South - East, Nigeria. Food Science & Nutrition Technology, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.23880/fsnt-16000269
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Effects of Crop Farmers’-Pastoralists’ Conflicts on Agricultural
Extension Practice and Services Delivery in South - East, Nigeria
AU  - Ajaero JO* and Aminu GO
JO  - Food Science & Nutrition Technology
PY  - 2021
VL  - 6
IS  - 3
DO  - 10.23880/fsnt-16000269
ER  -