large

Factors affecting Kolanut marketing in Kaduna metropolis, Kaduna State, Nigeria

Ariyo Oluyinka Christopher1*, Usman Mohammed Bello2, Olagunju Olubukola Eden1, Ariyo Mary Oluyemisi3, Ademuwagun Adebola Abimbola4

1Department of Entrepreneurship and Innovative Agriculture, Federal College of Forestry Mechanization, Forestry Research Institute of Nigeria, P. M. B. 2273, Afaka, Kaduna State, Nigeria, 2Federal College of Forestry Mechanization, Forestry Research Institute of Nigeria, P. M. B. 2273, Afaka, Kaduna State, Nigeria, 3Department of Horticultural Technology, Federal College of Forestry Mechanization, Forestry Research Institute of Nigeria, P. M. B. 2273, Afaka, Kaduna State, Nigeria, 4Department of Basic Sciences and General Studies, Federal College of Forestry Mechanization, Forestry Research Institute of Nigeria, P. M. B. 2273, Afaka, Kaduna State, Nigeria

Address for correspondence: Ariyo Oluyinka Christopher, Department of Entrepreneurship and Innovative Agriculture, Federal College of Forestry Mechanization, Forestry Research Institute of Nigeria, P. M. B. 2273, Afaka, Kaduna State, Nigeria. E-mail: ask4ariyo@yahoo.com
Submitted: 03-05-2021, Accepted: 10-05-2021, Published: 30-06-2021

ABSTRACT

The study examined factors affecting Kolanut marketing in Kaduna Metropolis, Kaduna State, Nigeria. Multi-stage sampling techniques were used for the study. Purposive sampling was used to select four markets in the study area. Random sampling techniques were used to selects 100 marketers in all the selected markets. Personal interview with the aid of semi-structured questionnaires was used to obtain information from the marketers. Data collected were analyzed with descriptive statistics and multiple regression analysis. The results showed that majority (88.42%) of Kolanut marketers are male, married with the highest household size of 6–10 members. They had mostly (37.89%) secondary school education and the highest marketing experience of 6–10 years. The net income from Kolanut marketing is influenced by gender, household size, educational level, years of marketing experience, and transportation cost. The constraints of Kolanut marketing are inadequate capital, high transportation cost, unavailability of Kolanut, and poor storage. Other includes high cost of labor, price fluctuation, and lastly, low price. The study concludes that adequate training on proper storage of Kolanut should be organized by the government at all levels and by the cooperative society for the marketers. Furthermore, famers should be encouraged to grow and produce more of Kolanut so as to increase the quantity of Kolanut that will be available to marketers.

Keywords: Factors, Kolanut, marketing, marketers, net income

INTRODUCTION

Kolanut is a tropical tree crop belonging to the family Sterculiaceae. There are over fifty species of kola, of which seven have edible nuts, but only two species are grown in Nigeria and widely exploited, these are Cola nitida (Gbanja) and Cola acuminata (Abata).[1,2] The most important is C. nitida because of its wide economic value. Kolanut is mostly produced in Africa and is cultivated to a large degree in Nigeria, but also in Ghana, Ivory Coast, Brazil, and the West Indian Islands.[3,4,5] Annual production from these countries alone is in excess of 250,000 tons, while the world production is about 300,000 tons.[6] Nigeria produces 88% of the world’s C. nitida crop and of this total, 90% is consumed within the country, mainly in the kola chewing areas of the Northern states. It is eaten in a fresh state for stimulating effect, while 10% only is exported. There exists wide export market for it because it has a lot of uses. The Yoruba of the southwest of Nigeria cherished the consumption of C. acuminata, while the people of northern and southeast Nigeria prefer C. nitida.

Kolanut is chewed in many West African countries, individually or in a social setting to restore vitality and ease hunger pangs. The seeds are chewed as a stimulating narcotic, beverage could be made by boiling powder seed in water, and also a cough syrup made from the juice extract.[7] Kolanuts are an important part of the traditional, spiritual practice of culture and religion in West Africa, particularly Nigeria.[8] Kolanut is used as a masticatory stimulant by Africans and has numerous uses in social, religion, ritual, and ceremonial functions by the natives in the forest regions of Africa.[9] It is used during ceremonies related to marriage, child naming, and installation of chiefs, funerals, and sacrifices made to various gods of African mythology.[10] It is also used in the everyday entertainment of important visitors where it is offered as a valuable gift on such important occasions.

