Factors Influencing Infrastructure Provision in Agrarian Communities of Ondo State, Nigeria

Submission Deadline-23rd July 2024
June 2024 Issue : Publication Fee: 30$ USD Submit Now
Submission Deadline-20th July 2024
Special Issue of Education: Publication Fee: 30$ USD Submit Now

Factors Influencing Infrastructure Provision in Agrarian Communities of Ondo State, Nigeria

Factors Influencing Infrastructure Provision in Agrarian Communities of Ondo State, Nigeria

Omotayo Ben Olugbamila*1, Ignatius Adelakun Akerele2, Omotayo Fatai Ogunyemi3, Latifat Oluwadara Isola-Muyideen4, Henry Afolabi5

 1,2,5Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria.

3School of Housing, Building and Planning, University Sains Malaysia

4Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Abuja, Nigeria.

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2024.1101027

Received: 05 January 2024; Revised: 20 January 2024; Accepted: 27 January 2024; Published: 17 February 2024

ABSTRACT

In the realisation of inclusive economy, infrastructure facilities are needed in the agrarian communities to boost farm produces and overall food insecurity. Considering the exponential increase in food items in the urban communities; global goal 2015 has earlier identified the provision of required infrastructure in the agrarian communities (farm settlements) important in attaining food security advancement. In the developing countries such as Nigeria, provision of appropriate infrastructure in the agrarian communities is considered herculean to the providers. This condition is however prior to number of factors limiting it’s availability in the agrarian communities (farm settlements) for improved productivity. The study however made use of questionnaire administration and physical observation to draw primary data through total enumeration technique in the identified farm settlements, thus, 255 household heads were identified in the four designated farm settlements of Ondo State. Likert scale was used to compute Mean Value Index (FIFI) for the identified factors influencing infrastructure facilities development in the farm settlements. The study concluded that government insensitivity, lack of visionary leader, government instability, maintenance failure, capital stagnancy and corruption were major factors influencing infrastructure development in the farm settlements of Ondo State; and that government should device action plans towards facilities development like, routine facilities maintenance and financial commitment which may also come from Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs).

Keywords: Farm settlement, Agrarian, Infrastructure Provision.

INTRODUCTION

The significance of community development in a nation system cannot be jettisoned. The summation of different dynamic communities in a spatial system forms different levels of planning: local, state and regional level (Yakaldevi, 2013). These planning levels take root in the communities of people that form a nation. A nation or acreation of different forms of communities functions on infrastructure: facilities, utilities and services (Adeyinka & Olugbamila, 2015; Olugbamila & Akerele, 2022). Infrastructure in a community is very important for the wellbeing of the people as advocated in urban planning.

There are different forms of communities either large or small: academic (university), virtual (social media), industrial (production areas) and agrarian (farming) communities, among others; however, the common concept in this regard, is a defined designation, a place where people work for a common goal and purpose toward mutual benefits (Olugbamila & Akerele, 2022). According to Tonnies and Talcott Parsons as adapted in the study of Yakaldevi (2013), community could be viewed in the guise of organic and inorganic entity. The former connotes traditional, natural and culturally inclined community, it is a place where planning techniques are reduced; while the latter encapsulates the post-industrial based communities, otherwise referred to as planned urban communities of requisites critical infrastructure that could support creation of jobs and other essential social needs (Basorun, 2005). In contrast, some rural communities are organically or traditionally formed devoid of comprehensive planning approach and basic amenities as applicable to urban centres where communities are well planned. These communities are rather referred to as pre-industrial communities characterised of shanties in absence of planning standards (Yakaldevi, 2013; Clark, 2017).

Contextually, this paper is premised on planned or inorganic agrarian form of communities. These sets of communities are established and monitored by the government with availability of basic infrastructure to improve the daily farming operations in the community. In regards to Western Region of Nigeria, the government in 1959, established and monitored agrarian communities called Farm Settlement (FS); these farm settlements are communities of farmers equipped with modern techniques in farming methods to improve traditional system of farming activities in the region; and thirty seven (37) of such were established throughout the five (5) Western Region States with Ondo State inclusive (Also, 2011; Familugba, 2016).

