Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The potential for greater soybean production in Nigeria exists, especially if the increasing amount of soybean meal imported for poultry feed is considered.This publication give details of the economic importance of soybean products in Nigeria context as well as its production.
Citation preview
The Potential of Soybeans in Nigeria and the Results of An IITA Survey in two Principal Production Areas (Benue .State and Zonkwa-Abuja)
H.C. Knipscheer and Peter Ay
Discussion Paper No. 1/82
Agricultural Economics
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TROPICAL AGRICULTURE PMB 5320 Oyo Road Ibadan, Nigeria
THE PO!ENTIAL OF sOYBEmS IN NIGERIA AND THE RESULTS OF AN IITA SURVEY IN TWO PRINCIPAL PRODUCTION AREAS (BENUE STATE Morn ZONKWA-ABUJ A)
H.C. Knipscheer and Peter Ay
Agricultural Economics
Farming Systems Program
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TROPICAL AGRICULTURE
IBADAN, NIGERIA
1982
Abstract
At present, soybeans are a minor crop in Nigeria, grown r.!ainly .in
two limited production areas by smallholders. Because they are marketed
primarily traough local channe13, information is scarce ana existing
data unreliable and erratic.
T.~ potential for greater soybean production in Nigeria exists,
especially if ti~ increasing amount of soybean meal imported tor
poultry feed is considered. Furthermore, local use of soybeans as
substitutes for other legumes (such as locust bean in the producti on
of local food flavour "daddawa" or local "maggi") and as a suppl ement
in ~raditional dishes for human consumption indicates an increased
production potential.
Results of an IITA survey conducted during july and August 1980,
in the t~·o main Nigerian gr~'ing areas -- Benue State and Zonkwa-JllJuja
SbO~1 the general picture of a sorghu;n-based cropping system in which
soybeans (intercropped [t;i th sorghum or somet:ines l.tal ze) appear for hlo
to three years at the end of a four to five-year culti\rati on period
before the land is left fallow. '. Only a minority of farmers seJ.1 part
of their production to marketing boards. Prices on ~1e local ~arket
are more than double the official minimum price. Increasing demand
Eor animal feeds and food processing indicates an increasing potential
Eor soybean production in Nigeria whi ch should influence research and
policy decisions in agricultural production.
2
Introduction
At present, soybeans account for more than half o f the totel l .. c rld
production of oil seeds. Two decades ago their share was only about
one third. Horeover, recent developments show that the importance of
soybeans is still increasing. T,.;o soy products have maj or importance
in the world market: soyoil for human consuJilpticn and soymeal for
animal feeds.
Nigeria 1s importing both products, usually meals for the expanding
poultry industry. Domestic production of soybeans in Nigeria depends
mainly on smallholders. They sell nearly all of their total production
on local markets for human consump tion. Two maj or product ion areas exist
in Benue State and in the Zonkwa-Abuja area (Figure 1) , Data on srnall-
holders' production refer to these areas which we.re selected for the IITA
survey; (Soybean~ are grown also in other Nigerian regions, i3ec.ause 0f
the smallholdings and local ~arketing, production figures a:.:,:;! ;JIl~ .. : ' l o«gl1
t!stimates. A similar situationexists for other West Afrjcan cOl" ~·~"i ~s
whele smallholders are the main producer!::.
Proposed large s c ale pn.ju ction schemes in Ghana and the Ivory Coast
plus the support given by the Nigerian government to large s caJe: i.:oopera-
tive farming. show official interest in the development of s oybea~s in
West Africa. HO\vever~ the minimum price for this product fixed by the
Nigerian government i~; far below t h e price sffiiilih olders can receive on .. -
local markets. The minimum price in Jur:e 1981 (D aily Times, June ::9) was
fixed at HlS5 per m~tric ton (about 2t;O US dollars). This level is
comparable to the expor t prices of the largest producer in the wo r ld --
the United States -- where the average 1979/1980 pr i .> ~'i as 260 do} lars
per met i:ic t ori . But in early 1981, this price had rie-en to more than
300 dollars (Foreign Agriculture Circu.!ar, February 1981 and March, 1981).
Sokoto
•
• Ikenne • Ijebu
Gusau
3
Xano •
Umuabia
•
•
Me.1duguri
•
M4jor production area. Potentia1 area. of production Sites o£ past and ongoing eX!1arimente
?ig.l. Map of Nigeria. showing major areae o~ eoybe~ :rr oouction, potenti.a.l. !I.reas and ~i tee of past and present experiments
4
IITA survey data show tha": during 1980 rHgerian t>"t!.allholders in
the main production al.-eas received bet\oleen N200 and 14300 (320 to 48;J
dollars) per metric ton of soybeans. Several l·;igeria!'l c .i lmills
advertised that they would p urchase soybeans "-bove the official p~ice
but below prices on the local narkets. ~hese f .l '.J..i.r.as indicate tha",;:
more !.::nowlt: dge on the potential for soybean product. ion in Nigeri a is
nec\':!:s$i'!ry to plan research priorities and niake policy decisions fa:!:
i~ler:lentat.i.on.
To assess potential soybean production and marketing in Nigeria,
dat:a on anir.tal fee&-; .'ire used \v:"lere soybean, products are mainly
j:!tr=orted. P.t present, h~/ever, nearl y all the: soy:bean prod.uction by
farmers in Nigeris is seld. ,for human consumption. Anothe r part of the
stuC'.l deals \'ii th the :f.' ::;>" 'sen t srnall~ ';;:: lders I system in til€CWQ principal
afte~ extracting the scyoiI is directly processed into prot~in substitutes
.:l!'lQ supplernerats {inc.l.\;,ding speciu~ ::.I.];"!Y f ood for chUx':t's: n with aUergies
been produced. But t11e ,' ( ; r':n~dt.l.cts have h,1d little 71;z':::-keting S1..\ l: c o, ,
because it is r:\ore ~(>;; nomical and easier to produce the real chickens,
cattle and turkeys by feeding ther. with so}·bea.'"l me .til.
At present the market for soybean!3 i 3 pri~~, ;': :., :i.":: :~ependent on the
U~€ of soybean me,,,; for livestock feeding. -"':1'11is has also influence on
the lagerian situation where increasing quantities of feed stuffs are
impoL-ted . The potential and the developl;k '.J.t. of ti'lis market in ;-:i.q3~:i. a
r,:~elJ ld be o.."\nsidered ilnportant factor in ·my agricult ural developT"!l.ent
policy •
5
2. 15>0rtance of soybean products in the !hgerian context,
2.1 Soybean r.teal and its substitutes
Protein concentrates form a substantial part of feed stuffs which
are being imported by Nigeria at increasing rates. They ax'e grouped
as oilseeds I fishmeal, and meat offal meal. Fi~hmeal originates
principally from Peru and Chile, and rapid expansion of production of
this product is unlikely. Sinilar to the meal made out of ~eat offal,
fishmeal is mainly a by-product of the fish/food processing industry .
Production of these by-products depends on the demand for the
main product3 to which these by-products are linked. They form only
a minor part of the market for protein concentrates. Therefore,
variations in consumption and production of oilseed products determine
this market. Table 1 shows the world production of the most important
oilseeds. soybeans have a relatively lower oil content and a higher
meal content than other oilseeds (Table 2).
In addition to the higher meal content, soy!::>eans nav", Gi. h. ::,q h crude
protein content in their meal compared with other oil r.1cals/cakes
(Table 3) and provide amuch larger quantity of crude protein per
metric ton than any other oilseed (Table 4).
2.1.1 soybean meal and its price
Demand for soybean meal is determined by its price in relation to
other protein sources. As can be expected, the prices of all the
protein concentrates move up and down together, signifying the large
degree of substitution bet"leen t!'lese produc"ts (Figure 2).