In Nigeria, there is a common saying that “kola is produced in the West by Yorubas, consumed in the North by Hausas and worshiped in the East by Ibos.” It enjoys special favor with the people of northern Nigeria who have accepted the C. nitida as a stimulant substitute for alcoholic drinks. The South Easterners are more interested in C. acuminata, which features prominently in most traditional ceremonies and social functions such as marriages, weddings, coronation, installation of high chiefs, and traditional rulers.[11] Kolanut, apart from the fact that it is widely consumed by virtually all categories of income groups, commodity has been found to be useful in the production of beverages, flavoring material alkaloids, caffeine, theobromine, laxatives, heart stimulants, and sedatives.

Various studies have been carried out to determine factors affecting the marketing of agricultural products and non-timber forest products (NTFPs) in Nigeria. For instance Anozie et al.[12] in their study of Economic Analysis of Banana Fruits Marketing in Ivo Local Government Area (LGAs) of Ebonyi State, Nigeria found the age of the marketers, education level, marketing experience, cost of transport, and access to credit were the factors that significantly affect retail banana fruit marketing in the study area, while age of the marketers, their educational level, marketing experience, cost of transportation, and membership of cooperative association were the factors that significantly affect wholesale banana marketing in the study area.[13] Stated that age of the respondents, experience of the household heads, farm practice, and quantity of harvested maize had a significant influence on the proportion of maize that will be offered for sale in the market. Ariyo,[14] in his study of determinants of fuelwood marketing in Igabi LGAs of Kaduna State, found years of formal education, years of marketing experience, household size, transportation cost, and labor cost significantly affecting gross return from the sales of fuelwood. In a similar study conducted by Ariyo et al.[15] on determinants of bushmeat marketing in Kaduna Metropolis, Kaduna State, Nigeria, selling price of fresh bushmeat, marketing experience, and household size were significantly different and play crucial role in determining the gross income of the respondents

The relationship between the output of Kolanut and socioeconomic factors of the respondents was determine by Oluwalana et al.[16] and found three variables such as age of farmers, farming experience, and farm size to be significantly different to the Kolanut output. Taiwo et al.[17] in their study of analysis of factors affecting the marketing of Kolanut in Ogun State, Nigeria, found the income earned per year by the marketers, source of Kolanut, and the preference of kola type consumed are major significant factors determining kola marketing in the study area at 5%, and 10% level of significance. This indicates that the income realizable from kola sales, source of Kolanut, and the preference of kola type consumed are important variables and to a large extent determines the volume of Kolanut the marketer is able to sell in a given year. Oluyole et al.,[2] in their study of Economic Analysis of Kolanut Marketing in Osun and Ogun States of Nigeria, found 12 out of 13 variables to significantly affect the income of Kolanut marketers in Osun and Ogun State, Nigeria. The significant variables are age (P < 0.01), marital status (P < 0.01), educational status (P < 0.01), years of marketing experience (P < 0.01), cost of fetching water (P < 0.01), cost of peeling/washing (P < 0.01), cost of packaging/preservation (P < 0.01), cost of transportation (P < 0.01), cost of reservoir (P < 0.01), cost of basket (P < 0.01), cost of preservatives/chemical (P < 0.01), and cost of nylon (P < 0.01).

Over 100 forest genetic resources of major importance have been reported in international market and Kolanuts are one of the products.[18] Furthermore, the marketing of Kolanut is more profitable than the marketing of other NTFPs because of its high amenability to storage, both fresh and dried.[19] Marketing of Kolanut is done by the producers who sell at the farm gate or village site to either the wholesalers in rural and urban areas or directly to the retailers who are mostly women.[20] These women process the kolanuts from the pods before selling to the consumers.[21] The Kolanut famers are located in remote areas and are saddled with poor market infrastructure and marketing information.[22] The marketers of Kolanut required marketing information such as policies which influence prices, how to store Kolanut, insecticides used during storage, marketing outlets, and handling of Kolanut. This marketing information will help to reduce the risk involved in and enhances marketing of Kolanut.

According to Adedoyin,[23] availability and effectiveness of marketing infrastructures such as storage facilities, transportation facilities, and communication networks determine the ability of marketing system to effectively and efficiently perform its developmental function; furthermore, the study revealed that an adequate transportation network must exist for effective distribution of Kolanut to take place. According to Ajani and Onwubuya,[24] the major problems of kola marketers were inadequate capital, poor storage facilities, and high cost of transportation, language barrier, inadequate supply of Kolanut, poor market experience, and other losses emanating from sprouting and theft. Based on the premises above, several factors affect the marketing of Kolanut, especially in the Kolanut consuming area of the North like Kaduna. Some of these factors have not been model in the study area to determine specifically which of the factors has significant effects on the income of the marketers. It is against this backdrop the study seeks to determine the factors affecting Kolanut marketing in the study area with the following specific objectives: (i) Describe the socioeconomic characteristics of Kolanut marketers, (ii) analyze factors affecting Kolanut marketing, and (iii) identify constraints encountered by marketers in Kolanut marketing in the study area.