There are five (5) farm settlements located in Ondo State. The inception of the farm settlement establishment was characterised of basic infrastructure facilities to aid the activities of the settlers in the farm settlement (Kreinin, 2005; Akerele, 2022). These facilities include: water, storage, machinery, school, road, healthcare, electricity and farm buildings, among others; these facilities were provided and being maintained by the defunct Western Region Government. At the collapse of the Regional Government in Nigeria, the farm settlements had been released to the State government for possession and maintenance. A study conducted by Akerele (2022) noted that the average infrastructure facilities in Ondo State farm settlements were poor and their major provider of were State government and Settler Based Group in the farm settlements. The study and others (Alao, 2011, Familugba, 2016; and Olugbamila & Akerele, 2022) primarily focussed on history, characteristics and facilities development in the farm settlements with no reference to the factors that influence infrastructure facilities development in the farm settlements; hence, this study.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The review

Osman and Afrah (2017) noted that infrastructure is the essential equipment, such as roads and bridges, among others that are required for a nation, region or organization to function effectively. Infrastructure contributes significantly to economic development, increasing productivity and providing services that could improve life quality of the people (Ezeogidi, 2014). The services rendered as a result of adequate infrastructure development translate into increasing aggregate production such as growing farmers’ output through improved roads, construction of maritime ports, rail connections, electrical generation, transmission and distribution, water and irrigation projects (Akinyosoye, 2010).

Auwalu, Ghali, Hamed and Akram (2020) established the need inherent in the infrastructure development and sustainable urban growth in Lagos Nigeria. In essence, Nigeria’s economy requires massive infrastructure development, among them is farm settlements facilities development across the nation. These facilities development hinge on several factors that initiate economic developments. Oyeyemi and Awujola (2014) examined the various factors that are responsible for economic growth and development in Nigeria. These factors include, capital, education, training, health and human resources and corruption, among others. The study pinpointed the interplay of these factors that grossly determine the localisation of these infrastructure facilities into appropriate sectors of the economy.

Infrastructure is very important in the development of human settlement; it facilitates spatial interactions within the settlement system. Sahoo (2011) established that an efficient transport system is a pre-requisite for a sustained economy that promotes interactions within a community of people. Infrastructure is an important key input to growth process.  According to Decon and Hoddinott (2005), road transportation service plays an important role in promoting the development of the backward regions and its integration into mainstream economy by opening trade frontiers and investment development. Consequently, effective and well established road network is needed to facilitate trade; trading in any country fulfils the needs of a sound transport system for sustainable economic growth.

The study conducted by World Bank (2007) established that 15% of agricultural products are lost between the farm gate and market due to poor roads and inadequate storage facilities; this has affected farmers’ incomes negatively. Poor rural roads infrastructure has posed hinderance to traders’ ability to connecting remote agricultural areas. This condition has opened a limited access to the market facilities from these areas and thus reduces competition in agricultural products (Patel, 2015). The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD, 1995) noted that the development of rural roads leads to increased agricultural production. The development of new land, intensifying existing land use to exploit expanded market opportunities through necessary infrastructure facilities like roads leads to increased productivity in farm produce.

The study of Ezeogidi (2014) established that holistic development in Nigeria has remained erratic due to poor facilities in the necessary sectors of the nation’s economy. The poor condition of infrastructure in the country has been manifested in underdevelopment characterized by unemployment, poverty, frustration, desperation and massive brain drain in the country. However, Okechukwu (2011) cited by Ezeogidi (2014) stated that infrastructure development remains important in any nation’s economy. The author further stated that infrastructure in Nigeria is in state of moribund and maintenance culture is quite problematic in the Nigeria context. This condition has led to infrastructure decay in the public sector of the economy.

Theoretical Underpinning

This study is premised on the growth pole theory by Perroux (1950) which is geared towards regional economic growth through fairly distribution of resources. It studies and enhances the growth of the complementary regions. Complementary region are border towns and cities that enjoys certain degree of freshness of central leading industry. Industrial development, however, in accordance with Perroux’s assertion; growth do not appear everywhere at once, but can spread in varying proportions with significant economic effects (Basorun, 2005).

The significance of the growth pole model in farm settlement development can be found within the ambit of the territoriality of a particular farm settlement, emitting or spreading agricultural innovations to other farmers who are not primarily a settler of a particular farm settlement. Farm settlements in these regions also bring about multiplier effects. The enhancement of individual’s per capita income will favour economic growth in such sub-regions. In growth pole development, dominant centre is usually being identified serving other regions with some specific services of growth and development. Farm settlements serves as a nodal points within the region; it attracts people and other ancillary developments.