6
The price explosion in the world market in 1973 was caused by a
combination of rapid increase in soybean meal use and a limited supply
of protein concentrates in general . When the U.s. government
subsequently ordered an embargo on the exports of soybean meal,
market prices in the rest of the world went \,.i1d. This showed the
inelastic nature of world demand for protein concentrates.
Table 1: ~rld production of oilseeds (1000 metric tons)
Oilseed 1960 1973 1979/80*
Cotton seed 19,579 25,272
Groundnuts 13,.824 17,021
Copra 3,299 3,968
Linseed 3,.123 2,502
Palm kernel 1,029 1,259
Rape seed 3,783 7,045
Sesame seed 1~528 1,970
Soybeans 28,710 57,310
Sunflower seed 6,107 10,932
Source: Beyer, p. 37
* Preliminary data, Foreign Agriculture Circular,
FOP 1-81, USDA, Wlshington, D.C.
25,014
17,670
4,707
2,667
1,382
10,180
1,764
93,362
15,267
7
Table 2: Average meal content of oilseeds
Oilseed Meal content (!is)
Cotton seed 46.5
Groundnut (unpealed) 39.0
Gl"c,mdnut (pealed) 54.0
Copra 36.0
Linseed 65.0
Palm kernel 53.0
Rape seed 60.0
Sesame seed 49.5
Soybeans 79.5
Sunflower seeds 50.5
Table 3:
8
Protein content of protein concentrates according to different sources
Literature source
Beyer 1977 Houck e "a .• 1972 Hoffmeyer 1971
Protein source meal/cake
Soybean
Cott.er;
Sunflower seed
Linsee.d
Copra
Palm kernel
Rapeseed
Sesame seed
Animal meal
Skim-mi lk powde r
%
45
39
49
40
34
21
33
40
65
crude protein by weight
42-50 45
36-43 4 ,)
45-56 SO
37-38 42
32-- 39 3S
22 21
23 20
33
60-73 65
50-65
33 ---" .. __ ._-"_._._-----------------------------
I"
Cl ollE'.r p~r
met~ie ton
., .. , .. ,,,
... '
9
---._ .. _, .. ~" ____ 'If UAllIII.AI.
. . . . ..... C." " •• ,,, _1~4 ____ __ ._"_~.ll.lIU.u _. _. _. _. _ ""II'ltli 1 IllUA L
Zit .. ~. ",,-... ., • Ji'"
,"
" .. ~ ,..-' "jt.."/ ...
,,., I 46
1 I I ,7 •• " 1 f I I
'-". 7/ 72 1~
Pig.2. World me.rkgt prices of p:::oote .in concen.tratee ~rom ~960 to 1975. (Zourc4: Eeyer,1977)
,i L I .,SA.
10
Table 4: Quantity crude prot:~in per metric tons of oilseed
Crop
Cot ton see ci
Groundnut (unpealed)
Groundnut (pealed)
Copra
Linseed
ilaltl kernel
Rape seed
Sesame seed
Soybeans
Quantity crude protein (kg per ~etric ton) •
181
195
210
76
228
106
198
19B
358
202
Because the prices in Figur$ 2 are calcl:. J. F. ted on a frotein
equivalent bases~ several :lJ:ll>::'rtant coILcl1.1s;.i. ons ca.!' be drawn. Prices per
metric ton ~rotein equivalent of all oilseed meals are nore or less
equal but, in general prices of fishmeal are a bit higher due to the
large quantity of methionine -- a very SC8:t.ce anin.l:::l acid in t.ile
product. Prices of sCtyDaan meal also generally carry a small premium
over other seed meals/cakes because of its favorable amino acid
profile. Soybean meal has a high content of lysine and a fairly high
content of methiodine. For ex~le, the crude protein of soybean meal
contains 6.4\ lysine and 1.4% methiodine; the protein of groundnut
11
oilcake contains only 3.4% lysine and 1.1% nethiod.1.11e; for fishmeal
these (i~'Ures are 8.1\ and 3% respectively (Vachel , 1974». A comparison
of the relative prices of groundnut meal, soybean meal, and fishmeal
between 1960 and 1975 shows that ~ protein equivalents there were,
on the average, a 30-50\ premium for fishmeal over groundnut meal and a
10-20' Pit(~l!J.um of soybean meal OVer groundnut meal. Relative prices
are listed in Table 5.
Table 5: Relative prices for graundnut cake, fismneal, and soybean meal (1960-1975
Proetin Meal/cake ,Dr.-ice index Protein % price i r,dex
Groundnut cake 100 50 100
FishJneal 140 65 182
Soybean meal 115 45 104
E'J:ot.~. the '.:;,,~ oLse!l:vat i o:1.s, the price far soybean meal in Nigeria,
should be equal or sliqhtly higher than the price for groundnu t cake.
Comparing protein value, it should be expec~ed that a feed mill CQuid
pay nearly twice the price for iishmeal compared w1 til 'F,:)undnut cake.
Personal interv ~.('Ows in June 1981 showed that groundnut cake so \. d at
Ibadan for N320 and fishrneal for N640 which confims the hypothesized
price relations.
12
2.2.1 Derived demand for soybean meal
The demand for protein concentrates (oilmealsicakes, fishmeal, and
other meals of animal origin) is derived from the demand for livestock
products. In Nigeria, the most commercialized livestock production
is the poultry sector for which the major part of the Nigerian-produced
livestock feed is used. The size of the commercial poultry sector
is therefore the main determinant of the demand for protein concentrates
(soybean meal) in Nigeria. Table 6 shows the amount of protein
concentrates that was needed for the commercial production of Nigerian
poultry meat and eggs in 1978. In calculating these figures, several
important assumptions based on different sources are made.
Table 6: Estimated poultry protein feed units (~tric tons of crude protein) for commercial poultry production in Nigeria (1978).
Poultry meat production total 165,000
Commercial poultry meat production 33,000
Poultry protein feed units 13,900 (a)
Egg production total 150,000
Commercial egg production 60,000
Egg protein feed units 26,400 (b)
Total poultry feed units (crude protein) 40,300 (a+b)
13
Table 7~ Utilization of Nigerian oilcakes in 1978*
Meal
Groundnut cake 31,638
PalJD kernel cake 20,981
Cotton seed cake 3,600
Coconut cake 3,500
Total 59,719
'* *'*
Source: FAC, unpublished figures (1981). See Table 3.
Crude protein**
15,819
4,196
1,440
735
22,190
First it was assumed that the commercialized share of the poultry meat
sector in 1978 was 20l and in the egg producing sector 40%. Furthermore,
it was assumed that the protein nutrient requirements for poultry
products in Nigeria were equal to those in Europe· and the U.S. This
implies the required input of 0.44 metric tons of crude protein for
each metric ton of commercially produced e99s and 0.42 metric ton crude
protein for each metric ton of commericlly produced chicken meat
(Knipscheer, 1979).
In 1978, Nigeria produced about 385,000 metric tons of livestock
feed 70\ of which was for poultry (Adegeye, 1981). Hith the protein
content of standard poultry feed of about 16\, the utilization of crude
protein amounted to 385,000 x .70 x .16 = 43,120 metric tons. This
figure is consistent with the total poultry feed units derived in
Table 6 ~O,300 metric tons) which confi~s the reliability of the
14
livestock feed production figures of about 385 , 000 metric tons . Asswning
the same protein content figure for total livestock f~ed as used above
for poultry feed Q,.6'} , the use of 385,000 x 0.16 = 616,000 metric
tons of crude protein is derived .
