LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Literature Review
The study shall review some relevant literature that relate to the subject matter of this research work. For a clearer overview of the various literature on the study, this section is divided into the major sub-headings as follows:
Concept of Agricultural Policy: An Explication from the Nigerian Agricultural Policy
The definition of public policy is germane in understanding agricultural policy. Public discourse today is saturated with the advocacy or criticism of various policies. It is common to hear of foreign policy, defence policy, economic policy, educational policy and policies in almost every area of government activity. We also hear of policy intension and the commitment of millions of naira to the implementation of certain policies (Ikelegbe, 1996).
The concept therefore is central to government or public sector. Public policy is simply actions taken or to be taken and actions not taken or not to be taken by government (Ikelegbe, 1996). It is a statement of what the government wants to do, what is doing, what it is not doing and what would not be done. In the same sense, agricultural policy is the statement of what the government wants to do , what it is doing and what it is not doing and what would not be done as regards to agricultural activities in Nigeria. Nigeria’s agricultural policy is the synthesis of the framework and action plans of Government designed to achieve overall agricultural growth and development (Ministry of Agriculture Policy Guide 2004). The policy aims at the attainment of self sustaining growth in all the subsector of agriculture and the structural transformation necessary for the overall socio-economic development of the country as well as the improvement in the quality of life of Nigerians (Ministry of Agriculture 2007).
The Broad Policy Objectives of the Nigerian Agricultural Policy
According to the ministry of Agriculture policy Guideline report (2004), the broad policy objectives of the agricultural policies in Nigeria include:-
Attainment of self–sufficiency in basic food commodities with particular reference to those which consume considerable shares of Nigeria’s foreign exchange and for which the country has comparative advantage in local production;
Increase in production of agricultural raw materials to meet the growth of an expanding industrial sector;
Increase in production and processing of exportable commodities with a view to increasing their foreign exchange earning capacity and further diversifying the country’s export base and sources of foreign exchange earnings;
Modernization of agricultural production, processing, storage and distribution through the infusion of improved technologies and management so that agriculture can be more responsive to the demands of other sectors of that Nigerian economy;
Creation of more agricultural and rural employment opportunities to increase the income of farmers and rural dwellers and to productively absorb an increasing labour force in the nations;
Protection and improvement of agricultural land resources and
preservation of the environment for sustainable agricultural production;
Establishment of appropriate institutions and creation of administrative organs to facilities the integrated development and realization of the country’s agricultural potentials.
Features of the Nigerian Agricultural Policy
The Ministry of Agriculture Policy Guideline 2004 gives a holistic insight of the main features of the policy to include: the evolution of strategies that will ensures self-sufficiency and the improvement of the technical and economic efficiency in food production. This is to be achieved through the introduction and adoption of improved seeds and seed stock, husbandry and appropriate machinery and equipment.
Efficient utilization of resources, encouragement of ecological specialization and recognition of the roles and potentials of small scale farmers as the major production of food in the country, reduction, in risks and uncertainties were to be achieved through the introduction of the agricultural insurance scheme to reduce natural hazard factor militating against agricultural production and security credit out lay through indemnity of sustained losses. A nationwide, unified and all– inclusive extension delivery system under the Agricultural Development Programme (ADP) was put in a place in a joint Federal State Government collaborative effort. Agro –allied industries were actively promoted. Other incentives such as rural infrastructure, rural banking, primary health-care, cottage industries etc. were provided, to encourage agricultural and rural development and attract youth, including school leavers, to go back to the land. The agricultural policy is supported by sub–policies that facilitate the growth of the sector.
These sub-policies cover issues of labour, capital and land whose price affect profitability of production systems; crops, fisheries, livestock and land use ;input supply, pest control and mechanization; water resources and rural infrastructure; agricultural extension, research, technology development and transfer; agricultural produce storage, processing, marketing, credit and insurance, cooperatives, training and manpower development, agricultural statistic and information management. Implementation of the agricultural policy is, however, moderated by the macro-economic policies which provide the enabling environment for agriculture to grow pari passu with the other sectors. These policies usually have major impact on profitability of the agricultural system and the welfare of farmers as they affects the flow of funds to the sector in terms of budgetary allocation, credit, subsidies, taxes, etc and, therefore, must be in harmony and mutually reinforcing with the agricultural policy.