The growth pole theory may not be effective until the resources in these farm settlements across the states are well harnessed, through the provision of necessary infrastructure facilities for the benefit of the settlers, thereby enhancing agricultural facilities development for food production, cash crop promotion, raw material for agro-industries and overall support for sustainable development goal in the country. This will enhance effective demand and supply in the farm settlements thereby leading to competitive comparative advantage among the farm settlements; which is capable of effecting positive changes in the farm settlements.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted in Ondo State, located in Southwest Geopolitical Zone of Nigeria (Figure 1). Ondo State is located some 491.6 km southwest of Nigeria’s capital city of Abuja, and it is bounded to the north by Ekiti and Kogi States, to the east and south by Edo State, also to the south by the Atlantic Ocean, and to the west by Ogun and Osun States. Ondo State has an area of 15,500 km². It lies between latitude 50°45` and 70° 52’N; and between longitude 40° 20’ and 60°05’E, of the Equator of the Greenwich Meridian. Ondo State comprised of 18 Local Government Areas (Figure 2) out of the 774 Local Government Areas that constitute the Federal Republic of Nigeria. It consists of three senatorial districts, namely, Ondo South, Ondo Central and Ondo North.

The Western Region Government established thirty-seven farm settlements across Western Region States of Nigeria in 1959. This was primarily with the view of increasing the socioeconomic standard of the people in the region (Gbadegesin, 2017). As stated earlier, there are five farm settlements located in Ondo State, one is disputed (Ifon farm settlement). The remaining four farm settlements considered in this study include: Onisere and Mariwo farm settlements in Ondo Central Senatorial district; Okitipupa and Ile-Oluji farm settlements in Ondo South Senatorial district. Farm Settlements in Ondo State still remain one of the major medium where farm produces are being supplied to the neighbouring towns of the study area, thereby boosting the economic base of the State. In addition, all farm settlements were not established same year. They are grouped into three categories: type A, B and C (Alao, 2011). Type A farm settlement contained mainly cash crops located in the forest vegetation zone and Type B contained mainly arable crops (Food crops) and livestock, while Type C was designed to accommodate low cost modern farms, rural industry and low cost modern housing.

Map of Ondo State in the context of Nigeria

Figure 1: Map of Ondo State in the context of Nigeria.

Source: Ondo State Ministry of Physical Planning and Urban Development, Akure, 2022

Figure 2: Map of Ondo State showing the Farm Settlements/Study Area

Source: Ondo State Ministry of Physical Planning and Urban Development, with Authors Modifications.

Data set utilized for this study was sourced from both primary and secondary data, primary data were sourced through physical observation and questionnaire administration on household heads in the identified farm settlements. Secondary data in respect to the list of farm settlement and the total number of the pioneer settlers were sourced from the Ondo State Ministry of Agriculture. Four functioning farm settlements were identified in Ondo State, these includes Okitipupa, Onisere, Mariwo and Ile-Oluji farm settlements (Figure 2). Total enumeration technique was utilized in the selection of respondents from the various groups of the target population, this result in the selection of the 255 settlers across the four farm settlements in Ondo State (Table 1). The technique allows all the members of the individual groups to be included in the survey. For instance, the population of the settlers at Mariwo and Ile-Oluji farm settlements were 32 and 48 respectively; for a reliable data collection, all the settlers were sampled. This also applies to Okitipupa and Onisere farm settlements with 80 and 95 population distribution of settlers respectively.

The sample size was drawn based on the settlers groups in operation in the farm settlements of Ondo State. The settlers in the farm settlements were therefore identified and sampled based on their respective societal group. Questionnaire was thus administered to the household heads located in each of the farm settlements, which made up the 255 study population in the study area.

Table 1: Population Distribution in Farm Settlements of Ondo State.

S/N Farm  Settlement Local Govt.   Area Adult Age  Group Youth Age  Group Sample Size
1 Onisere Idanre 35 60 95
2 Okitipupa Okitipupa 30 50 80
3 Ile-Oluji Odigbo 18 30 48
4 Mariwo Ifedore 14 18 32
   Total 97 158 255

Source: Author’s Field Survey, 2022.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This section discusses the analysis of data obtained from respondents in the farm settlements of Ondo State, Nigeria. It is subdivided into two (2) sections. The first section focuses on the socio-economic characteristics of settlers in FS. The second examines the factors influencing infrastructure facilities provision in the FS.

