USE OF AGROBIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION MEASURES

BY ARABLE CROP FARMERS IN OBOT AKARA LOCAL

GOVERNMENT AREA, AKWA IBOM STATE, NIGERIA

BY

SOLOMON, SILAS CHRISTOPHER

14/011145034

SUBMITTED TO

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND

RURAL SOCIOLOGY
FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE
RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
UNIVERSITY OF CALABAR
CALABAR

FEBRUARY, 2020

1
 CERTIFICATION

I certify that this project work titled“Analysis of Arable Crop Farmers’

Use of Agrobiodiversity Conservation Measures in ObotAkara L.G.A.

Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria was carried out by Solomon, Silas Christopher

with Matric no: 14/011145034 of the department of Agricultural Extension

and Rural Sociology, University of Calabar, Calabar, Cross River State,

under my supervision.

Dr. Hilda Eta

Signature: ____________

(Project Supervisor) Date:

________________

2
 DEDICATION

This seminar is dedicated to God Almighty for His reckless love, support,

grace, and dive provision doing this research and my academic pursuit.

3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly, I am most grateful to the almighty God for his sense of

direction, protection and provision. My profound gratitude goes to my

astute and amiable supervisor Dr. Hilda Eta who has taught me the

rudiments of research and meticulously tackled the snags in this research

work throughout its various stages of progression.

Also acknowledge are all the lecturers in the department of

Agricultural Extension and Rural Sociology whose Excellency in teaching

has led me thus far.

Moreover, I wish to acknowledge my beautiful mother Mrs. Eno Solomon

who stood by me financially and spiritually throughout the completion of

this work.

Also to my siblings Dr. Kingsley, Godwin, Victor and my Twin

Paul Solomon for their offer of assistance throughout the completion of

this work. My inspirational cousins Bliss, Moses, Confidence, Miracle and

other family members.

Furthermore, I wish to appreciate my contemporary scholars who

consciously and unconsciously added aesthetics to my stay in school and

toward the developmental project of this work. Clementina, Hibah,

Godswill, Archibong, Theremajesty, Jonah, Chief. Enang and Nkoyo etc.

4
 Finally, I remain grateful to my friends Joel, Love, Hope, Jeremiah

and to everybody who contributed meaningfully in one way or the other

towards the completion of this work.

ABSTRACT

The study examined the utilization of agrobiodiversity conservation

measures by arable study crop farmers in ObotAkara Local Government
Area, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. The specific objectives were to: identify
the various agrobiodiversity conservation measures practiced by
farmers,ascertain the factors influencing the use of agrobiodiversity
conservation measures identified, ascertain the level of utilization of
agrobiodiversity conservation measures by arable crop farmers and assess
the perceived effects of the adoption of agrobiodiversity conservation
measures on arable crop production. A total of 120 respondents were
selected for the study using multistage sampling procedure. Data obtained
were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Result from the study showed
that majority (54 2%) of the respondents were female, 62.5% aged
between 30-59 years, married (55.0%) and were mostly literates. Most
(62.5%) of the respondent had farm size ranging from 0.1-10ha, cultivating
mostly Cassava, yam and maize. The study revealed that the
agrobiodiversity conservation measures practiced were mostly mixed
cropping (=98.3), cover cropping(=98.3), collection and preservation
of seeds (=98.3), and inter cropping( (=97.5). Result on the level of
utilization of agrobiodiversity conservation measures revealed that mixed
cropping (=2.81), cover cropping (=2.63) and inter cropping
(=2.62), were significant employed by arable crop farmers. The result
revealed further that land tenure system(=3.38), religious and
superstitious beliefs (=3.30) and lack of finance (=3.28) had
significant influence on farmers’ use of agrobiodiversity conservation
measures. The findings of the study showed that the perceived effects of
agrobiodiversity conservation measures on arable crop production are:
conservation and restoration of indigenous species (=4.40), improved
nutrition (=4 .38), and the enhancement of soil fertility and nutrient
(=4.16). The study recommended that Governments and NGOs need to

5
allocate a substantial percentage of ecological fund for agrobiodiversity
conservation programmes and project to rural farmers.

6
 TABLE OF CONTENTTitle PAGE
i

CERTIFICATION ii

DEDICATION iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv

ABSTRACT v

TABLE OF CONTENT

LIST OF TABLE

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study 1

1.2 Statement of problem 3
1.3 Objectives of the study 4
1.4 Significant of the study 5
1.5 Scope of the study 6
1.6 Definition of terms 6

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Relationship between agriculture and biodiversity 7

2.2 Agrocbiodiversity conservation measures 8

2.3 Factors influencing arable crop farmers use of

13

agrobiodiversity conversation practices

2.3.1 Socio-economic factors 13

7
2.3.2 Internal factors 14

2.3.3 Social factors 14

2.4 Level of utilization of agrobiodiversity conservation 18

measures by arable crop farmers

2.5 Perceived effects of adoption of agrobiodiversity 20

conservation measures on arable crop production

CHAPTER THREE: RESSEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 The study area 24

3.2 Population of study 25

3.3 Sampling procedure and sampling size 25

3.4 Method of data collection 26

3.5 Measurement of variables 27

3.6 Data analysis techniques 31

REFERENCES

8
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

Agriculture remains an important source of livelihood for most

developing countries. It has been a main stay of the Nigerian economy

right from the time of independence (1960), providing employment for

about 30percent of the population (labour force statistics, 2010). It has

undoubtedly contributed to the gross domestic product (GDP) in Nigeria in

a consistent manner, assisted in reducing the problem of food

insufficiency, helped improve foreign exchange value by increasing the

amount of export from the sector and helped in supplying industries with

raw materials (Izuchukwu 2011; Verter, 2015).

The expansion and intensification of agriculture during the 20 th

century contributed to poverty alleviation and improved food security

globally, but these came at a cost to the environment (Tillman 2009).

Natural ecosystems were destroyed and the ecosystem services they

provide to man, degraded or lost (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

MEA, 2005). These ecosystem changes have been accompanied by loss of

biodiversity locally and increased risk of extinction globally. According to

the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) data,

9
agriculture is a major cause of global endangerment and recent analysis

have shown that endangerment is closely linked with agricultural land use

(scharlemann 2005). The most significant impact of agriculture on

biodiversity has been increased conversion of biodiversity rich habitats

into much simpler agricultural land use. Empirical evidence also suggests

that the intensification of agricultural activities rarely results in saving land

for nature (Angelson & Kaimowitz 2001). Furthermore, overuse and

mismanagement of pesticides poison water and soil, while nitrogen and

phosphorus inputs and livestock wastes have become major pollutants of

surface water, aquifers, coastal wetlands and outlets (Millennium

Ecosystem Assessment MEA 2005). Some introduced agricultural crops,

livestock, trees, fishes have become invasive species, displacing native

species (Mathews & Brand, 2004; Mooney et al., 2005).

Overtime, rural farmers have domesticated plants and animals, most

essential for their survival. The domestication is due to either the fear of

losing such varieties of plants or breeds of animals, or for ensuring

continuous utilization of such plants and animals (Camilus, 2010). Rural

farmers have adopted various ways or methods by which they sustain

plants and animals that are mostly needed by the community. The

measures are called agrobiodiversity conservation techniques (Chikare,

2016). Agrobiodiversity conservation technique used by a community will

therefore determine either the available or scarcity of such plants and

10
animals that need to be conserved. arms at increasing productivity,

providing food security, making farming system more stable, robust and

sustainable improving human nutrition and providing source of medicines

and vitamins, provision of fiber, milk, hides, fur, power, organic fertilizer,

fish products etc (Belon, Almekinders; 2015).

The technique could be shifting cultivation, alley cropping, mixed

cropping, collection and preservation of seeds, vegetative materials,

establishment and preservation of sacred grooves, selective maintenance

and cultivation of valued species of crop in the farm or backyard, adoption

of the panned grazing and browsing pattern, adoption of indigenous free

conversation management practices, establishment and maintenance of

range land with diverse forage crop species, domestication of live

populations of diverse species of dominant monogastrics in the herd,

adoption of natural breeding, random matting and pedigree breeding

(pimbert, 2009) .