Past Efforts at Revamping Agricultural in Nigeria
It is only recently that the growing awareness of the role of agriculture in the economic development of Nigeria has prompted various governments in the country to intensify efforts aimed at transforming agricultural from its present subsistence level to a market-oriented production. There had been a number of policy measures and programmes within the last two decades which involve the reconstruction or reformation of the whole structure of the agricultural sector by the creation of appropriate institutions and public services designed to strengthen the economic position of the independent farmer Anyanwu (1997). These measures and programmes are as discussed below:
The National Accelerated Food Production Project (NAFPP)
The desire to induce the masses of farmers to boost food production “within the shortest possible time”, led to the establishment in 1973 of the NAFPP a programme based on the green revolution concepts and experiences of Mexico, India, Phillipines and Pakistan. Its main objective is to accelerate the production of six major food crops namely rice, millet, sorghum, maize, wheat and cassava. This to be achieved by using field tested the traditional ones. The project which has three component-research, extension and agro-services- is divided into three phases namely the Minikit, Production Kit and Mass Production phases (Anyanwu, 1997).
The International Institute for Tropical Agricultural (IITA), Ibadan is the national coordinator of the project. The National Cereals Research Institute (NCRI). Ibadan houses the National Rice/Maize centre which guides and coordinates the activities of the NAFPP for rice and maize while the National Root Crop Research Institute Umudike is in charge of cassava. Another centre at Samaru near Zaira takes charge of sorghum, millet and wheat Anyanwu (1997) and Eze et al (2010).
Despite the fact that a substantial number of farmers have gained from the programme, it is bedeviled by inadequate finance, inadequate commitment by some states inadequate publicity and poor infrastructure facilities.
The Nigerian Agricultural and Co-operative Bank (NACB)
The NACB was founded in April, 1973, to foster growth in the quantity and quality of credit to all aspects of agricultural production including poultry farming, fisheries, forestry and timber production, horticulture etc. It also aims at improving storage facilities for agricultural products and the promotion of the marketing of agricultural products. The Central Bank of Nigeria has 40% of its equity shares which stood at N150 million in 1984.
The bank provides for two credit markets: direct-lending to individual farmers and organizations, and on-lending to established institutions mainly state governments and co-operative bodies against guarantees for on-lending to third parties.
After ten years of operation (1973-95), loans directly made to private sector investors in agriculture by the bank amounted to N122,468,031 and this is made up of 236 loans covering N26,776,654 made to individuals, 102 loans covering N94,071,747 made to incorporated companies and six loans covering N619,639 made to co-operative societies for direct private investment in agricultural. By 1995, its total credit was N3,179.6 million on 68.945 projects, with direct lending dominating at 62.4%.
Despite this apparent impressive performance, quantity of loans granted to small-holder has proved grossly inadequate.
(c) The River Basin Development Authorities (RBDAs)
The development of river basins was conceived in 1963 with involvement in the Lake Chad Basin and River Niger Commissions for countries bordering the Lake and the Niger River Anyanwu (1997) and Are (1985) cited Okoli and Onah (2002). But the concept was first tried in 1973 with the establishment of the Sokoto-Rima and the Chad Basin Development Authorities Anyanwu (1997). In addition, Anyanwu (1997) noted that eleven others were established under Decree Nos. 25 and 31 of 1976 and 1977 respectively. These include the Sokoto-Rima (for Sokoto), Hadejia-Jamare (for Kano), the Chad (for Borno), the Upper Benue (for Gongola), the Lower Benue (for Benue and Plateau), the Cross River (for Cross River), the Anambra- Imo for Imo and Anambra), the Nigeria (for Kaduna, Niger and Kwara) the Ogun-Oshun (for Oyo Ogun and Lagos), the Benin-Owena (for Bendel and Ondo) and the Niger Delta (for Rivers).