Socioeconomic Characteristics of Settlers

The socioeconomic attributes of the people living in a geographical confine has many connotative effects on the community in which they live (Asadu, Agbo, Asadu & Onyinye, 2019, Akerele, 2022, Olugbamila & Akereele, 2022). The socioeconomic variables examined in this study includes: gender, age, educational status, income, length of stay and household size.

The findings on the socioeconomic characteristics of settlers as presented in Table 2 revealed that more males (Ile-Oluji -89.6%, Onisere – 90.5%, Mariwo – 100%, Okitipupa – 92.5%) engaged in agricultural activities than their female counterparts (Ile-Oluji -10.4%, Onisere – 9.5%, Mariwo – 0%, Okitipupa – 6.3%). This confirms the study of Obayelu et al., (2020) that gender gap exist in agricultural participation with the males playing dominant roles as compared with the female counterpart. The age distribution of settlers showed that the young adult group (35-49 years) accounted for 46.3% of the total population, while 19.2%, 16.9% and 13.7% constituted 20-34years, 50-64years and 65 years and above groups respectively. Findings from the study equally revealed that majority (69.8%) of the respondents across the different FS of Ondo State have acquired secondary level of education which will likely influence their level of understanding of infrastructure provision in the study area. The study also revealed that low income group (N10,000 – N30,000) has the highest proportion of income across the farm settlements in Ondo State, this accounted for 37.3% of the total population. This revealed that majority of the settlers are low income earners and it has been established in the literature that income remains a significant yardstick in the development of agrarian infrastructure facilities (Yusuf, et al. 2011); even the patronage of the provided facilities hinges much on income of the people (Olugbamila & Adeyinka, 2015).

Further analysis revealed that most of the settlers (47.8%) have stayed in the various farm settlements for between 22–34 years with 56.9% of them having a household size of 7 – 9 people. It is expected that as the household size is increasing, the population size of the farm settlement will keep increasing, therefore, the study of the household size in the farm settlements would inform infrastructure providers of what to be expected in infrastructure facilities planning.

Table 2: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Settlers

Farm Settlement
Ile-Oluji (%) Onisere (%) Mariwo (%) Okitipupa (%) Total (%)
Gender Male 43 (89.6) 86 (90.5) 32 (100.0) 75 (93.8) 236 (92.5)
Female 5 (10.4) 9 (9.5) 5 (6.3) 19 (7.5)
Total 48 (18.8) 95 (37.3) 32 (12.3) 80 (31.4) 255 (100)
Age Structure 20-34 9 (18.8) 25 (52.1) 12 (25.0) 2 (4.2) 48 (18.8)
(years) 35-49 19 (20.0) 45 (47.4) 17 (17.9) 14 (14.7) 95 (37.3)
50-64 5 (15.6) 12 (37.5) 10 (31.3) 5 (15.6) 32 (12.5)
>64 16 (20.0) 36 (45.0) 14 (17.5) 14 (17.5) 80 (31.4)
Total (%) 49 (19.2) 118(46.3) 53(20.8) 35 (13.7) 255 (100)
Educational Status No Formal Education 2 (4.2) 7 (7.4) 4 (5.0) 13 (5.5)
Primary 5 (10.4) 7 (7.4) 10 (31.3) 8 (10.0) 30 (11.8)
Secondary 37 (77.1) 70 (73.7) 17 (53.1) 54 (67.5) 178 69.8)
Tertiary 4 (8.3) 11 (11.6) 5 (15.6) 14 (17.5) 34 (13.3)
Total (%) 48 (100) 95 (100) 32 (100) 80 (100) 255 (100)
Income (<N10,000) 6 (12.5) 14 (14.7) 3 (9.4) 14 (17.5) 47 (18.4)
(N10,000 – N30,000) 21 (43.8) 33 (34.7) 10 (31.3) 31 (68.8) 95 (37.3)
(N30,000 – N50,000)
(N50,000 above) 14 (29.2) 29 (30.50 15 (46.90 30 (37.5) 88 (34.5)
Total 7 (14.6) 19 (20.00 4 (12.5) 5 (6.3) 35 (13.7)
48 (100) 95 (100) 32 (100) 80 (100) 255 (100)
Length of Stay 5-19 10 (20.8) 30 (31.8) 3 (9.4) 14 (17.5) 57 (22.4)
20 – 34 27 (56.3) 57 (60.0) 7 (21.9) 31 (38.8)    122(47.8)
35 – 49 3 (6.30 2 (2.1) 12 (37.5) 30  (37.5 47 (18.4)
50 and Above 8 (16.7) 6 (6.3) 10 (31.3) 5 (6.3)     29 (11.4)
Total 48 (100) 95 (100) 32 (100) 29 (100) 255 (100)
Household Size 1 – 3 6 (12.5) 6 (6.3) 2 (15.0) 12 (15.0) 26 (10.2)
4 – 6 12 (25.0) 27 (62.5) 20 (62.5) 25 (31.3) 84 (32.9)
7 – 10 30 (62.5) 62 (31.3) 10 (31.3) 43 (53.8)     145(56.9)
Total 48 (100) 95 (100) 32 (100) 80 (100) 255 (100)

