International Journal of Tropical Agriculture and Food Systems, 4(2): 122-131, 2010 www.tapasinstitute.

org/journals/ijotafs Tapas Institute of Scientific Research and Development, 2010

THE ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF FOREST PRODUCTS IN ENUGU STATE, NIGERIA

C. E. P. Nzeh1, E. C. Eboh1, N.J. Nweze2, B. C. Okpupara2, U. Amakom1, N. E. Urama1, D. Ito1, O. C. Ujah3, J. S. Orebiyi3, J. O. Lemchi3 and P. I. Nwandu2 1 African Institute for Applied Economics (AIAE), No. 128 Park Avenue, GRA, Enugu, Enugu State, Nigeria 2 Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria 3 Department of Agricultural Economics, Federal University of Technology, Owerri, Imo State, Nigeria Corresponding author: C. E. P. Nzeh; E-mail:nzecelestine@yahoo.com ABSTRACT: This study examined the economic importance of exploiting forest products in Enugu State, Nigeria using 120 respondents. The study showed that most of the household heads were males aged between 31 and 50 years, and engaged in different forestry activities such as gathering, processing and marketing. Lack of access to modern technology and the forms in which products were marketed among other factors were major reasons weakening employment provision/generation from the forest products by rural households. The regression results, showed that access to modern forest products harvesting/processing technology (Te) and relative contribution of forest output in total household economy (Ro) were statistically significant at 5% level in explaining the observed variability in the dependent variable (E) based on semi-logarithmic model. It was recommended that government should encourage the stakeholders involved in forest product activities by importing the required machinery, without restriction. This will lead to production of value added products and attraction of more employment to both rural households and communities.

Keywords: Forest products, wood products, non-timber products, employment, rural households
INTRODUCTION In Nigeria, more than 75% of the population resides in the rural areas and more than 70% of the rural inhabitants are farmers (Azeez, 2002). According to FAO (1999), forest area constituted 17,800 hectares of Nigeria's total land area of 91,077 hectares in 1996. In many rural areas, forests play the important role of providing critical support to agricultural production, through provision of employment, particularly for rural households and insurance against drought and crop failure. Thus, both directly and indirectly, many forestry activities have an impact on rural peoples life situation. In stagnant or slowly growing rural communities, forest activities provide employment to surplus labor and in conditions of growing agricultural incomes they contribute to the process of growth, diversification and the shift to more productive uses of rural resources (Haggblade and Liedholm, 1991). It has been estimated that rural non-farm work provides 20 to 45% of full-time employment in rural areas and 30 to 50% of rural household income (Kilby and Liedholm, 1986; Haggblade and Hazell, 1989). Despite its magnitude and importance, the small enterprise sector such as forest based products has until recently been largely neglected. Information about the sector is therefore limited, though rapidly increasing. Employments from non-farm activities, including forest-based productions are of increasing importance in the rural economy of developing countries, especially in Nigeria. Small forest-based enterprise activities constitute one of the largest sources of such employment and income. They also account for a large part of the total harvest from forests in many areas. In Enugu State, forests and forest products can generate employment and even income in the rural area in addition to provision of insurance against crop failure, thereby diversifying crop production as well as spreading harvest across the season. However, economic productivity of this enterprise is still at predominantly at subsistence level as reported by lloeje (1981). This study investigated the economic importance of forest product activities (gathering, processing and marketing) of rural people in Enugu State and their implications for rural poverty alleviation.