Hypothesis of the Study

The hypothesis of the study was stated in null form as follows:

Ho: There was no significant relationship between the net income of Kolanut marketers and the factors that are affecting it.

METHODOLOGY

Study Area

Kaduna metropolis is made up of four LGAs, namely; Kaduna North, Kaduna South, Igabi, and Chikun LGAs. Kaduna State lies between latitude 10° 37’N and 10°20’N longitude 7° 17’ E and 7°45’E (Wikipedia). It has a population of about 6,066,512 people according to 2006 census figure, making it the third-largest state in the Federation after Lagos and Kano States.[25] The state is currently made up of 23 LGAs[25] and divided into four agricultural zones, namely: Maidala, Samaru, Birnin Gwari, and Lere zones. According to Wikipedia, Kaduna state has a total land area of about 46,053 km2 and the density is about 131.7 km2 (341.2 m2). The metropolis is a commercial and industrial center of Nigeria. The city has many factories such as textile, beverages, and furniture. It is a rail and road junction, thus, a trade center for the surrounding agricultural areas. The city was founded by the British in 1913 and became the capital on May 25, 1967, of Nigeria’s former Northern region. It got her name after the Kaduna river which flows through the center of the state and on which the city lies (Wikipedia). The area is marked with two distinct seasons of wet and dry seasons. The wet season commences in the month of April in the southern part of the state and late June in the northern part. The dry season extends from October to March and is marked by the hot, dry North-East, Harmattan wind. It has an annual rainfall of about 1000 mm–1500 mm per annum, maximum and minimum temperature of 32°C and 20°C, and maximum and minimum humidity of 89.42% and 27.83%.[26] Farming is the main occupation of the people of Kaduna and it is characterized predominantly by mixed cropping of crops such as maize, onion, cassava, groundnut, sorghum, millet, and cowpea. Rain-fed agriculture is mostly practiced with little Fadama Agriculture. The major ethnic groups in the city are the Hausas, Gwaris, Katafs, Gbagijs, and Jaba, who form the majority of the inhabitants of the area. Others include the Fulanis, Tiv, Idoma, Yoruba, and Ibos.

Sample Techniques and Sample Size

Multi-stage sampling techniques were adopted for this study. One major market with a high concentration of Kolanut marketers from each of the local government that made up of Kaduna Metropolis was purposefully selected. The markets are Barkin-Dogo in Kaduna North, Sabo Market in Kaduna South, Igabi market in Igabi, and Monday market in Chikun LGAs. Within each market, 25 marketers were randomly selected for this study. This made a total of 100 marketers as sample size.

Method of Data Collection

Primary data were used for the study. The primary data were collected through the administration of a well-structured questionnaire to Kolanut marketers in the selected market within Kaduna Metropolis. The questionnaires were designed in line with the objectives of the study, contained open- and close-ended questions. This was used to collect qualitative and quantitative data from 100 randomly selected Kolanut marketers. Data collection was done by personal interview of the respondents to determine factors affecting Kolanut marketing. Only ninety-five questionnaires were used for the analysis, while five were discarded due to inconsistencies in the information given by the respondents.

Data Analysis

Data obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics and multiple regression analysis.

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics such as frequency table, mean, and percentage were used to summarize the constraints of Kolanut marketing and socioeconomic characteristics of the marketers. The socioeconomic variables include: Age, sex, marital status, educational qualification, household size, and marketing experience.

Multiple Regression Analysis

Regression model is a casual relationship between two or more independent variables and a dependent variable.[27] It is a technique for determining the relationship between dependent and independent variable. Ordinary least square (OLS) regression analysis was used to analyze factors affecting Kolanut marketing. The multiple regression analysis was used in this study because it will help to analyze quantitatively the pertinent factors affecting Kolanut marketing in the study area. Three functional forms were tried, namely, the linear function, the semi-log, and the double log function. The best functional form based on coefficient of multiple determination- R2, F –statistics, t – ratio, and a-priori expectations as well as the number of significant variables was chosen. The data involving the null hypothesis was tested at 10, 5, and 1 % level of significance to determine the probability of association between variables. The model in its general (implicit) form is;

Y= f (X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6, X7, X8, X9, X10, X11 × 12+ μi)………. equation 1

Explicitly the function can be represented as

Linear function;