Source: Authors field survey, 2022

Factors Influencing Infrastructure Facilities

Provision in the FS.

Weighted Mean Value was employed in this study through Likert scale computation: Strongly Agreed (SA), Agreed (A), Disagreed (D), Strongly Disagreed (SD) and Undecided (U) in the order of 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 (Table 2). The Weighted Mean Value was used to compute an index mean value for each variable; Factor Influencing Facility Index (FIFI). Ten variables were identified as factors influencing facilities development in Ondo State farm settlements, these include: Government insensitivity, Lack of visionary leader, corruption, Government instability, Political agenda, Maintenance failure, Absence of funding from the government, Capital flight (cost increment), Capital stagnancy (abandoned project/poor quality) and Lack of Non-governmental Organisation support.

As presented in Table 3, the Summation of the Weighted Values (SWV) and its respective FIFI values, Mean Deviations were computed alongside with Variance, Standard deviation and Co-efficient of Variance. Mathematically, this is expressed as:

X =     Fi /n…………………………………(1)

Fi =     Frequency of the settlers rating of the factor

            influencing facility i

n  =      Total number of the identified factors

 influencing facilities at the farm settlement

              WV =  FiVi……………………………………..(2)

The Weighted Value (WV) for each facility was obtained as the product of the number of settlers responses for each factor influencing facility rating and their respective weight values.

WV =  Weighted Value

Fi       =  Frequency of the settlers rating of the factors

             influencing facility i

Vi    =   Weight attached to the factor influencing

facility i    

Furthermore, the Summation of Weighted Value (SWV) for each factor influencing facility were derived by adding the product of the responses of each rating for the factors influencing facility and their respective weight values.

SWV  =  ∑FiVi…………………………………….(3)

SWV  =  Sum of the weighted values

Fi          =   Frequency of the settlers rating of the

                 factors influencing facility i

Vi       =   Weight attached to the factors influencing

                 facility i

The Factors Influencing Facility Index (FIFI) for each factor in the aggregated farm settlements were obtained by dividing the SWV of each factor influencing facility by the total number of the respondents (N) at each farm settlement respectively, while Table 3 is used as decision rule for each value computed.

FIFI     =      ∑FiVi/N……………………………….(4)

The opinion of the settlers as regards the factors influencing infrastructure facilities development in the farm settlements were presented in Table 4. The aggregate  across the four farm settlements is 3.45. This implied that the respondents across the farm settlements agreed with most of the factors identified affecting facilities development in the farm settlements. The highest and lowest Mean Deviations (MDs) around aggregate  value are 0.47 (government insensitivity) and -0.58 (capital flight); this indicated that government insensitivity has contributed more to the failure of the facilities development in the farm settlements while cost increment of facilities has lower influences on facility development.

Furthermore, the positive MDs around FIFI include: 0.47 (government insensitivity), 0.16 (lack of visionary leader), 0.32 (government instability), 0.15 (maintenance failure), 0.44 (capital stagnancy), 0.42 (corruption). These implied that the respondents across the farm settlements showed that government insensitivity, lack of visionary leader, government instability, capital stagnancy (Plate 1), maintenance failure (Plate 2) and corruption are the major factors that are influencing infrastructure facilities development in the farm settlements. While the negative MDs around the FIFI, political agenda (-0.76), capital flight (-0.58), absence of funding by government (-0.30) and lack of NGO support (-0.32) are the the factors that have lesser influence on the infrastructure facilities development in the farm settlements of Ondo State.

