ADAPTATION OF COCOA FARMERS TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN EKITI-STATE

Fasakin James Idowu

idowufasakin2010@gmail.com

Department of Agriculture Economics, University of Ibadan, Nigeria

ABSTRACT
Cocoa is a major foreign exchange earner in Nigeria, ranking second after petroleum. However, it is
greatly affected by changes in climatic variables such as high or low temperature, relative humidity and rainfall.
Therefore, this study examined the adaptation of cocoa farmer to changes in climatic conditions in Ekiti- state.
The data were collected from 107 randomly selected cocoa farmers from four local government areas in Ekiti-
state. Well-structured questionnaires served as an instrument for data collection. Descriptive methods of data
analysis and multi-nominal-logit regression were used for data analysis. Results showed that the average age of
the farmers was 56years; average household size was 7 members with 37.2percent having no formal education.

The Multi-nominal-logit MNL result showed that the coefficients of age, years of formal education, frequency of
contacts with extension agents to be positive and significant at 1 percent (p<0.00). However, the coefficients of
household size, gender and area of farmland were negative and significant at 1 percent (p<0.00), 5 percent
(p<0.05) and 10 percent (p<0.10) respectively. It was suggested that there is the need to further educate the farmers
since this will help in the adoption of modern technologies which will invariably enhance their earning capacity
through increased production even in the face of changing climate.

Key Words: Climate change, Cocoa farmers, Multinomial Regression Adaptation, Ekiti State.

Background to the Study

Introduction

Climate change is a serious threat to agricultural production in many developing countries, adversely
affecting food availability, access to food, stability of food supplies, and food utilization. The impacts of climate
change on food security will differ across regions and over time and, most importantly, will depend on the level
of socio-economic development that a country has reached as the effects of climate change set in. (Ayoade 2003).
The poorest communities have the least capacity to adapt to the impacts of climate change. In these vulnerable
communities, climate change could erase the gains from many years of development efforts, causing repeated
food crises, threatening large populations with chronic hunger and disease, and leading to environmental refugees
as well as civil strife in already unstable regions. About 70 percent of the world’s poorest people live in rural
areas, particularly in Asia and Africa, where subsistence farmers depend on rain for their harvests.

Therefore, effective adaptation to climate change in these areas will be critical to attaining the MDGs by
2015(IPCC 2007). Climate change affects agriculture and food production in complex ways. It affects agriculture
production directly through changes in agro-ecological conditions and indirectly by influencing growth and
distribution of incomes, and thus demand for agricultural products. According to the IPCC, the adverse impacts
of climate change on agriculture will occur predominantly in the tropics and subtropics, and mostly in sub-Saharan
Africa, and yields from rain-fed agriculture in some African countries could fall by 50 percent by 2020. Cash
crops like cocoa, coffee, citrus, plantains and kola nuts etc. are the major cash crops produced mainly for income
generation among the poor and rural farmers in Sub-Sahara Africa. The production of these crops has been
declining in recent times due to the adverse effect of climate change in the ecological zones that specialized in
production of each crops. Cocoa is a major cash crop in Nigeria; records had it that before the discovery of
petroleum, it was a major contributor from the western part of the country to the gross domestic product (GDP)
of the nation. Cocoa (Theobroma cacao) was introduced into Nigeria in 1804. (Agboola 1987). This accounted
for a greater part of the foreign exchange generated for the country between the 1950s and 70s It was introduced
to west Africa in the nineteenth century and its introduction to Nigeria is believed to have taken place in 1874
through the Spanish Island Fernando Po (Ayorinde, 1966) when a local chief (Squiss Ibaningo) established a

1
plantation at Bonny in the then Eastern region. The first recorded effort of the government in the development of
cacao cultivation was the distribution of seedling for trial planting from the old botanical garden at Ebute-meta,
Lagos in 1887 (Opeke, 1987). One of the earliest commercial planting was made near Ibadan and the cultivation
of cocoa gathered momentum in Ibadan province, which later became the major contribution of the western region
to Nigeria economy in the 70s.

A number of factors influence the growing of cocoa plant. These factors range from the weather element
of rainfall, temperature, sunlight and humidity to others such as soil nutrient status, pest and diseases, farmers
planting practices and so on. It was observed that the higher the temperature (Maximum of 320c), the higher the
yield, while the lower the relative humidity, the better the yield. Cocoa is known to produce well with minimal
but sustained water availability throughout the year (Obatolu et al., 2003). Meanwhile, yearly variation in the
yield of cocoa is affected more by rainfall than any other climatic factors. Cocoa prefers cool and calm conditions
with persistent moderate wind, which can cause a severe damage to yield. Being a very picky (i.e. selective plant),
cocoa reacts badly to any incidence of extreme weather conditions. The International Cocoa Organization (2003)
described extreme weather to include weather phenomena that are at the extreme of the historical distribution,
especially severe or unfavourable weather, they noted that temperature and rainfall are important factors that
impacts on optimum yield.