Decree No. 87 of September 28, 1979 amended some sections of the original decree. Another amendment came in October 1981 under Amendment Act No. 7. In June 1984, the number of these river basins was increased to 18 under the new name of River Basin in River Development Authorities (old name being River Basin Development Authorities).
The River Basin Development Authorities are expected to cater for the development of the land and water resources potentials of Nigeria for agricultural purposes and general rural development. The rural development aspect will receive greater emphasis under their new names. Each RBRDA covers a state, except Lagos and Abuja, which share with one other state each.
In the area of surface water development, remarkable achievements have been made since the creation of the RBRDAs. They have also been involved in the exploitation of ground water resources.
As at August, 1984, 12 of the 18 RBRDAs have assisted their participating farmers to crop 188, 194 hectares of various crops during the 1984 planting season for where 524,859 metric tonne of assorted crop like maize, wheat, cowpeas, rice, millet, sorghum, groundnut and vegetables were produced. In the area of irrigation, the story is only about 82,305 hectares or 33% is presently under irrigation.
By 1995, the later reduced number of RBDAs (from 18 to 11 in 1987) developed 51,558 hectares of land, irrigated 12,540 hectares, constructed 443 kilometres of roads, catered for 136,514 families, and drilled 58 boreholes. Its funds stood at N589.3 million, with 96.1% coming from the Federal Government (CBN, 1995b).
Activities of the RBRDAs have been hampered due to inadequate planning data. Shortage of funds, shortage of spare parts and lubricants, difficulties in securing land for development especially in the south and the shortage of qualified and experience technical, professional and managerial manpower.
Operation Feed the Nation (OFN)
May 1976 witnessed the launching of the Operation Feed the Nation (OFN) Scheme by the Obasanjo regime mainly to increase food production and eventually to attain self-sufficiency in food supply Ijere (2001). Other objectives of the programme included encouraging the section of the population which relies on buying food to grow its own food. Under the scheme encouragement and material assistance were given to the people in the form of technical advice and the supply of essential farm inputs such as improved seeds. Fertilizer, pesticides, farm implement, livestock and livestock feed at subsidized prices.
In other to protect farmers against a drastic fall in prices of food crops minimum prices increases in output, the government announced guaranteed minimum prices per metric ton for the 1976 agricultural season. But it was soon found that the prices fixed were less than those obtained in the markets.
As a development strategy, the impact of the OFN was not as profound as its initiators may want us to believe. The programme only succeeded in keeping the nation aware of food shortage the mobilizing its effort in the fight against the problem. Everybody irrespective of trade took to farming but this did not last long for after a while interest started waning. Increased food importation, the land use decree, inadequate human and material resources, faulty campaign strategy and faulty administrative system led to the death of OFN.
Agricultural Credit Guarantee Scheme (ACGS)
The need to encourage the flow of increased credit to the agricultural sector raised the necessity for an investigation to determine the bottlenecks which were experienced in attracting credit to the sector Ijere (2001). He further noted that the enquiry, a joint effort of the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Commercial Banks, focused on the current size and coverage of lending by the commercial banks to agricultural and the measures needed to improve the situation.
The results was a Fund established by the Federal Government under the Agricultural Credit Guarantee Fund Act, 1977 which provided for a Fund of N100 million subscribed to by the Central Bank of Nigeria (60%) Anyanwu (1997). The scheme came into operation of April 3, 1978 with the objective of providing “guarantees in respect of loans granted for agricultural purposes by any bank in accordance with the provision of the Act” and with the aim of increasing the level of bank credit to the agricultural sector. The agricultural purposes in respect of which loans can be guaranteed by the Fund are those connected with the establishment or management of plantations for the production of rubber, oil palm and similar crops, the cultivation of cereal crops, animal husbandry, including cattle rearing and poultry and fish farming.
