Technical Efficiency and the Impact of Fadama Participation: A Meta-Frontier Analysis of Smallholder Cassava Farmers in Edo State, Nigeria

Enhancing the technical efficiency (TE) of smallholder farmers is critical for achieving food security and agricultural transformation in Nigeria, a nation where cassava productivity remains below potential despite being a global leader in production. This study evaluates the impact of participation in the FADAMA development programme on the technical efficiency of cassava farmers in Edo State, employing a novel meta-frontier framework to disentangle managerial performance from technology access. Primary data were collected from 480 farmers (240 participants and 240 non-participants) across three agro-ecological zones using a multi-stage sampling technique designed to ensure representativeness. Analysis involved a two-stage approach: first, Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA) estimated group-specific TE scores; second, a meta-frontier model calculated the technology gap ratio (TGR). A Tobit regression identified determinants of inefficiency. Results show that FADAMA participants had a significantly higher mean group TE (0.81) compared to non-participants (0.69). However, the meta-frontier analysis reveals a persistent technology gap, with participants' TGR at 0.89. This indicates that while participants are better managers, they still operate 11% below the potential regional best-practice frontier. Key drivers of inefficiency include limited access to formal credit, older farmer age, and greater distance to output markets. The study concludes that FADAMA successfully improves farm-level management but has not fully closed the technology adoption gap. We recommend programme redesign to integrate intensive practical training, facilitate formal credit access, and improve rural infrastructure to maximize efficiency gains.

Technical Efficiency, Meta-Frontier, FADAMA, Cassava, Stochastic Frontier Analysis

1. Aigner, D., Lovell, C. A. K., & Schmidt, P. (1977). Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. Journal of Econometrics, *6*(1), 21-37. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alene, A. D., & Hassan, R. M. (2006). The efficiency of traditional and hybrid maize production in Eastern Ethiopia: An extended efficiency decomposition approach. Journal of African Economies, *15*(2), 253-277. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Battese, G. E., & Corra, G. S. (1977). Estimation of a production frontier model: with application to the pastoral zone of Eastern Australia. Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, *21*(3), 169-179. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Battese, G. E., Rao, D. S. P., & O'Donnell, C. J. (2004). A metafrontier production function for estimation of technical efficiencies and technology gaps for firms operating under different technologies. Journal of Productivity Analysis, *21*(1), 91-103. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Coelli, T. J., Rao, D. S. P., O'Donnell, C. J., & Battese, G. E. (2005). An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis (2nd ed.). Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Ewekhare, B. T., & Idahosa, E.O. (2025). The Efficiency Gap in Nigerian Cassava Farming: A Stochastic Frontier Analysis. Global Academic and Scientific Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies (GASJMS). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. FAO. (2023). FAOSTAT: Crops and livestock products. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis (5th ed.). Prentice Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Israel, G. D. (1992). Determining sample size. University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Khandker, S. R., Koolwal, G. B., & Samad, H. A. (2010). Handbook on impact evaluation: Quantitative methods and practices. The World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Nweke, F. (2004). New challenges in the cassava transformation in Nigeria and Ghana (EPTD Discussion Paper No. 118). International Food Policy Research Institute. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. O'Donnell, C. J., Rao, D. S. P., & Battese, G. E. (2008). Metafrontier frameworks for the study of firm-level efficiencies and technology ratios. Empirical Economics, *34*(2), 231-255. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Oladele, A. O., Maharazu, I., Omotayo, O., & Aluwong, A. J. S. (2024). Resource productivity and determinants of technical efficiency among cassava farmers’ in north central, Nigeria. Agricultural Sciences, (42), 10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Oyotomhe, O. I., Aiyedun, E.A., & Ebukiba, E. S. (2025). Determinants of Cassava Production among Smallholder Farmers in Edo State, Nigeria. Global Academic Journal of Agriculture and Biosciences, *7*(3). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. World Bank. (2008). World development report 2008: Agriculture for development. The World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. World Bank. (2015). Project Appraisal Document for the Third National FADAMA Development Project (Additional Financing). Report No. PAD1005. The World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Breeding for a Greener Future: Selective Breeding and Crossbreeding Approaches to Minimize Methane Emissions in Ruminant Livestock
• Determinants of Adoption of Post-Harvest Losses Prevention Techniques among Banana/Plantain Marketers in Lagos State, Nigeria
• Enhancing Rice Yield Prediction Using UAV-Based Multispectral Imaging and Machine Learning Algorithms
• Seed-Borne Fungi of Groundnuts (Arachis Hypogaea) and Their Management with Ginger (Zingiber Officinale) Extract In Makurdi, Nigeria
• The Influence of Landforms and Slope on Agricultural Cropping Patterns in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar District