Nijerya'nın Kuzey Orta bölgesinde gölevez (Colocasia esculenta L.) yetiştiriciliğinde kârlılık analizi

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 31 Sayı: 1, 137 - 150, 11.03.2026

Mark Umunna Amadi , Jeremiah Aluwong , Ezekiel Haruna , Onyekachi Okwe Agwu , Abah Michael Oguche , Olugbenga Omotayo Alabı

https://doi.org/10.37908/mkutbd.1797878

https://izlik.org/JA76JH77HY

Öz

Bu çalışmada, Nijerya'nın Kuzey Orta Bölgesi'ndeki Gölevez yetiştiriciliğinin karlılığı analiz edilmiştir. İyi yapılandırılmış bir ankete dayanarak 220 gölevez çiftçisini seçmek için basit rastgele örnekleme yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Veriler, tanımlayıcı istatistikler, çiftlik bütçe tekniği, varlıkların amortismanı, finansal analiz, çoklu regresyon analizi ve Kendall'ın uyum katsayısı kullanılarak analiz edildi. Gölevez çiftçilerinin ortalama yaşı ve ortalama çiftlik deneyimi sırasıyla 42 ve 10 yıldır. Sonuçlar, hektar başına gölevez üretiminin ortalama toplam maliyetinin 410.442$, ortalama toplam gelirin ise 1066.67$ olduğunu göstererek önemli bir pozitif marjı gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur. Hesaplanan t-değeri (112.14), %5 anlamlılık düzeyinde tablodaki t-değerinden (1.96) daha büyüktü; bu, gölevez üretiminin çalışma alanında karlı olduğunu göstermektedir. Kârlılık analizi ayrıca 827.25$ brüt kar marjı ve 656.22$ net çiftlik geliri olduğunu ve bunun da 1.596'lık bir yatırım getirisi (YG) oranını yansıttığını göstermektedir. Yüksek kârlılığa rağmen, getirilerdeki SD = 87.602'lik değişim, maliyet SD = 42.594'e kıyasla verimlilik ve üretim kaynaklarına erişimde eşitsizlikler olduğunu göstermektedir. Yaş, deneyim, eğitim ve çiftlik büyüklüğü, gölevez çiftçilerinin net çiftlik gelirini etkileyen önemli faktörlerdi. Bu bulgular, gölevezin Nijerya'da gıda güvenliği ve gelir getiren bir ürün olarak ekonomik potansiyelini vurgulamaktadır. Çalışma, gölevez çiftçileri arasında kârlılığı sürdürmek için girdilere erişim, dayanıklı çeşitlerin kullanımı, yayım hizmet sunum sisteminin iyileştirilmesi ve pazar altyapısının iyileştirilmesi yoluyla tarımsal girdi destek programlarının güçlendirilmesini önermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kârlılık , Cocoyam Çiftçileri , Çiftlik Bütçeleme Tekniği , Çoklu Regresyon Analizi , Kendall , Nijerya

Etik Beyan

NIL

Destekleyen Kurum

NIL

Proje Numarası

NIL

Teşekkür

Thanks

Analyzing the profitability of taro (Colocasia esculenta L.) farming in North Central, Nigeria

https://izlik.org/JA76JH77HY

Öz

This study analyzed the profitability of taro farming in North Central, Nigeria. A simple random sampling design was used to select 220 taro farmers based on a well-structured questionnaire. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, farm budgetary technique, and depreciation of assets, financial analysis, multiple regression analysis, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance. The average age and farm experience of taro farmers were 42 and 10 years, respectively. The results show that the mean total cost of taro production per hectare was 410.442$, while the mean total revenue was 1066.67$ indicating a substantial positive margin. The calculated t-value of (112.14) was greater than the tabulated t-value (1.96) at 5% level of significance, this implies that taro production was profitable in the study area. The profitability analysis further shows a gross margin of 827.25$ and a net farm income of 656.22$, reflecting a rate of return on investment (ROI) of 1.596. Despite the high profitability, variation in returns SD = 87,602 relative to cost SD = 42,594 suggest disparities in the efficiency and access to productive resources. Age, experience, education, and farm size were significant factors influencing the net farm income of taro farmers. These findings underscore the economic potential of taro as a food security and income generating crop in Nigeria. The study recommends strengthening agricultural input support programs through access to inputs, use of resistant varieties, enhancing extension service delivery system and improving market infrastructure, value addition to sustain profitability among taro farmers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Profitability , Cocoyam Farmers , Farm Budgetary Technique , Multiple Regression Analysis , Kendall’s’ Coefficient of Concordance , Nigeria