Y = β0+ β1 × 1+ β2 × 2+ β3 × 3+ β4 × 4+ β5 × 5+ β6 × 6+ β7 × 7+ β8 × 8+ β9 × 9+ β10 × 10+ β11 × 11+ β12 × 12+ μi …… equation 2

Semi-log;

Y = β0+ β1 logX1+ β2 logX2+ β3 logX3+ β4 logX4+ β5 logX5+ β6 logX6+ β7 logX7+ β8 logX8+ β9 logX9+ β10 logX10+ β11 logX11+ β12 logX12+ μi …… equation 3

Double-log;

Log Y = β0+ β1 logX1+ β2 logX2+ β3 logX3+ β4 logX4+ β5 logX5+ β6 logX6+ β7 logX7+ β8 logX8+ β9 logX9+ β10 logX10+ β11 logX11+ β12 logX12+ μi … equation 4

βo = Constant, β1 to β12= regression coefficient, μi = error terms

Y = net income (₦), X1= Gender, X2= Age of respondents, X3= Marital status, X4= Household size, X5= Educational level, X6= Years of experience, X7= Purchase cost (₦), X8= Storage cost (₦), X9= Transportation cost (₦), X10= Marketing charges (₦), X11= Labor cost (₦), X12= Rent cost (₦)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Socioeconomic Characteristics of Kolanut Marketers

The socioeconomic characteristic of the respondents was presented in Table 1. It showed that majority (88.42%) of the respondents are male while 11.58% are female. This revealed that male marketers dominated the sales of Kolanut in the study area. This result was contrary to the findings of Taiwo et al.[17] which found female (mostly women) dominated the marketing of Kolanut in Ogun State. The majority of people in the study area are Muslims, and as such, Islamic religion and the culture of the people do not allow women to participate in businesses that require their outing and exposure to the male sex. This corroborates the statement made by Olagunju et al.[28] that religious beliefs and cultural background of the people in northern Nigeria restricts women from participating in some economic activities. Moreover, majority of the women in the study area are in Purdah and this explained why males are more in the marketing of Kolanut than females in the study area.

Table 1: Socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents

thumblarge

The highest age range (62.10%) of the respondents falls between 31 and 50 years, while the average age was 44 years. This was contrary to the finding of Adewumi[29] that the average age of kola marketers in Ekiti State is 50 years and 90 percent are female traders. The result showed that most of the Kolanut marketers are within the active and productive age range, young, and agile with enough vigor and innovative ideas to pursue the marketing activities. This is in line with the findings of Agwu and Anyaeche,[30] Nwawuisi et al.,[31] Nwaru,[32] and Banabana-Wabbi,[33] who noted that the ability of a farmer to bear risk, be innovative, and be able to do manual work decreases with age. However, 21.05% and 10.53% of the marketers are within 51–60 and 21–30 years, respectively, while only 6.32% are >60 years of age.

In terms of marital status, 96.84% which formed the majority of the marketers are married while only 3.16% are single. Marriage gives people the sense of responsibility to provide the basic needs of the family.[34] The married respondents are also expected to benefit from unpaid labor that will enhance their sales and increase income.

The household size of the marketers showed that majority (46.32%) of the marketers had family size of 6–10 members. Those marketers with household size between 1–5 and 11–15 members were 37.89% and 10.53%. Only 5.26% of the marketers had a lager household size of 16-20 members. The average household size of the marketers was 7. This implies that the marketers may perhaps utilize members of the household as labor for some activities relating to the marketing of Kolanut. This may reduce some transaction costs that may be incurred, thereby increasing the net income of the marketers.

The level of education of the marketers revealed that 37.89% and 34.74% had secondary and primary education. About 5.26% had tertiary education and 17.89% Islamic education. The proportion of the marketers that were not educated was low, 4.21%. This showed that majority of the respondents had formal education. This implies that they will have better marketing strategies that will boost their sales of Kolanut. Marketers with formal education have a greater ability to adopt new innovations, ideas, information, and marketing strategies to increase volume of sales. It is expected that the level of education will significantly influence decision-making of marketers. The result agreed with the findings of Nwaru et al.,[35] who stated that education helps for product management and easy access to information. Furthermore, Esiobu et al.[36] opined that exposure to high level of education is an added advantage in terms of achieving a higher volume of sales, huge profit, and efficient marketing.