Between April 1978, when the scheme came into operation, and the end of that year a total of 341 agricultural loans amounting to about N11.3 million had been guaranteed by the Fund. The Fund has continued to increase progressively over the years such that by the end of 1982, a total of 4,762 projects involving the sun of N143.2 million have been guaranteed by the fund. As table 2k shows the number of loans guaranteed rose from 341in 1998 to 18079 in 1995 while the value rose from N11.284 million in 1978 to N164.190 million in 1995.
However, some of the observed problems in the implementation of the scheme include delays experienced by farmers in having their application processed by the banks and some issues alleged to have arisen from the Land Use Act.
Rural Banking Scheme
At the instance of the Central Bank of Nigeria, the Financial System Review Committee in 1975 recommended and the Federal Government approved a programme of geographical dispersal of bank branches particularly designed to ensure the penetration of the rural areas by banks. The rationale for this included, among others, the fact that a network of rural banks would help to mobilize rural savings some of which would be invested in the agricultural sector. The first cycle of the plan covered the period 1877-1980 and 200 bank branches which were projected to be set up have since been established. During the second phase 19801983, 266 rural branches were planned to be opened. The third phase which was launched in 1985 covered 1985 to 1989 and it involved the opening of 300 rural branches. Though the scheme was abandoned in 1990, by 1991-200, 266, and 299 branches had been opened for each of the three phases, giving a total of 765, with only 1 outstanding.
Apart from the above, it has been observed that, this programme aimed at facilitating the transformation of the rural economy and thus restrain the population drift from the rural to the urban centres, was not being vigorously implemented. This appeared too slow and unacceptable. In addition, mere extension of the branches of existing ill-adapted banks into the rural areas falls short of a good model for “rural bank”. They should rather provide rural financial facilities in a more dynamic manner by engaging in the mobilization of funds for investment in most of the productive activities which offer potential returns in the rural areas.
Commodity Boards
There was also a reorganization of the then existing marketing board system for export in 1977 from regional-oriented boards to those with a national outlook. Thus there came into being 7 Commodity Board, viz: Cocoa, Rubber, Cotton, Groundnut, Grains (for Cereals) Root Crops (for Cassava, Yam and Cocoyam), and Palm Produce (for palm oil and Palm kernel) Commodity Boards. Their establishment was to promote both the production and marketing of their respective commodities.
In the particular case of the food crops, the boards have recorded little or no impact due to their low coverage with only a small proportion of farmers reached. In addition, the minimum prices fixed by the boards are lower than those obtaining in rural markets. However, the boards would up their operations in 1986.
Table 2k: Operations of ACGSF, 1978-1995
Year
No. of Loans
Guaranteed
Value of Loans
Guaranteed
(Nm)
Number of Loan By Purpose
Livestock
Food
Cash
Crops
Crops
Other
1979
341
11.284
137
116
-
53
1979
1,105
33.597
339
391
-
348
1980
945
30.945
263
472
-
198
1981
1,295
35.642
275
702
107
181
1982
1,076
31.764
320
658
22
69
1983
1,333
36.308
359
736
50
165
1984
1,642
24.655
537
808
30
258
1985
3,337
44.235
756
1,909
36
606
1986
5,203
68.417
715
4,204
190
58
1987
16,209
102.153
1005
13,674
1,027
386
1988
24,538
118.611
866
21,426
1,306
263
1989
34,518
129.300
540
29,669
2,473
1,352
1990
30,704
98.494
427
27,196
1,020
1,234
1991
22,104
82.107
509
19,321
977
956
1992
21,206
91.953
384
19,049
1.043
605
1993
15,514
80.846
389
14,103
389
565
1994
16,574
103.186
669
14,295
765
617
1995
18,079
163.170
753
15,253
850
1.078
Source: Computed from CBN (1995a,b)
The Land Use Decree
The Land Use Decree which was promulgated in March 1978 appears the most sensation institutional reform in Nigerian agriculture for several years. The decree was intended to reform the land tenure system which was believed to constitute a formidable obstacle to the development of agriculture. The guidelines for the Fourth National Development Plan explicitly stated inter alia, “The land tenure system has long been a bottleneck in the establishment of large-scale farms by private operators. With the implementation of the recent land use decree, private sector involvement in large-scale agricultural activities should receive a boost during the next plan period…. Availability of land should no longer be a constraint to agricultural undertakings. The reform should promote better security of tenure and also encourage consolidation of holdings and large-scale operation. It should make it easier to attract foreign entrepreneurs and foreign capital into agricultural production” Anyanwu (1997).
