CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Millets are highly variable grasses believed to have originated from West African wild grasses

over 40,000 years ago (National Research Council, 2006). They are identified by their small

grain sizes and are considered as the fourth most important cereal after rice, maize, and sorghum

in terms of cultivation and production in the tropics. Statistics indicate that over 95 percent of

millet production areas are concentrated in African and Asian countries (Basavaraj et al., 2010).

Millets forms a staple diet for over 500 million households who are mainly small-scale farmers

living in arid and semi-arid lands of the poorest states of the world (National Research Council,

1996) The cover over 15 and 12 million hectares in Africa (Nigeria, Niger, Chad, Burkina Faso,

Mali, Sudan, Uganda and Nigeria) and Asia (China and India) respectively. Within the last 5

years, millet production in Africa has been on a downward trend partly due to high demand and

profitability of competing crops, although, Millet still accounts for almost 87 percent of the total

area planted with millets (ICRISAT, 1996; Bennetzen, 2003).

Millet (Pennisetum glaucum) is the most commonly used all millets around the world. It

performs well under hot and dry climatic conditions with rainfall of between 200-600 mm

annually and highly saline soils where maize and potatoes would record poor yields. In

comparison to irrigated commodity crops supported by Nigerian government policies, millet

requires only 25 percent of rainfall demanded by sugarcane and banana (Nagarajan et al., 2007).

Therefore, Millet relieves Nigerian’s government of irrigation water or power demands making it

an excellent alternative for producers operating in harsh environmental conditions like arid and

1
semi-arid lands. In Nigeria, however, millet producers are classified as poor (with 2 limited cash

income alternatives), with no crop insurance and are wholly dependent on subsistence production

for food, feed and fodder needs (Nagarajan et al., 2007).

Millet has several merits it forms an excellent feed for livestock, both as grain and forage.

Studies have revealed that broilers fed on Millet are heavier with better feed conversion rate than

those fed on maize (Gulia et al., 2007). The crop is a major ingredient in fuel and ethanol

production with a fermentation estimated at 30 percent greater than that of maize. In addition,

Millet Distillers Dried Grains with Soluble (DDGS) co-products has higher protein and fat

content than that of maize (Gulia et al., 2007). In the rural household food baskets, millet grains

are important ingredients recommended for children, elderly and convalescents due to its high

levels of protein (up to 12 percent), energy (3600 K cal kg-1 ) and a balanced amino acid profile

making it a cheap source of grain iron (Fe) and zinc (Zn) (Parthasarathy et al., 2006; ICRISAT,

2007). In addition, its stems area major source of raw material for hut construction, fencing,

thatching and production of brooms, mats, baskets and sunshades.

Although, millet is nutritionally rich compared to other cereals, its consumption pattern has

reduced significantly in the past three decades. This has been linked to its lengthy cooking time,

change in consumers taste and preference, biased policies of supplying fix cereals at subsidized

prices to urban consumers and the free distribution of maize seeds to small scale farmers even

though they perform poorly in arid and semi-arid lands. This has discouraged small scale farmers

who have continuously allocated more land to maize despite its dismal performance in arid and

semi-arid lands (ASALs). As a result, the total area allocated to millet in Nigeria, has reduced

from 115,302.6 ha (2007) to 100,143.9 ha (2011) with per hectare yield declining from 1,610

kilograms in 1980 to an estimated 200-800 kilograms in 2008 against the potential of 1,500-

2
3,000 kg ha-1 (KARI, 2007; GoK, 2007; KARI, 2008; MoA, 2008; GoK, 2012). These negative

trends have resulted in imports from Tanzania and Uganda especially for industrial processing

estimated at 1,560 metric tons annually (United States Agency for International Development

(USAID), 2010).

In addition, small scale millet producers have identified several market constraining factors

limiting millet value addition and promotional attempts. Amongst these are poorly developed

and fragmented marketing channels with weak value chains, high assembly and processing costs,

uncompetitive grain prices which collapses during harvesting season, lack of market cleaning

costs, low access to credit, lags in legal and policy framework (FAO, 1996; Rohrbach, 2004). In

addition, Gulia et al., (2007) acknowledged that millet has no minimal set price and this has

limited farmers’ interest despite local communities’ preference for the crop. It is necessary

therefore to increase Millet marketing and value addition initiatives in order to increase its

consumer demand.

As part of intervention to promote millet marketing and value addition, the crop has received

increased attention within the Nigeria’s production structures. For instance, within the last three

years, the government of Nigeria has put more emphasis in promoting the usage of traditional

crops like Millet to improve their acceptability and consumption which will in turn increase

small holder incomes and reduce food insecurity (Gok, 2012). From 1994-2007, the government

of Nigeria and International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD, 2017) initiated the

Eastern Province Horticulture and Traditional Food crops project to improve smallholders’

incomes and food security through increased production of traditional food crops covering

Millet. To further promote millet production, International Crops Research Institute for Semiarid

and Tropics (ICRISAT, 2005), International Sorghum and Millets (INTSORMIL) and Bill and

3
Melinda Gates Harnessing Opportunities for Productivity Enhancement (HOPE) funded project

have developed interventions like breeding, distribution of improved varieties and the promotion

of resource conservation and management to address productivity and marketing challenges

(Karanja et al., 2009).

Despite the above external interventions, serious widening supply deficits are the norm within

the Millet growing zones, as very little of Millet reaches the final markets. In fact, it is estimated

that in Zimbabwe less than 3 percent of the Millet produced enters formal production channels

(Rohrbach, 2004). In the animal feeds sector, less than 2 million tons (9 percent) of Millet is fed

to animals in comparison to 30 million tons of sorghum (Léder, 2004). It is not clear to what

extent the above initiatives have been helpful in improving the competitiveness of Millet in

ASALs of Nigeria.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Despite the many efforts aimed at improving millet productivity and marketing in Funtua Local

Government, weak supply networks and independent working relationship between actors is a

major concern derailing this process. Yet, for successful achievement of improved market value

chain, efficient collaboration, networking and coordination are important. Past studies have

shown that efficient coordination has the potential of improving market demand and ultimate

producers’ output value thereby stimulating farmer adoption and production of targeted crops.

