Impact of youth rural-urban migration on household economy and crop production : A case study of Sokoto metropolitan areas , Sokoto State , North-Western Nigeria

Over the past decades, rural-urban migration research has focused on the hypothesis that the migration of household population, especially youths, has significant influence on the economy and crop production of households. This study aimed at examining the impact of youth rural-urban migration on household economy and crop production in Sokoto metropolitan area of Sokoto State, Nigeria. A multistage sampling technique was used to draw the sample of the study. Descriptive and inferential statistical tools were used to analyze the data obtained. The results indicated that all the migrant household heads were males, married and most of them fell within the ages of 45 to 54 years, while the majority of the migrants were within the ages of 18 to 27 years, single, males and literate. The common place migrated to by the migrants was Kaduna State due to lack of social amenities in their original place of residence. Majority of the migrants practiced temporary migration by coming back home at the onset of the rainy season to assist their parents on the farm, resulting to minimal losses in agricultural production for the household and at the same time remitting to their parents a certain amount of money which was used to cater for the welfare of the family. A non significant relationship was realized between the age of the migrants and some reasons behind their migration to the urban centres. It is recommended that social amenities should be provided by the government, nongovernmental organizations and the rural people with the aid of community driven development to the rural areas.


INTRODUCTION
In the past decades, youth labour migration and household agricultural economic research has focused on the hypothesis that the migration of the household population, especially youth, has significant influence on the economy and crop production of the households.The family labour which the rural farmers depends solely upon was reduced drastically due to migration of the youth to the rural centres.This phenomenon consequently resulted to high cost of production, low productivity, and reduction in annual income and a fall in standard of living of the rural populace (Akangbe et al., 2006).In a related study by Zimmerer (2004) reported that increased migration and transnational, as well as growth of forest product based handicraft industries, have led to rural households and communities abandoning agricultural lands, resulting to the growth of the imported agricultural packages.Farm labour provided by active and energetic youth is considered as an essential component of agricultural productivity in rural areas, because agriculture in isolated areas of an open country with low population density solely depends on family labour.Rural farmers, due to peasantry nature of the farm business and low income status, mostly depend on family labour, which is mostly provided by the youth.Despite the importance of youth migration to the urban centres due to, most especially, lack of social infrastructure in the rural settings, and lack of rural job opportunities during the dry season of the year, and its repercussions resulted to low yield and high cost of farm labour.Farm labour seasonal migration is often tremendous in magnitude and is widespread throughout the nation of Nigeria.Its net result has been described as having negative impact on the local development and production due to the reduction in human resources (Ray, 2001).
Migration, whether at the international or local level may be a deliberate decision or attempt by the migrant to reap social or economic benefit associated with changing locations.There are different types of migration.Internal migration is termed as the movement of people to a new home within a state, country or continent while external migration is the movement to a new home in a different state, country or continent (Adepoju, 2003;Adamu, 2009;Agbonlahor and Enilolobo, 2013).According to Chandna and Bala (1994) migration is the movement that involves a permanent or semi-permanent change in residence from one settlement to another.Rural -urban migration or labour migration on the other hand is defined as the movement of able bodied individuals from rural villages of origin to cities to earn a labour wage (Hunnes, 2012).Migrants are people who have left their homes to a new location, either temporarily or permanently in order to reap private social or economic gains (Adepoju, 2003).Youth rural urban migration was defined as the movement of youth from one geographical region to another, which may be on temporary or permanent basis (Adewale, 2005).Youth tend to move away from one place to another due to need to escape violence, political instability, congestion, drought in various dimensions and suspected or real persecution (Fadayomi, 1998).The level of poverty, lack of job opportunities and gross inadequacy of social infrastructures was found to be one of the reasons behind youth rural-urban migration (Aworemi et al., 2011).Also the seasonality of the primary job or the agricultural activities which the rural populace engaged in, results in seasonal unemployment and in addition, Ango et al. 123 small scale business opportunities in rural areas are being wiped out (black smith, pot making, processing of agricultural produce, fishing industry etc) by the supply of technological products from the urban centers thus, causing structural unemployment for parts of the year (Akinyele, 2005).The movement of youth from rural to urban areas is a common occurrence in Nigeria where most of the rural areas are ignored by the government despite the fact that majority (60 to 70%) of the country population resides there.
Studies by Ehirim et al. (2000), Adesiji et al. (1998) and Akinyele (2005) on rural-urban migration revealed negative effects of the migration on both the rural areas and the urban settings in Nigeria.According to Adesiji et al. (1998) when the energetic and productive members of the rural populace migrated to the cities, the original place of residence experience low food production, and high cost of labour, while the new location on the other hand may be faced with over population, resulting in unemployment, high rates of crime, prostitution, outbreak of diseases etc.
Due to inadequate or lack of scientific studies on impact of youth rural-urban migration on household economy and crop production in the study area, there is therefore a need to conduct research on the field in order to create a proper understanding of its effects on the households of the study area.
The specific objectives of the study are to describe the socio-economic characteristics of the migrants' household members and the migrants themselves; determine the nature of youth rural-urban migration and its relationship to the household heads farm yield; determine the reasons leading to youth rural-urban migration; find out the businesses engaged in by the migrants and their perceived income; determine the food coping strategies adopted by the household heads