Also, the amount of sunlight falling on the cocoa tree will affect its growth and yield, the most marked
effect of humidity on cocoa is on the leaf area, the other effects of humidity are the spread of fungal diseases and
the difficulties in drying and storage of cocoa produce. In general, the cumulative effect of temperature, rainfall,
humidity, limits of altitude, and sunshine hours have impacts on the yield of cocoa. Another danger to cocoa yield
is prolonged dry season which encourages bush burning and this is always very disastrous. On the other hand,
incessant rainfall for several weeks (as it normally occurs in July and September) easily leads to wide spread of
black pod disease which is very contagious also this poses untold hardship to the farmers because it drastically
reduces the yield (Blaikie et al. 1994). Cocoa is highly sensitive to changes in climate, particularly to temperature
due to its effects on evapo-transpiration (Anim-Kwapong and Frimpong, 2005). Weather elements can also alter
stages and rate of development of cocoa, pests and pathogen modify host resistance and result in changes in the
physiology of host pathogens/pest interaction, the most likely consequences are shift in the geographical
distribution of host and pathogens/pests altered crop (cocoa) yield and crop losses which, will impact on socio-
economic variables such as farm income, livelihood and farm level decision making.
The share of Nigeria’s agricultural products in total exports plummeted from over 70 percent in the 1960s
to less than 2 per cent in 2010 (Akoroda; 2010). The major factor contributing to the decline has been liked with
the negative effects of climate change on crop production in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, basic skills in cocoa
production, coupled with an optimum motivation, are sensitive requirement for best practices and consequently
high-quality yield. (CAST, Rosenberg, 1992). Stressed the need to measure the reliable index of weather on the
influence of crop yields. Similarly, (Adejuwon, 2004) recognized climate as the major factor affecting crop output,
stressing that there is a need to measure temperature fluctuation as a dominant factor affecting crop yield. Thus,
this study dwells on examining the impact of rainfall and temperature on the production of cocoa. The findings
from the study will serve as a framework for further research and guidelines for planners.

1.2 Problem Statement

Farmers in the study area have been finding it difficult to adapt to the problem bedevilling them due to
the unstable weather conditions. The farmer devised myriads of coping and mitigating options so as to ameliorate
the effect of adverse weather conditions on their productivity. In some areas, most of the farmers engaged in some
actions that can further enervate their productivity like bush burning, wrong spraying intervals, using inappropriate
herbicides on cocoa seeds and tress, etc. The vulnerability of the areas to changes in climatic conditions has
worsened the output of cocoa production annually (Adeyemi 2000). This has made the country to lose her leading
role in cocoa exportation and this has affected the production of beverages and confectionaries. However, Ekiti
state is the second largest cocoa producing state in Nigeria and is highly sensitive to variation in climatic factors
most especially rainfall, temperature and sunshine hours. (NCDC2009).
Several views have been expressed about the impacts of the vagaries of climate on cocoa production and
coping and adaptation options adopted by the farmers, some claimed that rural and poor cocoa farmers are most

2
affected; some said that farmers who depend on traditional adaptations options such as farming, fishing and
pastoralism are mostly affected while some other researchers claimed that subsistence cocoa farmers are the
mostly affected. Recent research has focused on regional and national assessments of the potential effects of
climate change on agriculture (Fischer et al, 2002, Lobell, et al, 2008; Hassan and Nhemachem, 2008). The efforts
have, for the most part, treated each region or nation in isolation but failed to integrate (i.e. combined biophysical
and economic) assessment of the potential effects of climate change on proletariat agriculture but mostly focus on
world agriculture (Dixon, 1998, ODI, 2007and Segerson). Therefore, this research intends to investigate the
effects of climate change at the grassroots’ and also, the communities’ coping options and adaptation to changes
in climatic conditions. This will help to provide a better understanding of the communities’ perception of climate
change and existing adaptation strategies.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The aim of this research is to assess the adaptation of cocoa farmers to climate change. Hence, the
following specific objectives are pursued as follows:
1. Examine the climatic factors that affect cocoa farmers in the study area.
2. Analyse the adaptation options adopt in respect to climate change.
3. Investigate the impact of extreme climatic conditions on cocoa yield
4. Make recommendations based on the findings.
Literature Review