122

Nzeh et al.: IJOTAFS 4(2): 2010

MATERIALS AND METHODS Study area: The study was carried out in Enugu State of Nigeria, which is located between latitudes 50561 and 70061N and longitudes 60531 and 70551E (Ezike, 1988). Enugu State shares boundaries in the East with Ebonyi State, in the North with Benue and Kogi States, in the south with Abia State and in the west with Anambra State and occupies an area of about 8,022.95 km2 with a population of about 3,257,298 (Ezike, 1988). The average annual population growth rate is 3.0% according to NPC (2006). Enugu State with seventeen Local Government Areas (LGAs) is divided into three agricultural zones namely, Awgu, Enugu and Nsukka. The sampling procedure: A multi-stage random sampling technique was employed to ensure a good spread of respondents for the study. The first stage was the selection of two LGAs from each of the three agricultural zones in Enugu State, making total of six LGAs for the study. Two communities were selected at random from each of the selected LGAs making 12 communities for the study. Twelve household heads each were selected from the twelve communities, making a total number of 144 household-heads. Out of the 144 household-heads interviewed, 24 of them could not give comprehensive answers to the questions in the data collection instrument and therefore were discarded giving 120 respondents that were finally analyzed. Data collection and analyses: Data for this study were collected, with the aid of questionnaires administered to household heads. In all a total of 144 questionnaires were administered in the state, but only 120 questionnaires were used for the analyses. Descriptive statistics and multiple regression analysis were used in analyzing the data. Modeling the determinants of the level of rural households employment generation through forest product activities: As reported in Nzeh and Eboh (2007), the general structure of this model followed the pattern outlined by Pani (1966), Siamwalla (1990) and Bell (1990). The multiple regression analysis was used to establish the relationship between the variables. The model implicitly stated as: E = f(Ac, Fx, Mk, Te, Ha, Ed, Nz, Ro)+. where; E = Amount of employment provided by forest-based activities (gathering, processing and/or marketing) (man days per month). Ac = Access to Credit (N) Fx = Access to forest extension services (1 for access, O other wise). Mk = Market access (percentage of total forest product that is sold for cash). Te = Access to modern forest product harvesting/processing technology (1 access, O otherwise). Ha = Age of household heads (years) Ed = Educational attainment of household heads (years of formal schooling). Nz = Number of years in forest product business (years) Ro = Relative importance of forest output in total household economy (percentage of total household output accounted for by forest output). = Error term. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION figure I showed that 75% of the respondents in the study area were in the age bracket of 31-51 years, 13% were within the age limit of 51 and above, whereas the remaining 12% were 30 years of age. These figures show that forest products provide employment more for able-bodied men then the younger and older men. The reason for both the younger men and older men not having higher employment from forest product may be connected to lots of energies required to handle these products, especially forest wood products. Figure II above showed that 64% of the respondents were males, while 36% were females. The lower percentage of the females may be attributed to poor access of the females to land in the study area as reported by Nzeh et al. (2008). The distribution of respondents according to educational status in the study area was presented in figure III. The highest percentage (56%) were those without any formal education. From the figure 3, 27% are those with primary school educational level, while 11% and 6% respectively had secondary and post secondary educational qualifications. According to Nzeh (2008) due to current rate of deforestation by both public and private agencies because of development programs products from the forest are found in the rural areas, where they create greater employment 123

Nzeh et al.: IJOTAFS 4(2): 2010

opportunities for the rural households than the urban areas. This condition may explain why non educated persons use these forest products as a means of employment.

Fig. I: Distribution of respondents according to age

Fig. II: Distribution of respondents according to sex

Fig. III: Distribution of respondents according to educational status 124

Nzeh et al.: IJOTAFS 4(2): 2010

Figure IV showed the distribution of respondents according to their awareness of forest extension services. About 90% of the respondents were not aware of forest extension services in the study area, while 10% were aware, implying that there may be over or under exploitation of the forest products in the study. Over exploitation may lead to deforestation of the forest resources, thereby resulting to lower employment from forest products on the long run. Under exploitation of the forest on the other hand may lead to less employment generation because much of the man power needed for the activities may not be available, as they vacate the rural areas in search of better paying jobs in the urban areas.

Fig. IV: Distribution of respondents according to awareness to extension services

Fig. V: Distribution of respondents according to access to modern forest technology Figure V showed that only 27% of the respondents stated that they have access to the use of modern forest technology to carryout activities, while 73% lacked such access to modern forest technology. The resultant effect of this finding could be that less employment would be created from the forestry sector, especially with regard to the processing activities of this sector. Added to the above implication is that some of the perishable forest products and even some wood forest materials will not be kept for longer time due to lack of machineries to transform them into a more durable asset. Figure VI showed that higher percentage of respondents (72%) stated that they had mostly tools for wood products harvesting/processing. Another 13% of the respondents had more of animal products harvesting and processing tools in stock. Figure VII showed the distribution of respondents according to reasons for non-procurement of forest tools in the study area. Respondents who stated that lack of finance is there major reason 125

Nzeh et al.: IJOTAFS 4(2): 2010

for non-procurement forest tools were more (69%) than the 22% lacked knowledge of equipment. This lack of knowledge of the forestry equipment may be attributable to the non-existence of the forest extension agents in the study area, who are suppose to guide the respondents and educate them on the values of these tools. Figure VIII showed that 60% of the respondents had access to forest products of various classes, while 30% had access to only non-wood forest products and another 10% of the respondents in had access to wood products only.

