CHALLENGES FACED BY USAID MARKETS II RICE FARMERS IN NIGER STATE, NIGERIA

,


INTRODUCTION
In Nigeria, rice is important, not only as food crops but even more as a major source of income for rural households; rice production in Nigeria is mainly in the hands of small-scale farmers who are using unimproved farming techniques. Being poor in capital resources, most rice farmers have only low access to production inputs and improved credit facilities for their purchase (Food and Agriculture Organization Statistics [FAOSTAT], 2011). More than 90% of Nigeria's rice is produced by resourced-poor farmers, while the remaining 10% is produced by corporate/commercial farmers. About 95% of the processors of rice are also small scale with low capacity and obsolete mills (Abdulrahaman et al. 2016).
The USAID/MARKETS programme allows farmer to have access to an array of agricultural services which they would otherwise not have access to. By reducing risk, uncertainty, transaction costs and more importantly ready market for their output, they have the potential to link farmers to markets and stimulate agricultural production in the face of globalization (United State Agency for International Development [USAID], 2013).
Markets and improved market access are critical and important to rural poor households as apre-requisite for enhancing agriculture based economic growth by improving the competitiveness of farming enterprise and improving rural incomes. Despite these, participation of smallholder farmers in rice market-oriented settings remains low due to a range of constraints faced by the USAID-MARKETs rice farmers in the study area (Ohen et al., 2013). The specific objectives of the study were to: i. describe the socio-economic characteristics of participating and non-participating small-scale rice farmers under the USAID/MARKETS II programme; and ii.
describe constraints faced by small scale rice farmers participating in the programme

MATERIALS AND METHODS The Study Area
This study was conducted in Niger State, in the North Central Zone of Nigeria, lies in between latitude 8 0 to 11 0 30 1 North and Longitude 03 0 to 7 0 40 1 East. It occupies a land area of approximately 76, 469.903 square kilometers or about 10% of Nigeria's land mass. The State has an estimated population of 3,950249 and gives the State a population density of about 33 per square kilometer, the lowest in the country.

Sampling Techniques
A multi-stage sampling procedure was used to select respondents for the study. The first stage involved a purposive selection of two (2) Local Government Areas (LGAs) namely Katcha and Lapai based on predominance of rice production in the study area. Secondly, six (6) out of a total of 24 villages were randomly selected, three (3) from Katcha (Baddegi, Gbakogi and Kataregi) out of 11 villages and three (3) from Lapai (Gbage, Lambata and Muye). Finally, a proportionate random sampling was employed to select a sample size of 247 (Table  1) for both participant and non-participant rice farmers. Primary data were collected for both participant and non-participants in USAID/MARKETS II intervention programme using structured questionnaire. Data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Constraints Faced by Rice Farmers
The constraint faced by USAID/MARKET II participant farmers in the study area were ranked according to their magnitude as presented in Table 3. High cost of inputs ranked first with 61.5% of the respondents indicating it as their major constraint. They asserted that the input is not available at the right time, and government subsidy is being diverted to unintended beneficiaries. According to the respondents, inputs like fertilizer, agrochemical and seeds were made available when farmers are far into the production period, sometimes at the middle of the rainy season. This finding is in line with Ekong (2003), who opined that most farmers have little or no access to inputs like, improved seed, fertilizer and continues to recycle seeds that have become exhausted after generations of cultivation.
About 45.4% of the respondents indicated inadequate capital to finance agricultural activities as a problems and this ranked second. This affect rice production in the study area as the new method introduced by USAID/MARKETS II is labour intensive, demanding more cash to pay for labour and buy inputs. The farmers complained that even when they desire to allocate more land to rice production, they are cash trapped, because their meager savings from off farm activities cannot meet their needs during the farming season.
Other constraints as indicated by 21% of the farmers include high cost of transportation, Pest and diseases and high cost of labour during the peak of the land clearing, ridging and weeding. These constraint as claimed, lead to labour shortage especially at the peak of farming activities. However it was observed that the non-participant farmers are faced with inadequate access to inputs, access to market and other logistic problem.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings, it can be concluded that participating in USAID/MARKETS intervention had broadened the knowledge base of the participants through advisory services of the programme, its enhanced the output, increased the income and living conditions of the participants more than that of the non-participants in the study area. The results emanating from this study will assist in future programme designs and evaluation. Hence, the programme is sustained and replication of the programme should be maintain in other state where rice is produced. In light of the findings of the study, the following recommendations were made: 1. Rice farmers in the study area should be encouraged by extension agents to take advantage of such intervention programmes to increase their productivity through better access to inputs and linkages to markets which would increase their income for better improvement in their living standard or escape for poverty. 2. The study had identified some constraints such as inadequate capital, limited access to market and high cost of inputs that may affect the sustainability of the programme. It was recommended that intervening agencies on agriculture should ensure that strong institutional linkages and facilitation are created among farmers, input suppliers, credit institutions and market for effective service delivery.