Years of marketing experience of the marketers showed that majority 45.26% of the marketers had 6–10 years of experience in the marketing of Kolanut. This was followed by 36.84% which had 1–5 years of experience. The percentage of marketers that had 11–15 years and 16–20 years of experience was 15.79% and 2.11%, respectively. The average year of experience was 7. This reveals that the marketers had moderate knowledge of marketing Kolanut. Long years of involvement in marketing expose the marketers to marketing ideas that will help them to overcome marketing intricacies.[37]

Regression Analysis of Factors Affecting Kolanut Marketing in the Study Area

The factors affecting the marketing of Kolanut in the study area were determined by OLS Regression Analysis. Variables such as gender, age, marital status, household size, educational level, years of marketing experience, purchased cost, storage cost, transportation cost, marketing charges, labor cost, and rent cost were subjected to regression analysis. Three functional forms: Linear, Semi-log, and Double-log, or Cob-Douglas functions, were tried. The result of the three functional forms was examined in terms of their significance as indicated by F- statistics, magnitude of the coefficient of multiple determinations (R2), a-priori expectations which include the magnitude and sign of the coefficient. Considering the above criteria, the semi-log gave the lead equation and was chosen based on the statistical criteria such as coefficient of multiple determination- R2, value of F-ratio, t-ratio, a-priori expectations, as well as the number of significant variables. The result of the analysis presented in Table 2 showed the R2 value of 0.7635, which implies the 76.35% of the variation in the dependent variables (net income) by the respondents was explained by the independent or explanatory variables while the remaining 23.65% was due to random error term. Variable X4 (household size) and X5 (educational level) are significant at (P < 0.01) probability level while variable X1 (gender), X6 (years of marketing experience), and X9 (transportation cost) were significant at (P < 0.05) probability level. The coefficient of significant variables and their sign IS explained below:

Table 2: Result of regression analysis

thumblarge

The coefficient of gender represented by variable X1 was positively signed in accordance with a priori expectation and significant at (P < 0.05) probability level. This implies that the male Kolanut marketers are more than the female counterpart. An increase in male marketers will increase the sales of Kolanut and consequently increase the net income of the marketers. This disagreed with the findings of Taiwo et al.[17] and Adewumi,[29] which stated that the majority of Kolanut marketers are female. However, Offor et al.[38] found coefficient of gender to be positive and highly significant at 1% probability level in yam marketing.

The household size of the respondents represented by variable X4 has a positive sign coefficient and significant at (P < 0.01) probability level. This indicates that the larger the number of household, the lower the marketing cost and the higher the net income obtained from the sales of Kolanut by the marketers. The larger household size will provide labor in the running of the business. Ariyo[14] and Ariyo et al.[15] found the coefficient of household size to be positive and significant at (P < 0.01) and (P < 0.10) in the marketing of fuelwood and bush meat at Igabi LGAs, Kaduna, and in Kaduna metropolis.

The coefficient of educational level denoted by variable X5 was positive in accordance with a priori expectation and significant at (P < 0.01) probability level. The positive relationship means that the more years of acquisition of former education by the marketers, the more the increase in sales and net income. This is because with the high level of education of the marketers, the marketers will be able to apply the new innovations to their marketing operations. This agreed with the statement of Offor et al.[38] that an increase in the level of education of the marketers leads to a corresponding increase in marketing efficiency. Educational attainment gives additional intellectual capital stock which may, in turn, leads to increase potentials for skills acquisition in marketing.[39] This was also supported by Ndaghu et al.[40] who stated that the higher the level of education of a marketer, the better the chances of enjoying higher returns from his effort in the business. The result agreed with Oluyole et al.[2], Ariyo,[14] and Offor et al.[38] which found coefficient of educational level positive and significant at (P < 0.01) and (P < 0.05) probability level in the marketing of Kolanut, fuelwood, and yam.

The years of marketing experience of the respondents represented by variable X6 has positive sign coefficient in accordance with a priori expectation and significant at (P < 0.05) probability level. The higher the number of years of marketing experience, the more the sales and income derived from Kolanut marketing. This showed that marketing experience increases the net income of the respondents. According to Okoye,[41] marketing experience helps to reduce proportionately the transaction cost of the business which in turns increases the net income of the respondents. This corroborates the findings of Ariyo[14] which found coefficient of years of marketing experience of fuelwood marketers to be positive and significant at (P < 0.01) probability level.

The coefficient of transportation cost denoted by X9 has a negative sign in accordance with a priori expectation and significant at (P < 0.05) probability level. This implies the inverse relationship, as transportation cost increases, the net income decreases, meaning the higher the transportation cost, the lesser the net income. They agreed with the findings of Oluyole et al.[2], Ariyo,[14] and Offor et al.[38] found coefficient of transportation cost negative and significant at (P < 0.01) and (P < 0.10) in the marketing of Kolanut, fuelwood, and yam.