As Table 7 shows, only 36% of this amount was covered b::l , ~;, Jcakes
from Nigerian origin. The deficit has to be offset by .t.mpor':",s of protein
concentrates - - mainly fishrneal and soybean meal. Import figures for these
items are not available, but prc';o::<:,ional figures for imported animal feed
by the FederaJ Office of Statistics (l974·,.1977 } indicate a huge increase
of imported animal feeds (presumably high p rotein feed) during these
three years. This trend appears to be cont1.~~LLlt :;; in Nigeria, as well iSI :":
in other Afr j.can countries. Nigeria at least in the short-run will depend
on j.~'l creasi!"i'7 ,;.j;~.,p;)~,;:t3 of prott;;.',l,;o concentl:ates of which soybean meal i s the
most important on the world r2a.cket r.rabl~ I} .
~ .1.3 wng-te~ ___ trend in t::'i~ demar.~~:L.!or SOY~!'§'~~ .. :S;:&
To assess long-tern; trends of food consunr:)tion a simple fOl.'mula
is uSed~
110f = l:.r: .+ sl11
Df = Demand for food
p. = Population
J = Income
e: =- income elasticity of tr.'." demand for food
This formula in ~~rds means the change in food demand is dependent
on the change in population plus the product of Lhe change in incomf~
tim:",' :'7 ~ .ts demand elasticity.
15
For food products, the income elasticity (e) is generally between zero
and one. Staple foods have a relatively lew or in some cases even a negati'J€
i r.com€ elasticity, while more special foodst uffs (such as vegetables and above
all, meat) have relative high incane elasticities. In t .he p:LE!vious section it
was t~hown how the demand for soybean :lleal is derived from thE' d.emand for poultry
meat . Given the difference in income elasticitl.es of food staples and meat,
the derr~d for meat product is expected to increase more rapidly than the demar.j
for foed staples. Therefore, the direct l i nk of soybeans to meat p l.oduction
lIakes the potEntial for their cuI ti vat ion Lr ighter than yam. for example, wIli ch
are a staplefood. Comparably, cassava and maize could face a rf31atively
higher increase in demand since both crops can have outletw to the foon market.
The demand for soybean meal is further stimulated by the trend to large
scale poultry fanns. Assumi ng that poultri is the major determinant of commer
cial liVE~stock feed demand for urban areas, the general d emand maa·el is
ui(:x1 i ned a.s follows:
l\Dcp
Dcp
pu
1
Apu + £p ~l
Demand cotrmercial population
Urb cl:)t population
lncane
Income elasticity of the demand fOl:: f; <;.~ltry
produ9ts
Elasticities of the rate of :'.ncrease of urban population vary from 4.6%
(OSDA. 19 80} to 6.3% iY~:· r1d Bank, 1979). Here a rate of 5.4% is assumed.
Estimates for the incCDle growth rate Vcl..l:Y O'fe r a bronde r range from 2%
~rld Bank, 1979) and 4% (AGERP, 1978) to 6.3% (IFPRI, 1977). To avoid
overest.imat.ing a deficit in protein concentrates I the conserv..-l ':.i..,e figure
of 2' is maint.ained. Data on incane elasti;:;ities for food items in Ni.;:red a
can be obtained f~:com several sources, incl.uding the (Federal Office of
16
statistics (1966), FAD (1967), Olayide (1973) Simmons U976), IFPRI (1977),
and. WJrld lank (1979). E'or poultry products, the income elasticities range
f r nm 0 . 65 to 1. 03 and ~l~l·"' :rage 0 .9 . I I TA' s estimate of the yearly j .. crease in
the demand for canmercial poultry is as follows:
= 5.4' + (0.9 x 2)% 7.2%
This estimate is hig.her than the World Bmk':3 esti mat_E! for the
increase in demand for _all poultry products (conmercial and household
p:coduct.:i..on) of 5. U per year. The difference between the two figures (7.2%
for cot'ill~erCi3l paul t%1' and 5.1 % for all poultry) indicates the processing
c~ercialization and sp¢ci alization of th~ poultry sector to which the
demand for Frotein concent~ates is related .
~o a~sess the potential demand for soybean meal, the following
aSS'l..i;:;.'! ~··~ :: j (Ions are made: Q) no incr~ase in gro-undnut oil and cake production
(2) an increase of palmoi l/c:ak<: pr-od ,1;:::titm 'of :3 .4\ which would be necessary
to keep up with the increa~K of the demand for palIuoil Obrld Bank~ 1979)
and (3) an increase of fishmeal supply of 5\ and 8, p resent share of only
20\ soybean meal in the supply :;;;.[ f,::d _,; ,-L, <.::,:..-.centrates (in protein equiva
lents), as opposeu 'Cc. ~iJ% for f:~ <:,; :" !.!" " "' ~. r 50'1, far groundnut cake, and Hr~
for palm kernel calH~, These assumptions lead to an estimates i :: ,c;~ease of
supply of protein shown in Table 8. Tn€.: :soybean meeil supply in Nigeria
would have to increase nearly 30\ per ye ar t o keep up with a 7.2% increase
of demand 1\;;·:;;- p :::-otein concentrates. Even if these assumptions a~ ;; r e laxed
in one way or another, a continuous growth of---'the pooJ t.ry sector in
Nigeria cannot take place without a huge increase in the soybean meal supply.
17
2.2 soyb~n..~!~ and its .s~:s.~.~,!:~
During the past five years, soybean ~1\eal provided 63% of the value
of soybeans and soybean oil only 37%. The degree of sUbstitution between
the different vegetable oiis (g:cou:ndnut. oil, pallnoil, coconut oil,
soybean oil, etc.) is not as large as in the case of c·L lseed ,:;akes or
meals.
During the past decennium, Nigeria has changed from a vegetable
oil exporting country to an importing country. Tables 8 and 10
illustrate this develop;'!:l!:mt \il'ld also indicate : :~'; ,:, potenti""l ci s(J~ir.x,:"m
oil as a supplement for Nigerian's vegetable oil deficit.
The import figures for soybean oil indic<~ te that there is already
iT, market for 6 0 i 000 .'TIE~t :::.~ .c: tons of sOyb.F :W Ct :: .. I <. .:1\ crushing efficiency
of HI~; oil frorn soybeans would !toean a production possibility of 333,000
tnetric tons of soybeans for oil processing f ::;:'.::.rn I'iigi:ri ... i., scurces. The
area econanically IlIOst suited is north C5: ~:he r ,,~_ n forest. In addi tiun,
there are ob"rioU<.> J.y 2r~'<> capacities of oil extracting in gr(.)"und:l1.~ ' ::.d lls
as thr:" grc'Ilmdnut production i;~.; ~~ 1: " "g:.ant or dec l~<C! <~ ~.;inq.
2.2.1 ~0l-~ oil and its price
Observing the price trends 3.nd y :;i CE. r~laticnships amon~ the b~u
oilseeds commonly gro~l in Nigeria -- groundnut and palm oil -- the
potent i al price for soybean oil can be assessed. During the p"f ·~. two
decades, groundnut product ion has Ct?en de c~.i.ning from an annual average
of 960,000 metric tens during the 1960 to 330,000 in the 1970s (FAD,
unpublished figures, 19B1). This was partly due to disease problems and
also to prier. developments.
18
Table 8: Estimated required annual increments in supply of protein concentrates in Nigeria
Share % Required annual supply increase %
Groundnut cake 50 0 (50)
Fishmeal 20 5 (21)
Palm kernel cake 10 3.6 (10.36)
Soybean meal 20 29.2 (25.84)
Total 100 7.2 (107.2)
Table 9: Production, fmport and export of the major vegetable oils in Nigeria (metric tons).
1961/65 1973 1980
Palm 011 production 666,000 590.000 675.000
Palm 011 exports 140,000 23
Palm oil imports 140,859 20,000*
Groundnut oil production 103,07:3 148,390 82 , 844
Groundnut 011 exports 70,703 110,796
Groundnut oil imports 4,000>1:
Source: FAO, unpublished figures.