Nevertheless, information on millet marketing and value chain potential, coordination,

distribution and collaboration is limited or nonexistence at all. Therefore, this study is an attempt

to analyze the millet value chain operating in Funtua Local Government and its related markets

of Nigeria.

4
1.3 Justification of the study

Millet is a potential alternative food crop in arid and semi-arid land (ASALs) of Nigeria that can

offer immediate food and nutritional security to over 79 percent of food insecure rural population

if proper marketing channels are established. Therefore, knowledge of market efficiency will

provide valuable information to policy makers about the potential opportunities for improving

the welfare gain from Millet market related activities. In addition, analysis of millet value chain

will help policy makers in the identification of weak chains and entry points thereby guiding

production improvement initiatives and distribution decisions. Moreover, identification of

marketing channel information will offer policy direction aimed at linking the producers and the

final markets. Furthermore, willingness to pay (WTP) information will provide support to

marketing policy initiation, certification and labeling processes.

1.4 General Objective of the Study

The main aim of this research project is to survey the production and marketing of millet in

Funtua Local Government Area of Katsina State. The specific objectives are:

i. To determine the socio-economic characteristics of millet producers in the study area.

ii. To determine the profitability of millet production in the study area.

iii. To identify the problems of millet production in the study area.

iv. To evaluate the marketing channel efficiency of millet and the benefits accruing from

farm gate to final consumers.

v. To identify major marketing constraints affecting millet traders in Funtua Local

Government of Nigeria.

5
1.5 Scope and Limitations of the study

The study was limited to only millet production and marketing particularly among the farmers of

Funtua Local Government Area of Katsina State. Moreover, the use of snowball sampling might

have resulted in biased information as most interviewers were directed to similar actors. In

addition, snow ball sampling technique required longer completion time but due to the tight

schedule of most interviewees, brevity was maintained.

6
 CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

As far as millet production is concerned, works on this field in recent years become a matter of

concern. As such, a lot of researches which are directly or indirectly related to this research exist.

This chapter reviews the related academic works. In the course of the review, it will be indicated

how they are related and how they differed with this research.

2.2 Conceptual Framework

2.2.1 Millet Production in Africa

Millets are a diverse group of cereal crops that produce small seeds with good nutritional

properties compared with more conventional staple grains. Millets are a major food source for

resource-poor farmers in the semi-arid tropics, due to their ability to grow in poor soils with

limited inputs (Kothari et al., 2005). There are many different millet species grown on nearly 20

million hectares in Africa (FAOSTAT, 2015). Four of the most commonly grown millets are:

Pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum], Foxtail millet [Setaria italic P. Beauv.], Proso millet

(Panicum miliaceum) and Millet [Eleusine coracana Gaertn.].

The rest are referred to as minor millets and include Barnyard millet (Echinochloa spp.), Kodo

millet (Paspalum scrobiculatum), Little millet (Panicum sumatrense), Guinea millet (Paspalum

scrobiculatum) and Browntop millet (Urochloa ramose) (Amadou et al., 2013). Millet production

is distributed differentially among a large number of African countries; the largest being in West

Africa led by Nigeria (41%), Niger (16%), Burkina Faso (7%), Mali (6.4%) and Senegal (4.8%)

(Obilana et al., 2002).

7
Millet productivity in the last five decades showed consistent increases in China, 132%, India,

182%, Nigeria 80% and Uganda, 40%. However, in African countries including Kenya,

Namibia, Rwanda, Burundi, and Zaire, productivity declined substantially by up to 71% in the

last decade (Dwivedi et al., 2012). This decline, both in production and consumption could be

attributed to the negative attitude and stigmatization of millets including Millet which is often

referred to as a ‘lost’ ‘minor’ poor man crop or birdseed (United States National Research

Council, 1996). Therefore, there is need to change the negative perspective of Millet especially

in Africa where it has great potential as a food and nutrition security crop.

2.2.2 Millet Production and Utilization Potential in Africa

Millet is one of the most important millets worldwide. It was domesticated and is mostly

produced in the eastern African sub-humid uplands (Hilu et al., 1979; United States National

Research Council 1996). It belongs to the grass family Poaceae in the sub-family Chloridoidae. It

is an allotetraploid (2n=4x=36), genome constitution AABB. Cultivated Millet resulted from the

selection and domestication of a large-grained mutant of the wild E. coracana subsp. africana

(Hilu et al., 1979, Babu et al., 2007; Dida et al., 2008). The common name “Millet” is derived

from the shape of the inflorescence which consists of a number of spikelets which resemble the

shape of human fingers. The spikelets produce seeds which are globose and smooth and may be

coloured brown, black, and purple, orange or white (Duke, 1983). The high variability of the

inflorescence may be consequence of farmers’ selection preferences for crop characteristics (de

Wet, 1995). Subsequently, the races and sub races of Millet can be differentiated from one

another by inflorescence morphology (Prasada Rao et al., 1993).

8
Millet is ranked fourth in importance among millets in the world after sorghum (Sorghum

bicolor), pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) and foxtail millet (Setaria italica) and can be

cultivated under varied agro-climatic conditions (Upadhyaya et al., 2007; Dida et al., 2007). In

Africa, it is extensively cultivated in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Burundi,

Zambia and Malawi (Mnyenyembe and Gupta, 1998; Obilana et al., 2002).

Millet is widely cultivated in India and Nepal (Upadhyaya et al., 2007). It is estimated Millet

accounts for 11% of production of all millets worldwide (Bennetzen et al., 2003). Under

irrigated conditions, yields of up to 5–6 metric tons ha- 1 have been obtained (United States

National Research Council, 1996). Millet has wider adaptability (Upadhyaya et al., 2007), higher

nutritional quality (Gopalan et al., 2002), and higher multiplication rate as compared with other

species of millet. Millet can also be stored for a long time without insect damage (Adekunle,

2012). Hence it is important during periods of famine. These qualities make Millet an ideal crop

for use as a staple food and for famine reserve. However, even though traditional Millet varieties

are adapted to current environmental conditions, it is predicted that they will be less suitable to

the changing climate. Research results indicate that Millet is sensitive to high temperature stress

during reproductive stages, and there is genotypic variability among Millet genotypes for number

of seeds per panicle and grain yield under high temperature stress, therefore the challenge will be

to accelerate its adaptation to climate change (Vermeulen et al., 2012, Opole et al., 2018).