METHODOLOGY
The study on the impact of youth rural-urban migration on household crop production and economy was conducted in some metropolitan areas of Sokoto city.(NPC, 2006).The major occupation of the people is farming, fishing and trading.The major tribes of the area are Hausa/Fulani and many other Nigeria minor and major tribes are also found.
The climate of the study area is characterized by a long dry season (October/November-April/May) with a short rainy season (May-September/October), (Singh and Babaji, 1989).Rainfall starts in late May and ends in late September or early October with annual rainfall ranging from 400 to 700 mm (Singh, 1995).The minimum and maximum temperatures are 19 and 34°C respectively with mean annual temperature of 21.5°C with relative humidity of 52 to 56%.The study area experiences harmattan wind (N-E Trade wind) which is a dry cold dusty wind blowing between the months of November to February.The soil of study area is predominantly sandy to sandy-loamy with low fertility level particularly poor in primary nutrients like nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium.The vegetation of the area falls within the Sudan Savannah agroecological zone characterized by sandy soil, loamy soil and some patches of Fadama land.An assortment of various species of grasses and legumes, patches of bushes and sparsely distributed indigenous tree species majority of which are thorny tree species are also found.Such trees include Acacia spp and Adansonia digitata (Figure 1).The primary data of the study was solicited from the respondents through the use of two sets of structured questionnaires; one set was administered to the households and the other to the migrants while the secondary data was restricted to published documents such as textbooks, journals, seminar papers, internet sources and past student projects.The data obtained were subjected to both descriptive statistics (percentages and frequency distribution) and inferential statistics (Chi-square) tests.A test of null hypothesis on the significant relationship between the some selected socioeconomic characteristics (age, occupation, marital status) of the migrants and the reasons for their migration was tested using Chisquare analysis.
The study considered two sets of variables; dependent variable which was socio-economic factors influencing migration and independent variables which include the reasons for migration, type of business engaged in by the migrants in cities and the estimated income of the migrants.Age of the migrants was measured in years; marital status of the migrants was measured as single, married, divorced and widow.Educational attainment of the migrants was measured based on Qur'anic education, primary school education, secondary school education, tertiary education, adult education and never attended school.Household size of the head of household and migrants was measured based on the number of people in the house; and the youth rural-urban migration was measured based on reasons for migration such as lack of basic social amenities, search for job, household food security, looking for better education and the perceived income of the migrants was measured in Naira.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Most (51.7%) of the household heads fell within the age range of 45-54 years, 25.9% falls within the age bracket of 35-44 years, and 20.75% of the household heads fall within the age ranges of 55-64years while only (1.7%) of the household heads were 64 years or older (Table 1).
The findings of the study imply that most of the household heads were within the age bracket of 45-54 years, indicating old ages and as such not active in terms of agricultural productivity.This could be due to the fact that the energetic youth belonging to the household have migrated to the cities which may lead to trend of agricultural productivity trend in the study area (Akangbe, 2006).Majority (72.5%) of the migrants fell within the age ranges of 18 -23 years, 22.5% were within the age brackets of 24 -29 years while only (5%) of the wards (migrants) were within the ages of 30 -35 years (Table1).
The findings shows that majority of the migrants were within their youthful stage of development, a stage when a youth could take decision in conjunction with their parents to travel outside the domains of their parents.The implication of this finding is that the young migrants have the strength and risks bearing ability associated with such population movement.This finding is line with Gimba and Kumshe (2000) that majority of the migrants from the villages to cities are young and energetic to cope with the hurdles of activities faced in cities.
The majority (70.7%) of the migrants surveyed had migrated at the age range of 15-19 years, 19.0% of the migrants migrated at the ages of 19 years and above, 10.3% migrated at the ages of 10-14 years (Table 1).Although the majority of migrants were only within the ages 15-19 years, and in child development stage, it appears they were able to identify the benefits accrued to migrants and were therefore influenced to migrate to the cities.
All (100%) of the household heads were married men while the majority (72.5%) of the migrants were single; 27.5% were married (Table 1).The finding that the majority of the migrants were single suggests it is easier for them to travel than married men, proceeds obtained from labour in the city are then sent to their parents at home.This contradicts the findings of Agbonlahor and Enilolobo (2013) in the South-western Nigeria where majority of the migrants were married, which indicates that they are likely to pay a frequent visit to their families at regular intervals to minimize social impact of separation from place of origin or residency.
The finding that all household heads were males could be due to the fact that in this part of the country, based on their custom, tradition and culture only the males are involved in rigorous agricultural activities (farming).This finding is in agreement with Ango et al. (2011) who reported that majority of the male of the rural populace in the northern part of the country engages in farming whereas the female folks partake only in rearing of children, domestic, other household chores and processing of agricultural produce.
None of the household heads and the migrants was illiterate as they have attained one form of education or the other.Most (58.6%) of the household heads had attained Qur'anic education, 17.3% of the household heads attained adult education, 13.8% of the household heads attained primary education, while only (10.3%) of the household heads attained secondary education, 60% of the migrants had attained primary education while 20% of them attained Qur'anic education and secondary school education respectively (Table 1).It is a normal trend or practice among the people of northern part of Nigeria, to first enroll children into Qur'anic education before being engaged in to any type of education (Chaudna and Bala, 1994).
Both the household heads and the migrants were from moderate to large family size.As shown in the findings in Table 1, most (53.4%) of the migrants household heads had a family size of 9 to 13 people, 37.9% had a family size of 14 to 18 people while only 8.6% of the household heads had a family size of 18 peoples and above.While in the case of the migrants 55% of them were from a family size of 9 to 13 people, 35% were from family size of 14 to 18 people while only (10%) of the migrants were from a family size of 18 people and above.This finding is in agreement with Kamaldeen (2003) and Ejeoma (2000) that majority of the households in the rural settings exceed 15 people due to the nature of the way they live together, and dependence on family as a source of farm labour, and that household size of a rural people is always much greater than their counterparts living in the city.
Based on the findings it was also observed that families with a greater number of people living in their households tended to have their children migrating to the cities purposely to ensure that the rest of the family members left at home were able to sustain themselves with the little that the farm produced.This finding is in accordance with Waliu (2003) that rural household with large family size produced food that is insufficient for their living, thus, sending their children to migrate to urban areas so as to reduce the amount of food consumed by the family.