Etik Beyan

NIL

Destekleyen Kurum

NIL

Proje Numarası

NIL

Teşekkür

Thanks

Kaynakça

• Abdulrahman, S., Ibrahim, H. Y., & Umar, S. (2015). Socio-economic factors influencing productivity among smallholder farmers in Nigeria. International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research, 3(4), 141–147.
• Afolami, C. A., Adeyemo, R., & Oladapo, M. O. (2020). Economic analysis of root and tuber crop production in Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development, 9(3), 55–64.
• Afolami, C. A., Obayelu, A. E., & Vaughan, I. I. (2015). Welfare impact of adoption of improved cassava varieties by rural households in South Western Nigeria. Agricultural and Food Economics, 3(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40100-015-0037-2
• Alabi, O. O., Safuga, G. F., & Aluwong, J. S. (2023). Cost efficiency and profitability analysis of rice (Oryza sativa) production among smallholder farmers in Federal Capital Territory, Nigeria. Australian Journal of Science and Technology, 7(1), 1–9.
• Alabi, O. O., Oladele, A. O., & Maharazu, I. (2022). Economies of scale and technical efficiency of smallholder pepper (Capsicum species) production in Abuja, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Sciences (Belgrade), 67(1), 63–82.
• Cochran, W. G. (1963). Sampling techniques (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
• Ezeh, C. I., & Okoli, V. B. (2016). Effects of climate change on root and tuber crop production: Evidence from smallholder farmers in Southeastern Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 20(2), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v20i2.4
• FAO. (2021). Statistical yearbook: World food and agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization.
• FMARD. (2023). National Agricultural Policy Framework (2023–2030). Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development.
• Ifeanyi-Obi, C. C. (2017). Education and agricultural productivity of smallholder farmers in developing economies: Lessons from Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, 9(10), 215–222. https://doi.org/10.5897/JAERD2017.0920
• Israel, A. O., & Hakim, A. R. (2015). Multidimensional poverty assessments in rural farm household, South-West of Nigeria: Evidence from Oyo State farm settlements. Business Economics Journal, 6, 1.
• Kuswanto, K., Zukifli, A., & Armandelis, A. (2019). The impacts of the efficiency of rubber production on the welfare of rubber farmers in Jambi Province. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 9(2), 80–86.
• Mukaila, A., Olarinde, L., & Yusuf, O. (2022). Agricultural credit, resource-use efficiency, and farm income among smallholder farmers in Nigeria. Cogent Economics & Finance, 10(1), 2026138. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2022.2026138
• NAERLS. (2024). Wet Season Annual Report, Nigeria. National Agricultural Extension and Research Liaison Service.
• National Bureau of Statistics. (2022). Annual agricultural performance survey report. Abuja: NBS.
• Okoye, B. C., Asumugha, G. N., & Njoku, E. C. (2008). Socio-economic determinants of adoption of improved cocoyam production technologies among farmers in Anambra State, Nigeria. International Journal of Food and Agricultural Research, 5(2), 28–43.
• Okoye, C. U., & Nwachukwu, I. N. (2019). Profitability and production constraints of cocoyam farmers in Nigeria. Nigerian Agricultural Journal, 50(1), 102–111.
• Olayemi, J. K., Ogunniyi, L. T., & Olubode, M. A. (2020). Socio-economic assessment of cocoyam production and consumption in Nigeria. International Journal of Agricultural Research, 15(2), 120–132.
• Onyeka, J. (2014). Status of cocoyam (Colocasia esculenta and Xanthosoma spp.) in West and Central Africa: Production, household importance and the threat from leaf blight. CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). International Institute of Tropical Agriculture.
• Otekunrin, O. A., Momoh, S., & Ayinde, I. A. (2021). Farm size, productivity and efficiency of smallholder farmers in Nigeria: Implications for agricultural policy. World Development Perspectives, 23, 100344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2021.100344