RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE, LIVELIHOOD CHOICE AND HOUSEHOLD WELFARE IN SOUTHWESTERN NIGERIA

Abstract

Availability of infrastructure in a rural community determines household livelihood activities and welfare status. The rural sector in Nigeria has experienced retarded growth for many years due to inadequate infrastructure. However, empirical evidence on the extent to which access to infrastructure contributes to rural household welfare in Nigeria is limited. The effect of rural infrastructure on livelihood choice and household welfare in southwestern Nigeria was investigated. A four-stage sampling procedure was used to select the respondents. Oyo and Ogun states were selected from southwestern Nigeria and 23% of the Local Government Areas (LGAs) were randomly selected from the states (twelve rural LGAs). Thirty-six villages and 442 rural households were randomly selected proportionate to sizes of LGAs and villages, respectively. Data were collected on household heads’ socio-economic characteristics (sex, marital status, age, educational status, household size, labour size, dependency ratio, migrant status, access to credit, farming experience and their Mean Per Capita HouseHold Expenditure (MPCHHE) profile). Information on their livelihood choices [Cropping+ Non-farm (CN), Cropping+ NonPoultry Livestock+Non-farm (CNPLN), Cropping+Poultry Livestock+ Non-farm (CPLN) and Cropping+Fisheries +Non-farm (CFN)] and Access to Rural Infrastructure (ARI) (potable water, primary school, health centre, market and agro-centre) (low access < 1 and high access ≥ 1)] were also collected. Level of welfare was disaggregated into high (>2/3 MPCHHE), medium (≤ 2/3 MPCHHE) and low (< 1/3 MPCHHE) welfare. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, multinomial logit regression and ordered logit regression at α0.05. Majority of the respondents were male (62.3%), married (80.1%), aged 48.1±11.5 years, with years of formal education, household size and farming experience of 7.3±4.7 years, 7.2±2.8persons and 13.7±10.4 years, respectively. The MPCHHE was ₦7,152.10. Households in the first quintile had a MPCHHE of N2,908.20, representing 8.1% of the total MPCHHE, while the MPCHHE of the fifth quintile was N14,297.10, representing 40.0%. The adoption of the livelihood choices were 35.8%, 41.6%, 12.2% and 10.4% for CN, CNPLN, CPLN and CFN, respectively. The proportion of households with access to potable water, primary school, health centre, market and agro-centre were 89.1%, 88.5%, 43.9%, 64.5% and 33.7%, respectively. More households had high access to infrastructure (52.8%). Many of the households had high welfare (43.9%), while 24.4% had medium welfare and 31.7% had low welfare. Age (β=0.45), sex (β=0.92), household size (β=0.12), primary education (β=0.58), secondary education (β=-1.13) and land ownership (β=0.81) explained CN, while CPLN was explained by household size (β=0.24), ARI (β=-0.86), secondary education (β=-1.34) and access to credit (β=0.79). Age (β=-0.05), household size (β=-0.39), primary education (β=1.21), tertiary education (β=2.73), land ownership (β=-1.38), access to credit (β=0.03) and ARI (β=0.04) explained CFN. High household welfare was explained by age (β=-0.32), male-headed households (β=0.51), non-farm income (β=0.20), ARI (β=-0.49), access to credit (β=0.39), educational level (β=0.25) and labour size (β=0.34), while age (β=0.15), male-headed households (β=-0.12), dependency ratio (β=0.87), ARI (β=0.18) and being a migrant (β=-0.05) explained low household welfare. Access to rural infrastructure influenced households’ choice for Cropping+Poultry Livestock+Non-farm (CPLN) as well as Cropping+Fisheries+Non-farm (CFN) activities. It also improved household welfare in southwestern Nigeria