Socio-economic characteristics of household heads
Majorities (84.5%) of the household heads were farmers, 12.1% were engaged in farming and trading while only (3.4%) of the household heads occupation was solely traders (Table 1).This implies that the rural populace who mostly are farmers engaged mostly in agricultural activities and their end-produce are either meant for family consumption and little for sale to provide those items not produced in the farm.The rural areas are known to have limited or non availability of social amenities which if present as in the urban areas, can serve as an opportunity for varying job opportunities.The finding of the study concurs with United Nations (2001) and Aworemi et al. (2011) that majority of the villagers engaged in farming since they lack social and basic amenities that will provide them with better opportunity to engage in other occupation similar to those that are available in the urban areas.
Majority (69%) of the household heads inherited their pieces of land, 31% inherited and bought the land used for agricultural activities while none of the household heads were found barrowing and leasing the land used for agricultural activities (Table 1).The finding reveals that majority of the household heads inherited the piece of land from their parents; because it is known to be part of the tradition and culture of the people of the study area that land belonging to deceased parent is shared to his heirs.
The findings showed that 69% of the household heads had a farm size ranging from 0.1-0.9ha and 31% of them had a farm size of 1 ha and above (Table 2).This implies that majority of the respondents had small plots of land for their agricultural activities.The finding concurs with Adamu (1997) the plot of land which the rural populace posses are mostly small in nature because it has to be shared among the heir of deceased owner.

Factors responsible for ruralurban migration
Majority (92.5%) of the migrants migrated to the cities because they lack social amenities and infrastructures in their places of residence 80.0% migrated for better employment, 52.5% migrated to further education, 45% of the migrants migrated to improve present welfare, 40.0%migrated to learn trade, 37.5% migrated to change environment, 32.5% migrated to look for money through labour as well as better transport in the urban areasrespectively (Table 2).The findings also reveals that 12.5% of the migrants travel to the cities because of crop failure and famine, 10% travelled to cities for better housing, while only (5%) migrated to join family members in the city.The findings showed that majority of the migrants leave their villages to the cities because they lack social amenities which are found in the cities which if present in the rural areas will provide them with many job opportunities that would deter them from travelling to the cities.This finding corroborates the works of Adepoju ( 2003), Martin and Taylor (2003), Adamu (2009), Aworemi et al. (2011) and Hunnes (2012).