1.2 Statement of Problem

Crop farmers are faced with a multiplicity of often competing demands

in rural areas and a scarcity to meet them. Major among them is the need to

conserve biodiversity, without which they will be unable to meet their

basic needs. Agro biodiversity helps farmers to improve on nutrition and

food security, it contributes to safe pest control and disease management, it

11
helps to diversify farm products and income opportunities as well as help

conserve or restore indigenous species like medicinal plants. As such, a

depletion of the agro biodiversity base of ecological systems like that of

Obot Akara LGA will negatively impact farmers in these areas. Studies on

agrobiodiversity conservation have been carryout by Camilus Bassey Ben,

(2004); Aboh and Effiong (2019) to appraise the indigenous

agrobiodiversity conservation measures in Akwa Ibom State and the

constraining factors to the adoption of these conservation measure.

However, these studies did not scrutinize the level of adoption and

perceived effects of the adoption of these conservation measures on arable

crop production in Obot Akara L.G.A. It is therefore against this backdrop

that the study seeks to address the following question?

i) What are the agro biodiversity conservation measures practiced

by arable crop farmers in the study area?

ii) What are the factors influencing the use of these agrobiodiversity

conservation measures in the study area?

iii) What is the level of utilization of agrobiodiversity conservation

measures in the study area?

iv) What are the perceived effects of the adoption of

agrobiodiversity conservation measures on arable crop

production?

12
1.3 Objective of the Study

The general objective of the study is to analyze the level of use of agro

biodiversity conservation measure by arable crops farmers in Obot Akara

Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom state, Nigeria.

Specifically, this study had the aim:

to identify various agrobiodiversity conservation measures practiced

by farmers

1. to ascertain the factors influencing the use of the conservation

measures identified.

2. to ascertain the level of utilization of agrobiodiversity conservation

measures by arable crop farmers.

3. to access the perceived effects of the adoption of agrobiodiversity

conservation measures on arable crop production.

1.4 Significance of the study

Due to the increasing depletion or destruction of the ecosystem,

accompanied by loss of agro biodiversity and increased risk of extinction

of crop species. This study is considered very significant because it will

help to identify the problems affecting the use of agro biodiversity

conservation measures by rural farmers in the study area and guide the

13
farmers, government, research organizations and extension agents in

addressing them. Studies on perception, local knowledge and indigenous

conservation measures at the local farmer and community levels as well as

lessons learned can provide the basis for concepts and methods of

assessing agro biodiversity impacts and vulnerability on livelihoods of the

local people and also proffer techniques to aid the use of these measures.

This research study will also serve as a reference material for studies on

agrobiodiversity conservation that has been carried out in the study area.

1.5 Scope of study

The study is focused on arable crop farmers in Obot-Akara Local

Government Area, Akwa-Ibom state, Nigeria; and the use of

agrobiodiversity conservation measures.

1.6 Definition of Terms

1. Agro biodiversity:
Agrobiodiversity also known as agricultural biodiversity. It is a
subset of biodiversity which refers to all forms of plants and animals
relevant to agriculture.

2. Conservation:
This is the management of nature and earth’s biodiversity with the
aim of protecting species, their habitats and ecosystem from
excessive rates of extinction and the erosion of biotic interactions.

3. Agrobiodiversity conservation:
This is the sustainable management of all forms of plants and animal
species, their habitats and ecosystem with the aim of protecting them
from extinction and erosion of biotic interactions.

4. Arable crops:

14
 These are staple, medicinal and aromatic crops suitable for farming.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

Review of Related Studies

2.1 Relationship between Agriculture and Biodiversity

Biodiversity refers to all species of plants, animals and micro-

organisms existing and interacting within an ecosystem (Vandermeer &

Perfecto 2005). Agrobiodiversity on the other hand includes all forms of

biodiversity existent in agro-ecosystems(European Commission 2001). It

includes domestic biodiversity (plants and animals produced for market

purposes) and wild biodiversity which has an indirect relation with

agricultural production and is apart of the agro-ecosystem (wild plants,

micro-organisms, field birds etc.). The recent literature emphasizes that

there is strong relationship between agriculture and biodiversity (European

Commission 2010). Agriculture can influence biodiversity positively or

negatively. Unfortunately, till now, the negative influences have been

widely emphasized (Benton 2003). This gave agriculture an image, as a

negative contributor to biodiversity. However, agriculture can positively

influence biodiversity as well. According to D’Haene et al..(2010), recent

researches show that a proper farming system and management, can

positively influence biodiversity by providing food, living place and

15
shelter for small animals, plants and micro-organisms which develops their

living on agricultural areas. Also, agriculture preserves in some cases

specific ecosystems that would disappear if farming activities were

abandoned. On the other hand, biodiversity can have an influence on

agriculture as well. Depending on the interaction between biodiversity and

agriculture, the influence can have a positive (functional agrobiodiversity),

negative (competitive agrobiodiversity) or neutral (neutral

agrobiodiversity) effect on agriculture. Functional agrobiodiversity

includes all the organisms and processes which support food production

and agriculture as a whole. (e.g pollination). Competitive agrobiodiversity

has negative effects (e.g.,pest species) whereas neutral agrobiodiversity

has neither a significant positive or negative effect on agricultural

production(e.g swallows) (Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research

ILVO, 2011)

2.2 Agrobiodiversity Conservation Measures

Conservation as applied to agrobiodiversity refers to preservation,

maintenance, sustenance, sustainable utilization, restoration and

enhancement of all species, breeds, and strains of livestock and varieties of

crop plans especially those of economic, scientific, and cultural interest to

man-kind for agriculture either at present or in future (World Conservation

Monitoring Center WCMC 2001). Agrobiodiversity conservation is a key

16
to hunger and poverty reduction among rural dwellers whose major

occupation is faming (Chikare 2016). The practice also provides basis for

health security interms of medicinal plants such as Cassia occidentalis

(Sang sanga) and most of the tree crop parts such as mango leaves, orange

leaves, guava leaves etc. and their trunk peels (Barau, 2017).

According to Mcneely (2009), rural farmers often have profound

and detailed knowledge of the ecosystem and species with which they are

in contact and have developed effective ways of ensuring that they are

used sustainably. Not only does this knowledge include information about

different species of animals and plants, their behavior and uses, but also

information about the ways which different aspect of ecosystem interrelate.

Some groups of rural farmers are known to construct taxonomies of plants

and animal breeds based on useful characteristics. They also compile

information on species abundance and distribution of ecological

communities and successions (Cooper 2001)’ these show that local people

can identify and classify useful plant and animal species, describe

ecological communities in an environmental context and test and evaluate

species for their useful potential. Using this knowledge, they design, test

and develop mechanisms for transferring knowledge from one generation

to another (Cooper, 2001).

One of the conservation practices adopted by rural farmers in the

maintenance of agrobiodiversity is the establishment and preservation of

17
sacred grooves (Castro, 2007). Sacred grooves acquire their importance in

conservation practice of local people from the fact that ancestor’s graves

are clustered in them; they are used as the meeting places; economically or

socially important crops are planed around tombstones (Castro 2007).

People especially women are banned from exploiting them. Elaborate

managements for protecting the grooves are instituted and enforced.

Punishment for offenders is often apportioned, including fines (Camilus,

2010).

Also, selective maintenance and promotion of particular species

have been the most important method of agrobiodiversity conservation

measures in Africa for some years now. (Castro 2007). Most areas in

Africa enjoy a surplus of trees, so that people who lived there had a luxury

of taking out unwanted species and concentrating on the preservation and

enhancement of others. Benneh (2007) cited the example of Adansonia

digitata, a crop species which is frequently promoted, planted and saved

above all around villages where it is valued for its edible spinach-like

leaves, it’s ascorbic fruits, the rope which can be made from its bark and

the water storage potential of it’s hollowed out trunk. Valued species are

usually cut and pollarded in such a way that they will be consumed on a

sustainable basis.

