ISSN: 0215-0212 / e-ISSN: 2406-9574 Pelita Perkebunan 41.
Ai7 Adoption cocoa 1rehabilitation techniques among cocoafarmers in Oyo State.
Nigeria DOI: 10.
22302/iccri.
Adoption of Cocoa Rehabilitation Techniques among Cocoa Farmers in Oyo State.
Nigeria Omowunmi Veronica Ayodele1*) and Itunu Esther Afuye.
Department of Agricultural Extension and Communication Technology.
Federal University of Technology.
Akure.
Ondo State.
Nigeria Corresponding author: ovayodele@futa.
Received: November 7, 2024 / Accepted: March 7, 2025 Abstract The study assessed the adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques (CRT.
by cocoa producers in Ido and Oluyole Local Government Areas Oyo State.
Nigeria.
Respondents for the study were 97, chosen through a multi-stage sampling technique.
T-test, mean statistics, and percentages were used for data analysis.
The studyAos findings showed the mean age of cocoa farmers to be 55 years and the mean for farming experience was 20.
9 years.
It further revealed, that though there was a low adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques .
= 1.
, there was a significant difference in the annual output of cocoa before .
= 211.
83 kg/h.
and after .
kg/h.
adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques with a p-value = 0.
The most used techniques were planting cocoa under trees .
= 3.
and complete replacement of old cocoa farms .
= 2.
It also revealed scarcity of improved cocoa varieties .
= 4.
and inadequate capital .
= 4.
were the major constraints to cocoa rehabilitation.
It was therefore recommended that cocoa rehabilitation efforts should be intensified while ensuring adequate availability of improved cocoa varieties and capital for the acquisition of necessary inputs.
Keywords:
Rehabilitation techniques, cocoa, farmers, adoption.
INTRODUCTION
Theobroma cacao L.
, a plant whose scientific name translates to Aufood of the GodsAy in Greek, is cultivated for commercial purposes in the tropical regions of the New World, western Africa, and tropical Asia (Cook.
Its beans, which have been used for thousands of years, are processed into cocoa powder, cocoa butter, chocolate, and other value-added products, including cocoa wine, and cocoa bread.
Nigeria was the worldAos second-largest producer of this crop in 1970, but its share of global output declined due to investments made in the oil industry during the 1970's and 1980's.
The crop was a significant source of foreign exchange earnings for Nigeria in the 1950's and 1960's.
However.
NigeriaAos cocoa production and its position in the global market declined, reflected in the countryAos 0.
3% agricultural GDP contribution to cocoa production in 2010 (Olajide, 2.
This continues to affect the nation today as it struggles to produce cocoa at the same levels as it did in the 1960s and 1970's when it was the worldAos secondlargest producer (Akinpelu et al.
, 2.
Nevertheless.
NigeriaAos position has shifted in the worldAos position to the fourth largest producer with 244,000 metric tonnes in the 2022-2023 season on global production after Ivory Coast.
Indonesia and Ghana (ICCO.
PELITA PERKEBUNAN.
Volume 41.
Number 1.
April 2025 Edition Ayodele & Afuye A successful cocoa yield can last for 50 years, with the maximum yield occurring between 15 and 25 years of age.
However, cocoa trees in Nigeria are aging and weak to produce at their peak (Badiru et al.
, 2.
There were quite several initiatives and strategies put in place to combat the decline in cocoa production in Nigeria.
Prominent among these strategies is the establishment and resuscitation of institutions saddled with the responsibility of increasing cocoa production.
Some of these organizations include.
the National Cocoa Development Committee (NCDC).
Farmer Business School (FBS).
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA).
Cocoa Farmers Association of Nigeria, and the Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria (CRIN).
Specifically, among the several measures aimed at raising cocoa yields and improving its production in Nigeria was the 1999 presidential cocoa rehabilitation and production sustainability programme announced by the Federal Government of Nigeria.
This initiativeAos main goal was to restore cocoaAos former grandeur and turn it into a significant driver of the Nigerian economy.
The Cocoa Rehabilitation ProgrammeAos innovations address issues with weeds, pests, diseases, low yield, and deteriorating soil ripeness.
There is a collaboration between the Cocoa Development Units (CDU.
or Tree Crop Units (TCU.
of every state that produces cocoa, and units in CRIN to oversee the growth of various seedlings.
Responding to this development, the CRIN created several Cocoa Rehabilitation Techniques (CRT.
, including coppicing, complete replanting, side grafting, top grafting, phased farm replanting, fertilizer application, and planting beneath cocoa trees.
Meanwhile.
CRIN was also tasked with conducting high-quality research in the areas of cocoa, kola, coffee, cashew, and tea to rejuvenate older cocoa plants on cocoa fields and see that there is an improvement in the farmersAo income and standard of living (Akande, 2.
The purpose of cocoa rehabilitation is to help weaker cocoa farms reach and sustain their full potential throughout their existence (Akinpelu et al.
, 2.