These significant variables (gender, household size, educational level, years of marketing experience, and transportation cost) in this study thus play crucial roles in determining the net income from Kolanut marketing. However, Oluyole et al.[2] identified 12 out of 13 variables to significantly affect the income of Kolanut marketers in Osun and Ogun State, Nigeria. The significant variables are age (P < 0.01), marital status (P < 0.01), educational status (P < 0.01), years of marketing experience (P < 0.01), cost of fetching water (P < 0.01), cost of peeling/washing (P < 0.01), cost of packaging/preservation (P < 0.01), cost of transportation (P < 0.01), cost of reservoir (P < 0.01), cost of basket (P < 0.01), cost of preservatives/chemical (P < 0.01), and cost of nylon (P < 0.01).

However, variables such as age of the respondents (X2), marital status (X3), and labor cost (X11) were not significant in the present study but had positive coefficients. This means that increasing the variable will bring about an increase in net income; however, the positive coefficient of labor was against a priori expectation, this may be due to the large family size of the marketers which translate to the family labor use by the respondents, on the other hand, the coefficient of the purchase cost (X7), storage cost (X8), marketing charges (X10), and rent cost (X12) were negative, showing inverse relationship to net income. This implies that reducing these variables will increase the net income.

The F- statistics of 16.23 revealed that the overall model was significant at (P < 0.01) probability level and all the coefficients estimated by the model were not all equal to zero. Base on his result, the null hypothesis which stated that there was no significant relationship between the net income of respondents and factors that are affecting it, is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis accepted. This means that the variables used in the model determine the net income obtained by the respondents from the marketing of Kolanut.

Problems Encountered by Marketers in Kolanut Marketing

The various constraints encountered by the marketers were presented in Table 3. It showed that inadequate capital had the highest value of 33.60%. This was followed by high transportation cost and unavailability of Kolanut with 19.76% and 17.00%, respectively. Poor storage system accounted for 11.86%. Adedokun et al.[42] stated that the different constraints experienced by marketers of Kolanut are majorly storage, of which insects accounted for 53.33%, heat 51.77%, and transportation. Price fluctuation and low price had 15.79% and 10.53%, respectively. Other constraints as found in this study are high cost of labor 7.91%, price fluctuation 5.93%, and lastly, low price had 3.95%. The analysis of constraints to Kolanut marketing by Ashaye et al.[43] revealed that lack of credit, non-availability of loan, high cost of transportation, and storage facilities fall in the category of “very severe” with a respective mean score of 3.36, 3.31, and 3.09. Availability of storage facilities and poor road network with respective mean scores of 3.06 and 3.01 were in the category of “severe,” while the high cost of labor, grading, packaging, and processing of Kolanut and poor prices of products were considered “not severe” with mean scores of 2.99, 2.88, and 2.71, respectively. Osalusi[44] stated that seasonality of the product, high cost of transportation, low demand, and climatic problems are the most severe constraints associated with Kolanut marketing, while price fluctuation, insufficient capital, and deforestation are severe but not too severe constraints associated with Kolanut marketing.

Table 3: Constraints encountered by marketers in Kolanut marketing

thumblarge

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

It can be concluded from the results of the study that majority of Kolanut marketers in the study area are male, having an average age of 44 years, married with an average household size of 7 members. They had mostly secondary school education and average marketing experience of 7 years. The net income from Kolanut marketing is influenced by gender, household size, educational level, years of marketing experience, and transportation cost. The constraints of Kolanut marketing are inadequate capital, high transportation cost, unavailability of Kolanut, and poor storage. Other includes high cost of labor, price fluctuation, and lastly, low price. However, based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations were made:

  • i. Effective transportation network should be provided to reduce the cost of transportation, thereby reducing the marketing cost. This can be done by renovating the bad roads and new ones constructed by the government.

  • ii. The marketers should come together to form cooperative society. This will enable them to pool their resources together for members to obtain loan at lower interest rate. This will boost their capital base and expand their business. Furthermore, the Central Bank should encourage commercial banks to give out loan to marketers at a single-digit interest rate to boost the marketing activities of Kolanut.

  • iii. Adequate training on proper storage of Kolanut should be organized by the government at all levels and by the cooperative society for the marketers. This will help to reduce storage losses.

  • iv. The farmers should be encouraged to grow and produce more of Kolanut so as to increase the quantity of Kolanut that will be available to marketers.