Additionally, the projected food demand for 2025 will require the yield of millets to rise from 2.5

to 4.5 t ha-1 (Borlaug, 2002). This increase will largely come from improved varieties modified

for resistance to abiotic and biotic stresses (Kothari et al., 2005). Millet is grown mainly by

subsistence farmers and serves as a food security crop because of its high nutritional value and

excellent storage qualities. Due to these desirable characteristics, it is now receiving increased

9
attention from food scientists, technologists, and nutritionists, especially as an ingredient with

the potential to prevent chronic disease (Kannan, 2010; Saleh, 2020). These health benefits are

attributed to its polyphenol content (Chethan and Malleshi, 2007) with antioxidant properties that

protect against degenerative diseases (Rhodes et al., 1997; Hooper and Cassidy, 2006). Every

100g of grain contains 72.6g of carbohydrates, 7.7g protein, 1.5g fat, and 3.6 g crude fiber. High

levels of calcium (350 mg), iron (3.9 mg) and amino acids thiamine 0.42 mg, riboflavin 0.19 mg,

and niacin 1.1mg have also been reported in Millet (Saleh, 2020).

Despite the desirable nutritional qualities of Millet, utilization of nutrients is limited by the

presence of phytates, phenols, tannins and enzyme inhibitors (Sripriya and Chandra, 1998).

These effects can be reduced through processing techniques that increase bioavailability of

minerals like calcium and iron. These techniques include grinding/milling, popping, roasting,

malting and fermentation (Singh and Raghuvanshi, 2012). Supplementary feeding programs in

Colombia, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal and Sri Lanka have effectively used nutrient-dense Millet

recipes with acceptance from participants (Singh and Raghuvanshi, 2012). Composite flours that

combine wheat, Millet and legume are a good option for providing a wider variety of nutrients

and consumers acceptable qualities (Lupien, 1990). One of the challenges to African scientists is

to enhance the productivity and utilization of Millet. In Eastern Africa, particularly in Kenya,

Uganda and Ethiopia, researchers are working to increase productivity, utilization and nutritional

enhancement of this highly nutritious food and nutrition security crop.

10
2.2.3 Millet seed production and dissemination

In most countries, production of improved crop varieties is regulated by governmental agencies.

However, this oversight typically does not apply to landraces or local varieties, which are

exchanged freely between neighboring farmers and sold in local markets. In Kenya, farmers can

acquire Millet seed from neighbors, local markets, agricultural input stores, and research

institutions including the Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Institute (KALRO) and

International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT, 2005). Millet is

self-pollinating, which limits chances of cross pollination (Dida et al., 2007). Therefore, on-farm

seed production is a viable option for increasing access to improved seed. Tamil Nadu

Agricultural University (TNAU) in India is implementing the seed village program to promote

quality seed production, a concept which could be adopted in Millet growing areas to facilitate

easy access to seed without compromising on quality. It is a program where trained groups of

farmers are involved in seed production to cater for their own needs, and those of other farmers

within the same or neighboring villages. The objective is to increase seed production to meet

local demand at the appropriate time of year and at a reasonable cost. In areas with marginal

rainfall, adoption of seed quality enhancement techniques such as on-farm seed priming for

direct sown Millet has the potential of reducing time to flowering and maturity by 6 days

resulting in significant yield increases and improved food security (Kumar et al., 2002).

2.2.4 Millet Crop Management

Millet provides farmers with a reliable access to food and nutrition in environments with erratic

and scanty rainfall, and low soil fertility levels. This is attributed to its wide genetic adaptation

and ability to grow successfully in diverse soils, varying rainfall regimes, diverse photoperiods,

11
in marginal, arid and mountainous terrains where major cereals have low success (Padulosi et al.,

2009). Additionally, it is often the grain left in storage after the major cereal grains have been

destroyed by storage pests. Indeed, studies have determined that Millet stores for 10 years or

more without damage by storage pests (United States National Research Council, 1996;

Adekunle, 2012), a major limiting factor for food security in Africa. Despite these desirable

qualities, Millet yields in Africa have steadily declined in countries such as Uganda, Ethiopia and

Kenya (Kidoido et al., 2002; FAO, 2006; Dida et al., 2008; Oduori, 2008). Millet production

constraints in Eastern Africa include low soil fertility, environmental and nutrient stresses, pests

and diseases, including blast disease (Magnaporthe grisea), and Striga weed (Striga hermonthica

(Del.) Benth) (Dida, 2008; Oduori, 2007), among other constraints. Adoption of improved

varieties and management practices such as use of fertilizers could 11 improve Millet yields

(Oduori, 2008). Application of NPK along with micronutrients and FYM at the rate of 7.5 – 12.5

tha-1 increases yields of Millet (Rohrbach 2004). Millet is also known to benefit from residual

fertility from the previous crop. Therefore, recommendations should consider crop management

systems that include rotations with high residue producing crops. Maintenance of surface residue

cover combined with reduced tillage results in greater soil organic carbon and nitrogen, and has

the potential of improving soil productivity (Mahli and Lemke, 2007).

Other soil fertility replenishment approaches have been developed based on naturally available

resources and cropping systems. Babu et al., (2007) recommended direct application of

indigenous rock phosphates which are potentially important locally available phosphorus (P)

sources for resource-poor farmers in extremely P deficient soils in Africa, Asia and Latin

America. Studies have also shown that incorporation of green manure including Lithonia divers

folia could increase the availability of N, P and K (Partey et al., 2011). Tens thousands of

12
farmers in East and Southern Africa who have adopted these technologies have become food

secure (Henna, 2002).

