Journal of
Agricultural Extension and Rural Development

  • Abbreviation: J. Agric. Ext. Rural Dev
  • Language: English
  • ISSN: 2141-2170
  • DOI: 10.5897/JAERD
  • Start Year: 2009
  • Published Articles: 466

Full Length Research Paper

Adoption of German International Corporation (GIZ) technology intervention on shea nut processing in Niger State, Nigeria

Koloche I. M.
  • Koloche I. M.
  • Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research, Benin-city, Nigeria.
  • Google Scholar
Solomon S.
  • Solomon S.
  • Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research, Benin-city, Nigeria.
  • Google Scholar
Adaigbe V. C.
  • Adaigbe V. C.
  • Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research, Benin-city, Nigeria.
  • Google Scholar
Yahaya S. A.
  • Yahaya S. A.
  • Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research, Benin-city, Nigeria.
  • Google Scholar
Odufale O. O.
  • Odufale O. O.
  • Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research, Benin-city, Nigeria.
  • Google Scholar
Garba M. H.
  • Garba M. H.
  • Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research, Benin-city, Nigeria.
  • Google Scholar


  •  Received: 29 September 2022
  •  Accepted: 27 October 2022
  •  Published: 30 November 2022

 ABSTRACT

This study assessed the activities GIZ technology intervention on Shea nut processing in Niger State, Nigeria. The objectives were to identify the available improved shea nut processing technologies and the level of adoption of the improved GIZ shea nut processing technologies in the study area. A two-stage sampling technique was adopted for the study. Data were collected through interview schedule and analysed using percentages, and likert type scale. The data reveals that majority of the respondents (98.7%) adopted the GIZ improved processing technologies, while very few of the respondents (1.3%) did not adopt the GIZ improved processing technologies. In the seven sub-components in which a few of the respondents that did not adopt it might be due to some factors adduced to inadequate concrete platform, unavailability of some equipment/materials and inadequate knowledge of some concepts which they might have forgotten as taught under GIZ  extension services. The study concluded that the intervention programme should be repeated and extended to non- beneficiary Local Government of the State to increase the economic activities of the processors on quality production of Shea butter.

Key words: Adoption, shea nut, processing, technology, german International Corporation (giz) and intervention, processors, beneficiary.


 INTRODUCTION

Shea tree (Vitellaria paradoxa) is a versatile agroforestry tree crop that grows across sub- saharan Africa. It is also called a resourceful tree that can stand a wide range of climatic conditions.it has a high demand from several markets (Maranz and Wiesman, 2003a; Masters et al., 2004). It covers a vegetation of 5,000 km wide belt of savanna including West Afrian countries of Senegal, Mali, Cote d’Ivooire, Burkina Faso, Togo, Ghana, Benin, Cameroon, Nigeria, Niger,  and  further  east  in  Uganda, Sudan and Ethiopia (Chalfin, 2004; Goreja, 2004). The merchants (Ferris et al., 2001) referred to shea parkland coverage as shea belt.

Shea tree produces fruits or seeds, the mesocarp are consumed by some peasant farmers in Africa as desert food crop during the peak period of farming activities when other crops have not matured for harvesting. It provides vegetative covers for farm lands which contribute to environmental protection, a lot of non-timber resources are derived from it, including income generating activities from food, medicine and shea butter (Teklehaimanot, 2004; Suleiman, 2008; Pouliot, 2012).

The shea fruits contain about (50%) oil that is edible and used as cooking oil, cosmetics, and skin care, pharmaceutical and medicinal purposes. Also, being used as substitute for margarine and coaco butter in the food industries and it is considered as second most valuable oil crop to oil palm in Africa (Alander, 2004; Moore, 2008; Suleiman, 2008).

The shea oil or butter that is being traditionally or mechanically extracted from shea kernel are exported from Africa countries including Nigeria to France, Great Britain, the Netherland, Denmark, North America and Japan (Elias and Carne, 2007). In these countries, it is extensively processed into varieties of food products including chocolate which is becoming more acceptable in the cosmetic industries (Schreckerberg, 2004).