Concept of adaptation
Adaptation are adjustment to or interventions, which take place in order to manage the losses or take
advantage of the opportunities presented by a changing climate. Adaptation is the process of improving time
scales, from short term (e.g., seasonal to annual) to long term (e.g., decades to centuries). The adaptive capacity
is defining as the ability of a system to adjust to climate change (including climate variability and extremes), to
moderate potential damages, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences. (IPCC 2001).
The goal of adaptation measure should be to increase the capacity of a system to survive external shocks or
changes resulting from the losses. According to Santiago (2001), adaptation involves adjustment to enhance the
viability of social and economic activities and to reduce their vulnerability to climate, including its current
variability and extreme events as well as longer-term climate change. Adaptation to climate is the process through
which people reduce the adverse effects of climate on their health and wellbeing and take advantage of
opportunities that their climatic environment provides. The term adaptation means any adjustment, whether
passive, reactive or anticipatory that is proposed as a means for ameliorating the anticipated adverse consequences
associated with climate change (Alao, 1999).
Adaptation has the potential to reduce adverse impacts of climate change and to enhance beneficial
impacts but will incur cost and will not prevent all damages. Adaptations are adjustments or interventions; which
takes place in order to manage the loss or take advantage of the opportunities presented by a changing climate. It
can also be view as the process of improving society’s ability to cope with changes in climatic conditions across
time scales, from short term to (seasonal to annual) to long term (e.g. decades to centuries) (IPCC, 2001). The
goal of adaptation measure should be to increase the capacity of a system to survive external shocks or change.
The assessment of coping strategies (adaptation options) adopted by Cocoa farmers to sustain adverse
effect imposed on cocoa production by climate change is important to formulate policies that enhance adaptation
as a tool for managing a variety risks associated with climate change and it also provide information that increases
the capacity of farmers to survive external shocks or changes. (IIED Climate Change /Working Paper No. 1,
2011). Adaptation encompasses an enormous range of activities and these processes vary greatly from context to
context such as adaptation deficit i.e. increasing the capacity of human societies and the systems on which they
depend to cope with and recover from the impacts of existing climate variability and changes, adapting to
incremental changes in existing climate related risks, i.e. increasing the capacity of societies to cope with extreme
changes and variability in order to accommodate increased variability and more frequent and severe extremes
conditions and adapting to qualitative changes in climate and climatic environmental transitions, i.e. transforming
or replacing existing systems (e.g. livelihood systems, economic, systems etc.) in order to ensure that development
is viable and sustainable under future climatic and environmental conditions that might be quite different to those

3
pertaining to today, and in the face of new risks that might be associated with the emergence of new climate
hazards and effects.(Wilson 2008).
2.5 Concept of Mal-Adaptation
Mal-adaptation occurs when development activities unknowingly increase vulnerability to climate
change, or result in lock-in to patterns of development that might be unsustainable under future climatic
conditions, increasing the risk of economic and wider societal disruption. The scenario occurs when a longer term
climatic and environmental change and variability is ignored in development planning. This may result in
development strategies being developed under implicit or explicit assumptions of climatic stationary (e.g.
assuming current climatic conditions will continue indefinitely), or that current levels of key resources such as
water will be sustained into the future when climate change will in fact alter the availability of such resources.)
Maladaptation also entails development which involve overlooking climate change impacts, ignorantly increases
exposure and/or vulnerability to climate change. (OECD 2009: 49) Maladaptation could also include actions
undertaken to adapt to climate impacts that do not succeed in reducing vulnerability but lead to the increase instead
of reducing the process.
2.6 Climate Change and Cocoa Production
Climate change impacts on agricultural production and trade are normally investigated by linking climate
change models with agricultural trade models such as the ‘Basic Linked System’ (BLS) developed by FAO and
the International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). The BLS is usually run using the Special Report
on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
It is predicted that the majority of Nigeria viz-a-viz African countries will have novel climates over at
least half of their current crop year by 2050. Higher temperatures, longer droughts, and increasingly frequent and
violent storms are predicted to exacerbate the current challenges faced by agricultural productions system in
Nigeria. Already climate change rate is gradually exceeding the adaptive capacity of a broad range of crop and
forage varieties, animal breeds, and tree populations, ten years earlier than the prediction of IPCC climate model
prediction of 2020 (IPCC, 2007). Consequently, food production and access to food, in many part of the country
is becoming more expensive and unavailable, in some cases scarce, severely compromised, exacerbating food
security problems and malnutrition; poverty, hunger, diseases; and communal conflicts resulting from the loss of
92, 000 hectares of land to drought and desertification (Commission for Sustainable Development, 2008).
Climate variation and change have come to play a major hindrance in the informal-agricultural labour
market viz a viz the employment potential it had in the past especially among inhabitants in northern Nigeria. The
agricultural sector is being relegated, due to poor government attitude towards the sector; youths abandoning it in
search of white collar jobs and other survivalist jobs. This has brought about massive rural-urban migration and
later to the border towns. The 2009 National Statistic puts the unemployment rate in Nigeria at 4.9% signifying a
2 percent increase from 2.9 percent in 2005 (National Bureau of Statistics, 2009). The corollary effect of climate
change has been observed as playing a negative impact on Nigerian families, their financial needs at home and
has led to reduce standard of living. This is evidently justified by the increasing level of Child labour through the
Almajiries system to alleviate poverty especially among the illiterates and rural populace especially in northern
Nigeria. (Ikuomola, 2007). In response to climate change, different emerging survival strategies are gradually
being adduced forward, as households cope with the shocks and stresses of the change, relying on family,
community structures, self-insurance, migration, child labour and fosterage, prostitutions and other livelihood
diversification all to cope with the climate change effect. (Freeman, et al, 2006; Watson, 2008).
Similarly, the oversight and neglect of countries in the developing world, placing less emphasis on the
need for adaptation under the National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) has not helped too. NAPA
focused on climate change impact on agriculture, forestry and water resources Management (Kovats and Akhtar,
2008), without envisaging other possible impacts on the socio-economic wellbeing, national food security and
communal conflicts. Climate is defined as a long-term average weather conditions in a place which exercise some
controls and effects on agricultural produce either directly or indirectly. However, climate change is any long term
significant change in the “average weather condition” that a given region experience. IPCC (2007), sees climate
change as any change in climate overtime; whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activities.
According to the WHO (2003) climate change is caused by both internal variability within the climate system and
external factors (both natural and anthropogenic).