The Decree thus invests the control of all and in state governments’ hands to be held in trust for the Federal Government. It does not disturb the rights of users of land already occupied or developed in rural areas but transfers allocative powers over undeveloped land from traditional authorities to local government. A Land Use Allocation Committee exists in each state to advise the governor with respect to urban lands Anyanwu (1997). Land Allocation Advisory Committees exist in the rural areas to advise local governments on the effective management of land. The Decree has received mixed reaction from Nigerians. Some see it as an unnecessary interference with the basis of private property while others think that one cannot take socialist measures without the state itself becoming socialist. The decreed appears to have a more radical effect on the systems in the southern part of Nigeria than the northern part.
The Green Revolution Programme (GRP)
With the birth of civilian administration in 1979, the question of food shortage in the country once more received a critical look as the drain in the nation’s foreign reserves and its threat to the economy and existence were realized Anyanwu (1997) and Okeke (2001). Thus the Green Revolution Programme was launched in 1980 by the then Shagari administration. Its objective is centred at self-reliance in food production and the diversification of Nigeria’s sources of foreign exchange. To achieve this all known constraints to increased production were to be removed.
Under the scheme, new input procurement and distribution systems came into operation. Input subsidies and crop pricing were streamlined while construction of rural physical infrastructure was embarked upon via massive federal funds allocation.
Green Revolution National Committee and state Representatives were formed with the state co-ordinating committees responsible for co-ordinating and implementation policies and programmes of various Federal Ministries concerned with the Green Revolution in the states. The programme covered all areas of agricultural production, food and export crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry.
Some measures of positive results were recorded in increased cultivated land hectares, livestock production, forestry of funds, mismanagement and fraud, poor and thorough research and extension services, problems of land acquisition, inadequate data, inadequate executive capacity and lack of infrastructural facilities (Anyanwu, 1986).
(j) Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs)
As part of rural development programmes ADPs were established first in pilot states and later in all the state in the country. Some of their key areas of activities are the provision of infrastructure (including water points washbores), farm service centres, the supply of farm inputs such as fertilizers, root crops/ tubers, agro-chemicals (pesticides and herbicides), and water pumps, and extension and training (including the establishment of special plots for extension and training (SPAT). Indeed, the ADP concept has been used as the primary method to increase production and welfare in the small holder agricultural sector in Nigeria. Since 1974, the World Bank had assisted Nigeria with a series of ADPs which have gone through various phases. ADPS started in 1974 with the establishment of the first three “enclave projects” in the northern part of Nigeria (Funtua, Gusau and Gombe
ADPs). The development approach focused on simple improved packages for some of the major food crops such as maize, sorghum and millet, combined with improvements in the extension service, the input supply system, the rural road network and village water supply. Some success recorded with these early ADPs caused both the federal government and the World Bank to quickly replicate the ADP model in other states. Thus, from 1975 to 1980, the number of projects grew for the original 3 to total of 9 enclave projects.
The need and pressure to enlarge the programme and to cover all the states led to the first multi-state ADP (MSADP-1) comprising 7 states: Anambra, Bendel Benue Cross River, Imo, Ogun, and Plateau. These came on stream later part of 1985 and early 1986. MSADP-II later covered Gongola, Kwara. Ondo, Lagos, and Rivers states, with the later programme incorporating support for fisheries in those maritime states. Thus, by 1988, the entire country had been covered by the ADP system with benefits spread to all the LGAs in each state.