Nigeria is blessed with wild coverage of shea parkland, Niger State ranks first amongst  the shea nut producing States, followed by Kwara, Nassarawa, Zamfara, Kaduna, Kaduna, Sokoto, Jigawa, Kano, Plateau, Taraba, Benue, Adamawa, Bauchi, Edo, Yobe and Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja (Suleiman, 2008).

Despite the availability of shea nut, it is characterized by traditional or local method of processing which result in low productivity and quality of shea butter produced by the processors in Nigeria and particularly in Niger State, where large population of shea trees are found, and high quantity of nuts are collected. In order to improve the production capacity and quality of shea butter processed by the processors, the Federal Government of Nigeria in collaboration with German International Corporation (GIZ), other NGOs and government Organizations have developed and disseminated improved shea nut processing technologies to traditional shea nut processors in Niger State. In addition, GIZ is a pro-poor growth and employment creation (SEDIN) that tracks a three tiered approach established in order to improve pro-per growth and employment creation in micro, small and medium sized enterprises (MSME). (GIZ) have facilitated different interventions in the Shea sector, aimed to increase Shea butter production in the state and improve the income base of the processors as well as their social well-being.

The objectives of the study were to identify available GIZ shea nut processing technologies and examine the level of adoption of GIZ shea nut processing technologies in Niger State.


 MATERIALS AND METHODS

Area of study

The study was conducted in Niger State which is located in the North Central zone of Nigeria and has its capital in Minna. It lies between latitude 3°–10°N and longitude 3°–8°E. It is bordered by Kebbi and Zamfara States to the North-West  and to  the  South  by Kwara and Kogi States while Kaduna State and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) bordered the State to the East and South-East respectively. The State also shares a common international boundary with the Republic of Benin at Babanna in Borgu Local Government Area of Niger State. This gives way to common inter-border trade with the State. The State has a land mass of 76,363 Km2 making it the largest State in Nigeria in terms of total land area and has twenty-five (25) local government areas. The State has the highest wild shea tree plantations in Nigeria with a substantial number of traditional rural processors of shea nut which cut across the agricultural zones of the State (Suleiman, 2008). It is divided by Niger State Agricultural Development Programme into three agricultural zones for better agricultural administrative activities, namely: zone, I, II, and III with headquarters at Minna, and the zones have their headquarters at Bida, Kuta, and Kontogora respectively (Figure 1).

In order to have a wide coverage and full representation, all the three Agricultural Development Programmes (ADP) zones were used for the study. A 3-stage sampling technique was adopted for the study. In the first stage, a purposive selection of 15 Local Government Areas (LGAs) of German International Corporation (GIZ) intervention site was made (GIZ, 2011, 2014) across the three zones. The purposive selection was carried out due the fact that there was high population density of shea trees and high participation of shea value chain particularly shea processing activities.  At the second stage, from the profile list of GIZ Shea groups comprising 2970 processors GIZ, 2011; 2014 profile lists, a proportionate random selection, based on 10%, of Shea nut processors were made across the selected LGAs giving a total sample of 297. Also, in the same LGAs, snow-balling technique was used to randomly select 297 Shea nut processors that were GIZ non-beneficiaries, thereby making a total sample size of 594 as indicated in Table 1.

Data collection and instrument for data

The data for the study was obtained from both primary and secondary sources. The primary data were collected through interview schedule. The secondary data were sourced from published and unpublished documents of agricultural journals, internet and past studies. Trained enumerators of the State Agricultural Development Programme office and extension agents were engaged in the study area to collect information from the respondents.

Analytical techniques

Descriptive such as frequency counts and percentages were used in this study

Model specification

The available GIZ Shea nut processing technologies was measured using 3 point-likert type scale against the list of GIZ shea nut processing technologies. Respondents were asked to respond to the GIZ shea nut processing technologies put in place and coded as Available (1) Not Available (0). The level of adoption of GIZ Shea nut processing technologies was measured as Adopted (1) and Not-Adopted (0)