*Preliminary estimate.
19
Table 10: Imports of soybe an oil in Nigeria (metric tons)
1977 70,777
1978 61,900
1979 50,000
1980 60,000* -------- ----------.------Source; FAO, unpublished figures, 1981.
*Prcliminary estimate.
'tl:.ble 11: Ee timated requii: ,·:d annua l :t ncremer.:::::::: in supp ly of vegetable oils in Nigeria •
........ ... "._--_._-------------Reql.d ::·t:d ;.mmi. ~ll ir.crease supply %
.. .. . ... ........ . --.. -~--- .~------
Palm oil 75 3.6 (77 .7)
Groundnut oil 10 o (10)
Soybean oil 7 16 (8 .1)
Other vegetable oils a .. ... ~.- ... -- ........ .. " .. -------_.
Total 100 4.2
20
In the early 19608, the official price for groundnuts per weight
unit was 1.99 t~es the price of sorghum -- the main food staple in
Northern Nigeria. During the 19706 this price relationship had fallen
to as low as 0.94. But on the local markets, groundnuts maintained
their relative value. During this same period, the price of groundnut in
Northern Nigerian markets was 2.13 the price of sorghum (annual price
average, Zaria, Kaduna State). Consequently, the export of groundnut
products has decreased radically from 510,885 metric tons of groundnuts and
159.5 metric tons of groundnut cake in 1970 to zero 1n 1978. Nigeria
now imports groundnut cake. Groundnut processing facilities in Northern
NIgeria at present are uoder utilized and some even deserted.
The export of another oilseed -- palm kernel -- also decreased from
181.9 metric tons in 1970 to 41 in 1978. A recent USAlD/USDA report
(1980) estimates that this trend will continue and predicts huge imports
of food products io 1990 to meet domestic demand.
During the period 1974/75-1978/79. the price for vegetable oil
(palm 011) 1n Lagos increased from 38 to 99 kobo per beer bottle an
increase of 261%. During 1974/75, the price of palm oil (the major
vegetable oil in Southern Nigeria) was still 0.52 -- the price of groundnut
oil. During 1978-1979, however, the prices were virtually equal (98 kobo).
This illustrates the reversal of a surplus paJm oil eC '~:lomy to a deficit
palm oil economy where locally-produced palm oil reached the same level
as that of the north "imported" substitutes.
Although it appears that the high demand for vegetable oils during
the past few years has nullified any premium for groundnut oil over palm
oil in local markets, Nigerian import figures (FAO unpublished data. 1981)
21
indicated that imported groundnut oil still can:ied a 20% premium over
soybean oil ~hich would mean that soybean oil is about 70% t h8 r rL::e 0-::
gr.oundm~,:: oiL On the oth~r h and, us export fig :' ll:-es f~)r 1979/S0 USDA,
1981) show that pd.ces for exported soybean eil and peanut oil were
virtually equal ($620 and $600 per metric ton).
2.2.2 The lo~&::tenn trend in the demand f or sc.Y.2~a!!_ oil
The J ong-tenn demand for soybean oil has been estimated by the
same method described in section 2.1.3. Howeve r ~ the d t:m;~~; d f or soybean
oil is not restricted to urban areas and is not derived from any other
producl.
Almual population growth in Nigeria is e s t imated to be :1 :1., and income
at 2%. Estimates of the income 81,1sticities for vegetab le oil i n Nigeria
vary fran .49 to O. n (f""deral Off:lr ',!: of Statistics, 1966; FAO, 1967 t
Olay:i.de , 19 73; Simmons, 1976; IFPRI, 1977; World Bank, 1979 >_ Het -e a -' ) iJl: lle
of 0.6 i t, assumed. Thus, the yearly increase in the dema~-id f(~ :·-:- yp./?:etable
oil is estimated to be:
D veg. en - '3% (0 •. ( ;It 2)' :. % =. 4.2i~
Again, assuming a stagnant grollr.d:m.1.t o:U production ;,\,',<:; do ),:;"~ :d.y
increase of palm eil production of 3 , ~7,. an increasing need for supplEmeDtary
vegeta't:l .... d J . i~::: d>::);:Jonstrat ed. Table 11 is based on the: lO upply figures of
'[abIes 9 and 10. Vegetable nils from sou!'ceG < .bel: t h an paLTJI. oil~ groundnut
oil, and soybean oil are assumed to 03Il,.-:;·unt to 8% of the present supply with
a growth rate of 5%. This gives an :i.n.c:.cease of 16% ,:;'IlU':.l ::: l1.y f o r soybean oil.
22
2.3 Soybean asfoed
2.3.1 Nutritional value of soybeans . The major importance of soybealls for food can be related to their
high protein content -- about 40% of the total dry matter (Steyn, 1977).
Based on chemical analysts, soybean protein compares to hen's egg protein
in most of the components (Faryna, 1978, See Table 12). Compared with
other legumes, soybeans have the highest protein content and also a very
high digestive nutrient percentage. An unsaturated fat content of about
20% is suitable for special diets. Also soybeans have a high lysine
content compared with other sources of plant protein but rates relatively
poor in sulphur amino acids. However, when used in combination with
cereals which have a higher concentration of sulphur/amino acids. the
nutrition value compares favorably with all components of animal protein.
The traditional practices in Nigerian diets to combine vegetables and
cereals or vegetables and root crops already has this combination.
Compared with other protein sources, soybeans are very cheap_
Faryna (1978) presented these cost equival~nts for other proteins:
Eggs • 30 tillles more expensive than soybeans
Beef = 15 times more expensi \;-~ than soybeans
Milk .. 9 times more expensive than soybeans
Cowpeas = 3 times more expensive than soybeans
Soybeans do not play a major part in human nutrition in spite of
these obvious advantages for two reasons: to get the full nutritional
value, it is necessary to process soybeans, and they have problems
related to their flavor and flavor stability (Wolf/Cowan. 1977).
23
Table 12: Amino acid patterns for soybeans and hen's egg protein (Mg/G Total E.A.A.).
Amino acids Soybean flour* Egg protein
Lysine 161 125
Total sulphur amono acids 74 107
Methionine-sulphur amono acid 37 61
Cystine-sulphate amono acid 37 46
Tryptophan
Threoqine
Isoleucine
Leucine
Phenylalanine
Valine
Tyrosine
Protein score
Sources:
30 31
101 99
119 129
181 172
117 114
126 141
91 81
68 100
Rackis, J.J. and co-workers, 1961 Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, 1965 Based on total sulphur contaioing ~ino acids
24
? urthermore, for huma.11. consumption they need to be boiled and
fennented. In Ulany Asian countries which have had a long experie.nce
with soybean processing, a large number of different dishes and products
are used. To assess t he potential of soybeans for human. con~.;mnptioo in
the Nigerian situation~ it is essential to look at existing traditional
food sources for which soybeans can supplement or be substituted.
2.3.2 Soybean as a substitute
In Northern Nigeria, women produce food flavor out of locust beans
by fermenting. This 'tu:±.ddawa" or local 11111aggill is a high value protein
source which is increasingly produced with cheaper soybeans, The
processing of aoybeans consists of several steps, including the removal
of the seedcoats, two hours of boiling, and a fermentation period of
two days. After fermenting, the product is pounded and sun-dried for
marketing.
Melon seed ("egus i") is of major importance for Ni~c:;c· i an vegetable
soups. The price has risen continously in recent years which increases
the chances for soybeans to spread as a substitute. YUWA (1964)
described this use for the Koros two decades ago. Soybeans are de husked
and ground to a coarse paste which L ; well (; ( ; (',ked to resemble "e>gusi" in
texture and taste.
Of greatex importance for the Nigerian situation could be the
increased use of soybean milk, especially fl.::; ;;i "'Te~ning food. Protein
reqUirements are highes t during the rapid growth period of children.