Intercropping Millet with leguminous crop species such as Desmodium (Desmodium intortum) is

also a strategy which is effective for the control of pest and increasing soil fertility thereby

contributing to higher yields and economic returns (Midega et al., 2010). The effect of

intercropping on soil fertility varies with management practice. Chu et al., (2007) determined

that N transferred from peanut (Arachis hypogea) in an intercropping system made a contribution

to the N utilization of rice (Oryza sativa), especially in low N soils. It is estimated that legumes

roots contribute between 5-15 kg N ha-1 to soil N under intercropping (Nnadi and Haque, 1988).

Benefit-cost ratios indicated that legume-millet rotations were profitable in eastern Uganda

(Ebanyat et al., 2010). Research is on-going in Kenya to determine the agronomic and economic

benefits of Millet-legume intercropping in farmers’ fields. The activity is funded by the

Collaborative Crops Research Program of the McKnight Foundation. Results of these studies

will enable farmers to make informed choices on their production strategies for improved soil

fertility, increased yields, improved nutrition and health of the farm families and increased

income generation from sale of the companion crops.

2.2.5 Millet Processing and Utilization

Nutrition plays an important role in the national development of any country therefore;

nutritional quality of food crops needs to be considered in addressing the problem of food

insecurity and malnutrition. Millets are nutritionally superior to most cereal crops grown and

utilized in Africa and provide much needed diet diversity (Kannan, 2010). Millet is well

recognized for its anti-diabetic, anti-tumorigenic, and anti-atherosclerosis effects, as well as anti-

13
oxidant and anti-microbial properties (Devi et al., 2014). Due to the growing public awareness of

potential health benefits of phytochemicals, polyphenols and dietary fiber, there is increased

need to identify new food sources with desirable functional characteristics to meet growing

demand. Millet is one of the crops that can fulfill these requirements (Devi et al., 2014) and

efforts should be made to increase awareness of the nutritive value, health benefits and variety of

food products that Millet can provide (Singh and Raghuvanshi, 2012).

Millet products are often made using composite flours, and have been well accepted in

Colombia, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Sudan. They are nutritionally properties of

traditional cereal fermented products including Millet could also be enhanced by increasing their

nutrient and energy density. In India, East and West Africa, products made from fermented

Millet are popular across different demographics (Nout, 2009; Mugocha et al., 2000).

Fermentation increases the rate of availability of iron, manganese and calcium in Millet products

(Makokha et al., 2002) while mineral fortification combined with dephytinization increases the

mineral status of the product (Nout, 2009).

Although maximum utilization of the nutrient potential of the Millet is limited by the presence of

phytates, phenols, tannins and enzyme inhibitors (Shobana et al., 2013), these effects can be

reduced by using processing techniques like popping, roasting, malting and fermentation

(Mugocha et al., 2000; Nout, 2009). The use of these techniques not only decreases the content

of phytates but increases the content of compounds that improve bioavailability of certain

minerals like calcium and iron which is significant especially among mothers and young children

(Hotz and Gibson, 2007). Processing techniques such as fermentation are also known to increase

the content of major organic acids including lactic and acetic acids (Sripriya and Chandra, 1996).

Composite flours made from Millet can be used for preparation of various nutrient dense recipes

14
which would effectively be used in supplementary feeding programs (Singh and Raghuvanshi,

2012).

2.2.6 Millet Commercialization and Marketing Strategies

Increasing millet productivity and value-added product development will depend on increased

consumption of millet-based products through commercialization and marketing. Therefore,

there is need to improve processing technologies including compositing, fermentation, malting

and steaming to enhance the quality of the end-products. Diversification of end-use products

would also enhance commercialization of Millet. Its excellent malting quality makes it suitable

as a raw material for the brewing industry and local production and processing would save on

foreign exchange currently required to import malting products (Taylor et al., 2006). Better

presentation and packaging of ready-to-use Millet products such as noodles and cookies will

increase appeal to urban consumers. Indeed, marketing and presentation of Millet as a healthy

product with superior nutrient quality will increase its utilization among men, women and youth

who are increasingly conscious about their health and dietary well-being (Shobana et al., 2013).

Several studies have highlighted the contribution of neglected and underutilized crop species

such as Millet towards generating income in both domestic and international markets (Chadha

and Oluoch, 2007). In India, adding value to millet nearly tripled farmer incomes and generated

new employment opportunities, particularly for women (Vijayalakshmi et al., 2010). There is

increased interest internationally in new foods and products with the potential to contribute to

health and nutrition. This is an opportunity to develop markets for non-staple crops from which

poor communities would benefit. Promoting niche markets through denomination of origin

(DO), eco-labelling, fair trade, organic, and Slow Food Initiatives (Kahane et al., 2013) may be

particularly useful to increasing the attractiveness of Millet products.

15
2.3 Empirical Studies

A number of empirical studies related to this research work were reviewed, with a view to make

it clear as to the gap existing in literature for this study to fill. They include: Ahmed & Cho

(2019) carried out a study titled “an economic analysis of smallholder Millet production in

selected African countries”. The researcher drawn objectives to deals with the economics of

smallholder Millet production in sub-Saharan Africa. It considers agricultural technology

adoption, productivity, and food quality and safety. The study was a survey and questionnaires

were used for data collection. Data collected were analyzed using t-test. The study shows the

important of Millet production in sub-Saharan African countries. He concluded that Millet would

normally perform better in the region with more farming improvising and practice. The previous

study is relevant to the present research as it was carried out on an economic analysis of

smallholder Millet production in selected African countries. Also, the study uses questionnaire

which this study will also use.

Prasad, (2015) carried out a study titled: Growth and production of Millets. The main thrust of

this study among others was to determine the production and growth of Millet. Four research

questions and four null hypotheses were formulated in line with the research objectives. A

researcher made test was used for data collection and data collected was statistically analyzed

using t-test. The relevance of this study to the present research is that, the study was carried out

to determine the growth and production of Millet while this study will try to survey on Millet

production and Marketing in Funtua Local Government Area of Katsina State.

Happy (2018), conducted a research titled: millet production constraints, farming systems, and

farmer-preferred traits in Nigeria. The study was carried out with four research objectives, four

16
research questions and four null hypotheses were formulated for the study. Data was collected

with the use of questionnaire, while data collected were analyzed using ANOVA and Correlation

statistics. Result from the study revealed some major important points on Millet production

constraints, farming systems and farmer-preferred traits in Nigeria.