4
 Global climate change is one of the greatest environmental challenges facing the world today. Essop
(2009) opined that minor changes to rainfall pattern (especially coupled with increased severity of droughts and
floods) threaten agricultural productivity. These high rates in climate changes have greater influence on the three
phases of cocoa production ranging from seedling phase, establishment phase and processing phase. This is
because weather and climate influence most of the processes involved in cocoa production for example: solar
radiation produces energy for warming the soil, plants, air and metabolic processes; rainfall and it characteristics
in terms of amount, intensity, reliability and distribution influence crop growth and soil erosion, atmospheric
evaporability determines the performance and survival of crops. (Ayoade 2007). Planting date of cocoa seeds is
determined by start of the rains. Irrigation adds economic value to the products. Sun drying reduces the water
content of cocoa seed and makes its processing easier. From the above, we can see that all cocoa production
processes are directly or indirectly weather and climate dependent. Cocoa is highly sensitive to changes in climate
from hours of sunshine to rainfall and application of water, soil condition and particularly to temperature due to
effects on evapotranspiration.
Climate changes could also alter stages of rates of development of cocoa pests and pathogens, modify
host resistance and results in changes in physiology of host pathogen or pest interaction and this altered cocoa
yields and resulted to crop loses which, will impact socio-economic variables such as farm income, farm level
decision making, marketability and farmers’ livelihoods. Cocoa is highly susceptible to drought and the pattern
of cropping cocoa is related to rainfall distribution across the producing state. Significant correlations between
cocoa yield and rainfall over varying interval prior harvest of cocoa pods have been reported. Cocoa seedling
mortality is encouraged by prolonged dry season (drought), short dry season affects pod filling which will affect
the bean size. In mature cocoa plant water deficit can results in low yield and increases the level of capsid damage.
Capsid is an insect that makes cocoa difficult to establish. Black pod diseases are the most destructive disease that
affecting cocoa pod and it is mostly related to climate and prevalent in damp situation and most destructive during
the rainy season. (Alao 2000).
Methodology
3.1 Study Area
This research work was conducted in Ekiti State, Nigeria. Ekiti State is one of the six states constituting
the south-western region of Nigeria. Although some parts of the region are fairly urbanized, the greater majority
of the population still lives in rural areas. Ekiti State was carved out of the former Ondo State on the 1st October
1996. The State is situated entirely within the tropics. It is located between longitudes 40451 to 500 51 East of
Greenwich meridian and latitudes 70 151 to 80 51 North of Equator. It has to south, Kwara and Kogi States as
well as East to Osun State. It is bounded in the East and in the South by Ondo State. Ekiti State has 16 Local
Government Areas. Going by the 2006 National Census, Ekiti State has a population of 2,385,212 (National
Population Commission, 2006) and covers a total land area of 5,43500sqkm. Ekiti State is chosen as the study
area because of its prominent in agricultural activities and being a major cocoa producing state in the country.
Source of Data and Sampling Procedure
The study made use of primary data. Data were collected through personal interview and administering
questionnaire on cocoa farm household in the study area. The data provided information on the socio-economic
characteristics of the cocoa farmers, farm size, input sources, yield, costs, expected returns, effect of climate on
cocoa production, degree of vulnerability and coping strategies adopted by farmers in response to these effects.
The interviews were conducted privately to avoid duplication of ideas and unnecessary influence of one
farmer’s answer on the others. A total of 107 questionnaires were administered across the four local government
areas.
3.2 Sampling Technique
A multistage sampling technique was employed in the study to select the respondents, based on the cocoa
production percentage. This made a total of 4 LGAs out of the 16 LGAs in the state. 14 rural communities were
later selected with at least four from each of the LGAs. Respondents were randomly selected based on
probability proportionate to size and a total of 120 questionnaires were administered out of which only 107 were
used for the analysis.