 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Table 2  shows  the  GIZ  improved  method  of  shea  nut processing technologies while Table 3 shows the percentage distribution of the GIZ Shea nut processors. The data reveals that majority of the respondents accepted that the first component which is the processing equipment for storage of shea nut  were available to them, in the following steps picking and collection of dropped matured healthy and undamaged fruits or Shea nut (100.0%), de-pulping of Shea nut was done immediately to avoid fermentation process taking place (100.0%), per- boiling of Shea nut was done immediately after collection within 30 ≤ 45 min and draining after par-boiling using basket (100.0%), proper drying of Shea nut for 5 to 7 days or more until the nut were rattling inside the shells (99.3%), de-husking or cracking of Shea nut with due consideration to the damaging of the nut on clean platform and mats beneath it (100.0%) and drying of kernels to between 10 to ≤ 15% moisture content or until proper hardness of kernels are achieved (97.6%) and storage of kernels in jute bags or baskets in ware-houses with proper ventilation with barriers (94.9%). The reason could be adduced to very few farmers in some cases who claimed unavailability of some sub-components might be those that did not understand very well the concept at the period of training or forgot out rightly the concepts.

Table 4 and 5 shows the percentage distribution of the Shea nut processors by the adoption of improved Shea nut processing technologies. The data indicates that the sub-components of processing of shea kernel into shea butter,  the respondents (100.0%) indicates that the sub-components of actual processing of shea kernel into shea butter, were available except drying of kernels to between 6 to ≤ 10% moisture content or until proper hardness of the kernel are achieved, roasting of kernel with rotary drier without any oil addition for 30≤60 min  and boiling of kneaded kernel paste on recommended stove technologies where very few percentages of the respondents; 1.7, 3.0 and 1.7%% respectively indicated that they were not available. Also, as in the first components, the reason that could be adduced to a very few in some cases who claimed unavailability of some sub-components might be those that did not understand very well the concept at the period of training or forgot out-rightly the concepts. .The results is consonant with the findings of Ragasa and Mazunda (2018) that  if smallholder farmers or processors become better informed about their technical options or  for increasing yields, their productivity usually rises, leading to better working conditions on farms and higher food security.

Table 6 shows the percentage distribution  of the  Shea nut processors by the adoption of GIZ Shea nut processing technologies. The data indicates that for the first component of the GIZ processing technologies, that is, storage of shea nuts before processing was adopted by all the respondents (100%) components except in the two cases of drying of kernels to between 10 to ≤ 15% moisture content until hardness is achieved and storage of kernels in jute bags/basket in store/ware houses where  few   percentages   of  (1.3%)  and  (9.1%) respectively did not adopt. The reasons adduced for the non-adoption of these sub-components were inadequate concrete or cemented platform for drying and scarcity of jute bags in the markets. The results concur with the findings of Warner et al. (2008) that a major factor of competitiveness that plays a role in agricultural value chains is farmers’ having access to affordable physical infrastructure. Examples of such infrastructure is irrigation,  energy,  transportation,  pre   and  post-harvest storage, telecommunications, covered markets, agro processing and packaging facilities, as well as bulk storage (Warner et al., 2008).

Table 7 and 8 shows the percentage distribution of the GIZ Shea nut processors by the adoption of improved Shea nut processing technologies. The data reveals that the adoption of second components of GIZ processing technologies and depict that in five sub-components, all the respondents  (100.0%)  adopted  the technologies in seven sub-components, though not all but majority of the respondents adopted the technologies. In the seven sub- components in which few of the respondents that did not adopt it might be due to some factors adduced to inadequate  concrete   platform,   unavailability   of  some equipment/materials and inadequate knowledge of some concepts which they might have forgotten as taught under GIZ extension services.

Table 9 shows the percentage distribution of GIZ Shea nut  processors  by  the  level  of adoption of giz Shea nut processing technologies. The data reveals that majority of the respondents  (98.7%)  adopted  the  GIZ  improved processing technologies, while very few of the respondents (1.3%)  did  not  adopt   the   GIZ   improved processing technologies. This implies that a high level of adoption of the GIZ technologies could be attributed to the credence of effective dissemination of the technologies and provision of necessary support by the programme to the respondents in the study area. The results is in consistent with  Sharma (2016), that smallholder farming or processing participation in the global value chains is perceived as of prime importance for their inclusion in the agricultural development of developing countries.