In August 1990 when the loan for the first set of state-wide ADPs terminated, an Agricultural Development Fund (ADF) loan was initiated for the projects, (NATSP) and the National Fadama Development Project (NFLP). Both loans became effective in 1992. The NATSP provides assistance for technology adoption and dissemination in Bauchi, Kano and Sokoto states while the NFDP provides funds for Fadama Development in Nigeria by concentrating on irrigation with the use of ground water in already cultivated fadamas.
We note that, basically, all ADPs had the key objective of increasing food production and hence farm incomes for the majority of the rural households in the defined project regions, thus improving the standard of living and welfare of the farming population.
The various components of ADPs are: farm and crop development, civil assistance through long-term and short-term consultancies.
These components are achieved by the following:
Through applied research, an improved extension system and a more efficient system of input procurement and distribution (especially fertilizer).
Provision of feeder roads, the construction of Farmer Service Centres (FSC) for input supply in rural areas, and the establishment of project offices and staff houses.
Establishing the development programmes through training as well as the training of local government staff.
Table 21 summarizes the operations of ADPs between 1991 and 1996.
Table Showing the Operational Data on Agricultural Development Projects
(ADPs), 1991-1995
1991 (1)
1992 (2)
1993 (3)
1994 (4)
1995
(5)
Source of Fund (4m)
IDRD/IFAD
Federal
State
Others
Infrastructure
Roads (km)
Constructed
Maintained
(iii)Rehabilitated
Earth Dams,
Borcholes and Washbore (No),
Tubewells
448.0
241.9
68.0
129.8
8.3
197.0
1.949.0
601.0
5,190.0
1,217.5
804.7
80.0
296.0
36.8
1,0014.5
3,498.8
2,277.7
5,523.0
1,493.5
951.7
134.9
363.8
34.1
1.204.7
1,387.9
1,078.9
325.7
2,119.7
1.375.0
135.2
561.2
48.4
631.5
-
1,655.2
8,108.0
1,851.4
1,221.5
74.6
496.8
58.6
100.1
-
213.4
9.809.0
Farm Service centre/store (No)
Fish pounds (No)
Irrigation development (HA)
Farm input supplied
Fertilizer (000 tonnes)
Seed (000 tonnes)
Root/Tubers (bundles)
Liquid Agrochemicals
(tonnes)
Solid Agrochemicals
(tones)
Pumps (No)
Ox-Ridges
Other Farm Implements
Extension and Training
Farm families covered
(000)
Extension Agents (No)
SPAT Plots established
(No) (000)
On Farm/Station Trials
Women in Agricultural
Groups Established (No)
Number Trained (000)
383.0
-
7,658.0
344.7
-
-
769.7
-
6,052.0
-
-
722.0
279.0
2,786.0
1,410.0
1.4
9,353.5
303.0
384.3
5,758.0
6,296.0
16,995.0
6,090.5
562.0
260.0
36.617.0
331.9
12.9
6,088.0
110
28.0
2,042.0
5,249.0
6,389.0
5,823.7
505.0
779.0
34.510.0
208.7
47.2
1,304.6
96
38.4
1,882.0
5,904.0
852.0
11,522.5
541.0
212.0
2,613.3
545.5
1.3
9,063.0
1.5.4
25.8
4,072.0
1,483.0
1,539.0
7,809.5
4,764.0
-
90.6
-
-
159.000.0
7,804.0
286.9
2,620.0
3,601.0
6,526.0
6,412.0
277.7
2,558.0
2,721.0
4,481.0
7,027.0
228.2
1,911.0
2.074.0
4,498.0
6,563.0
235.6
1,729.0
3,696.0
4,411.0
Special Plot for Agricultural Training (SPAT)
Source: CBN Annual Report & Statement of Account, 1995.
