ASSESSMENT ON ADAPTATION STRATEGIES OF ARABLE CROP FARMERS IN THE ERA OF CLIMATE VARIABILITY

CHAPTER ONE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study Agriculture is one of the most important sectors of the Nigerian economy, accounting for around 42% of the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and more than 70% of the country's exports of goods other than oil. It satisfies more than 80 percent of the nation's dietary requirements (Oyekale, Bolaji, & Olowa, 2021). There are around 70 percent of Nigerians who reside in rural areas, and 90 percent of those people work in agriculture. This suggests that agriculture is a crucial industry that has the potential to favourably impact the lives of the vast majority of Nigerians (Okolo, 2004). This industry has been gravely challenged by a number of issues, the most significant of which are climate-related calamities like as drought and floods. Despite its large contribution to the economy as a whole, this sector has been facing serious challenges (Ozor, Madukwe, Enete, Amaechina, Onokola, Eboh, Ujah, & Garforth, 2022). According to Udofia (2001), the terrifying impacts of climatic variability on the entire environment have reached a global dimension. This conclusion was reached by the author. In spite of the widespread awareness of its impacts as well as the ecological and economic repercussions, it would appear that these issues have not received the level of serious attention they merit. The statistical description of climate, expressed in terms of mean and variability of key parameters over a time period ranging from months to hundreds or millions of years is referred to as climate. According to the definition provided by the World Meteorological Organization, the classical period lasts for a period of thirty years (WMO, 1992). Surface variables like as temperature, precipitation, and wind speed are most frequently included in this category of values. The distinction between climate and weather is that climate is what you anticipate, while weather is what actually occurs. Climate is what you anticipate, while weather is what actually occurs (Ozor, Madukwe, Enete, Amaechina, Onokola, Eboh, Ujah, & Garforth, 2022). The phrase "climate variability" refers to the natural aspects of weather that are borne out in the shifts in weather patterns that occur over the course of a certain period of time (Palatnik, & Roson, 2021). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2001) provides the following definition of climate variability: "variations in the mean state and other statistics (such as standard deviations, the occurrence of extremes, etc.) of the climate on all temporal and spatial scales beyond that of individual weather events." [Climate variability] "variations in the mean state and other statistics (such as standard deviations, the occurrence of extremes, etc.) of the climate on all This concept makes it possible to think about climate change as a low-frequency component of climate variability, which means that it can be handled using the same quantitative tools and research methodologies as before (Mertz and Stone, 2003). Climate fluctuation can improve or lessen a local area's competitive advantage in agriculture. Alterations in the amount of water that is available in the soil, a rise in the frequency of temperature extremes, climate fluctuations, and crop diseases all have the potential to contribute to an overall drop in crop output and a severe food crisis (Palatnik, & Roson, 2021). According to some projections, by the end of the 21st century, the variability of the climate will have had a significant impact on the output of crops (Slater et al 2007). Although it is impossible for humans to make a precise forecast of what the upcoming season will bring, the agricultural industry, input suppliers, the marketing industry, and the government would all like to know because this information is essential to decision making. Variability in climate has led to unpredictability in terms of temperature, rainfall, and wind patterns (Oyekale, Bolaji, & Olowa, 2021). As a consequence of this, people living in rural areas of nations like Nigeria, whose primary source of income or economic activity is agriculture, are confronted with a great number of difficulties in terms of the decisions they must make regarding their agricultural endeavours ( Barnwal and Kotani, 2020). According to Nyong, Adesina, & Osman-Elasha (2007), climate variability adaptation methods are those tactics that enable the person or the community to cope with or adjust to the repercussions of the change in climate. These approaches can also be used to communities. Despite the fact that Zeirvogel et al. (2019) stated that the world has been going through a series of adaptations in response to climate variability, it is anticipated that the current climate change will provide an increased risk, novel combinations of risks, and potentially severe consequences. As a result, adaptation has been recognised as one of the policy options that can be utilised to reduce the negative effects that climatic variability has on agricultural output (Oyekale, Bolaji, & Olowa, 2021). Adaptation helps farmers achieve their goals of food, income, and livelihood security in spite of shifting climatic and socioeconomic conditions. These conditions include climatic variability, extreme weather conditions such as droughts and floods, and volatile short-term changes in both local and large-scale markets (Kandlinkar and Risbey, 2000). One of the policy measures that has been regarded as having the potential to mitigate the debilitating consequences of climate unpredictability is agricultural adaptation (Kurukulasuriya & Mendelsohn, 2019). According to a study that Mendelsohn and Dinar conducted in 1999 at the farm level, significant reductions in the negative impacts caused by climatic variability are feasible when adaptation measures are fully put into place (FAO, 2007). Some adaptation tactics for crop production among farmers include the planting of early maturing crops, mulching, small scale irrigation, adopting hardy types of crops, growing trees and staking them to minimise heat burns, and so on (Nyong, et al, 2007). The process of agricultural adaptation in Nigeria is fraught with a great deal of difficulty. According to Nzeh & Eboh (2021), the most significant barrier to successful agricultural adaptation is likely a lack of awareness and understanding regarding the fluctuation of the climate. According to Onyeneke & Madukwe (2020), other obstacles include a lack of information on suitable adaptation options, inadequate access to markets, and a paucity of agricultural labour (Palatnik, & Roson, 2021). According to Apata et al. (2020), capital, land, and labour serve as significant variables for coping with adaptation. They also emphasised that the absence of these factors as well as the choice of adequate adaptive measures form a severe barrier to agricultural adaptation. This corroborates the findings of Deressa et al. (2019), who found that adjusting to climatic variability is an expensive endeavour, which is made even more expensive by the requirement of intense labour utilisation. As a result of this, the development of a number of different adaptation strategies is required in order to make adjustments to the variable climate. In light of the changing climate, these policies put an emphasis on risk management, minimising vulnerability, increasing agricultural productivity, safeguarding the environment, and assuring sustainable development (Palatnik, & Roson, 2021). 