Fig. VI: Distribution of respondents according to forest tools in stock

Fig. VII: Distribution of respondents according to reasons for non-procurement of forest tools

Fig. VIII: Distribution of respondents according to forest products access

126

Nzeh et al.: IJOTAFS 4(2): 2010

The low percentage of respondents with access to wood products alone may be connected with stressfulness involved in handling wood forest products, hence it required mainly able bodied-men. From figure IX it could be seen that 39% of the respondents reported that they have access to timber, charcoal and fuel wood products, while 29% stated that fuel wood is the wood products they have much of its access. Figure X showed that 22% each of the respondents reported access to food and animal/food products, while 19% agreed that they have greater access to fiber, food and animal products. Another 4% of the respondents had access to only medicinal and cosmetic products.

Fig. IX: Distribution of respondents according to access to wood products

Fig. X: Distribution of respondents according to access to non-wood forest products Figure XI grouped the respondents according to periods of their involvement in forestry activities, with 65% of them indicating that 41% and above as their time were expended on forestry activities. Furthermore, only 30% of the respondents agreed that their level of involvement in forestry activities was between 21 and 40% of the time. Figure XII showed that 41% of the male respondents were into gathering, processing and marketing of the forest products, while 23% reported gathering and marketing as their main forestry activities. Those involved in processing only were the least (4%). This least of respondents 4% involving themselves in forestry activities are those that agreed that they are involved in processing of forestry materials only. Figure XIII indicated that 27% of participating the female respondents were involved in gathering and marketing, while those solely involve in gathering, processing and marketing of forest products were 26%. However, female participants involved only in marketing of forest products were 23%, whereas 5% were involved in processing of the forest products. The reason for these results may be lack of knowledge of the appropriate tools to use for the processing of these products. Added to this, is lack of appropriate information from forest extension 127

Nzeh et al.: IJOTAFS 4(2): 2010

agents, who according to Nzeh (2004) are not always available to the rural households in the study area.

Fig. XI: Distribution of respondents according to period involved in forestry activities

Fig. XII: Distribution of respondents according to male participation in forestry activities

Fig. XIII: Distribution of respondents according to female participation in forestry activities Figure XIV showed the distribution of respondents according to activities performed in forestry enterprises in the study area and revealed that 36% of the respondents combined gathering, processing and marketing as the major activities they perform. Another 35% of the respondents stated that the major forest enterprise activities they were involved in were gathering and marketing. From figure XV 49% of the respondents stated that they sale their forest products on weekly basis, while 23% sold on bi-weekly basis, and only 20% sold on daily basis. The higher percentage of those respondents that sale their forest products on weekly basis is expected because these rural households requires time to gather and process the forest materials before selling them to enable maximize profit. 128

Nzeh et al.: IJOTAFS 4(2): 2010

Fig. XIV: Distribution of respondents according to activities performs in forestry enterprise Figure XVI showed that 33% of the respondents marketed non-wood forest products, while animal and non-wood forest products recorded 21%. However, forest wood products and nonwood/medicinal products had the least percentage of 3%.

Fig. XV: Distribution of respondents according to frequency of sales of forest products

Fig. XVI: Distribution of respondents according to forest products marketed. This is attributable to limitless access of the wood forest products to the males, especially in the study area. This is because according to Nzeh and Eboh (2007) males have more access to forest products, especially wood products due to the stress involved in these activities. Figure XVII showed that 39% of the respondents reported that gathering, processing and marketing were the forest products activities in the study area with highest level of employment. The respondents that agreed that gathering and marketing only were their highest level of employment were 30%, whereas those that reported gathering and processing were 15%. 129