17
 CHAPTER THREE

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter describes the procedure adopted in the study. It is organized under the following

headlines; introduction, research design, study area, population of the study area, sample and

sampling techniques, instrumentation, procedure for data collection and procedure for data

analysis.

3.2 Background of the Study Area

The study was conducted in Funtua Local Governments. Katsina State is located in the North

Western Zone of Nigeria. Its headquarters are in the town of Funtua, near the A9 highway

(Muhammad, 2018). It has an area of 452 km² and a population of 153,744 at the 2006 census.

The state lies on the latitude 12 o 59’N and longitude 7o 36’E. It has a total land area of about

23,920 km2, with an estimated human population of 5.2 million of which majority live in the

rural areas (NPC 2006). The state extends to two major savanna vegetation zones; Sudan

savanna zone in the north and Guinea savanna in the southern zone. The main languages spoken

are Hausa and Fulfulde. Islam is the main religion, with a handful of Christians. The main

occupation is farming. Industrially, Katsina State is making progress with its oil mill and steel

rolling mill. The main occupation is farming. The state is very rich in art and culture, and it is

linked by road rail systems to other parts of the Federation.

18
3.3 Sampling Technique and Sampling Size

A multistage sampling approach was utilized for this study. The first stage involves the

purposive selection of Funtua LGA due to the bulk of millet farmers therein. The second stage

involves the random selection of 50 millet farmers across 5 villages in Funtua LGA, making a

total of 50 respondents for the study. In line with the assertion of Muhammad (2019), that simple

random sampling enables every individual element in the population, the chances of being

selected.

3.4 Method of Data Collection

Data for the study was retrieved through the use of structured questionnaire administered in the

study sites. The farmers were asked questions on the size of their farms, farm resources, output,

and quantity of millet consumed, socio-economic characteristics and other production constraints

among others. The secondary data were obtained from journals, textbooks, projects thesis and

other documented information.

3.5 Method of Data Analysis

Simple descriptive statistic was used for data analysis.

19
 CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Gender

Table 4.1 Gender Distribution of the Respondents

Gender Frequency Percentage

Male 35 70%

Female 15 30%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

The table 4.1 shows 70% of the farmers are male and only 30% are female. With the high

percentage of the male over female, this shows that agriculture as the key to Nigeria can easily

be achieved because male has ability to spend more time on the farm than female.

4.2 Age

Table 4.2 Age range of the respondents

Age range number of respondent percentage

20-30 16 32%

31-40 17 34%

41-60 11 22%

60 above 6 12%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

The table 4.2 shows that 34% of the respondents are 31-40 and 60 above are 12%. There is a lot

of potential in terms of man power needed to boost millet production.

20
4.3 Educational Background

Table 4.3 Distribution of Millet Farmers According to Education Background

Educational Background Number of farmers Percentage

Adult Education 17 32%

Primary Education 11 22%

Qur’anic education 3 6%

Tertiary Education 16 32%

None of the above 3 6%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

The table 4.3 shows that 34% of millet farmers attended adult education. Therefore they provide

a very good ground in term of acceptance innovation.

4.4 Land Acquisition

Table 4.4 Distribution of millet production according to land acquisition

Mode Frequency Percentage

Gift 10 20%

Inheritance 10 20%

Purchase 20 40%

Rent 10 20%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

The table 4.4 shows that 40% of the farmers acquired their land by purchasing it. This indicates

the millet production have been developing since many purchase their land.

21
4.5 Income

Table 4.5 Distribution of Respondents Based on income level of farmers

Income level Frequency Percentage

1000-10,000 6 12%

10,001-50,000 18 36%

50,001-100,000 20 40%

100,001-above 6 12%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

It observed in table 4.5 that 40% of the respondent income is 1000-50,000. This shows that the

respondents have the ability to increase the farms size according to the research. It also shows

that the income of farmers influence has ability to accept and adopt new farm practice

particularly through extra lost.

4.6 Years of Experience

Table 4.6 Distribution of the millet farmers according to years of experienced

Years Frequency Percentage

1-5 years 15 30%

6-10 years 5 10%

11-20 years 20 40%

20 above 10 20%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

22
The table 4.6 shows that 40% of farmers have been in production between 11-20 years. This is a

relatively long period for them to have experience all it taken to improved millet production.

4.7 Farm Size

Table 4.7 Distribution of the Respondents according to their farm size

Size (Hectares) Frequency Percentage

1-5 hectares 7 14%

6-10 hectares 13 26%

11-15 hectares 20 40%

16 above 10 20%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

The table 4.7 shows that 40% of the farmers have 11-15 hectares of land and 16 above are 20%.

This refers to the availability of land in the study area.

4.8 Fertilizer Usage

Table 4.8 Fertilizers Usage

Fertilizer Frequency Percentage

Organic fertilizer 2 4%

In organic 8 16%

Both 40 80%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

23
The table 4.8 shows that 80% of the farmers used both organic and in-organic fertilizer. These

refers to the agricultural developments in our society can be high speedy grown due to high

percentage of usage both organic and in-organic fertilizer.

4.9 Source of Seed

Table 4.9 Distribution of the Respondents according to seed Source

Seed Source Frequency Percentage

Market 20 40%

Store 15 30%

Both 15 30%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

The table 4.9 shows that 40% of farmers purchase seed from market which indicates that farmers

most often do not get seeds at subsidize cost which in the end added up to total cost of

production. This refers to the way by which farmers get their seed for millet production.

4.10 Marketing Channels

Table 4.10 Marketing Channels

Channels Number of Sellers Percentage

Producers 20 40%

Whole sellers 10 20%

Retailers 8 16%

Consumers 12 24%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

24
The table 4.10 shows that 40% of the farming production is used by the producers. This consists

of the people organization and activities necessary to transfer the ownership of goods from the

point of production to the point of consumption.