1.2 Statement of the Problem Recent studies confirm that Africa is one of the most vulnerable continents to climate variability and change and low adaptive capacity. Some adaptation to current climate variability has been taking place; however, this may be insufficient for future changes in climate (IPCC, 2007). The uncertainty associated with climate variability is a disincentive to investment and adoption of agricultural technologies and market opportunities, prompting the risk-averse farmer to favour precautionary strategies that buffer against climatic change, particularly as a result of increased variability and extreme over activities that are more profitable on average (Barrett et al, 2007). It has been predicted that many farmers in Africa are likely to experience net revenue losses as a result of climate change, particularly as a result of increased variability and extreme events (TerrAfrica, 2009). The adverse consequences of climate variability includes damage on arable lands, livelihoods and biodiversity will take an irreplaceable toll on food production in developing countries like Nigeria which have a low capacity to cope and adapt to these challenges (Sha, Fischer van Velthuizen, 2009). Given the foregoing challenges a study of this nature will be a timely intervention. Many studies have been carried out in addressing the effects of climate variability on agriculture in Nigeria. However, not many of these studies have fully addressed the issues of adaptation strategies. Enete and Amusa (2021) discussed the challenges of agricultural adaptation to climate change in Nigeria, but the study was based on review of relevant literature thus leaving a gap for more empirical approach to the study of this issue.Enete and Amusa (2021) in another paper made further attempts to investigate the most cost-effective and sustainable indigenous climate change adaptation practices in South East Nigeria but studies covering wider area such as Nigerian agro-climatic zones and several arable crops simultaneously appear not to have been documented yet. Umoh and Eketekpe (2020) attempted to study climate change adaptation measures by wetland farmers in Niger Delta region of Nigeria but did not study any other State beyond Bayelsa out of the nine States in the Niger Delta. The study focused only on a single Local Government Area. The study of Emaziye (2013) was based on perceptions of climate change among rural farming households in the Niger Delta area of Nigeria in other todetermine the direction of change of the climate change indicators thus leaving a gap for empirical studies on adaptation especially in Delta State where little or no work on adaptation strategies has been done. Previous studies showed that the dimensions of use of these measures have not been effectively explored particularly in Delta State. This is considered important, considering the fact that farmers least able to adapt to climate variability will suffer most severely. In the light of this, this study has addressed the following research questions: What are the socio-economic characteristics of crop farmers? What is the perception of crop farmer’s about climate variability? What are the adaptation strategies adopted by farmers to mitigate the effects of climate variability? What socioeconomic and environmental factors influence farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies? What factors constrain farmers in adapting to the effects of climate variability? 1.3 Objectives of the Study The main objective of the study was to determine the adaptation strategies of arable crop farmers to climate variability in Delta State. The specific objectives were to: i)describe the socio-economic characteristics of arable crop farmers in the study area. (ii)ascertain farmers’ perception about climate variability on crop production. (iii)examine adaptation practices adopted by arable crop farmers in the study area. (iv).ascertain the factors that influence farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies. (v). determine the cost and return of adaptation strategies among arable farmers. (vi)identify constraints to adoption of adaptation strategies by arable crop farmers . 1.4 Hypotheses of the study The following null hypotheses were tested: (i). socioeconomic factors do not influence use of climate change adaptation strategies by crop farmers; (ii). institutional and farm-specific variables do not influence use of climate change adaptation strategies by food crop farmers; (iii). climate change adaptation strategies do not influence technical efficiency in crop production in the study area; and (iv). climate change adaptation strategies do not influence profit efficiency of food crop farmers in the study area. 1.5 Justification of the Study The present inability of food crop production sector to meet the foods demand of Nigerians and the challenge posed by climate change and variability emphasized the need for the improvement of food crop farmers. Failure to know the present food crop production efficiency (technical and profit) and the influence of climate change coping strategies on efficiency level of food crop production will inhibit designing and formulating appropriate policies to meet food crop production demands of the country. Developing economies can benefit much from inefficiency studies especially a type like this that incorporates farmers’ adaptation strategies to climate change to explain efficiencies. The results of this study are expected to give direction for policy makers in designing appropriate public policies to increase agricultural productivity and mitigating effects of climate change on food crop production in Nigeria especially in the Southwestern zone. It will provide a useful guide to international and local donor agencies interested in climate change mitigation and adaptation in their provision of grants and funds for environmental and resource management studies. The results of this study will also help agricultural planners in the Agricultural Development Programmes (ADPs) and Ministries of Agriculture, Science and Technology; and Environment in the southwestern region and Nigeria as a whole and those states in the zone with Agro-climatological and Ecological zone study Units in their planning activities and providing useful weather data that will guide in planning public (or planned) adaptations to complement the farm-level (or autonomous) adaptation strategies. Researchers are going to have a good resource base to look at climate change for further work. Farmers are also going to benefit by knowing those adaptation strategies to climate change that are more productive and efficiency-enhancing. 1.6 Limitations of the Study The major limitation was on data collection. The enumerators elicited information from the respondents using interview schedule as against the supposed structured questionnaire. The respondents were interviewed all through because of the importance of the information the questionnaire to elicit. It was not self-administered as it is supposed of questionnaire but rather enumerator and researcher-administered (Eboh, 1998). This made the collection of data to take more time than necessary but the data were free of error due to omission of relevant information needed for the study. Another limitation was the issue of finance for the data collection. This was overcome as the researcher sought for money to address this issue in order to still meet up with the set time for the data collection.