Agrobiodiversity is also conserved by rural people through taboos

and religious sanctions. Religious sanctions in the Nigerian context are a

18
way of commending elders or rulers to gods and the ancestors and using

their authority on the living individuals ( Nigerian Study/Action Team

NEST, 2001). In some African local language, there is unique noun prefix

for all agricultural crops and animals, gods and spirits, and many crop

species, and they are thought to house spirits (Shepherd 2002). Examples

of these sort of sanctions and taboos as highlighted by Shepherd (2002)

include (i) the attraction of certain calamities to the illicit felling of trees

(ii) the threat that over exploitation of a particular crop specie would call

forth a deity who is dangerous to humans (iii) the threat by some chiefs to

amputate the arm of anyone who mutilates the seedling of a crop species.

Srivasta et al, (2001), Soule and Piper (2002), Igbozurike (2007); carried

out a research on agrobiodiversity conservation measure and reported that

in many rural farmers cultivate areas of land with diverse species of crops,

harvest and process and store their produce using techniques that ensure

sustainable protection of genetic priority and diversity of such crops for

generations. Most of them adopt mixed cropping practice. Mixed cropping

has the tendency to preserve an ecosystem and its diversity by either

reproducing a particular agro-ecosystem or limiting the natural ecosystem

structure. It also enhances the agrobiodiversity multiple functions such as

the management of detrimental insects, pests, diseases and weeds

(Igbozurike 2007). Mixed cropping enhances species complementariness

19
which is very important in the preservation of genetic species and agro-

ecosystem diversity.

Camilus Bassey Ben (2010) carried out a similar research to appraise

the status of agrobiodiversity conservation practices among rural farmers

in Akwa Ibom state, Nigeria. The specific objective was to determine

indigenous agrobiodiversity conservation practices adopted by rural

farmers. The study revealed that ru4al farmers employed indigenous

practices such as shifting cultivation, establishment and management of

sacred grooves and imposition of traditional sanctions in the conservation

of agrobiodiversity in the state. Barau and Michael (2017) also carried out

a research to examine agrobiodiversity conservation techniques adopted by

rural farmers in Kware local government Area, Sokoto, Nigeria. Results of

the findings showed that most of the farmers conserve plants by practicing

collection and preservation of seeds, and conserved animals using random

mating.

Okafor and Chineye (2009) reported that conservation of

biodiversity could be achieved through various strategies such as creation

of awareness on the need to preserve biological reserves or gene bank,

market oriented approach, use of farmers’ indigenous knowledge and

research based strategies. Chinasa and Kelechi (2015) also carried out a

research on indigenous knowledge and practices for sustainable

conservation of agrobiodiversity by farmers in Umuahia North Local

20
Government Area of Abia state, Nigeria. The result showed that the main

indigenous knowledge and agrobiodiversity conservation practice

employed to a high extent by farmers in the area were: mixed cropping,

selective maintenance and cultivation of valued species of crops in

backyard, alley cropping and preservation of vegetative materials.

2.3 Factors Influencing Arable Crop Farmers Use of Agro-

Biodiversity Conservation Practices.

Most studies investigated the factors influencing farmers’ use of

agrobiodiversity measures or subsidies. They identified financial

motivation as the main reason for the adoption and use of these practices

(Chouinard &Gorton, 2008). However, Ryan et al.,(2003) showed that

subsidies alone were neither enough to create a willingness to join

conservation programs in the USA, nor did they create a long term and

useful conservation ethic. Factors influencing the use of these conservation

measures are identified as follows:

2.3.1 Socio-economic factors

Farm characteristics such as farm size, location and farming type

have been shown to influence decision regarding conservation practices to

a certain extent (Baudry,2003; Kristensen 2011). The influence of age,

education, availability of successors and previous experiences on adoption

21
of farmers’ agro-environmental practices is contradictory (Siebert 2006).

For instance, Siebert (2010) did not find any significant effect of age or

education level on the amount of land offered for conservation of

biodiversity.Camilus Bassey (2010) carried out a research designed to

determine strategies for involving rural farmers in agrobiodivesity

conservation in Akwa-Ibom state, Nigeria. Findings revealed that the

hindrances to the involvement of rural farmers in agrobiodiversity

conservation borders on economic, religious, and superstitious beliefs.

2.3.2Internal factors

An increasing range of studies emphasizes that values and beliefs

play an important role in influencing farmers’ behavior (Seibert 2006). For

example, stewardship values as well as long term family concerns seem to

be the most important value guiding farmers’ reasoning (Chouinard,2008).

Greiner and Gregg (2001) found out that stewardship goals were the most

important factors’ for the use of conservation practices by grazers in

Australia. Beedell and Rehman (2000) stated that moral norm s were also

related to the farmers’ intention to conserve. They also found that Farming

and Wildlife Advisory Group (FWAG) farmers felt a greater moral

obligation to plant trees and hedges on their farms than other farmers.

2.3.3Social factors

22
 Recent studies suggest that social capital plays an important role in

farmers’ decision making (Mathijs, 2003; Defrancesco, 2008). For

example, Jacobson (2003) claimed that new farming methods that sustain

rather than reduce and simplify biological relationships will be adopted

only if they address these social realities of farmers. The importance of

social influence was shown by Mathijs (2003) though a case study of

farmers in a village in Flanders when investigating the determinants of

adoption of arable field margins. The same study concluded that family

members had the greatest influence on decision-making regarding

biodiversity conservation. Kneim and Sibert (2004) stated that according to

farmers’ own statements, direct contact and interaction with family

members, friend and colleagues have a clear influence on the farmer’s

decision-making process. Browers and Lane (2009) used the decision

system theory to explain the reasons for maintaining biodiversity features

by farmers in South Africa. They concluded that decision making is

influenced by their motivations and expectations and that they are taken

into family decision-system if the farmer expects to gain ‘caring for

family’ or into the business decision-systems if the farmer expects to make

money. In some cases, social factors do not influence decision making.

Beedell and Rehman (2000) used the theory of planned behavior and found

no correlation between social pressure and conservation behavior. `

Alexandrina Roca (2011) carried out a research on the socio-

23
psychological study of adoption of farmers’ agrobiodiversity friendly

practices in Flanders and reported that the use of agrobiodiversity

conservation measures is dependent on their socio-economic

characteristics.

Several studies have also shown the constraining factors to the use

of agrobiodivesity conservation measures. One of the constraint to the

conservation of agrobiodiversity by rural farmers is lack of education

(Camilus, 2010). Nigerian Conservation Foundation (NCF) (2005) pointed

out that tackling loss of agrobiodiversity, requires action mostly from

environmental education. It could therefore be inferred that lack of

environmental education among the farmers is the single greatest

contributor that constraints the conservation of agrobiodiversity by arable

farmers (Niobi, 2004).

Another factor which has tremendous adverse influence on the

ability of arable farmers’ conservation is unattended population growth

(National Environmental Study/Action Team NEST, 2001). If the

population density is exceeded, these human demands translate into

excessive pressure on the land and agro-resources. Hence, the partnership

between population and the environment becomes endangered and may

break down as problems of loss of agrobiodiversity (Board of Science and

Technology for International Development BOSTID, 2002). Religious

and superstitious beliefs also constrains the use of agrobiodiversity

24
conservation measures amongst other factors (National Environmental

Study/Action Team NEST, 2001).

Varela (2001) carried out a research on managing agricultural resources

for biodiversity conservation and reported that adoption of sound policies

and technologies leading to agrobiodiversity conservation has been

hampered by several factors including lack of appreciation of the value of

biodiversity in agricultural systems, deficient sectorial integration,

financial factors, lack or deficient coordination and accuracy of existing

legislation. Shepherd’s (2002) study on constraints to the use of

agrobiodiversity conservation measures blamed the poor conservation

disposition of rural farmers on tenure and land use changes. He noted that

one of the facts which emerged of recent in the conservation circle is the

tremendous paucity of knowledge about the conservation of forest based

agro-resources. Kellen (2008) in his study on the constraints to the

adoption of agrobiodiversity conservation measures reported that the study

of vanishing biodiversity is necessarily the study of man’s perception of

plants and animals. ‘’What we fear, what we hope and what we admire in

plants and animals will inevitably determine their fate.