The computed Co-efficient of Variance (25%) indicated that 75% of the settlers have similar opinions and the computed mean values are reliable in the determination of the factors influencing infrastructure facilities development in the agrarian communities as applicable to farm settlements of Ondo State. In essence, it was observed that factors such as, government insensitivity, visionary leader, government instability, maintenance failure, capital stagnancy and corruption were agreed upon by the respondents in Ondo State. These findings further substantiate the earlier standpoint of Ilori (2019) on account of government influence and inability to providing adequate critical infrastructure for the people. This condition has warranted reduction in the infrastructure facilities level in the urban environment. In addition, the study conducted by Fan, Heydari, Saeidi, and Lai, (2023) equally established that corruption is a major factor limiting the pace of infrastructure facilities development in the developing countries as it applies to Nigeria context.

Okitipupa farm settlement 

Ile-Oluji Farm settlemen

Plate 1: Abandoned Storage facilities project in the farm settlements

Ile-Oluji FS Federal Govt Water Project

Onisere FS Grain Silos

Plate 2: Lack of Facilities Maintenance at the Farm Settlements of Ondo State

Table 3: Likert Scale Decision Table for FIFI

Likert Scale Interval Difference Rating (comment)
        1 1.00 to 1.79 0.79 Undecided (U)
        2 1.80 to 2.59 0.79 Strongly Disagreed (DA)
        3 2.60 to 3.39 0.79 Disagreed (D)
        4 3.40 to 4.19 0.79 Agreed (A)
        5 4.20 to 5.00 0.80 Strongly Agreed (SA)

Source: Author’s Field Survey, 2022

Table 4:   Factors Influencing Infrastructure Facilities Provision in the Farm Settlements

Factors SWV FIFI MD Rate (comment)
Government insensitivity 1000 3.92 0.47 1 (A)
Lack of visionary leader 920 3.61 0.16 6 (A)
Government instability 961 3.77 0.32 4 (A)
Political agenda 685 2.69 -0.76 5 (DA)
Maintenance failure 918 3.6 0.15 7 (A)
Lack of gunding by govt. 802 3.15 -0.3 8 (D)
Capital flight 732 2.87 -0.58 10 (D)
(cost increment)
Capital stagnancy 992 3.89 0.44 2 (A)
(Abandoned projects/
poor quality)
Absence of NGO support 799 3.13 -0.32 9 (D)
Corruption 987 3.87 0.42 3 (A)
Total 8751 34.5

Source: Author’s Field Survey, 2022

n = 255;         N = 10,

Aggregate Mean = 34.50 ÷ 10 = 3.45            Variance = 7.84 ÷ 10 = 0.784,

Standard D. = √(0.784) = 0.89                        Co-efficient of Variance = 0.89 ÷ 3.45 = 25%

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The study has been able to assess factors influencing infrastructure facilities in the agrarian communities of Ondo State. It was established that government insentivity, lack of visionary leader, government instability, maintenance failure, capital stagnancy and corruption are the salient factors affecting infrastructure facilities development in the agrarian communities (farm settlements) of Ondo State. Also, political agenda, absence of funding by government, capital stagnancy and lack of NGO support have lesser impacts on infrastructure facilities development in the farm settlements of Ondo State.

Therefore, it is recommended that the government at all levels should be sensitive with financial commitment to the infrastructure facilities development in the farm settlements; people/farmers should be more proactive in the election of good leaders with better political agenda. The settlers at various farm settlements and the government should improve on facilities maintenance, while government should woe NGOs to farm settlement facilities supports in Ondo State. Generally, government should roll out policies to the development of infrastructure facilities in the farm settlements for the overall improvement of the agriculture sector and facilities management in Ondo State.