Places (Cities) migrated to and nature of migration practiced
The findings reveal that 27.5% of the migrants migrated to Kaduna State, 22.5% travel to Kano State, 12.5% travel to Lagos State, 10.5% migrated to Zamfara State, 7.5% travel to Sokoto city, Abuja and Niger States respectively while 5.0% of the migrants travel to Kebbi State (Table 3).Kaduna State having the higher percentages migrants from this study may be due to presence social infrastructure, high rate of job opportunities, better educational facilities as well as its serene environment.According to most of the migrants, they migrated to Kaduna State due to its closeness to Sokoto State in terms of distance and were found to be better than their original place of residence in terms of social infrastructures and amenities.

Nature of migration, jobs engaged in, and amount (naira) earned by the migrants
As indicated in the findings of Table 3, the majority (87.9%) of the household heads agreed that their wards return home after a while and 12.1% were of the view that their wards stay where they migrated to for life.The findings imply that majority of the household wards who migrated returned home on the onset of the rainy season, did so to assist their parents in farming activities and thus, these group of migrants' practices temporary migration.This type of migration practiced by the respondents goes contrary with the type practiced by the southern Nigerians who mostly returned home only during the festive periods of the year.This finding concur with Adewale (2005) and Olorunshogo (2007) that migrants from the village to the cities either stay in the cities to practice permanent migration or often go home frequently to pay visit to their people thus practicing temporary migration.As shown in Table 3, that 36.2% of the migrants engaged in petty trading, 17.5% were Okada (Motorcycle) riders, 12.5% went for studies, and 10.0% were labourers while only 7.5% of the migrants were taxi drivers.The findings indicate that majority of the migrants engaged in one form of business or the other that provides them income.No migrants were involved in white collar job that generates appreciable amount of money due to lack of good educational background and capital to invest in the cities.Based on the findings, majority of the migrants were of the opinion that despite not engaged in white collar, migration to the cities is better than remaining idle at home.This finding is in contradiction with Okpara (1983) that the rural people in the cities only end up in petty businesses and unskilled vocation jobs in the urban areas that attracts no much income.
The findings depicts that 30% of the migrants earned more than #50,000 (Naira) monthly, 20% earned between #30,100 and #40,000 monthly, 12.5% earned between #10,100 and #20,000 and between #40,100 and #50,000 respectively while only 2.5% of the migrants earned below or up to #10,000 per month.Part of the income generated / gained was used for self-keeping while the remaining is remitted home to family (Table 3).

Impact of youth ruralurban migration on household food crop production
As shown in the findings 36.2% of the household heads stated that two of their wards had migrated, 34.5% stated that only one of their wards migrated, and 27.6% of the household heads stated that three of their wards migrated and only (1.7%) of the household heads stated that four of their wards ever migrated (Table 4).The finding of the study implies that the higher percentage of the household heads had only two of their children that have ever migrated; or it could be due to the fact that there is enough agricultural harvest by the family.This result is in contradiction with Kamaldeen (2003) who reported that from every household there always found some wards migrating and their number ranges from 4 and above this is because the agricultural produce harvested was small and it could not be enough to feed the family for the whole year.Migration of the wards according to him is the next alternative to purchase of seed and other farm inputs that could be used next year and is therefore considered as an act of supplementing the family income or food stock.The result in Table 4 reveals that most (55.2%) of the household heads had 4 to 8 bags of assorted grains/year, 31% 9 to 13 bags of assorted grains/year and 13.8% of the household heads had realized a yield of 13 bags and above of assorted grains/year.The findings imply that most of the household heads produced between 4 to 8 bags of assorted grains/year, an indication of the peasantry nature of the agricultural activities where farmers cultivate mostly for household consumption and selling some of the farm produce to provide essential commodities not produce in the farm.This type of agricultural activities made farmer to operate on a small piece of land due to lack of capital and government incentives.