Jackson (1983), commenting from his studies on the problems of

conservation in Nigeria, cited bush fie and other indigenous agricultural

practices in most communities as hindrances to the use of agrobiodiversity

conservation measures. Conducting a research on biodiversity conservation

25
and agricultural sustainability in USA, Sheer and Mcneely (2007) also

reported that the effective conservation of biodiversity in agricultural

landscapes will require increased research, policy coordination and

strategic support to agricultural communities and conservations.

2.4 Level of utilization of Agrobiodiversity Conservation Measures

People’s dependency on agrobiodiversity as a livelihood strategy is

on the rise for their subsistence (Jackson, 2017). Farmlands are the places

where undomesticated wild species can be deliberately grown and

conserved. It is an important unit for a household since it is more stable

and reliable in growing trees and vegetables than cropland (Abebe 2005;

Fox, Ramahkutty, 2014). Most valuable species, either crop or non-crop

are cultivated in the farmlands for the regular supplies of crops and

services that the farmers need for their livelihood (Barford, 2014).

Therefore human managed agroecosystem like that in their farmland

appears to be conserving a variety of crops, trees and livestock. Besides,

wild and native fruits play a key role in conserving other faunal diversity

in the farm landscapes. Thus, assorted and diverse species grown on

farmlands, commonly known as farm forestry are playing a crucial role in

sustaining agricultural production, reducing pressure on remaining forest

and enhancing agrobiodiversity through in situ conservation of trees on

farms (Jianchu, 2009).

26
 Asare (2006) demonstrated in his findings the potential of

indigenous fruits and woody species in combination with food crops in

various farming systems in Cameroon. Farmers grow vegetable crops in

the rice fields adjoining to the home garden. Although the high diversity of

agricultural crops contributes directly to agrobiodiversity conservation and

livelihoods, this study reported only seven crops species in the field.

farmers perceive that hybrid varieties where being used for its high

productive values, compared with local varieties. Due to land scarcity in

Bangladesh, along with its large population thereby limiting their level of

utilization of agrobiodiversity conservation measures.

In the study of Aboh and Effiong (2019) from the agrobiodiversity

conservation measures used by Ukwa west LGA, Abia state. Intercropping

was ranked first as the most used agrobiodiversity conservation measure

with mean score 4.00 and cover cropping was ranked second with mean

score 3.96, zero/minimum tillage ranked third with mean score of 3.70,

organic farming ranked fourth with mean score of 3.75, soil and water

conservation ranked fifth with mean score of 3.72… this is in line with

Pimbert (2005) which states that intercropping and cover cropping is the

major agrobiodiversity conservation technique adopted by the respondent

in his study of biodiversity conservation practices among farmers in

northern Nigeria, a case study of Kano and Kaduna states.

27
2.5 Perceived Effects Of Adoption Of Agrobiodiversity Conservation

Measures

Agrobiodiversity involves farming practices that rely on ecosystem

services rather than on external inputs (Isgren, 2016; Wezel 2014).

Bretagnolle (2018) states that “agrobiodiversity conservation considers

biodiversity and ecological processes to be at the heart of the agro-

ecosystem functioning through the provision of ecosystem services, and

has great potential for developing innovative and sustainable agricultural

production methods”. Agrobiodiversity conservation practices aim to

reduce the environmental impacts of agriculture while meeting the

growing demand for food, contributing to landscape quality and

biodiversity and enhancing resilience (Duru, Rojar-Estrade and Richard,

2017). Biodiversity conservation is both used as an overall farming

concept (Diaz, Fargione, Chapin and Tilman 2006; Sherwood and Uphoff,

2000) and as a strategy to battle specific problem associated with farming,

such as land degradation (Pearsom, 2007). In the operationalization of

agroecology into specific measures and practices, the concept bears

resemblance and also partly overlaps with concepts such as sustainable

intensification, ecological agriculture, resilient agriculture, conservation

agriculture, sustainable agriculture, and carbon farming (Erisman 2016,

Govae 2009, Pretty 2008; Smith and Olesen, 2010, Theorond 2017). Some

28
shared measures and themes includes zero tillage, crop rotation, efficient

irrigation and natural pest control (Theorond, 2017). The adoption of these

agrobiodiversity practices yield an array of benefits. They contribute to

productivity, resilience in farming system, income generation, nutritional

value and food and livelihood security for numerous societies (Aboh and

Effiong, 2019). Agricultural biodiversity also provides ecosystem services

on farms such as pollination, fertility and nutrient enhancement, insect and

disease management and water retention (Lori Ann, 2001).

Also, adoption of agrobiodiversity conservation measures has

improved pharmaceutical industries as a significant proportion of drugs are

derived directly or indirectly from biological sources. About 40% of the

pharmaceuticals in use are manufactured using natural compound found in

plants and animals. Medicinal drugs derived from natural sources make an

important global contribution to health care (Adebebola, 2001). An

estimated 80% of people in less developed countries rely on traditional

medicine for primary health care. Some 120 chemicals extracted in pure

forms around 90 species of plants are used in medicines throughout the

world (Kate and Laird, 2009). The cardiac stimulant digitoxin, the most

widely used cardiotonic in western medicine is extracted directly from

dried digitalis (Fox glove) and catharan thusreuses (Rossy Perewinkle)

used to treat leukemia (Kate and Laird, 2009). Some other notable

medicinal plants in tropical rain forest of Nigeria including African nutmeg

29
(Monodoru myristica), guinea pepper, lemon grass, sweet basil, garlic,

ginger and black pepper are used in preparation of traditional medicine for

both young children, confined mothers and aged people industrial

materials are derived directly from biodiversity. Natural forests provide

trees like Mahogany, Opepe (Nauclea didarrichita), Afara (terminalia

superba) and others. They supply raw materials to our timber industries

(Bowe, 2012).

Several studies have shown the effects of adoption of

agrobiodiversity conservation measures. Lori (2000) carried out a research

on the valuable role of agrobiodiversity for sustainable agriculture and

reported that adoption of agrobiodiversity conservation practices

contributes to productivity, resilience in farming systems, income

generation, nutritional value and food and livelihood security for numerous

societies. Also Emma-Okarfor, Lilian and Izuchukwu (2009) carried out a

similar research to appraise the effect of biodiversity conservation in

tropical rainforest of Nigeria. The study revealed that the conservation of

biodiversity in our ecosystem is essential since mankind depends largely

on livelihood derived from the natural resources such as land, forest, water

and air, an agricultural system functioning depends largely upon it.

Also, Bassey (2010) reported that the adoption of agrobiodiversity

conservation measures perform many closely inter-related socio economic

and environmental functions, including promoting food and livelihood

30
security, maintaining productive and environmental sustainability and

contributing to resilient rural economics. Barau and Micheal (2017)

commenting from his research on agrobiodiversity conservation techniques

adopted by rural farmers in Kware LGA, Nigeria stated that these practices

provides basis for food and health security, increases productivity, making

farming system more stable, robust and sustainable; and provision of fiber,

fur, milk, hides, organic fertilizers, fish products etc.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.6 Theory of planned behavior

The theory was proposed by Ajzen (1989) as a refinement to the

earlier theory of reasoned action proposed in the 1970s by Ajzen and

fishbien. The model claims that behavior is controlled by intension these

intension vary in their strength and are influenced by 3 factors: Behavioral

attitudes about the outcome of the behavior and the value placed upon the

outcomes. The individuals subjective norms (their perception of how other

would view the behavior); and perceived behavior concerns (the extent to

which they feel they can actually perform the behavior.

Ajzen’s (2002) argued that attitudes are most likely to predict

behavior when the level of specificity of the attribute matches that of the

behavior and when the person thinks he is able to do the appropriate

behavior.