4.11 Source of Fertilizer

Table 4.11 Source of Fertilizer

Fertilizer Sources Number of Respondents Percentage

Producing Company 20 40%

Open market 25 50%

All of the above 5 10%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

The table 4.11 shows that 50% of the farmers get their fertilizer source from open market. This
shows that governmental industries agencies are highly need to help the farmer’s to purchase
good fertilizer.
4.12 Mode of transportation

Table 4.12 Mode of transportation

Mode Frequency Percentage

Animal 10 20%

Car 15 30%

Train 5 10%

Motor cycle 10 20%

Bicycle 10 20%

Total 50 100%

Source: questionnaire 2022

25
The table 4.12 shows that 30% of farmers used car for transporting. This shows that the farmers

need good road through the entire village and low price of petroleum so that farmers will their

products in low transportation price.

CHAPTER FIVE
26
5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Summary

Millets are highly variable grasses believed to have originated from West African wild grasses

over 40,000 years ago. The main aim of this research project is to survey the production and

marketing of millet in Funtua Local Government Area of Katsina State. Millet is one of the most

important millets worldwide. It was domesticated and is mostly produced in the eastern African

sub-humid uplands. The study was conducted in Funtua Local Governments. Katsina State is

located in the North Western Zone of Nigeria. Its headquarters are in the town of Funtua, near

the A9. A multistage sampling approach was utilized for this study. This study revealed that

there is low level efficiency in the millet grain marketing system; the millet grain market is also

concentrated. There is need for efficient linkages of all classes of millet market traders. Such

policies might include formation of micro selling schemes, use of contract agreements and

setting up of online marketing system to sensitize processors on the annual domestic production

levels and supply sources.

5.2 Conclusion

This study analyzed the economics of millet marketing at yan buhuna market in jibiri Funtua

Local Government Area of Katsina State, Nigeria. This study revealed that there is low level

efficiency in the millet grain marketing system; the millet grain market is also concentrated; the

socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents had significant effects on marketing margin

(profit); and several factors have been identified as constraints in millet grain marketing. It has

been revealed from the study that marketing costs were relatively high, and there is a great need

to reduce these costs.

5.2 Recommendations

27
Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are made for policy actions

to improve profitability and reduce marketing costs in millet grain marketing;

i. The study recommends formation of group cooperative to forestall the high cost of

transportation and storage to enhance profit margin among millet suppliers.

ii. There is need for efficient linkages of all classes of millet market traders. Such policies might

include formation of micro selling schemes, use of contract agreements and setting up of online

marketing system to sensitize processors on the annual domestic production levels and supply

sources.

iii. Encouraging the adoption of millet processing technology at all levels.

iv.Improvement of agriculture financial support.

28
REFERENCE

Adekunle A. A. (2012) Agricultural innovation in sub-Saharan Africa: experiences from

multiple-stakeholder approaches. Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa, Ghana.
ISBN 978-9988-8373-2-4.

Ahmed, S., & Cho, J. (2019). The Roles of Different News Media Use and Press Freedom in
Education Generated Participation Inequality: An Eight Country Comparative Analysis,
Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 63, 566-586.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2019.1653100.

Amadou I., Gounga M.E., Le G-W (2013) Millets: Nutritional composition, some health benefits
and processing – A Review. Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture 25:501- 508.

Babu B.K., N. Senthil S.M. Gomez, K.R. Biji, N.S. Rajendraprasad, S.S. Kumar and R.
Chandrababu (2007) Assessment of genetic diversity among Millet (Eleusine coracana
(L.) Gaertn.) accessions using molecular markers. Gen. Res. Crop Evol. 54:299-404.

Basavaraj, G. porthasaratly, raop. Bhagavatula s. Ahmad w. (2010) Availability and utilization

of pearl millet in india. Journal of SAT Agricultural Research 8.

Bennetzen J.L., Dida M.M., Wanyera N.W.M. and Devos K.M. (2003) Characterization of
genetic diversity in Millet (Eleusine coracana). [Online] www.cerealsgenomics Accessed
August 15 2016.

Borlaug N.E. (2002) Feeding a world of 10 billion people: The miracle ahead. In Vitro Cell Dev
Biol: Plant 38: 221–228.

Chadha M.L. and M.O. Oluoch (2007) Healthy diet gardening kit for better health and income.
Acta Horticulturae 752:581-583.

Chethan S. and N.C. Malleshi (2007) Millet polyphenols: optimization of extraction and the
effect of pH on their stability. Food Chemistry 105:862 – 70.

Chendra, Shikuma and Augam B.E . (1998). Wind Erosion in the Southern Sahelian Zone and
Induced constraints of pearl Millet production.

De Wet J.M.J. (1995) Millet, Eleusine coracana. In: Smartt J, Simmonds NW (eds) Evolution of
Crop Plants. Longman, Singapore, pp137-140.

29
Devi P.B., R. Vijayabharathi, S. Sathyabama, N.G. Malleshi, V. B. Priyadarisini (2014) Health
benefits of Millet (Eleusine coracana L.) polyphenols and dietary fiber: a review. Journal
of Food Science and Technology 51:1021 – 1040.

Dida M.M., Srinivasachary, S. Ramakrishnan, J.L. Bennetzen, M.D. Gale and K. Devos (2008)
Population structure and diversity in Millet (Eleusine coracana) germplasm. Tropical
Plant Biol. 1:131-141.

Dida MM, Srinivasachary, Ramakrishnan S, Bennetzen JL, Gale MD, Devos KM (2007) The
genetic map of Wnger millet, Eleusine coracana. Theor Appl Genet 114:321–332.

Duke J. (1983) Handbook of energy crops. Unpublished. Purdue University.

Dwivedi SL, Upadhyaya HD, Senthilel S, Hash CT, Fukunaga K, Diao X, Santra D,
Baltensperge D and Prasad M. (2012) Millets: Genetic and Genomic Resources. In: Plant
Breeding Reviews. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, New Jersey, pp. 247-375. ISBN
9781118100509.

Ebanyat P., N. de Ridder and A. de Jager (2010) Impacts of heterogeneity in soil fertility on
legume-Millet productivity, farmers’ targeting and economic benefits. Nutrient Cycling
in Agroecosystems 87:209-231.

FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization) (1996). The world Sorghum and Millet Economics
facts. Trends and outlook. FAO Decument Responsibility W1808\E.