At present, the protein demand for a large number ·..:f children is not
met even in the villages where vegetable protein 1.13 available. Soybeans
could fill paxt of the gap if the processing is understood and the milk
boiled before use. After soaking the beans, the seedcoat is removed and
25
soybeans are ground to a fine paste which is strained through il clo th
preferably 7l.ylon which is already used for other food processing and
available in local markets (Faryna, 1978).
The taste of soybean milk can be improved if sugar and other
flavoring ingridents are added. It differs from the taste of cow milk
which is not a major component of local food in Ni2.~ria. Therefore,
the problem of substituting a kno~~ and introduced food source should
not be too difficult. Young children are the main target group who do
not as yet have relatively strong and unchangeable food preferences.
2.3.3 20ybeans as a supplement
Soybeans are used as supplement in two basic forms -- paste and
flour. In many Nigerian dishes, one of them can be added to increase
the nutritional valu'f:;. Be cause of the ':'lmount of labor involved in
prepara tion, f ai r ly large quantities should be prepared at one time.
Soaking the beans for about 12 hours ",ttll ::1 change of water makes t 'hc
dehuskir~ easier. Dchusked b~~ns are ground on a grinding stone or in
a mill to f! fine paste. For flour preparation, soyb€ M~, ;; are boiled for
about 30 minutes before soaking them for 12 ,to 14 hours. 'fh . e see~:~8
dehusked ana dried before gr.inding or milling.
According to Faryna, some Nigerians have recently developed a method
of soaking the beans for about t~n minutes in boiling water before 10ng-
term soaking in co1.G 'w~t t;: :: . Th::l.s is meant to improve the flavor.
Soybean mi lk, pastf : c. and f lour can be added to locally-us~d p3lJS and
porridges. In "Alele" or "Moi moit1. soybeans can, supplement or
substitute for cowpeas , In same dishes, a mixture with cowpeas is
necespary because of t he binding qual! ties 0f cov,'peas ~ paate () : flour
26
can be added to soups used.either with cereals or tuber crops. The
preparation of soybean patties, together with egg or meat and several
compete favorable ~:lth the traditional food. As sweet snack
foods, soybean paste and flour can supplement or substitute more
expensive ingredients. Soybean flour pancakes and high-protein soy
biscuits are already locally prepared.
It is possible to improve the nutritional value of bread by adding
soyflour. Locally-produced soyflour could reduce the dependence on
imported wheat flour which at the moment is the main basis for increased
bread production in Nigeria.
The already estblished local market indicates expansion possibilities
for Nigerian farmers' production. The expansion possibilities may be
highest in areas where soybeans can be used as a substitute for established
food varieties.
3. Soybean crop and farming system
3.1 General
Faryna quotes Ezedinma (1965) who gives '. 1908 as the year of the
first planting of soybean in NIgeria. Experi,ments were conducted at
Moor Plantation in Ibadan. Twenty years later, a successful trial was
reported from the Samaru Agricultural Research Station. Soybeans
originated in Asia, and several quotations (Probst/Judd, 1973) describe
a 5,OOO-year period of soybean cultivation. However, Hymowitz, who did
intensive origin research of soybean variteies, dates the domestication
of this crop back to about the 11th century B.C. He locates it in
North China from where the product spread over other Asian countries.
27
3.2 Data on smallholder production in Nigeria
Official information on the soybean production in Nigeria is errati c
and unreliable. Records are available on the purchases of the Nigerian
Marketing Board for export. They give 3 t OOO metric tons for each of the
years from 1976 to 1979 (compaz-e Table 13). FAO estimates for the total
1981 Nigerian production of about 75~OOO metric tons are based on
unpublished data. Nigerian sources (Ashaye et al., INTSOY, 1975;
Faryna. 1978) named two main production areas - Benue State and the
Abuja-Zonkwa area. Thirty far,,'lers in the Zonkwa area and 36 in the
Benue are a were selected for interviews. (Each interview lasted about
45 minutes) . The aim was to collect general information on soybean
production. Therefore, less emphasis was given to representative sampling.
To have easy and rapid access to villages the existing contacts of local
officers (MANR*) were sought, and the selection of farmers was done with
their cooperation.
Yield figu.:eswere not recorded because such tl :l i.:. a collection reqUires
high i nputs. Different sources indicate these soybean yi elds in t h e
surveyed area: 400 to 700 kg/ha (Feder,'11 Office of Statistics, 1977),
667 kg/ha (750 kg/oa (Federal Office of Statistics, 1977), 667 kg/ha
(Federal Office of Strltistics, 1979), 368 kg/ha (FAO, 1919); 600 kg/ha
(Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA}; 330-1090 (.'lv. 709) kg/ha
(Phillips, 1916) and 600 kg/ha (INTSOY, 1975).
For the survey, more or less standard methods wE"!ra followed according
to Williams (1976); Delgado (1979); Norman et aI, 1979) and Atayi et al,
1980) . They arrange their data under similar headings. Obserlations
are grouped around difi erelYt production factors stlch as land . labor.
*Ministry of Agriculture and Nat~!ral Resources
28
Table 13: Yearly quantities purchased by the Nigeria Marketing Board for export (100 metric tons).
1972 4(1)
1973 1 (1)
1974 1(1) (2)
1975 1(1) (2)
1976 3(2)
1977 3(2)
1978 3(2)
1979 3(2)
(1) Source: Foreign Agricultural Circular, Oilseeds and Products FOP4-·;i Sl April 1978, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
(2) Source: Soya Bluebook 1900, American Soybean Association.
29
(labor calendar availability, utilization). capital (paid and non-~aid
inputs) cultivation practices (intercropping, rotation), and utilization
method ;;, (hOt's choid processing and marketing).
3.2 . 1 Land
Soybean farmers grow soybeans mainly on upland fields which are
available in larger areas. The number of plots t-lith soybeans in the
Zonkwa area averages 1.5 per: £ai:"lrie'i: G.:.: .. ci in Benue State 2.4. The higher
input data per farmer in Benue Stat2 suggest larger soybean farms in
rhis production area,
The periods be.tw·eerl t'-i"~ fallow averaged 4 years in Benu~ State,
in Zonkwa about 5 years. The average farmer gro\.,':; 2 to 3 crops of
soybeans in successive years (See Table 14). Soybean is rarely
cultivated during the first year after fallow. The rotation after
fnllow near.ly always starts with yam in Benue State and with sorghum
(guinea corn) in the Zonkwa area.
The second ye~n soybeaIls appear ) :<:'1. the rotation of~en intercropped
with guinea corn nnd ~3ornetimes with maize. The picture is a sorghun
based cI'opping system in which sorghum/soybeans appear for 2-3 yp.ars at
the end of .3 4-5 year cultivation period.
The majority of farmers use on l y i'.<c:d hc(~X. y,;g for land preparation.
Farmers who us~d tractors (about one out of five in the sample) hired
them mostly fran the government at MB.20 per hectare.
Plant ti~j.cix~g 101.' soybeans varied greatly. The maj or factor
influe~\,::ing tl~p 3[::o.d.ng was weed control which is related to accessibj.lity
of the plants.
30
3.2.2. Labor
Measurement of actual -labor utilization data is time-consuming and
tedious work. Therefore, farmers were asked to compare labor use i 0:1.'
soybeans with labor use for other more popular crops for which labor
utilization data were fairly well known.