31
 The Theory of Planned Behaviour has been widely applied in

predicting health behavior (Norman Conner, 2001), leisure choice (Lam &

Hsu, 2006) and waste management (Tonglet, 2004). However, recently the

theory has gained application more in studies such as general pro-

environmental behavior or specific conservation behavior (Waiters, 2010)

including biodiversity conservation (Bamberg & Moser 2007, clack et al

2003, fielding et al, 2008, Lokhorst et al, 2011). Due to its high predictive

validity, the theory is a useful tool to study the adoption of specific agro-

environmental practices. (Armitage & conner, 2001’ Kaiser et al, 2005)

with respect to this study, the theory will help in understanding how

humans, particularly arable crop farmers can change their behavior if the

perceive a high relative advantage of a conservation practice to the one

being practiced. it will also assist in understanding farmers’ intentions of

agrobiodiversity conservation especially if actual behavioral control like

capital, knowledge, skills, opportunities etc are provided.

32
 CHAPTER THREE

REEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 The Study Area

The study will be carried out in Obot Akara LGA, Akwa Ibom state,

Nigeria. Its administrative headquarters is at Nto-edino. It was founded I

1991 and also forms a federal constituency alongside Ikot Ekpene and

Essien Udim LGA. It lies between latitude 5˚15’60.00”N and longitude

7˚38’59.99”E. It covers an area of 237km2 and is bounded in south by

Essien Udim local government area, in the east by Ikot-Ekpene local

government area, in the north-east by Ini and Ikono local overnment area,

in the north by Ikwano local government area of Abia state and in the west

by Isiala Ngwa North and Obingwa local government area of Abia state.

Data available at the national population commission of the 2006

population census puts the population of Obot Akara LGA at 147, 286

with 74, 392 males and 72, 894 females (National Population Commission

NPC, 2016). The area is one of the block that makes up the Ikot-Ekpene

agricultural zone. The block consists of ten(10) cells namely Ikot Abia i,

Ikot Abia ii, Ikot Abia iii, Nto Edino I, Nto Edino ii, Nto Edino iii, Nto

Edino iv, Obot Akara I, Obot Akara ii and Obot Akara ii. Christianity is

the predominate religion in this area.The climate here is tropical. Rainfall

is about 129-274mm for most months of the year with an average annual

temperature range of 25.99 – 26.2˚C. The annual precipitation is about

33
2289mm, with a mean relative humility of 82%. The vegetation is typical

of a rain forest, comprising of different plant species.The predominant

occupation of the people is agriculture. The farmers cultivate both food

and cash crop which include: cassava, maize, yam, oil palm, etc. they also

engage in hunting and craft making.

3.2 Population of Study

The population of the study comprises all arable crop farmers in

Obot Akara Local Government Area.

3.3 Sampling Procedure and Sample Size

The block comprises ten (10) cells. A multi stage sampling

technique will be adopted in sampling the respondents for the study.

Firstly, simple random sampling will be used to select four(4) cells out of

the ten (10) cells that makes up the block because these cells cultivate

more of arable crops. Secondly, simple random sampling will be used to

select household heads from each of the selected cells. A list containing

the registered number of household heads (arable crop farmers) will be

obtained from Akwa Ibom Agricultural Development Programme

(AKADEP) and used for this purpose. Ten (10) percent of the population

of registered household heads of the selected cells was used as a

samplesize for the study due to time & budget constraint giving a total of

120 respondents.

34
 The table showing the sampling procedures is presented thus:

Block Cells Selected Cells No. Of Registered No. of Respondents

Household Heads Selected (10%)
Obot Akara Ikot Abia i Ikot Abia i 340 34

Ikot Abia ii Nto Edino i 340 34

Ikot Abia iii Obot Akara i 170 17

Nto Edino i Obot Akara ii 350 35

Nto Edino ii

Nto Edino iii

Obot Akara i

Obot Akara ii

Obot Akara iii

Obot Akara iv

TOTAL 10 4 1200 120

Source:AKADEP

Table 1: Procedure for Selection of Sample Size

3.4 Method of Data Collection

Primary data was used for the study. A set of structured

questionnaire was used to obtain the primary data. The questionnaire was

designed and validated by the researcher’s supervision and other experts in

the Department, to ensure accuracy and reliability of information gathered.

The questionnaire was designed based on the study objectives and divided

into four main sections. Section A was concerned with information on the

35
socio-economic characteristics of the respondents. Section A was on

information on types of agrobiodiversity conservation measures practiced

by farmers. Section B was on the factors influencing the use of agro

biodiversity conservation measures identified. Section C was on the level

of utilization of agrobiodiversity conservation measures. Section D was on

the perceived effects of agrobiodiversity conservation measures on arable

crop production.

3.5 Measurements of Variables

The dependent variable of this study is agrobiodiversity

conservation measures. The independent variables are the types of

agrobiodiversity conservation measures used by farmers, factors

influencing the use of agrobiodiversity conservation measures, level of

utilization of agrobiodiversity conservation measures and perceived effects

of agrobiodiversity conservation measures.

These variables was measured as follows:

a) Socio Economic Characteristics

Age: Age of respondents was measured in years.

Sex: This was measured at nominal level as male =1, female = 2.

Marital Status: Respondents were requested to indicate whether they are

single(1), married(2), divorced(3), widowed (4).

36
Educational Level: Respondents were requested to tick the level of

educational attainment from the options given as follows: no formal

education, attempted primary education, completed primary education,

attempted secondary school education, completed secondary education,

attempted tertiary education, completed tertiary education. Nominal scores

of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, &7 will be assigned to each class respectively.

Household Size: Household size was measured based on the number of

persons in a household. This will be grouped as follows: <5=1, 5-10=2, 11-

15=3, >15=4.

Farm size: Respondents were asked to indicate their farm size in hectares,

which will be grouped as follows; <5ha=1, 5-10ha=2, 11-15ha=3 and

>15ha=4.

Types of livelihood activities: Arable crop farmers were asked to indicate

the types of livelihood activities they carryout as follows; faming=1,

trading=2, fishing=3, civil servant=4.

Membership to association: Arable crop farmers were asked whether

they belong to an association. A nominal score of 1 and 2 was used. 1=yes,

2=no.

37
Farming experience: Arable crop farmers were requested to indicate the

actual number of years they have spent in farming. This will be grouped as

follows; .5years=1, 5-10years=2, 11-15years=3 and >15years=4.

Types of crops grown: Farmers were requested to indicate the types of

crop grown from a given option as follows; cassava=1, yam=2, maize=3

and others=4.

Objective 1 which is concerned with the various agrobiodivesity

conservation measures carried out in the study area and was measured as

follows: a list of measures for agrobiodiversity conservation practiced as

obtained from literature will be presented to arable crop farmers to identify

the ones that are practiced in the community. The score of 1 will be

assigned to any measure practiced and 0, to anyone not practiced.

Objective 2 which deals with the factors influencing the use of

agrobiodiversity conservation measures and was measured thus; a ;list of

factors influencing agrobiodiversity conservation measures as obtained

from literature will be presented to respondents to indicate the ones that

influence the use of conservation measures practiced. The extent of

influence of these factors was measured using a four point Likert-type

scale with response categories of No Extent (1), Low Extent (2), Moderate

38
Extent (3) and great extent (4). The values 1,2,3 and 4 was summed up and

divided by four to obtain the mean score of two(2). Any factor with mean

score ≥2 is considered to be of significant influence, while any factor <2 is

considered of no significant influence.

Objective 3 which deal with the level of utilization of agrobiodiversity

conservation measures was measured thus; a list of agrobiodiversity

conservation measures as obtained from literature was presented to

respondents to indicate the extent of usage of the conservation practice in

the study area. A four point likert-type scale with response categories of no

usage (NU), low usage (LU), moderate usage (MU) and high usage (HU).