REFERENCES

1.  Ojo SO, Ehinmowo OO. Economic analysis of kola-nut production in Nigeria. J Soc Sci 2010;22:1-5.

2.  Oluyole KA, Akinpelu AO, Yahaya AT. Economic Analysis of Kolanut Marketing in Osun and Ogun States of Nigeria. Proceedings of the 54th Annual Conference of Agricultural Society of Nigeria 2021. Nigeria:AE-FUNAI;2021. 1218-23.

3.  Eijnatten CL. Kola:A review of the literature. Trop Abstr 1973;28:1-10.

4.  Oludemokun AA. Processing, storage and utilization of kolanuts, Cola nitida and Cola acuminata. Trop Sci 1983;24:111-7.

5.  Opeke LK. Tropical Tree Crops. Ilorin:Woye and Sons Ltd.;1987. 327.

6.  Brickell C, Cole T, Marc-Cathey H. The American Horticultural Society Encyclopedia of Plants and Flowers. New York:D.K. Publishing;2002. 720.

7.  Tachia-Obeng, Brown 2004. Available from:http://www.carpe.umd.edu/documents2001/report-tachiaobengbrown2001/pdf?.

8.  Catherine M. Kolanut production processing and utilization. Afr Sci 2011;2011:70.

9.  Asogwa EU, Anikwe JC, Mokunye FC. Kola production and utilization for economic development. Afr Sci 2006;7:217-22.

10.  Opeke LK. Tropical Commodity Tree Crops. Ibadan, Nigeria:Spectrum Books Limited;2005.

11.  Asogwa EU, Otuonye AH, Mokwunye FC, Oluyole KA, Ndubuaku TC, Uwagboe EO. Kolanut production, processing and marketing in the South-Eastern states of Nigeria. Afr J Plant Sci 2011;5:547-55.

12.  Anozie RO, Okelola OE, Ivoke GE. Economic analysis of banana fruits marketing in Ivo local government area of Ebonyi state, Nigeria. In:Sustainable Strategies for Enhancing Food Security and Livelihoods in Nigeria. 52nd Annual Conference of Agricultural Society of Nigeria. Abuja:ARCN;2018. 179-84.

13.  Lawrence OO, Adebiyi GD. Determinants of market participation by maize farmers in Ondo state, Nigeria. J Econ Dev 2014;5:69-77.

14.  Ariyo OC. Determinants of fuel wood marketing in Igabi local government area of Kaduna state, Nigeria. J Forest Res Manage 2019;16:148-59.

15.  Ariyo OC, Alabi OF, Ariyo MO, Idowu SD, Okelola OE. Determinants of Bushmeat marketing in Kaduna metropolis of Kaduna State, Nigeria. In:Anamayi SE, Balogun SO, Henry S, Olagunju OE, Olusegun OA, Mudashiru MA, et al., editors. Diversification of the Nigerian Economy Where Lies Agriculture. Proceedings 19th Annual Conference of the Nigerian Association of Agricultural Economists (NAAE) held at Federal College of Forestry Mechanization (FCFM). Afaka, Kaduna:Nigerian Association of Agricultural Economists;2018. 1097-103.

16.  Oluwalana EO, Okojie LO, Ashaolu FO, Olaniran VO. An analysis of yields of kola-nut production, processing and marketing in Sagamu Lga, Ogun state, Nigeria. J Hum Soc Sci Creative Arts 2016;11:88-103.

17.  Taiwo O, Shitu TR, Lawal JO, Yahaya AT, Okeowo TA. Analysis of factors affecting the marketing of kola nut in Ogun state, Nigeria. Asian J Agric Extens Econ Sociol 2017;19:1-6.

18.  Carr M, Chen M, Tate J. Globalization and home-based workers. Feminist Econ 2000;6:123-42.

19.  Adebayo S, Oladele O. Medicinal values of kolanut in Nigeria:Implication for extension service delivery. Life Sci J 2012;9:887-91.

20.  Momoh S, Dipeolu AO, Oluwalana SA. Economics of kolanut production in Ogun State, African scientist. Asian J Agric Exten Econ Sociol 2000;1:33-40.

21.  Food and Agriculture Organisation. The Major Significance of Minor Forest Products:Special Report, Forestry Department. Rome, Italy:Food and Agriculture Organisation;2005. Available from:http://www.fao.org.

22.  Eusebus JM. Improving small holder marketing in Africa:The case of maize Sustainable Agriculture Center for Research Extension and Development in Africa, Kenya. Berlin, Germany:Springer;2004. 63-8.

23.  Taiwo O, Mokwunye IU, Mokwunye FC, Adebowale LA. Analysis of the impact of Pest infestation and its correlates among kola marketers in Ogun State, Nigeria. Int J Chem Gas Mater Sci 2017;1:27-34.