Table 14: Distribution of farmers according to the number of years soybeans were successvely planted on the same land
Zonkwa Benue Total %
1 year 4 4 8 12
2 years 17 9 26 39
3 " 9 11 20 30
4 " 4 4 6
5 " 2 2 3
6 " 1 1 2
Continuous cropping 4 4 6
N/A 1 1 2
Total 30 36 66 100 "
Average number of years: 2,;16 2.80 2.6
31
In this area sorghum and groundnuts can serve as benchmark crops
as data on labor are colle·cted in other studies ,~ Norman (1972; Thorton
(1973); Parker (1978); Norman et aI, (1976), Heys et a~., (1977);
Williams (1980); and by World Bank and other sources. Labor utilization
data for the savanna zone could be derived from them (See Table 15).
The farmer was asked to rank sorghum, groundnut, and soybeans according
to their labor requirement per activity. A short description of this
method is given in Appendix 1.
Soybean required less labor than did groundnuts for planting and
weeding. as well as harvesting. Soybean are generally weedeo once . ]>1("
land preparatiun activity was erroneously ommitted :i.n the questionnaire.
Based on data from the benchmark crops, it is estimated to be abour 25%
(42 man days). With other operations such as fertilizer and insecticide
application and bird scaring, the total amount of labor used can be
estimal;c;(t in absolut.e and relative figures (Table 15). The fertilizing
figur:: for the Zonkwa region (9.0 man-days/ha) ccr,1,p;;.res well with the
incidental data from Nor!uan, et a1 (l9l 6) ccrap::' l c;:! f or groundnut
fertilization (10.4 man-days/ha).
The relative labor utilization per activity derived by the
i~omparative method corresponds well with the-celative figures that are
directly derived from famers' response t o th.~' question regarding their
actual labor input. The latter figures support the result obtain~d
by this method.
Op
erat
ion
Pla
nti
ng
*
Wee
ding
Har
ves
t i n
9
Tot
al
Tab
le
15
Res
ult
s o
f co
mp
arat
ive
met
hod
soyb
ean
lab
or
uti
lizati
on
dat
a
Ben
chm
ark
cro
ps
Soy
bean
la
bo
r u
tili
zati
on
P
rob
abi1
ity
dis
trib
uti
on
of
sopg
hum
gro
undn
ut
rrm
ulay
s/ha
(f
) (2
) cr
y so
ybea
n I~bor
req
uir
emen
ts
(a)*
* (b
)**
11
%
%
P(a
<y>
u)
P{b<
y>l1
).
10
20
16
46
16
15
19
.2
22. I
4.
45
0.36
4
29
28
35.9
30
.9
5.94
0.
424
40
35
44.9
47
.0
17.5
1 0.
333
85
78**
* 10
0.0*
**
100.
0***
(1)
Der
ived
by
th
e co
mp
arat
ive
met
hod.
(2)
Dir
ect
from
qu
esti
on
nai
res.
* E
rro
neo
usl
y
the
land
p
rep
arat
ion
acti
vit
y w
as
omm
itte
d in
th
e q
ues
tio
nn
aire
,'n~
M
anda
ys/h
a
0.09
1
0.04
5
O.
lOt)
***
Act
ual
ly
the
rela
tiv
e
tab
or
uti
lizati
on
fo
r p
lan
tin
g,
_'1ee
ding
an
d h
arv
esti
ng
am
ount
ed
to o
nly
65
.3%
of
the
tota
l la
bo
r in
pu
t in
to s
oybe
ans:
ad
dit
ion
all
y 2
5%
(42
man
rlay
s)
wer
e us
ed
for
land
cle
ari
ng
. G
(ab
out
7 m
anda
ys)
fert
iliz
ing
, 0.
5% f
or
Inse
ctic
ides
ap
pli
cati
on
and
2.
9%
for
bir
d
scar
ing
(a
ol7r
pa1'
e Ta
b l.e
1
6).
Sta
nd
ard
ized
no
rmal
ra
ndom
var
i ab
Ie
Za
Zb
1. 1
0 0.
23
1.43
O
. II
0.97
0
.27
w
N
33
Table 16: Combined labor utilization data for soybean cultivation in Zonkwa and Benue areas
Relative labor utilization
Operation % Man days
Planting, weeding, harvesting 65.3 78
Land preparation 25.3 30
Fertilizer application 6.0 7
Insecticide application 0.5 1
Bird scaring 2.9 3
Total labor 100.0 119
It is also possible to calculate the stand and deviation (0) that
is associated with estimates of II as an indication of the accuracy of
the results. For example, Table. 15 shows that the estimate of labor
utilization for planting is more accurate than th~t for harvesting.
Because the labor requirements for harvesting are dependent on yield,
a larger variation in the labor utilization of this operation was
expected.
Table 17 shows the relative importance of different labor sources
(family, hired. and community) per operation for the two regions. The
larger farmers in Benue State use about half their labor from sources
outsi<le the family. Land preparation is the operation for which most
34
Fig
ure
3
Lab
or
cale
nd
ar
for
soyb
ean
pro
du
ctio
n
in
Nig
eria
Jan
uar
y
Feb
ruar
y M
arch
A
pril
M
ay
Jun
e Ju
ly
Aug
ust
Sep
tem
ber
Oct
ober
N
ovem
ber
Dec
embe
r
Land
cl
eari
ng
,.
.,
Pla
nti
ng
•
Fer
t.
ap
p 1
. •
i
Wee
din9
..
..--
----
--4
Bi r
d
sca
rin
g
• H
arve
stin
g ..
..
35
l abor is hired .. For t hi:':' Zonkwa farmers, the family is the main source
of labor. I he. main difference in labor use between the regions lies
in ~hc ;:·,<::!: .~I.'e labor utilization for harvesting (Zonkwa region 24.9%
compared with 37.3% in Benue State). Differences may be explained
by different seed maturation .
T~!~~;.elbor calendar for soybean production is presented in Figure
2. In Benue State, where the rainy season starts about one week earlier
than in the Zonkwa region, the timing of the different operations is
therefore more variable. Sometimes planting is delayed to mi.n.imize
rain at flowering.
3.2.3 Other inputs
~~ It was indicated in preliminary interviews that seed can still
germ.mate after 1-2 years in storage. The main survey showed that
germination p r';;;blems do exist:. FarmerG i n Benue State reported an averag,,:
loss of abo!!! 12r ::;.ecau.';;:, of poor gerndn.,,:tion. However, in Zonkwa more
than 50/; was lost. Bin~ :'1 .. ~.nd de(!ay of seeds W(,1",.:, i1i'v';n ., 13 reasons for
poor getmJnation results in both regions. (Al .~f) lack of rain in the
Benue area). Nearly one-third of the farmers replant part or a :U of
their lost soybeans ,
All farmers in the sample expect one were. far..iliar with only one
variety. Farmers in Benue State used their own home grown s "",I. but in
the Zonkwa region ab ;~:\; 1: one third of the interviewed farmers bought their
seed at the local market . This is probably ... elated to a rapid expans ion
of soybean production which was m€:n', :; c ne. d in interviews in that a r ea.
The average amoun l: of .seed p l anted around Zonkwa in 1979 was 14.6 mudus
( l mudu ~" about 1 kg ) . This increased to an average of 23.2 mudus p,:;'
farmer in 1980. For farmers in Benue State the relative increase was
36
smaller: from 99.6 mudus to 106.2 mudus. More than half of the total
sample (58%) reported an increased production over the past five years
while one third (32%) reported a decrease. The production of the
fermented "Daddawa" or "maggi" was given as an important reason for
the increase in the Zonkwa area. Expansion of cash income in Benue
was mentioned as a prime reason which confirms the impression that
soybean production in Benue State is more market-oriented.
Fertilizer: Most of the sample farmers (92%) applied fertilizer on the
soybeans. More than half of the users applied single super phosphate;
20% compound fertilizer (15-15-15) and the remaining 28% super sulphate
and urea. Both government suppliers and the local market are important
fertilizer sources.
Table 17: Different labor sources by operation and by region (B • Benue State; z· Zonkwa Region) in their relative importance (percent of total labor input).