Nzeh et al.: IJOTAFS 4(2): 2010

Fig. XVII: Distribution of respondents according to forest products activities with highest level of employment Regression results: To ascertain the determinants of employment provided by forest based activities (gathering, processing and marketing), a multiple regression analysis was carried out. The four functional forms linear, double-log, semi-log and exponential were tested. The SemiLogarithmic was chosen since it provided higher number of variables with significance levels and based on its record of having best R2, F-ratios and the best coefficients when signs and significant are considered. The results of the multiple regression analysis were shown in tables 1. R2 indicates the percentages variation in the independent variables. The higher the R2, the better the equation fits the data. The t-ratios of the regression variables indicate the level of significance of each variable. The F-test was statistically significant at 5% level suggesting that there is a relationship between the level of employment provided and the independent variables. Table 1: Semi-Logarithmic regression results of the determinants of the level of income provided by forest product activities. S/N Explanatory Variables Coefficients t-ratios 1. Access to Credit (Ac) 0.01911 0.46 2. Access to forest extension service (Fx) 0.09613 1.52 3. Access to market (Mk) -0.03604 -0.69 4. Access to modern forest product harvesting/ -0.06143 (-1.67)** processing Technology (Te) 5. Age of household (Ha) 0.00028 -0.10 6. Educational level (Ed) 0.00004 0.01 7. Number of years in forest product business 0.00185 0.86 (Nz) 8. Relative contribution of forest output in 0.00236 (2.29)** total household economy (Ro) 9. Constant 1.60841 0.4693 10. R2 11. F Value (11.35)** 12. N 120 ** Significant at 5% From the result as shown in the table 1, based on the Semi-Logarithmic model, the R2 value of the model was 0.4693 and this means that the independent variables in the model explained only about 47% of the variability in employment of these products. This may mean that outside the tested variables, some variables that may be relevant in the regression model were omitted. Such variables may include physical proximity of the forest to the household residence, size of the household, marital status, dependency ratio of household, etc. Outside the above factors, the remaining variables were those assumed to have no significant effect on the level of R2 and can be justified by the nature of the study. Specific deductions were made using the F-ratios. 130

Nzeh et al.: IJOTAFS 4(2): 2010

The coefficients of Relative contribution of forest output in total household economy (Ro) was positively signed and significant at 5% in conformity with the a prior expectations. This implies that this variable is significantly related to the level of employment provided (i.e. it is a major determinant of level of employment provided by forest product activities in the study area). The coefficient of access to modern forest product harvesting/processing Technology (Te) is negatively sign and significant at 5%. This implies that access to modern forest product harvesting/processing Technology (Te) leads to decrease in level of employment provided. Nevertheless, this disagrees with the a prior expectation that access to modern forest product harvesting/processing Technology (Te) would lead to an increase in the level of employment provided to the rural households in the study area. However, the situation may be understood when considering the fact that in the study area there are limited extension activities to encourage the rural dwellers on the usage of modern forest products technologies. Coefficients of market access (Mk), access to credit (Ac), access to forest extension services (Fx), age (Ha), educational level (Ed), and number of years in forest products business (Nz) are insignificant at 5%, they were therefore ignored. Since the variables were not significant at 5% level, when their coefficient are compared, it implies that no significant relationship exists between them and employment level provided by forest products, when considered separately but the F-test confirms that in combination these factors affect employment of rural households by forest product activity significantly. CONCLUSION The study showed that there are numerous forest products, which are gathered, processed and marketed in Enugu State. These products make direct and indirect contributions to household economy, through the generation/provision of employment through their sales and exchange. The contributions of this sector to both household employment and national GDP would not be significant without provision of improved modern forest harvesting/processing technology. REFERENCES Azeez, I. O. (2002). Evaluation of media mix for disseminating forest conservation information in southwestern Nigeria. PhD Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. Ezike, J. O. (1998). Delineation of old and new Enugu State. Published bulletin, Land and Survey, Ministry of Works, Enugu, Nigeria. FAO (1999). State of the world's forest. Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome, Italy. Haggblade, S. and Hazell, P. B. (1989). Agricultural technology and farm-non-farm linkages. Agricultural Economics, 3: 345-364. Haggblade, S. and Liedholm, C. (1991). Agricultural, rural labor markets, and evolution of the rural non-farm economy. Growth and Equity through Microenterprise Investments and Institutions (GEMINI) Project Working Paper 19. Bethesda, Maryland. Iloeje, N. P. (1981), A new geography of Nigeria, New revised edition, Longman Limited, Ikeja, Nigeria. Kilby, P. and Liedholm, C. (1986). The role of non-farm activities in the rural economy. Employment and Enterprise Policy Analysis Discussion Paper 7. Harvard Institute for International Development, Cambridge, Massachusetts. NPC (2006). Nigeria census figure. National Population Commission, Abuja, Nigeria. Nzeh, C. E. P. (2008). Economic valuation of deforestation in Enugu State, Nigeria. PhD Research Proposal Presented to Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria. Nzeh, C. E. P., Amakom, U., Ujah, O. C. and Omeye, S. C. (2008). Population density and agricultural land use in Enugu agricultural zone of Enugu State, Nigeria. Book of Proceedings

of 10th Annual National Conference of Nigerian Association of Agricultural Economists

(NAAE), held at 750 Seater Lecture Theatre, Main Campus University of Abuja, Nigeria, 710th October, 2008, Pp: 591-602. Nzeh, C. E. P. and Eboh, E. C. (2007). Analysis of income effects of forest products activities among rural households in Enugu state Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture and Social Research (JASR), 7(1): 23-33.

131