With values 1,2,3 and 4 respectively assigned to them. These values was

summed up and divided by four to obtain the mean score of two (2). Any

factor with mean score >2 was considered a significant measure for

biodiversity conservation, while any factor <2 was considered a less

significant measure for biodiversity conservation.

Objective 4 which deal with the perceived effects of the adoption of

agrobiodiversity conservation measures on arable crop farmers in the study

area was measured thus: a list of effects of adoption of agrobiodiversity

conservation measures on arable crop production as obtained from

literature will be presented to arable crop farmers to indicate which ones

39
are experienced by them. A five Likert-like type scale was used for this

purpose with response categories of Strongly Agreed SA), Agreed(A),

Undecided(U), Disagreed(D) & Strongly Disagreed(SD) and with score

values 5,4,3,2 & 1 respectively assigned to them. These values was

summed up and divided by 5 to obtain the mean value score of 3. Any

factor with mean score ≥3 was considered a significant effect, while any

factor with mean score <3 was considered of no significant effect.

3.6 Data Analysis Techniques

Descriptive statistics will be used to analyze the data.

40
 CHAPTER FOUR
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Socio Economic Characteristics OF Arable Crop Farmers

4.1.1 Sex

The distribution of respondents according to sex reveals that most

(54.2%) of the respondent are female, while 45.8% are males. The low

percentage of males in arable crop production in the study area is attributed

to the fact that majority of males are engaged in plantain crop farming,

fishing and artisans while more rural women are responsible for cultivating

arable crops and for the integrated management and use of bio-resources to

fulfill daily household needs. The result is in line with the finding of

Asseta (2016) that rural women cultivate and domesticate more diversified

crops/livestock in order to meet household needs.

3.1.2 Age

The age distribution of respondents shows that majority (64.0%) of the

farmers are between the age of 30-49 years, while 18.3% are above

50years (Table 2). It can be inferred from the results that farmers in their

mid-adulthood participate more in agrobiodiversity conservation in the

study area, which may be due to physical strength that is used for

conservation activities. On the other hand, adults of age range 51 and

above participate less in agrobiodiversity conservation. This may be due to

inability to engage in strenuous activities. This corroborates the findings of

41
Effiong and Aboh (2019) who reported that farmers within the age of 41-

50 years are in the fore-front of the agrobiodiversity revolution.

4.1.3 Marital status

Table 2 shows that majority (55.0%) of arable crop farmers are

married while 20.8% have lost a spouse. The higher percentage of married

farmers in the study area can be attributed to the socio-cultural and

religious beliefs of the community members where marriage is encouraged

and termed as a sign of responsibility and one of the religious obligation of

the farmers. Being married provides room for procreation which serves as

a source of farming labour required for crop production and carrying out

agrobiodiversity conservation techniques. Marriage also gives farmers a

sense of responsibility thereby motivating them to conserve agro resources

for the future use of family members. Abubakar, 2011).

3.1.3 Educational Level

The results of the study show that most (52.3%) of arable crop farmers

either attempted or completed secondary school education (ie24.2%

attempted secondary education while 28.3% completed secondary

education). On the other hand, only 15.85% had either attempted or

completed tertiary education (Table 2).

42
The more educated farmers are, the more they become enlightened and

participate in agricultural activities especially agrobiodiversity

conservation activities. The finding of Godoy and Contreas (2011)

revealed that farmers partake more in agrobiodiversity conservation when

they are educated. Also, Effiong and Aboh (2019) affirmed that knowledge

is relevant for agricultural biodiversity conservation

4.1.5 Household Size

Result of the study on Table 2 show that a greater proportion

(45.8%) of the farmers had6.10 persons per household. The presence of

more members in a household provides required labour to carryout

agrobiodiversity conservation practices. The finding is in consonance with

the finding of Aliyu (2017) where 48.3% of rural household had 6-10

members. The presence of more family members may also tend to

influence the type of agrobiodiversity conservation measures that may be

used by the famers. This view is supported by Mathijs who observed that

family members have a great influence on each other in terms of decision-

making regarding biodiversity conservation.

43
4.1.6 farm size

Most (62.5%) of the respondents had farm sizes ranging from 0.1-

10ha land and 10.0% had 15ha and above. This result refers that the arable

crop farmers are peasant crop farmers with relatively small and fragmented

farms. This might also be a reflection of the land tenure system operating

in the study area. This study corroborates the finding of Alexandrina

(2011) who reported that farmers with fragmented farm size are unable to

practice some agrobiodiversity conservation measures.

4.1.7 Livelihood Activities

Table 2 shows that majority (65.0%) of the respondents engaged in

farming 15.8% are traders, 4.2% engaged in fishing while 15.0% are civil

servants. Rural people especially in Nigeria make Living in Livelihood

activities such as farming, fishing, forestry or related activities (Mgbado,

2010; Akpabio, 2015). Arable crop farming in particular serves as the main

staples of rural households.

4.1.7 Membership in Association

Result in Table 2 reveal that majority (96.7%) of arable crop farmers

in the study area belong to an association, while 3.3% did not belong.

Membership into association can help arable crop farmers to learn or share

experiences on agrobiodiversity conservation measures practices. This

44
corroborate the findings of Knierim and Sibert (2004) that contacts and

interaction with family members, friends and colleagues have a clear

influence on farmer’s decision-making process on agrobiodiversity

conservation.

4.1.8 Farming Experience

The result on Table 2 shows that majority (60.0%) of the

respondents had more than 16years farming experience while 9.2% had

between 0.5years experience. The fact that most of the farmers have

experience in farming maybe an indication that they have a good

knowledge of their environment as well as the agrobiodiversity

conservation measures that are best suited within the study area. This is in

line with the farming of Mcneely (2009) that rural farmers have a profound

knowledge of the ecosystem and species with which they are in contact

with and have developed effective ways of ensuring that they are used

sustainably.

4.1.9 Crops Grown

Results on Table 2 show that most (43.3%) of the respondents are

into cassava production, yam (20.0%) and maize (20.0%). Other crops are

cocoyam, sweet potatoes etc. Considering that these crops constitute the

staple food in the study area, farmers will go the extra mile adopting

agrobiodiversity conservation measures to ensure that they are produced

45
sustainably. According to Bassey (2010) these crops serve as a source of

energy, income opportunity, not only to the communities around.

Table 2a: SOCIO ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF ARABLE CROP FAMERS

Variables Frequency Percentages

Sex Male 55 45.8
Female Female 65 54.2
Total 120 100
Age 20-29 years 13 10.8
30-39 years 39 32.5
40-49 years 39 32.5
50-59 years 22 18.3
60-69 years 7 5.8
Total 120
100
Marital Status Single 19 15.8
Married 66 55.0
Divorced 10 8.3
Windowed 25 20.8

Total 120 100

Educational level No formal education 2 1.7
Attempted pri, education 17 14.2
Completed pri. education 19 15.8
Attempted sec. education 29 24.2
Completed sec. education 34 28.3
Attempted tertiary education 9 7.5
Completed tertiary education 10 8.3
Total 120 100

Household size 1.5 25 20.8

5-10 55 45.8
11-15 30 25.0
16 and above 10 8.3
Total 120 100
Farm size 01-5.00ha 30 25.0
5.01—10.00ha 45 37.5
10.01-15.00ha 33 27.5
15.01ha and above 12 10.0
Total 120 100
Source: field survey, 2019

46
 Variables Frequency Percentages
Livelihood activity Farming 78 65.0
Trading 19 15.8
Fishing 5 4.2
Civil servant 18 15.0

Total 120 100

Membership to association Yes 116 96.7

No 4 3.3

Total 120 100

`farming experience 0.5 11 9.2
6-10 21 17.5
11-15 16 13.3
16 And Above 72 60.0
Total 120 100
Crop production Cassava 52 43.3

Yam 24 20.0

Maize 24 20.0

Others 24 16.7
Total 120 100
Source: field survey, 2019

AGROBIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION MEASURES PRACTICED

Table 3 respondent the agrobiodiversity conservation measures

practiced in the area. The result shows that majority (98.3%) of the

farmers practiced collection and preservation of seeds, cover cropping

(98.3%), mixed cropping (98.3%) and inter cropping (97.5%). Practicing

cover cropping mixed and inter cropping does not serve as a

biodiversity conservation measure, but helps to protect the farmer

against crop failure. The collection and preservation of seeds may be a

prevalent practice in the study area because it does not only ensure

genetic preservation but is less strenuous. Also, the fact that not so

many of the farmers practiced agro-forestry maybe attributed to the

47
existing land rights which leaves farmers with insecure lands

making them reluctant to adopt agrobiodiversity

conservation measures whose benefits are in the long term.