Family Hired .Commu-nity
Region _.kS .. Z B Z B Z B Z Operation:
Land preparation 7.7 22.6 13.3 3.4 3.4 24.4 26.2
Planting 7.8 13.9 3.9 1.0 0.5 0.4 11.2 15.3
Fert. preparation 4.0 7.0 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 4.4 7.6
Weeding 15.4 14.3 3.1 6.0 1.3 1.8 19.8 22.1
Insect appl. 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5
Bird scaring 2.4 3.4 0.1 2.5 3.4
Harvesting 16.7 15.3 19.4 2.8 1. 2 6.8 37.3 24.9
Total 53.4 77.2 39.9 13.5 6.7 9.3 100.0 100.0
Total
Mean
25.3
13.2
6.0
21.0
0.5
2.9
31.1
100.0
37
Government stations, however, supply large amounts at low prices t o onl y
a few farmers (Table 18). From observations, they are the more prosperous
farmers. The smaller farmers have to buy their fertilizer mostly at the
local market at higher prices. In Benue State, fertilizer i s generally
applied by top dressing and broadcasting is a common practice. I ~
Zonkwa it is said to be mostly incorporated in the soil. Hanure is not
used in either region.
Insecticides: A minority of the surveyed farmers (11%) applied
insecticides on their soybean fields. The use of insecticides is limited
to seed dressing before planting. Aldrex T is generally the br and bought
from local dealers (Benue State) as well as from the Government (Zonkt.a).
The average application in the Zonkwa region is 7 packets per farmer and
in Benue State 36 packets. The average cost per packet amounts to H4.
3.2.4 Problems
Farmers in the survey mentioned pest control and economic inputs
as their most ~portant problems. Birds (~l%), rat (39%), ants (17%),
insects (15%) and chickens (15%) were the pest problems most often
mentioned. Approximately two-thirds of the farmers complained about
poor soybean marketing facilities.
3.2.5 Harvesting and utilization
The average sample farmer in Zonkwa area produced about 8.5 bags
(about 850 kg) of soybeans per (no~al) year, in Benue State 34 bags.
Table 18:
Source
38
Average fertilizer prices (N/bag) and quantities purchased (No~ bags) by source and type.
Government Local market
Type Quantity price % Farmers Quantity price % Farmers
Super phosphate 9.6 1. 70 24 9.7 3.87 2S
Compound (15-15-15) 90.7 2.67 5 3.5 6.33 18
Super sulphate 9.5 2.38 6 3.4 5.56 17
Urea 0 2.1 7.00 17
Nearly all respondents reported shattering losses during harvesting.
Figure 4 shows which quarter of the year soybeans are sold. Nost farmers
(86%) stor~ before selling and the average farmer sells the last part
of his soybeans up to 6.5 months after harvesting. Storage is nearly
ah,,'ays done in sacks in dry places. Losses by rats are reported to be
the main problem during storage.
Of the farmers surveyed, nearly all in the Zonkwa region (93%) and
one-third in Benue State (31%) eat soybean "!'!laggi" daily. Respec tively
27% and 3% of the farmers reported that they eat fried and cooked soybeans.
Kafanchan is the nost: important processing and marketing centre for
fermented soybean "dadda\"a" in Nigeria. This is reflected by producers f
prices. During the period of the survey (October-November 1980), Zonkwa
farmers reported prices of )f30 per bag (100 kg), while Benue farmers
received only M20. The distance Kafanchan - Zonkwa is about 40 km but
Kafanchan-Gboko (Benue State) is about 400 km. Traders from as far as
Sokato, Haiduguri, Niger, and Tc.had come to Kafanchan to buy soybean
"daddar,va". Substitution of soybeans for locust beans is reported in
Upper Volta (Swanson, 1979).
39
Fig. 4: Percent of farmers marketing soybeans i!l three month sequences of th e year
Percent of f.armers
5~ !
I n 40-\
I .
1
~ ...,n ~ . .. _ .- -1 '. ~u-~ I . I
1 1---. ' ~1 I \. I ! 1--.--- 1
L l I , , . I ' 1 I \ ~
_ .......... :. ... _ -- .. . . .1.. .......... " .. . .... _ .-4-_.---.. , '
Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sept Oct -Dec
40
Only 9% of the farmers (all from Benue State) sold their soybeans
production to the government or cooperatives. During the survey, the
Groundnut Narketing Board bought soybeans for only Nl3S per ton but
the farmers may have had other advantages such as a cheap fertilizer
supply. The use of soybean for animal feeds is virtually unknown
among the soybean producers. Nevertheless, there are indications that
an increasing number of ~il mills in Northern Nigeria are seeking to
buy soybeans for processing.
CONCLUSION
The potential of soybean production in Nigeria is much greater
than presently recognized by officials and research programs. Soybean
meal for animal feeds, mainly for the poultry industry, are being
imported in increasing quantities. At the same time, potenti.8.l ex ists
for substituting soybeans for a variety of traditional human food
products and dishes and/or using them as supplements.
Soybeans need special processing to use t~eir full nutritional
value both for human food and animal feeds. Therefore, research programs
should also focus on processing possibilities under Nigerian conditions.
Because most of the production comes from smallholders, their
production systems have to be understood in ordel.' to provide optimal
improvement inputs. Several efforts already have been undertaken to
increase soybean research in Nigeria. These efforts need more official
recognition and coordination. Even though the nation lacks sufficient
data on soybean development and production, the basis for greater
production exists ,-,lith increasing demand on one hand and on the other
hand production experience of local farmers in the two main production
areas.
41
The comparative method for the c ol1ecti.on of labor utilization for soybeans
During the survey. farmer were asked to c.ompare the labor
utilization for the secondary crop with that for the two principal
crops (data known from the literature), assuming a plot of equal
size for each of the crops.
Each farmer ranked the one ~ '2!condary crop (soybeans) and the
two principal crops (sorghum and groundn ~t) according to their labor
requ iJ:e.rn o:::c ts. The dervied advantaget: were assumed to reflect the
probability that the labor1:;;;qui.l:ell; .. :: nts of crop A were high or l ov~ r
thar. those of crop B. A se(;m:d ';: . .:y ie distribuition wi th an unknown
mean (ll) and an unkno~rn. variance (0 2 ). r'igure 5 dl 0WS the h'lpothetical
distrubution of farmers according to t hcLr rankin.;; :: of labor requirement:;;.
The shaded parts in Figure 5 a l:. €: t1-: e percentages of fanners that
consider the labor require:l£nts of the secondary crop ( y ) lOVJer than
that of crop A (expec.ted value = a), and hig'rlLr ;;:;tal:. '::i-!:! t of crop B
(expected value = b). The ass~ptioi1 of u r..;r;r.a l d istri!xlt"jon a llows
the use of the Z-statistic.s where Z is the stnndardizcd nannal random
vnriable:
probability p (Yl<Yll)
v ,-11 .!.
which is as s ociated with the
42
Figure 5~ Frequency distribution of surveyed farmers according to labor inpu~ requirements (y ~ N [~, 62J).
Labor use by activity (fill out table)
Activity
Land prep_
Planting
Ferti lizing
Weeding
Applying inse cticide
Bird scaring
Harvesting
(Explain "other"
FAMILY
no. of people
no . of days
LABCU R S 00 RCE HIRED
no. of people
no. of days
Figure 2: Example of labor record (one-visi~ su~vey)
OTHEl<
no. of people
no. of day s
43
In Figure 2, ZA = ~ - a, where ZA is associated ~ith the a
probability of farmers j udging the labor requirements of the secondary
crop lower than that of crop A. From the percentage of f armers ranking
the labor input of crop y lower than that of crop A, this p robability
can be estimated. This probability in turn provides the a s sociated
value for ZA' ~ can be derived. Analogously, the value of ZB = a
The whole point of the analys is shO\vs tha t:
z (b) + Z (a) A B
=
In this equation the unknmYn a has cancelled out.