Methods of Data Analysis

A number of statistical tools were employed in this study. These include; descriptive statistics and Multi-
nominal regression model analysis.

5
Descriptive Statistics: -. This was employed to summarize the socioeconomic characteristics of households in
the study area. Tables, means, and frequencies were used to summarize the data obtained from the survey.

Multinomial Logit Model

The multinomial logit was used to analyse factors that determine adaptation techniques. The multinomial
logit model (MNLM) is used for analysing unordered qualitative variables. It deals with truly nominal and
mutually exclusive categories. Suppose a dependent variable (DV), y, has n categories that are y = 1, 2 …n with
P1, P2…Pn as associated probabilities, such that P1+P2+…+Pn = 1. The usual thing is to designate one as the
reference category. The probability of membership in other categories is then compared to the probability of
membership in the reference category. Consequently, for a DV with N categories, this requires the calculation of
m-1 equations, one for each category relative to the reference category, to describe the relationship between the
DV and the independent variables (IVs). The choice of the reference category is arbitrary but should be
theoretically motivated. The generalized form of probabilities for an outcome variable with N categories is:

𝑚 𝑃𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑥𝑝(𝑋𝑖𝐵𝑚)
𝑃𝑟 (𝑌𝑖 = 𝑋𝑖) = 1
+ exp(XiBm) (1)

𝑚
Σ𝑚=2 For m > 1
1 1
Pr (𝑌𝑖 = ) = 𝑃𝑛 = ∑𝑚 (2)
𝑋𝑖 𝑚=2 exp(𝑋𝑖𝐵𝑚)

log(Pmi Xk=1)
1 (PiIXk = 0) (3)
PiXk= Xk=1
Pmi

Specifically, the standard MNLM for model with m=6 categories become
1 𝐼 𝑛𝑖𝐼
Pr (𝑦𝑖 = 𝑋𝑖 ) = 𝑃𝑖 𝐼 + exp(𝑋𝑖 𝐵2) + exp(𝑋𝑖 𝐵𝑛) = 𝜂𝑖1 + 𝜂𝑖2 + 𝜂𝑖3 … . 𝜂𝑖6 (4)

2 𝐵𝑚 𝜂𝑖2
Pr (𝑌𝑖 = 𝑋𝑖) = 𝑃𝑖2 = exp(𝑋𝑖 + exp(𝑋𝑖 𝐵𝑚) = 𝜂𝑖1 + 𝜂𝑖2 + 𝜂𝑖6 (5)
𝐼

Empirical model: The empirical multinomial logit model for this study is specified as:

Y i = f (X1, X 2… X 5)

Where Yi, the dependent variable is dichotomous and it is the method of adaptation chosen by the farmer; xis are
the explanatory variables. The dependent variable (yi) is defined as 1Smoking, Borrowing, Migrate from village
to city, Reduced household food intake and Withdraw children from school.

The independent variables are:

𝑋1 = Age (Years)
𝑋2 = Household size
𝑋3 = Years of Education (Years)
𝑋4 = Area of farmland (Hectares)
𝑋5 = Access to extension agents
𝑋6 = Gender (Male = 0, Female = 1)

6
Result Presentation

Table 1.