 CONCLUSION

From the findings, there was a high adoption of GIZ technologies both at the storage of shea nut with seven sub-components and actual processing of shea kernel into shea butter with twelve sub-components, though the beneficiaries complaint of being constrained by inadequate finance, poor market linkages/channels, inability to understand some complexities due to illiteracy, inadequate extension contact, poor processors’ groups for annexing opportunities and inadequate capacity building and follow up, among others. The adoption of this technology by the beneficiaries has however helped to enhance their productivity (quantity of shea nut processed, output and income) and livelihood condition better than before the intervention.


 RECOMMENDATIONS

Re-introduction and inclusion of more shea nut processors in non-GIZ villages especially for the state as a whole is highly necessary to enjoy large number of processors in order to enhance the shea butter industry.


 CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors have not declared any conflict of interests.



 REFERENCES

Alander J (2004). Shea Butter- a Multi- Functional Ingredient for Food and Cosmetics. Lipid Technology 16(9):202-205.

 

Chalfin B (2004). Shea Butter Republic.Routledge. New York, NY. Intro, Ch1.
Crossref

 

Elias M, Carney J (2007). African Shea Butter: a Feminized Subsidy from Nature. A Case Study of Africa P 77.
Crossref

 

Ferris RSB, Collins ON, Wanda k, Jagwe J, Wright P (2001). Evaluating the market organisation for Shea Nut processed products in Uganda. Submitted to USAID.

 

German International Corporations (GIZ) (2011). Employment Oriented Private Sector Development Programme (EoPSD), Profile Shea Nut Groups in Niger State, presented at Abuja, February, 2011.

 

German International Corporations (GIZ) (2014). Employment Oriented Private Sector Development Programme (EoPSD), Profile Shea Nut Groups in Niger State. GIZ, Minna Field Office.

 

Goreja WG (2004). Shea Butter: The Nourishing Properties of Africa's Best-Kept Natural Beauty. Amazing Herbs Press. New York, NY, pp. 34-39.

 

Maranz S, Wiesman Z (2003a). Evidence for Indigenous Selection and Distribution of the Shea Tree, Vitellaria paradoxa, and its Potential Significance to Prevailing Parkland Savanna Tree Patterns in Sub-Saharan Africa North of the Equator. Journal of Biogeography 30(10):1505-1516.
Crossref

 

Masters ET, Yidana JA, Lovett PN (2004). Reinforcing Sound Management through Trade: Shea Tree Products in Africa. Unasylva 210:46-52.

 

Moore S (2008). The role of Vitellaria paradoxa in Poverty Reduction and Food Security in the Upper East Region of Ghana. Earth and Environment 3:209-245

 

Pouliot M (2012). Contribution of "Woman's Gold" to West Africa Livelihoods: the Case of Shea (Vitellaria paradoxa) In Burkina Faso. Economic Botany 66(3):237-248.
Crossref

 

Ragasa C, Mazunda J (2018). The impact of agriculture extension services in the context of a heavily subsidized input system; The case of Malawi. World Development 105:25-47.
Crossref

 

Schreckenberg K (2004). The Contribution of Shea Butter (Vitellaria paradoxa C.F. Gaertner) to local livehoods in Benin. Forest products, livelihoods and conservation. Case studies of non-timber forest product systems 2:91-113.

 

Sharma N (2016). Determining growers' participation in contract farming in Punjab. Economic and Political Weekly 51(2):58-64.

 

Suleiman MAT (2008). Assessment of Potentials for Shea nut in Selected Local Government Areas in Niger State. Report for Employment Oriented Private Sector Development Programme pp. 3-28.

 

Teklehaimanot Z (2004). Exploiting the Potential of Indigenous Agroforestry Trees: Parkia biglabosa and Vitellaria paradoxa in Sub-Saharan Africa, In New Vistas in Agroforestry (pp. 207-220). Springer, Dordrecht.
Crossref

 

Warner M, Kahan D, Lehel S (2008). Market-Oriented Agricultural Infrastructure; Appraisal of Public-Private Partnerships. Overseas Development Institute, London.

 




          */?>