The estimation of ~ per activity provides absolute figures for the
labor requirements of the secondary crop. From this absolute fi gures
(mandays per hectare), the relative importance of the labor requirements
per activity can be derived. These re.lative values , in turn. s houl d
be compared \dch 'vith relat.ive values that · are found else,,,here in the
field survey I,ben farmers were asked to estimate t he nUP.lber of days they
worked on the secondary crop. Figure 5 shO\~s the composition of th::'s
question. As the plot size is unknown, onl y relative labor IJ t i.1L~<.llion
per activity can be derived from the answers. The comparison of the
absolute figures and the relative figures provide a validity norm l~f
this comparat.ive approach .
44
REFERENCES
Adegeye, A.J. "Nigerian Poultry Industry Scrambles to Close Prf)tpi I~ Gap" . Intenlational Agricul tur:,1 Development, l'larch, 1981
AGREP ('vorld Bank). TO\~ ards Greater Food Security for Niged c: AGREP Division Working Paper No. 13, 1978.
American Soybean Associati oa . "Soya Blueb oo~: 80", Loui.s , 198(J
Atayi, E.A. and H.C. Knipscheer. "Survey of Foodcrop Fanning System in t he 'ZAPI-ESI Came roon". lEA/ONAREST, 1 980 .
Beyer, V. "Der '-;'eltmarkt fur Eiweissfuttermittel." Agrarmarkt, Studien Heft 25, Verlag Paul Par cy, Eamburg, 1977 .
Delgado, C.L. "The Southern Fulani Farming System in Upper Volta: A ~lode1 for Integration of Crop and Livestock Product:iol1 iii
the west African Savanna." African Rural Economy Pa;)(; r, No. 21 Michigan State, 1979.
Emechbe, A.H. The Promi.se and Problems of Soybe2.ns in the Savan n3 Z Oll.e of Nigeria. Proceedings of the Firs t ~ational Meeting of Nig~rian Soybean Scientists, Institute of Agricultural Research and Training. Ibadan, 1980.
FAO "Agricultura]. Commodities for 1975 andJtH~5. If Romei.'j67, vol. 11
FAO 1979 Productior. _._~< ·~, ("book, Rome
Faryna ,l; . .]. :'Soybeans in the Nigerian Diet" (Udofia, ad.). Agricultural Extension Research :Li.a.i..s o!! St::Lvicl~ S, Ahrna<1l1 3ellml University, Nay 1978.
Federal Office of Statistics. "Expenditures Elasticities of the Demand of Household Consumer Good s. " Lagos, 1966.
Federal Office of Statistics. "Rural Econol!lic Survey, 1977/78. Agricultural Survey Unie, Lagos, 1979.
Hays, H.H. and A.K. Raheja. "Economics of Scle Crop Co-v;pea Production in Nigeria at the Fanner' s Leve : Using Improved PracU , :·· ~'. " Samaru Research Bulletin 286, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, 1977.
45
Phillips, T.A. An Agricultural Notebook. Longman, Ibadan, 1976 .
Probst, A.H. and Ludd, R.W. Origin, U.S. History and Development, and World Distribution. Caldwell, B.E. (ed.): Soybeans Agronomy No. 16. Wisconsin, 1973.
Scott, W.O. and Aldrich, S.R. !1~fodern Soybean Production l1• I llinoi s
1970.
Stey, W.R. "Agricultural Research Impact on Soybeans. Special Report 1977. Agricul t ural and Home Economics Experiment Station. Iowa State University.
Simmons, E.B. "Rural Household Expenditures .in Three Village s of Zaria Province, l'lay 197 0-July 1971. "Samaru Nisce llaneous Paper, 56. Ahmadu Bello University.
Swanson, R.A. "Gourmantche Agriculture t t• Part 11. Documen t No.8.
B.A.E.P., Fada N. Gornms, 1979.
Thorton, D.S. Agriculture in South East Ghana." Development Study No. 12, University of Reading, 1973.
USDA, Foreign Agriculture Circulars. FOP 1-81 and FOP 26-80, Washington, D.C .• 1980-81.
USDA/uSAID. "Food Problems and Prospects in Sub-Saharan Af rica: The Decade of the 1980 IS. II \yashingt011 , D. C. 1980.
USDA/AID "Food Problems and Prospects in Sub-S aharan Afri ca." USADA, International Economic s Di vis i on. \,'ash i ngton, 1980.
Vachel, J.P. "Use of Subs titute Produc ts in Lives tock Feeding." Internal Infonnation on Agriculture. No. 130. Commis sion of the European Communities , }lay. 1974.
Wolf t W.J. and Cowan, J.C. Soybeans as a Food Source. London , 1971.
Williams, L. B. "Benchmark Survey for Sorghum. II Three Crops in Nigeria Wheat! ~lillet
by H.C. Knipscheer, K.H. Benz and F. H. Ibadan, 1980.
Lenchmark Surveys o f and Sorghum (edi ted) Khadr, IlTA/:-.IAFPP,
World Bank "Nigerian Agricul tural Se ctor Review." Re port No . 2181-UN1, West African Projects Dep a rtment, Agricultural Divis ion. J une, 1979.
46
Hepmowitz, T. On the Domestication of the Soybean. Econ. Bot. 24: 408-421.
Hoffmeyer, M. "Die Voraussicht1iche Entwick1ung der Internationalen Folegen fur die Geneinschait. n Hittei1unge.n uber di e Landwirtchaft Nr. 26, Commission of the European Communit i es July, 1979.
Houck, J.P. and J.S, Mann. "Analysis of Domestic and Foreign Demand for U. S. Soybe an and Soybe an P roduc ts. " Te chnical Bu lIe tin 256, Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Minnesota, 1968.
IFPRI "Food Needs of Developing Countries: Projections of Production and Consumption in 1990. II Research Report No.3, 1977.
ILCA liThe Nigerian Econol!lY, Agriculture and Livestock Sector. 1I
ILCA Bulletin No.6, Dec. 1979.
INTSOY IISoybean Production, Protection and Utilization. t1 INTS0Y Series No.6, University of Illinois~ Harch, 1975.
INTSOY "A Program for Soybean Development in Ghana.· 1 t-larch, 1977.
Knipscheer, H.C. "Rural Retai l Prices (1979-1980) of Naj or Foodcrops in South West Nigeria". Agricultural Economics Information Bulletin, No. 2/81, IITA, May , 1981.
Knipscheer, H.C. "Soybean Fanning Systems in West Africa: The Case of Smallholder! s Production in ~igeria." Mimeo, rITA, 1981.
Knipscheer, H. C. and L.D. Hi 11. "The Demand for Soybean Meal by the EEe: an Econometric Model". Agricultural Economics Research Report, University of Illinois (in press).
Norman, A.G. Soybean Physio1o~y, Agronony and Dt ilizatiol1. Ne, .. York, San Francisco, London, 1978.
Norman, D.I~. "A Economic Study of Thr ee Village:.. in Zaria Province~ 2. Input-output Study (Test)." Sarnaru Miscellaneous Paper. No. 32, Ahmadu Bello Univer s ity , Zaria, 1972.
Noman, D.W., J.C. Fine., A.D. Goddard., F.J. Kroeker and D.N. Proyor. riA Socio-economic Survey of Three Villages in the Sokato Close Settled Zone. 1I Samaru Hiscellaneous Paper No. 64, Ahmadu Bello University , Zaria, 1976.
Parker, R.N. ItThe Feasibility of Some Small-Scale Development Pr ojects in the Light of a COIlL1lunity's Socia-Economic Structure. II Unpublished y.:. Sc. Thesis, University of Reading. 1973.