Food copping strategies adopted by the heads of the household in the community
As indicated in Table 5, majorities (93.1%) of the household heads received assistance from their migrating wards in form of monies sent while the remainder did not.This finding implies that majority of the migrants engages in one form of business venture or the other from which some incomes were generated.It's out of these incomes that some were sent home for up keep of the family.The findings in Table 5 also revealed that 46.6% of the migrants remitted between #10,000 and #20,000 to the family at home, 17.2% of the migrants remitted less than #10,000 and #20,000 -#30,000 respectively to their family at home while only 8.6% of the migrants did not remit any amount of money to their family.The finding shows that majority of the migrants remitted certain amount of money to their family at home.Majority (72.4%) of the household heads were of the opinion that the money remitted home by their wards was not sufficient for home demands, 19% of the household heads agreed that the money remitted was enough while only (8.6%) household heads said that their wards that migrated did not remit money home (Table 5).
As shown in the findings in Table 5, majority (70.7%) of the household heads used the money remitted in purchasing food stuff, 19% paid labourers for services rendered with the money remitted and 8.6% of the household heads bought domestic animals with the money remitted while only (1.7%) household heads engaged in business with the money remitted by their wards that migrated.The result indicated that most of the money remitted home by their migrating wards was used for the purchase of food stuff because the majority of the farmers practiced subsistence farming out of which the yield obtained could not sustain the family.
The findings in Table 5 reveal that the majority (79.3%) of the migrants' absence was not felt by their family while only (10%) of the migrants' family felt the absence of their wards due to the separation with members of their family.The reason behind majority of the families of the migrants not feeling the absence of their wards could be due to temporary migration practiced, and some amount of money remitted home.In addition, the use of information technology such telephone to interact with the family members also helps in reducing the long silence between the households and their migrated wards.

Testing of research hypothesis
There is no significant relationship between reasons for migration and food provision coping strategies of the heads of the household.The Chi-square analysis result in Table 6 revealed a significant relationship between migrants search for better employment in the urban centres and the money remitted home (X 2 = 0.36, P-values = 0.55).This finding implies that the migrants migrated to the cities due to the presence of job opportunities that yields some money out of which some were remitted home for the upkeep of the family.
The Chisquare analysis also revealed that there is significant relationship between lack of social amenities and infrastructures in the rural areas and migrating of the youth to the cities (X 2 =0.26,P-values = 0.61).The finding implies that the migrants migrated from their place of origin which is characterized with low availabilities of social infrastructure to urban areas where there is more opportunities for venturing into businesses that attracts some income, thereby remitting to the family at home to purchase food stuffs and other needs of the family at home (Table 6).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Youth rural urban migration directly impacts the economy and especially crop production of the rural household in the Sokoto metropolitan area, owing to a number of reasons.Firstly, the youth who form the majority of the and energetic group of rural residents often migrate to urban centres because of push factors like lack of job opportunities, social amenities and infrastructures in rural areas.Secondly, the preference to relocate to urban centres to search for jobs and make remittance back home in rural areas to support family members financially in order to meet the cost of food and other necessities for the welfare and to improve the socio-economic status of the household.As result of the findings it was concluded that migration of the youth (wards) to the cities is more appreciable to their parents than remaining home idle.Based on these realities, these types of researches are crucial for the development of the Sokoto Metropolitan area and its rural environs.Based on the above the following recommendations deemed necessary: 1. Provision of social amenities and establishment of cottage industries in the rural areas is necessary to enable the rural residents live a very descent and comfortable live.2. Government should encourage private sectors to invest in the villages more especially on agricultural activities.3. Provision of subsidized agricultural inputs such as fertilizers, pest and herbicides, animal drawn plough and irrigation facilities that enable the rural farmers to have appreciable yield is highly recommended.4. Rural populace should be encourage to establish projects with the aid of community driven development projects in the rural areas.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Map of Sokoto State showing the study area.
Multistage sampling technique was employed to arrive at the sample size of the study.The first stage was the purposive selection of Wamakko Local Government Area out of the three Local Government Areas that constitute Sokoto metropolis because of the high numbers of youth known to have migrated to the urban centres.The third sampling technique involved the random selection of two districts out of the four districts in the Local Government Area, and the fourth technique involved the purposive selection of two villages from each of the selected districts due to the concentration of migrants in the communities.Lastly, the sample size of the study constitutes 98 comprising 58 households and 40 migrants.

Table 1 .
Distribution of household heads and their wards socio-economic characteristics (n=98).

Table 2 .
Distribution of migrants based on reasons for migration (n = 40).

Table 3 .
Migrants distribution based on places migrated to, nature of migration, jobs engaged in, and amount earned/month (n = 40).

Table 4 .
Distribution of household heads based on number of migrated wards and their yield/year (n=58).

Table 5 .
Distribution of Heads of Household Based on copping strategies adopted, amount remitted by the wards and the sufficiency of the remitted amount (n=58).