REFERENCES

  1. Adeyinka, S. A. and Olugbamila, O. B. (2015). Public Private Participation for Infrastructure in Developing Countries. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 4 (2), 11- 17.
  2. Akerele, I. A. (2022). Assessment of Infrastructure facilities in Farm Settlements of Ondo State, Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis submitted to the Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria.
  3. Akinyosoye, M. (2010). Infrastructure Development In Nigeria. Road Map to Sustainable Development in Lagos. Working Paper, Green Hill Technical Services Ltd. https://www.scirp.org.
  4.  Alao, F. (2011). A History of Western Nigeria Farm settlement Schemes, 1942-1975. A Ph. D Thesis, submitted to the Department of History and International Relation, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife.
  5. Asadu,  A. N.,  Agbo,  F.  U.,  Asadu, C.  L.  A.  & Onyeme, E. (2019). Socio Economic Characteristics of Farmers in five Agrarian Communities in Anambra State, Southeastern Nigeria, International Journal of Current Research, 11(04), 2984-2989. Available online at  http://www.journalcra.com
  6. Auwalu, F., Ghali, A., and Akram, A. Hamed, R. (2020). Analyzing urban growth and land cover change scenario in Lagos, Nigeria using multi-temporal remote sensing data and GIS to mitigate flooding. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2021.1887940.
  7. Basorun, J. (2005). Basic Element of Urban Regional Planning. Shalom Publishers, Akure Nigeria.
  8. Central Bank of Nigeria (2009). Highway Maintenance in Nigeria: Lessons from the other Countries. Research Department, Central Bank of Nigeria Occasional Paper No.27.
  9. Clark, A. (2007). Understanding Community: A Review of Networks, Ties and Contacts (Working Paper), Economic and Social Research Council National Centre for Research Methods Working Paper Series 9/07, Real Life Methods, University of Leeds.
  10. Decon, S. and Hoddinott, J. (2005). Livelihoods, Growth, and Links to Market Towns in 15 Ethiopian Villages. Food and Consumption and Nutrition Division, Discussion Paper 194, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C.
  11. Ezeogidi, C. (2014). The Impact of Poor Infrastructural Development on Nigeria Education and Global Economy, 1960-2014. COOU Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 1(1), 405-435.
  12. Familugba, J. (2016). A Historical Evolution Of Farm Settlement In Western Nigeria, The Case of Orin in Ekiti State: 1959-1966. Humanities and Social Sciences Review, 05(01):397–404.
  13. Fan, M., Heydari, Saeidi, M. and Lai, M. (2023). Corruption and Infrastructure Development Based on Stochastic Analysis. Archives for Technical Sciences, 28 (1), 11-28.
  14. Gbadegesin, M. (2017). The Tomorrow Farm: Life More Abundant for Nigeria’s Youth Governance, Entrepreneurship. Retrieved from https://muyiwagbadegesin.com/blog.
  15. IFAD (2011). Rural poverty in Nigeria. IFAD’s rural poverty report 2011. Retrieved from http://www. Rural povertyportal.org/country/home/tags/nigeria.
  16. Ilori, B. (2019). The Role Of Government in The Development of Basic Infrastructure. Central Bank of Nigeria.
  17. Kreinin, M. (2015). The Introduction of Israeli’s Land Settlement Plan to Nigeria. Michigan State University. Retrieved from http://ajae.oxfordjournals.org.
  18. Obayelu, A. E., Ogbe, A. O. and Edewor, S. E. (2020). Gender Gaps and Female Labour Participation in Agriculture in Nigeria, African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 11(2), 285-300.
  19. Olugbamila, O. B. and Akerele, I. A. (2022). Assessment of Farm Settlement Characteristics in Ondo State, Nigeria in Hemandez Camon, J.R and Kalgi, M. E. (ed). A New Economy for the 21st Century Digital Evolution. Proceedings of the 5th International European Conference on Interdisciplinary Scientific Research, 64-75
  20. Osman, G.and Afrah, A. (2017). Lack of Infrastructure: The Impact on Economic Development as a case of Benadir region and Hir-shabelle, Somalia, 7(1), 224-239.
  21. Oyeyemi, A., and Awujola, A. (2014). An Appraisal of Some Factors Influencing Economic Growth in Nigeria. International Journal of  African  and  Asian  Studies  –  An Open  Access  International  Journal,3  (33), 567-587.
  22. Patel, A. (2015). Infrastructure for Agriculture and Rural Development In India. Need for A Comprehensive Program and Adequate Investment. Indian Rural Development Report.
  23. Sahoo, P. (2011). Transport Infrastructure in India: Challenge, Development and Lessons From Japan. V.R.F Series, No. 465.
  24. World Bank, (2007). The World Bank Annual Report 2007, DC
  25. Yakaldevi, A. (2013). Basic Concepts of Community. Laxmi Books Publication, Solapur: http://www.isrj.in
  26. Yusuf, A., Omokore, D., Akinola, M., and Omolehin, A. (2011). Socio-economic Characteristics influencing farm household participation in Gandu system in Charanchi Local Government Area of Katsina State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development 3(12), 220-223.

Article Statistics

Track views and downloads to measure the impact and reach of your article.

0

PDF Downloads

437 views

Metrics

PlumX

Altmetrics