Despite the existence of technologies for cocoa rehabilitation and other measures to help boost cocoa production, there is still a decline in coca production thereby resulting in a fall in its economic importance in Nigeria (Adetarami et al.
Shahbandeh .
and Adetarami et al.
, reiterated that some of the challenges confronting cocoa production are poor access to marketing information and finance, high cost of crop management, weak and aging cocoa trees, and non-adoption of improved techniques of recommendation from research.
It is, therefore, important to evaluate how cocoa producers in Oyo State, were implementing CRTs, which were predicted to boost cocoa production, raise national income, and reduce poverty.
The study therefore, examined the extent of adoption of CRTs.
evaluated the annual production of cocoa before and after the adoption of CRTs.
and identified the constraints on the various techniques adopted.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study was conducted in Oyo State, in the southwest of Nigeria.
The stateAos capital is Ibadan, it is 28,454 km2 in size, with 7,840,864 people.
The state is situated geographically at latitude 7A 51' 9.
25" N and longitude 3A 55' 52.
50" E.
The stateAos climate is favorable for growing crops including cashews, plantains, cocoa, cassava, rice, and yam making agriculture the primary industry.
The soil texture is mostly sandy loam, rich in copper.
There are large numbers of cocoa farmers in the state and the state is the site of notable agricultural technology transfer institutes in the country like the Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria (Awodumila et al.
, 2.
PELITA PERKEBUNAN.
Volume 41.
Number 1.
April 2025 Edition Adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques among cocoafarmers in Oyo State.
Nigeria A three-stage sampling procedure was used for the respondentsAo selection.
Ido and Oluyole Local Government Areas (LGA.
were chosen because those were the only places where the farmers under CRINAos cocoa rehabilitation programme were located during the time of the study.
In the second stage, four out of the twenty .
wards were purposefully chosen from the two .
Local Government Areas based on the predominance of cocoa farmers in those locations.
A proportionate sampling technique was used in the last stage based on the contribution of each to the sample frame.
Thereafter.
The Research Advisors Table was used to pick 31 cocoa farmers from Onipe, 25 farmers from Aba Agbo, 22 farmers from Apa Paanu, and 19 farmers from Ajerun from the list provided by the CRIN office to arrive at 97 respondents for the study.
A structured questionnaire was administered to the respondents to elicit data for the study.
The farmersAo level of adoption of the cocoa rehabilitation techniques was assessed using a four-point scale with the following scores: highly adopted = 4, average = 3, moderately adopted = 2, and not adopted = 1, and a mean score of 5 was used.
The constraints to the various techniques adopted were assessed using a five-point likert scale with the following score:
extremely great = 5, great = 4, moderate = 3, mild = 2, and not a constraint = 1, and a mean score of 3.
0 was used.
Those constraints above the mean were regarded as serious constraints and those below were regarded as mild constraints.
To evaluate cocoa production before and after farm rehabilitation, farmers were asked to supply the annual quantity of cocoa produced in kg before adopting any of the cocoa rehabilitation techniques using the recall method and the quantity produced after the adoption.
Data analysis was carried out using mean statistics, percentages, and t-test.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
FarmersAo Personal and Cocoa Farms Characteristics Results in Table 1 shows that the majority .
0%) of respondents were male.
This shows males were more involved in cocoa rehabilitation.
RespondentsAo mean age was 55 years and this depicts that, though the cocoa farmers could no longer be regarded as youths, they are still within the active age useful for agricultural production.
The mean years of experience in cocoa farming was 20.
years, revealing good experience in cocoa Badiru et al.
confirmed the mean age of 21.
5 years for cocoa farming These findings suggest that the cocoa farmers have accumulated valuable knowledge and skills that could contribute to higher productivity.
There were 77% farmersAo households with three to six members which may increase the availability of family labor.
Also, 82% of respondents had some level of education, and only 15% of respondents had no formal education, this is expected to have a high impact on the adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques.
Extent of Adoption of Cocoa Rehabilitation Techniques Table 2 reveals that planting under trees was the most adopted cocoa rehabilitation technique .
= 3.
According to the survey, one respondent said that AuPlanting young cocoa raised from the nursery under older trees is believed to reduce the stress, as the older cocoa trees shield the saplings from direct sunshineAy.
The results further revealed that most of the cocoa rehabilitation techniques were not adopted.
The grand mean for the extent of adoption of the techniques was This implies a low adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques and could further result in a decline in cocoa production.
PELITA PERKEBUNAN.
Volume 41.
Number 1.
April 2025 Edition Ayodele & Afuye Table 1.
FarmersAo personal and cocoa farms characteristics Characteristics Percentage Gender Male Female FarmersAo age .
Cocoa farming experience .
Household size Level of education No formal education Primary education Secondary education FarmsAo age .
Farm size .
C1.
6Ae 2.
C3.
Farm acquisition type Self-owned Inherited Sharecropping Major crops grown in addition to cocoa Pla ntain Cassava Type of labour used in cocoa farm Self/Family Mean 0 A 13.
9 A 11.
0 A 1.
4 A 10.
09 A 1.
Communal * Multiple responses.
Table 2.
Extent of adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques Extent of adoption of CRTs Mean Coppicing Complete replanting Side grafting Top grafting Phased farm replanting Fertilizer application Planting under trees Grand mean Key : NA = Not adopted.
RA = Rarely adopted.
MA = Moderately adopted and HA = Highly adopted.
Figures are percentages.
further revealed that the objective of the cocoa rehabilitation programme had not been realized optimally.
This outcome is consistent with the finding of Akinnagbe .
on the adoption rates of cocoa rehabilitation initiatives in Southwest Nigeria, which affirmed that many cocoa growers did not implement cocoa rehabilitation initiatives.
Annual Cocoa Production Before and After Adoption of Cocoa Rehabilitation Techniques As shown in Table 3, the average annual cocoa production before cocoa rehabilitation 83 kg/ha while the average annual production following the implementation of cocoa rehabilitation techniques was 605.
24 kg/ ha with 43.
0% of the respondents producing PELITA PERKEBUNAN.
Volume 41.
Number 1.
April 2025 Edition Adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques among cocoafarmers in Oyo State.
Nigeria Table 3.
Production before and after adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques Annual production, kg/ha <200 20 0Ae 40 0
40 1Ae 60 0
60 1Ae 80 0
> 800
T ota l Before adoption, % between 601Ae800 kg/ha.
The difference in production figures, which was more than double, revealed a great increase in the quantity of cocoa produced after the implementation of cocoa rehabilitation.
This shows that though the adoption of the cocoa rehabilitation techniques was low, the few ones adopted were very effective.
This revealed the programme had a great and positive effect on cocoa production.
The results showed the efficacy of the strategy and revealed the potential of the cocoa rehabilitation programme to address the decline in cocoa production.
Akinnagbe .
confirmed the use of cocoa rehabilitation programmes significantly increased cocoa production.
Also.
David et al.
confirmed an increase in the number of pods per tree and the value of cocoa sales after cocoa rehabilitation.
Constraints to Adoption of Cocoa Rehabilitation Techniques Table 4 reveals that the greatest constraint to the adoption of the cocoa rehabilitation technique was the unavailability and high cost of cocoa seedlings .
= 4.
The key informant interviewed conducted reported this AuThe seeds were not always available for farmers to plant and the prices farmers got them from the designated agencies were not always affordable.
Also, farmers often got adulterated varieties when they tried getting from sources other than CRIN.
CDUs, and TCUsAy.
Furthermore, access to capital .
= .
was revealed as a major barrier in cocoa Inadequate capital to acquire Mean, kg/ha 2 11 .
After adoptionm, % Mean, kg/ha 6 05 .
other inputs such as labour and agrochemicals constituted a constraint for the farmers.
This finding is corroborated by that of Acheampong, .
, who affirmed that lack of credit and scarcity of hybrid seedlings were the most confronting challenges in cocoa rehabilitation.
All the other constraints identified in the study were.
fulani herdsmen attacking farms .
= 4.
farmersAo attitude towards risk and change .
= 4.
, inadequacies in extension intervention .
= 4.
inadequate land for expansion .
= 4.
the complexity of new technology .
= 4.
poor technical training and information .
= .
, environmental and economic barriers .
= 4.
, weak information links with other actors of the network .
= 4.
, and poor educational competencies of farmers .
= .
were revealed to be major constraints.
The grand mean of 4.
46 shows the farmers were confronted with serious constraints in cocoa rehabilitation.
The study is in tandem with that of David et al.
and Akinnagbe .
which state that lack of training, credit facilities, and input delivery systems, and lack of skills for the technicalities in cocoa rehabilitation were major constraints that hindered the adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques.
Difference in Annual Cocoa Production Before and After Cocoa Rehabilitation Table 5, reveals that there is a significant difference .
= 2.
PC 0.
in cocoa production before and after cocoa rehabilitation.
That means, there is a difference in the quan- PELITA PERKEBUNAN.
Volume 41.
Number 1.
April 2025 Edition Ayodele & Afuye Table 4.
Constraints in adoption of cocoa rehabilitation techniques Constraints to the adoption of technology Mean Inadequate and high cost of seedling supply Inadequate access to capital Fulani herdsmen attack on farms FarmersAo attitude towards risk and change Inadequacies in extension intervention Inadequate land for expansion Complexity of new technology Poor technical training and information Environmental and economic barriers Weak information links with other actors of the network Poor educational competencies of farmers Grand mean Table 5.
Difference in cocoa production before and after the adoption of CRTs Annual production before adoption Annual production after adoption Sig.
-taile.
Mean difference tity of cocoa produced before rehabilitation and the quantity produced after implementing cocoa rehabilitation.
This outcome is consistent with the study of David et al.
, who found that there was an increase in the quantity of cocoa produced for participating farmers in cocoa rehabilitation than those farmers who did not participate.
availability of improved cocoa varieties and capital for the acquisition of necessary inputs.
CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
ACKNOWLEDGMENT