(k) The National agricultural Land Development Authority (NALDA) The NALDA was established in 1991 to execute a national agricultural land development programme to moderate the chronic problem of low utilization of abundant farm land. The main target of the programme was the development of 30.000-50.000 hectares of land in each state during the 1992-94 National Rolling Plan period. Also, it was to see to the placement of at least 7,500-12, 500 farmers within the area developed such that each lives within 3km-5km radius of his farmland. An average of N300 million was allocated to NALDA by the Federal Government annually in 1991 and 1992, while the State and Local Government were to allocate suitable tracts of land to authority in addition to token contributions towards the funding of its programme.
By the end of 1995, NALDA had developed a total of 16,000 hectares of land our of which 81.1% was cultivated with various crops. However, NALDA’s performance had been constrained by inadequate and untimely release of funds and inadequate farm machinery/equipment.
2.2 Theoretical Framework
It is a tradition in the social sciences to adopt existing paradigms or theories to enable us articulate our analysis Obuoforibe (2002:27). Theories are simply the foundations upon explanations or predictions can be made. In many ways, a theory is a guide to action and an aid in search for the essential meaning of occurrence. Haralambos (1980:521) defined a theory as a set of ideas which provides explanation for something”. An elaborate definition is however given by Kerlinger (1973:8). He defines theory as “set of interrelated constructs (concepts), definitions, and propositions that present a systematic view of phenomena by specifying relations among variables with the purpose of explaining and predicting the phenomena”.
In the study, the theory used to explain the impact of agricultural policies and Nigerian economy is the Eastonian approach of the “system theory” propounded by Devid Easton of Chicago University, USA in 1953. The idea of systems implies the interdependence of parts and subparts for the effective performance of the whole system Das and Choudhury (1997:21).
Going by the Eastonian approach, the economy of any nation is like a system with many parts and sub-parts, it is difficult to understand one part without the other. The central assumption is that all social, economic and political phenomena are interrelated. They affect each other for survival of the whole system. Easton therefore argues that, it is not possible to understand one part of the society in isolation from the other parts which affect its operation.
To explicate on the working of the system theory, David Easton identifies three properties: comprehensiveness, interdependence and the existence of boundaries. By interdependence it means that a change in one subset of interactions produces change in all other subsets due to the mutual coexistence among the different units. The property of comprehensiveness refers to that all the interactions found in the system Ayatse and Akuva (2009). The property of existence of boundaries in a political system means, that there are points where the other systems end their functions and the other beings from where the other stops.
Application of the Theory to the Study
From the foregoing, the major assumptions of the Eastonian approach of the system theory could be used to explain the relationship between agricultural policies and the Nigerian economy. This is because the systems theory has so many justifications with the subject matter of this study. The Nigerian economy is made up of different sectors and sub-sectors which David Easton calls the system and sub-systems. The system here represents the Nigerian whole economic set up while the subsystems are the different economic sectors like agriculture, petroleum, energy, mine, education, health, the manufacturing etc. By interdependence, it means that change in one sector of the economy lead to change in the other sector of the same economy, it implies that no sector of the economy on its own, without interacting with the other can be successful nor lead to the advancement of the whole economic set up. Agricultural policies cannot be successful no matter how good they are if other sectors of the economy like energy, education backing sector and the manufacturing/industrial sectors are malfunctioning. The absence of or poor social infrastructures like roads, water, electricity, health, education etc can truncate the success of agricultural policies. The energy sector need to provide electricity for industries to be established so that agricultural produce can feed the industries. The absence of interaction among the various sectors of the economy has made it difficult to experience comprehensiveness in the Nigerian economic set up. The much revenue generated from the oil has not been used to effectively impact on the agricultural projects not even to put in place social infrastructures. The banks are not willing to assist poor farmers with loans, even when the facility is there the conditions are stringent. The disconnection among the various sectors of the economy is what Claude Ake calls
“economies hardly advance.
From the above argument, is clear that, though agriculture has the impacted positively on the Nigerian economy, on its own it can do nothing without getting the necessary functional support from other sectors of the economy. The poor economic sectoral relationship in the Nigerian economy is purely responsible for the failure of agricultural policies in Nigeria.