(FAOSTAT, 2015)Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2015) FAOSTAT Statistical

Database of the United Nation Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Statistical
Division. Rome. Available at: http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx. Accessed Jan
2016.

Food and Agriculture Organization. (2006) Available online: www.fao.org/3/a0800e.pdf

Accessed July 2012.

Gopalan C., B.V. Rama Sastri and S.C. Balasubramanian (2002) Nutritive Value of Indian
Foods. National Institute of Nutrition, Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR),
Hyderabad 156p.

Gulia, S.K, Wilson, J.P., Carter, J. and Singh, B.P. (2007). Progress in grain pearl millet research
and market development. Retrieved on 14th April 2012, from
www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/ncnu07/pdfs/gulia196-203.pdf

30
GoK, (Governmental of Kenya (2012). Economic review of Agriculture. Central Planning and
Minting Unit. Government printer, Nairobi print.

GoK, (Governmental of Kenya (2007). Mbere District Development Plan, 2002-2007.

Government printer, Nairobi print.

Gupta, S. K., Sharma, R., Rai, K. N., and Thakur, R. P. (2012b). Inheritance of foliar blast
resistance in pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum). Plant Breed. 131, 217–219. doi:
10.1111/j.1439-0523.2011.01929.x.

Henna, A. (2002) proceeding international workshop in ICRSAT india availability of millet

varieties.

Hilu KW, De wet JMJ, Harlan JR (1979) Archacobotanical studies of Eleusine coracana ssp.
Coracana (finger Millet). Amer J bot 66(3): 330-333.

Hooper L. and A. Cassidy 2006. A review of health care potential of bioactive compounds. J.
Sci. Food Agric. 86:1805-1813.

Hotz C. and R.S. Gibson (2007) Traditional food processing and preparation practice to enhance
the bio-availability of micronutrient in plant-based diet. J. Nutr. 134(4): 77-100.

H Y Chu, T Fujii, S Morimoto, X G Lin, K Yagi, J L Hu, J B Zhang (2007).Community structure

of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria under long-term application of mineral fertilizer and
organic manure in a sandy loam soil Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 73 pp.
485-491.

ICRISAT (2005): International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics.
[http://dspace.icrisat.ac.in/dspace/ _12/12_2002.pdf] site visited on 6/8/2010.

ICRISTAT (2007) Improved cultivation practices for Groundnut Technical Report. International
Crops Research Institute for the semi-Arid Tropics.

IFAD (2018) farmers participatory on Contributing of Working Group on Sorghum and Millet.

Kahane R., T. Hodgkin, H. Jaenicke, C. Hoogendoorn 2013. Agrobiodiversity for food security,
health and income. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 33(4) 671-693.

Kannan S. (2010) Millet in nutrition transition: an infant weaning food ingredient with chronic
disease preventive potential. British Journal of Nutrition 104:1733 – 1734.

31
Karanja J, Ngulu SN, Mwangi G. (2011). The reaction of millet. Parasitism as influenced by
nitrogen and Phosphorus fertilization. KASAL end of program Conference and
exhibition, August, 2011. http://www.kari.org/kasal.

Kari, (Kenya Agricultural Research Institute). (2007). Annual report 2006. Kari headquarters,
Nairobi.

Kari, (Kenya Agricultural Research Institute). (2008). Annual report 2007. Kari headquarters,
Nairobi.

Kidoido M.M., V. Kasenge, S. Mbowa, J.S. Tenywa, P. Nyende (2002) Socioeconomic factors
associated with Millet production in eastern Uganda. African Crop Science Journal
10:111-120.

Kothari A., S.L. Kothari, R.K Satish Kumar, A. Vishnoi, K. Kothari, N. Watanabe (2005)
Applications of biotechnology for improvement of millet crops: Review of progress and
future prospects. Plant Biotechnology 22:81–88.

Kumar A., J.S. Gangwar, S.C. Prasad and D. Harris (2002) On-farm seed priming increase yield
increases in direct-sown Millet in India. International Sorghum and Millets Newsletter
43:89-90.

Leder, I. (2004) Cultivated Plants, primarily as food source – Sorghum and Millet. Encyclopedia
of life support system (EOLSS) Retrived on 17 th February 2011. From
http//www.eolss.net/books/Sample%20Chapters/C10/E5-02-01.04.pdf.

Lupen J.R (1990) sorghum and millet in human nutrition. FAO ICRST.

Mahli S.S., and R. Lemke (2007) Tillage, crop residue and N fertilizer effects on crop yield,
nutrient uptake, soil quality and nitrous oxide gas emissions in a second 4-year rotation
cycle. Soil Till. Res. 96:269-283.

Makokha, M., Hare, M., Li, M., Hays, T., Barbar, E. (2002). Interactions of cytoplasmic dynein
light chains Tctex-1 and LC8 with the intermediate chain IC74.

Midega C.A.O, Khan ZR, Amudavi DM, Pittchar J, Pickett JA. Integrated management of
Striga hermonthica and cereal stemborers in finger millet (Eleusine coracana (L.)
Gaertn.), through intercropping with Desmodium intortum, International Journal of Pest
Management, 2010, vol. 56 (pg. 145-151)

32
Mnyenyembe P.H., and S.C. Gupta (1998) Variability for grain yield and related traits in Millet
germplasm accessions from Malawi. African Crop Science Journal 6:317-322.

MoA, (Ministry of Agriculture). (2008). Annual report. Ministry of Agriculture Headquarters,

Nairobi.

Mugocha P.T., J.R.N. Taylor and B. H. Bester (2000) Fermentation of a composite Millet-daily
beverage. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 16:341 – 344.

Muhammad S, (2018). Millet Characteristics in futehmiran Northeastern yobe state Nigeria.

Dutse, Journal of pure and agricultural science.

Nagarajan, L. Smale, M. and Glewwe P. (2007). Determinants of Millet Diversity at the

household-farm and village community levels in the dry lands of india: the role of local
seed systems. A journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 36: pp. 157-167.

National Research Council (1996). List crops Africa vol 1. Grain national academy press
Washington.