Socio-Economic characteristics of the Sampled Household

S/N Variables Frequency Percentage

1. Gender
Male 104 97.2
Female 03 02.8
2. Marital status

Married 86 80.37
Single 21 19.63

3. Primary Occupation
Farming 86 80.37
Teaching 08 7.48
Civil Servant 04 3.74
Artisans 09 8.38
4. Age
> 30 03 2. 80
31 – 60 59 55.14
61 – 90 45 42.06
5. Education level
Primary 16 14.95
Secondary 16 14.95
Tertiary 11 10.28
No Education 64 059.
6. Household sizes
03 – 06 43 40.19
07-10 45 42.05
11-15 19 17.76
7. Nature of Sickness affecting Farmers
Malaria 71 66.36
Cold 05 4.67
Hypertension 01 0.93
Typhoid 04 3.74
Cough 07 6.54
Others 19 17.56
8. Farming experiences(years)
10 – 40 23 20.49
42 - 60 59 55.14
61- 80 45 42.06
9. Farm Sizes(acre)
Personal farm 75 66.36

Rented farm 09 8.41

7
 Lease farm 14 23. 01

Shared cropping 09 08.41

10. Area of Farm

0.5 - 3 77 71.96
≥6 30 28.06
Source: Field Survey, 2017

Table 2. Adaptation Options Adopted by the Farmers in Respect to Climate Changes

Adaptation Option/ Years 2009 2010 2011

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Withdraw children from 104 03 104 03 104 03
school
Reduced household’s food 42 67 40 67 38 67
intakes
Borrow food from friends 74 33 72 35 73 34
Borrowing 60 47 59 48 62 45
Migrate from village to 102 05 102 05 104 03
village
Migrate from village to city 103 04 101 06 101 06
Smoking 94 13 74 33 77 30
Taking alcohol 95 12 94 13 91 16

Source: Field Survey, 2011

Table 3. Mitigating options Adopted by the Farmers in the Study area.

Mitigation Option 2009 2010 2011

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Diversify into other 74 33 81 26 82 25
crops
Diversity into non- 44 63 53 54 55 52
farming activities
Invest in cocoa drying Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
machine
Monitor weather by 79 28 80 27 78 29
indigenous knowledge
Re-spraying of cocoa 65 42 63 44 65 4
Irrigation Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
Monitor weather through 74 33 76 31 73 34
the media
Planting of hybrid seeds 11 96 15 92 16 91
Regular cocoa spraying 85 22 86 12 83 24
Change planting and 37 70 38 69 37 70
harvesting time.
Source: Field Survey, 2011

8
Table 4. Observed Climate Changes (2009)
Climate Variables Yes No
High temperature 96 11
Low temperature 11 96
Too much rainfall 05 102
Too low rainfall 34 23
Delay in rainfall commencement 85 22
Delay in rainfall stopping 44 63
Too stormy rainfall 05 102
Thick cloud cover 4 103

Table 5. Observed Climate Changes (2010)

Climate Variables Yes No
High Temperature 4 103
Low Temperature 90 17
Too much rainfall 36 21
Too low rainfall 34 86
Delay in rainfall 19 88
commencement
Delay in rainfall stopping 72 35
Too stormy rainfall 22 85
Thick cloud cover 56 51
Source: Field Survey 2011.

Table 6. Observed Climate Changes (2011)

Climate Variables Yes No
High Temperature 03 104
Low Temperature 90 17
Too much rainfall 88 19
Too low rainfall 25 82
Delay in rainfall 84 23
commencement
Delay in rainfall stopping 64 23
Too stormy rainfall 64 43
Thick cloud cover 74 33
Source: Field Survey, 2011

Table 7. Assets Owned by the Households

Assets Frequencies Percentages
Radio 78 72.89
Television 48 44.86
Bicycle 18 16.82
Motorcycle 54 50.47
Vehicle 20 18.69
Mobile phone 68 63.55

9
Determinants of Adaptation to Climate Change
Table 8: Parameter estimates of the multinomial logit climate change adaptation model

Explaining Smoking Borrowing Migrate Reduced Withdrawn

variables from HH food from School
Village to
City
Estimates Coeff. Coeff. Coeff. Coeff. Coeff.
Std. E Std. E Std. E Std. E Std. E
Age .1436* -.5482 .3382* .8648* .2363

.01726 .2211 .53672 .4537 .76432

Households -.6350** .30283 .0234 -.4653** .5643

sizes
.2136 .3612 .5446 .1721 .78643

Years of .6350* .72136 .0034* .0233* .63543*

formal
.21369 .0811 .9632 .8342 .1254
education

Area of -.3960** .8911 -.5832 .3542** .6373

farmland
.1819 .72136 .4328 .8673 .73533

Access to .2365* .02334* .47653 .2365* .3786

extension
.5657 .654 .0763 .6343 .6355
agent

Gender -.321** -.5632* .6720** -.3543 .1821*

.25621 .1321 .18790 .2753 .53621

LR chi Square 37.4

Log Likelihood 85.037

Pseudo R square 7.56

Sig at 1% *Sig at 5% ** and Sig at 10% *** respectively

Table 1. showed the socio-economic characteristics of the households.