Similar findings have been reported by Srvista et al, (2011);

Aliyu (2017), Igbozurike (2017); Effiong with diverse species

of crops, harvest, process and store their produce using

techniques that ensure sustainable preservation of genetic

materials for generations.

TABLE 3: DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BASED ON AGROBIODIVERSITY

CONSERVATION MEASURES PRACTICED

S/N CONSERVATION MEASURES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

1 Establishment and preservation of sacred 98 8.1

grooves

2 Enacting of taboos and religious sanction 105 87.5

3 Mixed cropping 118 98.3

4 Shifting cultivation 101 84.2

5 Collecting and planting/preservation of seeds 118 98.3

6 Inter cropping 117 97.5

7 Organic farming 81 67.5

8 Cover cropping 118 93.3

9 Zero/minimum tillage 71 59.2

10 Alley cropping 77 64.2

11 Afforestation 69 57.5
Source: field survey, 2019

48
4.2 Level OF Utilization OF Agrobiodiversity Conservation Measures

Result on the level of utilization of agrobiodiversity conservation

measures are represented in Table 4. A mean score value of 1.5 was used

as a benchmark to rank the level of utilization of agrobiodiversity

conservation measures. The mean score values show that the most

significant agrobiodiversity conservation measure used were mixed

_ _ _
cropping ( X =2.81) cover cropping ( X =2.63), inter cropping ( X=62)
_
and preservation of seeds ( X 2.52). All the other conservation measures

cropping as a measure for agrobiodiversity conservation can be due to its

tendency to preserve agro-ecosystem and diversity. Camilus (2010) and

Igbozurike (2007) such as the management of detrimental insect, diseases

and weeds. Arable crop farmers also employ to a high extent intercropping

as a measure of diversification, thereby supplying a range of products.

Intercropping with legumes also enriches the soil through nitrogen fixation

and promotes better weed control, thereby improving the quality of the

farmer’s produce. The use of cover cropping also can be due to its

tendency to provide effective cover for the soil and so minimizes erosion

to exposure of the soil to degradation factors. This shows that rural farmers

detailed knowledge of the ecosystem and species which they are contact

with. Not only does this knowledge include information about different

species of animal and plants, their behavior and uses, but also information

about the way in which different aspects of the ecosystem interacts which

49
enables them to adopt agrobiodiversity conservation techniques most

suitable to their environment. This finding is in consonance with the earlier

empirical workers of ROSTID (2002) and Shiva (2002), which pointed to

enormous contributions of rural farmers and other local people in the

development and protection of agrobiodiversity resources used for food,

fuel and medicines.

TABLE 4: DISTRIBUTION OF FAMERS BY LEVEL OF UTILIZATION OF

AGROBIODIVERSITY MEASURES

S/N CONSERVATION MEAN RANK

1. Establishment and preservation of scared groves 1.53 7th
2. Enacting of taboos and religious sanction 1.73 6th
3 Mixed cropping 2.81 1st
4. Shifting cultivation 1.91 5th
5 Collection and planting/preservation of seeds 2.52 4th
6 Inter cropping 2.62 3rd
7 Organic farming 1.21 10th
8 Cover cropping 2.63 2nd
9 Zero/minimum tillage 1.06 9th
10 Alley cropping 1.46 8th
11 Afforestation 1.02 11th
Source: field survey, 2019

50
FACTORS INFLUENCING AGROBIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
MEASURES

The factors influencing arable crop framings’ utilization of

agrobiodiversity conservation measures is presented in Table

5. A mean score value of 2.05 was agrobiodiversity

conservation measures. Result show that all the factors had

a significant influence on the use of agrobiodiversity

_
conservation measures. Land tenure system ( X =3.38),
_
religious and superstitious beliefs ( X=3.30), lack of finance
_ _
3
( X =3.28), high population (X =3.27) where highly significant. Land

tenure system and land use changes adversely influence agrobiodiversity

conservation. This effect is largely felt by women in Nigeria society in

general and Akwa Ibom State in particular. Women are held in no high

esteem as they are allocated fragmented farm sizes, making it imposible

for them to practice some agrobiodiversity conservation techniques.

Religious and superstitious beliefs may influence agrobiodiversity

conservation as they employ sacred grooves and animal as strategies for

restricting rural dwellers to conserve biodiversity. However, the traditional

religion and traditional methods of conservation as sacred forest are now

becoming hunting grounds.

High population is an influential factors on the conservation of

agrobiodiversity among arable crop farmers as it leads to shortening of

51
follow periods and excessive exploitation of available agroresouces with

disregard to conservation. This finding is in line with that of Shepherd

(2002) who blamed the poor conservation disposition of rural farmers on

high population pressure. National Environmental Study/ Action Term

(NEST) also noted that rapid population growth has tremendous adverse

effect on the ability of the rural farmers’ conservation nature as it exerts

excessive pressure on the land and exploitation of agro-resources.

TABLE5 DISTRIBUTION OF FARMERS BY FACTORS INFLUENCING THEIR USE

OF AGROBIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION MEASURES

S/N FACTORS MEAN RANK

1 Land tenure system 3.38 1st

2 Religious and superstitious beliefs 3.30 2nd

3 Lack of finance 3.28 3rd

4 High population 3.27 4th

5 Level of education 3.26 5th

6 Lack of knowledge on conservation 3.15 6th

technique

7 Limited agriculture land 3.03 7th

8 Previous experience on 2.96 8th

agrobiodiversity conservation

9 Government 2.38 9th

10 Family members 2.44 10th

11 Age 2.40 11th

12 Lack of agriculture service 2.25 12th

Source: field survey, 2019

52
 REFRENCES
Aboh, C.L. and Effiong, J.B.2019 Indigenous practices
militating against the agricultural production: Methods
of improving its productivity in Uruan L.G.A of Akwa
Ibom State, Nigeria. L Wati: A journal of contemporary
Research. (16) 144-52.
Adebe T., 2005. Diversity in home garden agro-forestry
system of Southern Ethiopia Wangermnigen University
Alexandrina, R.G. (2011) ‘’A socio psychological study of
adoption of farmers’ agrobiodiversity friendly practices
in Flanders’’

Angelsen, A. & Kaimowitz, D. (eds) 2001 Agricultural

technologies and tropical deforestation. Wallingford, Uk:
CABI publishing.

Asare (2006) A review on cocoa agroforestry as means of

biodiversity conservation. Paper presented world cocoa
foundation partnership conference; Brussels.
Barau, A.A.,and Michael, J.A. (2017) ‘’Agrobiodiversity
Conservation Technique Adopted by Rural farmers in
Kware local Government area.
Barford As, 2014. The potential of palm in seasian
agroforestry system and home gardens world
agroforesty congress
Baudry, J., Burel, F., Thenail, C.,C., Le Coeur, D., (2000). ‘A
holistic landscape ecological study of the interactions
between farming activities and ecological patterns in
Brittany, france. ‘’Landscape urban plan 50:119-128.
Beedell, J.D.C.R., T (2000) ‘‘Using social-psychology models
to understand farmers’ conservation behaviour’’ Rural
studies 16: 117-127.
Bellon, M.R..,Almekinders, C. and Boef, W. (2015).
Encouraging biodiversity: The Conservation and
Development of Plants Genetic Resources, Intermediate
Technology Development Group, London, 48.