24.  Ajani EN, Onwubuya EA. Marketing infrastructure for kola-nut in Ika local government area of Delta state, Nigeria. J Emerg Trends Comput Inform Sci 2012;3:5.

25.  National Commission on Population. National Population Commission, Federal Office of Statistics. Census. Nigeria:National Commission on Population;2006.

26.  National Medical Association. Nigerian Meteorological Agency, North Central, Kaduna, Kaduna State. African:National Medical Association;2012.

27.  Gupta SP. Statistical Methods. 31th ed. New Delhi:Gultan Chand and Sons Educational;2002:75-6.

28.  Olagunju OE, Ariyo OC, Emeghara UU, Olagunju OS, Olafemi SO. Determinants of farmer's attitude to plant agro-forestry trees in Kaduna state, Nigeria. J Adv Res 2020;21:155-66.

29.  Adewumi OR. Marketing of Kola Nut in Moba Local Government of Ekiti State, Nigeria. Agric Economics and Farm Management. Abeokuta:Federal University of Agriculture;2003.

30.  Agwu AE, Anyaeche CL. Adoption of improved cassava varieties in six rural communities of Anambra state, Nigeria. Acad J 2007;6:89-98.

31.  Nwawuisi JU, Okoye BC, Odaji CO. Adoption of Improved Cassava Varieties (TMS 30211 and TMS 3001) in Ivo L.G.A of Ebonyi State. Samaru:Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 41st Conference of the Agricultural Society of Nigeria;2007. 527-30.

32.  Nwaru JC. Rural Credit Markets and Arable Crop Production in Imo State of Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation Umudike:Nigeria Michael Okpara University of Agriculture;2004.

33.  Banabana-Wabbi J. Assessing Factors Affecting Adoption of Agricultural Technologies:The Case of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Kumi District, Eastern Uganda. Unpublished M.Sc Thesis. Virginia:Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Virginia Polythenic Institute and State University USA;2002.

34.  Albert CO, Ladu T, Isife BI. Assessment of women involvement in cassava processing in Ikwerre local government area of rivers state, Nigeria. Int J Appl Res Technol 2017;6:44-51.

35.  Nwaru JC, Nwosu AC, Agommuo VC. Socioeconomic determinant of profit in wholesale and retail banana marketing in Umuahia agricultural zone of Abia state, Nigeria. J Sustain Dev Afr 2011;13:200-9.

36.  Esiobu NS, Nwosu CS, Onubuogu GC. Economics of pineapple marketing in Owerri Municiupal Council Area, Imo state, Nigeria. Int J Appl Res Technol 2014;3:3-12.

37.  Okoye BC, Onyenweaku CE, Ukoha OO. Effect of Transaction Costs on Seller Decisions Among Small-holder Cassava Production in South-Eastern, Nigeria:Paper Presented at the 11th Annual National Conference of Natural Association of Agricultural Economist Held at Federal University of Technology (FUT). Minna, Nigeria:University of Technology;2010. 183-7.

38.  Offor EI, Nse-Nelson FA, Asokome F. Determinants of marketing efficiency of yam market in Umuahia North local government area of Abia state, Nigeria. Agro Sci J Trop Agric Food Environ Exten 2016;15:54-8.

39.  Laper ML, Holloway G, Ehui G. Polari options promoting market participation among smallholder livestock producers:A case study from Philippines. Food Policy 2003;28:189-211.

40.  Ndaghu AA, Taru VB, Tizhe I, Tizhe J. Analysis of socio economic characteristics of fuel wood marketers in yola metropolis, Adamawa state, Nigeria. J Hum Ecol 2011;36:153-7.

41.  Okoye BC. Analysis of market participation among small-holder cassava famers in response to transaction cost in South Eastern Nigeria. Ph.D. Dissertation. Umudike, Abia, Nigeria:Michael Okpara University of Agriculture;2011. 145.

42.  Adedokun MO, Soaga JA, Olawumi AT, Oyebanji OO, Oluwalana SA, Imaledo EA. Socio-economic contribution, marketing and utilization of edible kolanut (Cola acuminata and Cola nitida) to rural women livelihood in Abeokuta, Nigeria. Int J Mol Ecol Conserv 2012;2:32-8.

43.  Ashaye WO, Daramola RB, Anyaeji FO, Wahab AA, Alao B. Marketing of Kolanut (Cola nitida) in Sagamu and Ikenne local government areas of Ogun state. Continental J Soc Sci 2017;10:1-11.

44.  Osalusi CS. Price determinant of kolanut in selected markets in Ibadan, Oyo state, Nigeria. Int J Forest Anim Fisher Res 2019;3:109-12.