Table 2. shows the adaptation options adopted by the farmers in respect to climate change. It was indicated from
the survey that most of the household reduced their foods intake or change their food consumption patterns.
Options like smoking, taking alcohol, migrate from village to village, migrate from village to city, borrowing,
borrow foods from friends and withdraw children from school were less adopted by the farmers in respect to
climate change among the households in the study area.

Table 3, shows the percentage of the noticeable climatic conditions on the health of the households. 45.79% of
the households agreed that there was an effect on their health due to the changes in climatic conditions, while
54.21% of the households did not observe any effect in their health conditions.

Table 4, shows that, in year 2009, there was a delay in rainfall commencement and delay in rainfall stopping,
which culminated in little rainfall in the study area, rate of temperature (heat) was very high since there was little
rainfall, there were few cases of stormy rainfall and thick cloud cover.

Table 5, shows that there was no delay in rainfall commencement despite the high rainfall recorded in the year.
Also, there was low temperature (heat), the rainfall season was lengthened, i.e. late in rainfall stopping, high cloud
cover but there were few cases of stormy rainfall.

10
Table 6, shows that there was high rainfall throughout the season in 2011, despite the delay in the commencement
of rainfall. There was low temperature (heat), because of the high volume of rainfall. It was also reported that
there was too stormy rainfall and high cloud cover

Table 7, shows the frequency of assets owned by the household in the study area. 72.89% of the households
possessed Radio, 63.55% of the households possessed Mobile phone, 50.47% of the households had a Motorcycle,
44.86% had a Television, 18.69% of the households had a Vehicle and the least assets owned by the households
is Bicycle, with about 16.82% of the households using it. It showed that, households in the study area have access
to information going on around, and the high standard of living.

The results of the estimated equations are discussed in terms of the significance and signs of the parameters. The
model (Table 8) shows that the set of significant explanatory variables varies across the groups in terms of the
levels of significance and signs of regression coefficients. Age is positively related to each of the adaptation
decision taken by the farmers. Age is related to how experienced the farmers are in coping with climate change.
As the farmers get older, he gains more experienced in coping with climate change, and the less likely his
livelihood suffers, but, it is negatively related smoking and borrowing. Years of formal education is positively
related to all the adaptation methods identified. The result implies the important role education play in promoting
the use of adaptation methods to reduce the negative impact of climate change. Access to extension agent has a
positive and significant impact on withdrawn children from school; migrate from village to city, reduced
household foods intake as an adaptation option. But it is negatively related to smoking. Gender, household size,
and area of the farmland all have a negative coefficient respectively on decision to adapt any option but not
significantly related to any of the adaptation options relative to the reference category. The negative signs suggest
an increase in the probability of sampled farmers in using any of the adaptation options relative to the reference
group as the explanatory variables increase. The implication is that the probability of the farmers deciding on
those adaptation options is greater than the probability of opting for the reference group. The negative and
significant parameter means that the probability of opting for such options is lower relative to the probability of
being in the reference group.

Summary of the Major Findings

From the analysis of the socio-economics characteristics of the households, it was observed that majority of the
respondents were male, and the average age of the farmers was56years. 59.81% of the respondents had no formal
education, and Household sizes are fairly large with an average of 7-10 persons (40.25%). About 80.37% of the
respondents were predominantly cocoa farmers and had farming as their major occupation. The result of the survey
also showed about 66.36% of the households is affected by malaria at least one to three times a year. Most of the
respondents had been engaged in cocoa farming for long period (years of cocoa farming) about 42.06% of the
respondents has been in the business for about 40-60years. It also showed that most of the respondents (65.55%)
have their own cocoa farm. Area of land cultivated by the farmers according to the survey is fairly large with
71.96% of the respondents cultivating between 0.5-3acres of land. 57.94% of the farmers rehabilitate their farm
every year, while about 54.21% of the respondents have their proportion of cocoa farm covered totally with cocoa
alone. It also showed that nearly all the households are affected by climate variables like rainfall (stormy, high or
low) temperature (high or low) and the amount of cloud cover. The result of the Multi-nominal regression analysis
showed that, age, years of formal education and access to extension agents all have a positive relationship with
the adaptation options, while gender, household size and area of the farmland all have a negative relationship with
the adaptations options adopted by the farmers.

Conclusion:

Based on the findings of the survey, it was revealed that climatic variables have both positive and negative effects
on cocoa production; this is a great global problem, because the area is very vulnerable to climate changes, and is
a great environmental issue that must not be taken with levity. Also, from the survey, malaria is major problems
bedevilling cocoa farmers in the study area, and it greatly affects their productivities. Also, most of the farmers
agreed that government aids and assistance to help them in their production are not enough, and even when
provided, they do not reach the intended farmers in the rural communities. They suggested a bottom-top approach
in the distribution of subsidies to the farmers. So also, they argued that cocoa farming is now left to the aged

11
farmers who are not active again in farming activities, as most youth has gone to the city in seeking white-collar
jobs. It was revealed that fire incidence is not a common occurrence in their farmland, but their production declines
due to their inactiveness i.e. old age; climate effect, insufficient government aids and assistance, inadequate
extension services, shortage of improved seedlings and other subsidies.