53
Benton.T., Vickery J., Wilson J., (2003). ‘’Farmland
biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key?’’ Trends in
ecology and evolution 18(4) : 182-188.
Bowers, Q.L.,R. (2009). ‘’Understanding Farmers strategic
decision-makingprocesses and implication of
biodiversity conservation policy’’ Environmental
management 90 (2); 1135-1144.
Benneh, G. (2007). Land Tenure and Agroforestry: Land use
system in Nigeria. London: International African
Institute, pp: 65-67

Camilus, B.B (2010) ‘’Strategies for Involving Rural Farmers

in Agrobiodiversity Conservation Measures in Akwa-
Ibom State, Nigeria.
Camilus, B.B (2010) ‘’Evaluation of Agricultural Biodiversity
Conservation Practices by Rural Farmers in Akwa Ibom
State, Nigeria.
Castro, A.H.P. (2007). Institutions and Food Security:
Implications for Forestry Development. Rome: F.A.O,
PP: 234-235.
Chikare, J.U. (2016) Agrobiodiversity conservation in Owerri,
Nigeria. University of Technology, Owerri, Nigeria 27 th
may.
Copper, D. (2001). Supporting conservation and utilization of
local biological resources. In: W.R.M. (Ed). Biodiversity:
social and ecological perspective. London: Zed Books
Ltd, pp: 5-6
Chouinard, H.,Paterson, T., Wandschneider, P. & Ohler, A.
(2008) ‘‘Will farmers trade profit for stewardship?
Heterogeneous motivations for farm practice selection ‘’.
Land economics 84(1).66-82.
Defrancesco, E., Gatto, P.,Runge,F. and Trestini, S. (2008).
‘’Factors Affecting Farmers’ Participation in Agri-
Environmental Measures’’. A Northern Italian
Perspective. Agricultural Economics 59:114-131
D’haene, K., Laurijssens, G., Van Gils, B., De Blust, G.,
Turkellboom, F. (2010). Agrobiodiversiteit. Een
54
 steunpilaar Voor de 3de generatie
agromileumaatregelen? INBO and ILVO i.o.v. het
Department Landboun en visserij, afdeling monitoring
en studie. INBO.R. 2010.38.
EC(2010). Agriculture sector and biodiversity conservation:
Best practice Benchmarking. E.BB. platform Brussels.

Emma, O., and Lilian, C.I., Ibeakwuchi, I.I., Obiefuna.J.C

(2009) ‘’Biodiversity Conservation for Sustainable
Agriculture in Tropical Rainforest of Nigeria.
Igbozurike, U.M. (2007). Agriculture at the cross-roads: A
comment on agricultural ecology. Ile Ife press, pp.111-
113.

International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

(2002): Position statement on translocation of living
organisms, introduction, re-introduction and re-
stocking. Gland: IUCN, pp: 24-25
Izuchukwu, .O. (2011) Analysis of the contributions of the
agricultural sector on the Nigerian economic
development. World review of Business Research 1:
191-200.

Jackson, P.S.W (2002) Ex-situ conservation of plants. In:

WCMC (Ed). Global biodiversity, status of earth’s living
resources. London: Chapman and Hall, pp: 58-60.

Jainchu. X. 2009. changing lifestyles of mountain

communities-new use for ancient landscapes in:
studied a kathamindu (nepul)
Jacobson, S.K., Sieving, K.E., Jones, G.A. and Van Doorn, A.
(2003). ‘’Assessment of farmers Attitudes and
Behavioural Intentions toward Bird Conservation on
Organic and Conventional Florida Farms’’. Conservation
Biology 17: 595-606
John, C.I. and Charles, K.O. (2015) ‘’Indigenous Knowledge
and Sustainable Conservation for Agrobiodiversity by
Farmers in umuahia North-Local Government Area of
Abia State, Nigeria.

55
Kanu, B.S., Salami, A.O., & Numasawa, K. (2014). Inclusive
growth: An imperative for African Agriculture. Tunis:
African Development Bank.

Kellert, S.R. (2008) Social and perceptual factors in the

preservation of animals species. In: Norton B.G. (Ed).
The preservation of species: The values of biodiversity.
Princeton University press, pp: 121-125
Knierim, A.S., R. (2004) towards multi-functional agriculture-
what motivates German farmers to realise biodiversity
conservation? (pre) proceedings of the 6th European
symposium of the international Farming Systems
Association, Vila Regal, Portugal.
Labour Force Statistics (2010) ‘Nigerian Bureau of Statistics
2 010’ Archieved from the original on 24 april, 2015.
Retrieved 22 june, 2015.
Mathews, S.& Brand, K. 2004. Africa invaded: the growing
danger of invading alien species. Global invasive species
programme, Cape town.
Mathijs, E. (2003) ‘’Social capital and farmers willingness to
adopt countryside stewardship schemes’’ outlook on
AGRICULTURE 32 (1): 13-16.
Mcneely, J.A. (2009). Economic and Biological Diversity:
Developing and Using Economic Incentives to Conserve
Biological Resource. Gland: IUCN, PP: 103-104

Mcneely, J.A, J.A. Miller (2000). Conserving the world’s

biological diversity. Switzerland; IUCN, pp: 211.
Mgbado, J.U. (2010): Agricultural Extension: The Human
Development Perspective. Computer edge publishers
Enugu.
Ministry of budget and national planning (2017) Economic
recovery and growth planning: 2017-2020.

Nigerian Conservation Foundation (NCF) (2005) Matters 7(4) :

16-20

56
Nigerian Environmental Study/Action Team (NEST) (2004).
Nigeria’s threatened environment. Ibadan: Intec printers
Ltd, pp ; 85-87
Olomola, Ade .S. (2007) ‘Strategies for managing the op
portunities and challenges of the current agricultural
commodity booms in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Pimbert, M.P (2009) Sustaining the multiple functions of
agricultural biodiversity. Gate keeper series No 88,
IIED. London.
Ryan, R.L., Erickson,D.L., & De young, R. (2008). ‘Farmers
motivations for adopting conservation practices along
riparian zones in a Mid-western agricultural watershed.
Journal of environmental planning and management
46: 19-37.

Scharlemann J.P.E.,Balmford A., Green R.E (2005) The level

of threat to restricted range bird species can be
predicted from maped data on land use and human
population. Biol conserve 123, 317-326
Siebert, R.,Toogood, M. & Kneirem.A. (2006) ‘’Factors
affecting European farmers participation in biodiversity
policies. ‘’sociologia Ruralis 46(4): 318-340.
Siebert R. Berger, G. Lorenz, J.& Pfeffer, H. (2010).
‘Assessing German farmers’ attitudes regarding nature
conservation set-aside in regions dominated by arable
farming’. Journal for nature conservation 18 (4) : 327-
337.
Soule, J.D and Piper,J.K. (2002) Conserving biology- its
challenge and massachussets: Sinauer Associates, pp:
164
Srivastava, J., Smith, N.J.H and Ferno, D. (2001).
Biodiversity and agriculture: Implications for
conservation and development. World Bank Technical
paper number 8, pp: 2-5

Shepherd, G. (2002). Managing Africa’s tropical dry forests: A

review of indigenous methods. London: Oversea
Development Institute (O.D.I), pp: 51-56

57
Tillman, D. Wedin D. and Knops J. (2009) ‘’Productivity and
sustainability influence of biodiversity in Grassland eco-
system nature 376 (6567) 718-720

Tillman, D. (2009) Global environment impacts of

agricultural expansion: the need for sustainable and
efficient practices. Proc Nat Acad Sci UA 96,5995-6000
Verter, Nahanga (2015) ‘An analysis of yam production in
Nigeria’. Acta universitatis agricultural et silviculturae,
mendelinae Brunesis, 63:659-665.
Vandemeer, J. Perfecto (2005). Breakfast of Biodiversity: the
truth about rainforest destruction. Food first books,
Oakland: 185.
(WCMC) World Conservation Monitoring Center (2002).
Global biodiversity; A status of the Earth’s living
Resources. London: Chapman and Hall, pp: 51

58