National Population Commission (NPC) (2006) Nigerian Population Census Report. National
Population Commission, Abuja, 21-27.

Nnadi LA, Haque I (1988). Agronomic effectiveness of rock phosphate in an Andept of Ethiopia.
Comm. Soil Sci. and Plant Anal. 19: 79 – 90.

Norman M.T.S (2013) berson and Scale. Ecology of Trophical Crops Cambridge University
Press.

Nout M.J.R. (2009) Rich nutrition from the poorest – Cereal fermentation in Africa and Asia.
Food Microbiology 7: 685 -692.

Obilana AB., E.O. Manyasa, J.G kibuka, and S. Ajanga (2002) Finger Millet Blast Sample
Collection in Kenya: Passport Data, Analyses of Disease Incidence and Report of
Activities. NARO, Uganda-ICRISAT – HR, UK-KARI, Kakamega, ICRISAT- Nairobi.
12pp.

Oduri C.A.O (2008) opportunities and Constraints for farmers for farmers of west africa to use
seasonal precipitation forecast with Burkina faso.

Oduori C.O.A. (2007) In: Mgonja MA, Lenné JM, Manyasa E and Sreenivasaprasad S. (eds.).
2007. Finger Millet Blast Management in East Africa. Creating opportunities for
33
 improving production and utilization of finger millet. Proceedings of the First
International Finger Millet Stakeholder Workshop, Projects R8030 and R8445 UK
Department for International Development – Crop Protection Programme held 13-14
September 2005 at Nairobi. Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: International
Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics. 196 pp. ISBN: 978-92-9066-505-2.

Oduori, C. O. A., & Kanyenji, B. (2007). Finger millet in Kenya: Importance, Advances in R &
D, Challenges and opportunities for improved production and profitability. Facilitating
the promotion of improved and blast resistant finger millet varieties to enhance
production. In M. A. Mgonja, J. M. Lenne, E. Manyasa & S. Sreenivasaprasad (Eds.),
Proceedings of the first international finger millet stake-holders workshop, projects
R8030 & 8445, UK Department for international development – crop protection
programme held on 13th -14th September 2005 at Nairobi (pp. 10-22).

Opole R.A., P.V.V. Prasad, M. Djanaguiraman, K. Vimala, M.B. Kirkham and H.D. Upadhyaya.
(2018) Thresholds, sensitive stages and genetic variability of finger millet to high
temperature stress. J. Agro Crop Sci 204 (5):477:16p.

Padulosi S, Bhag Mal, Bala Ravi S et al. (2009) Food secu-rity and climate change: role of plant
genetic resourcesof minor millets. Indian Journal of Plant Genetic Re-sources22(1): 1–16

Parthasarathy R.B.S & Ready, Belum (2006) diagnose of Sorghum and Pearl millet.

Partey ST, Quashie-Sam SJ, Thevathasan NV, Gordon AM. 2011. Decomposition and nutrient
release patterns of the leaf biomass of the wild sunflower (Tithonia diversifolia): a
comparative study with four leguminous agroforestry species. Agroforest Syst. 81:123–
134. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]

Prasad, C. S. ; Sampath, K. T. ; Shivakumar, N. ; Rao, A. S., 1993. Effect of feeding different

levels of protein supplements to untreated and urea-treated finger millet straw (Eleucine
coracana) on nutrient utilization in calves. Indian J. Dairy Biosci., 4: 1-5.

Prasad, V.L. (2015) Barriers to ICT Use Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in
Secondary Schools: Teachers’ Perspective. Journal of Management Research, 7, 190-208.
https://doi.org/10.5296/jmr.v7i2.6935.

Rhodes, M.J.C. Price, K.R Plumb, G.W. and G. Williamson. (1997). “Antioxidant Properties of
the Major Polyphenolic Compounds in Broccoli” Free Redical Research, Vol. 27, No. 4,
pp . 429-435.

34
Rohrbach, D.D. (2004): Improving the commercial viability of sorghum and pearl millet in
Africa. ICRISAT series report, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. Retrieved on 20th January 2012,
from www.afripro.org.uk/papers/paper22rohrbach.pdf.
Saleh M.M. (2020). Stress breeding of neglected tetraploid primitive wheat (Triticum dicoccum,
Triticum carthlicum and Triticum polonicum). Current Botany 11: 99-110.

Singh, P. and Raghuvanshi, R.S. (2012) Finger Millet for Food and Nutritional Security. African
Journal of Food Science, 6, 77-84.
https://doi.org/10.5897/AJFSX10.010.

Shobana, S., Krishnaswamy, K., Sudha, V., Malleshi, N. G., Anjana, R. M., Palaniappan, L.,
(2013). Finger millet (Ragi, Eleusine coracana L.): a review of its nutritional properties,
processing, and plausible health benefits. Adv. Food Nutr. Res. 69, 1–39. doi:
10.1016/B978-0-12-410540-9.00001-6.

Srinivasachary, Dida MM, Gale MD, Devos KM. Comparative analyses reveal high levels of
conserved colinearity between the finger millet and rice genomes. Theor Appl Genet 115:
489-499.

Taylor J.R.N., T.J. Schober and S.R. Bean (2006) Novel food and non-food uses for sorghum
and millets. Journal of Cereal Science 44:252 – 271.

United State Research Council New Sorghum, Millet and other grains development (1996)

United State Agency for International development (2010). Staple food value chain analysis
canly repeat Kenya. Retrieved on 24 june (2011).

Upadhyaya, H. D. ; Gowda, C. L. L. ; Gopal Reddy, V., 2007. Morphological diversity in finger

millet germplasm introduced from Southern and Eastern Africa. SAT e-Journal, J. SAT Agric.
Res., 3 (1).

Vermeulen, S.J., Campbell, B.M., & Ingram, J.S.I. (2012, Nov.). “Climate change and
food systems”.Annual Review of Environment and Resources, (37) 195-222.

Vijayalakshmi, G (2010). Finger millet (Eleusine coracana) - An economically viable source for
antihypercholesterolemic metabolites production by Monascus purpureus. Journal of food
science and technology. VL - 47 0.1007/s13197-010-0070-9.

35