Recommendations

Adaptation of cocoa farmers to climate change should not be a matter of designing projects or putting together
lists of measures to reduce the impacts of climate change. There should be an anticipatory national policy response,
and this should be anchored on the country’s framework for economic growth and sustainable development, and
must be integrated with its poverty reduction strategies. Information is crucial to planning for adaptation to climate
change, therefore, rural farmers need the capacity and resources to track meteorological patterns, forecast impacts,
and assess risk in order to make good decisions and provide timely information on their farms. Capacity for
monitoring and forecasting climate change can significantly affect livelihoods, for example, having access to
technologies for adaptation and knowing early about abrupt changes in rainfall patterns or temperature can make
the difference between a bountiful harvest and invariably, crop failure.

Integrated rural development schemes aimed at alleviating poverty can play a double role of reducing poverty and
increasing adaptation to climate change. Bottom-top approach system should be employ in the distribution of farm
subsidies to the farmers, as most of the beneficiaries are not practicing farmers. Farming activities should be
encouraged among the young farmers, because most cocoa farmers are even older than the cocoa trees, so that
new and dynamic ideas will be imported into the activities. Also, government should help the farmers buttress
their knowledge through research work so that when rainfall is very high in a particular year usually (July-
September) the farmers are to quickly apply chemical sprays such as insecticides and fungicides so as to prevent
major disease on cocoa production that year. Also, communication implements like telephones, transistors radio,
television sets should be provided to the farmers so as to monitor climate change

12
REFERENCES
Adams R.M, Glyer JD, Mc Carl B.A, Dudek DJ (1998). The implications of Global change for Western
Agriculture. West J Agric-Econs 13:348 -356.
Adegeye, A.J., (1996). Production and Marketing of Cocoa in Nigeria, Problem and Solution in proceeding of
National Seminar on Revolutionizing Nigeria’s Cocoa Industry. Ibadan.
Adejuwon, S.A, (2004). Impacts of climate variability and climate change on crop yield in Nigeria, Lead paper
presented at the Stakeholders Workshop on Assessment of Impacts and Adaptation to Climate Change,
Conference Centre, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile Ife 20-21 September, 2004.
Adger, W.N. (1996). Approaches to Vulnerability to Climate Change. Global Environmental Change working
paper 96-05, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment. University of East
Anglia and University College London. of global change for western agriculture.

Adenikinju SA, Esan EB, AA. Adeyemi (1989). Nursery techniques, propagation and Management of cacao, kola,
coffee, cashew and tea pp.1-27. Progress in Tree Crop Research (2nd Edition), Cocoa res. Inst. Nigeria.
Ibadan.

Adeogun S.O. (2006). Information delivery and its effect on production of Cashew in Oyo State. Proceedings 20th
Annual National conference in Farm Management Association of Nigeria. Proceedings of 20th Annual
National Conference, pp. 147151.

Adejuwon, S.A. (2004). Impact of climate variability and climate change on crop yield in Nigeria. Paper presented
at a stakeholder workshop on the assessment of impact and adaptation to climate change (AIACC).
Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, 20-21stSeptember

Adeyemi A.A. (2000). Effective management of cocoa farms in Nigeria for profitability. Cocoa Growers’ Bulletin
No. 52:21-31.

Agboola, S.A. (1987). An agricultural atlas of Nigeria. Oxford University Press, London, UK.

Akoroda 2010, Impact of climate variability and climate change on crop yield in Nigeria. Paper presented at a
stakeholder workshop on the assessment of impact and adaptation to climate change (AIACC).
Amanor, K.S., 1994, 1996. The new frontier: Farmers response to land degradation: A West-African case study.
Zed Press, London and UNRISD, Geneva.

Anim-Kwapong, G., Frimpong, E. (2005) Vulnerability of agriculture to climate change Impact of climate change
on cocoa production.’ Accra, Ghana.

Asare, R. 2005. Cocoa Agro forests in West Africa: A Look at Activities on Preferred Trees in the Farming
Systems, Danish Centre for Forest, Landscape and Planning (KVL):77

Ayoade, J.O. (2003, 2004), Introduction to Climatology for the Tropics. Spectrum Books Limited, Ibadan page
258.

Badaru, K. and P. O. Aikpokpodion (2001) Comprehensive assessment of all accessions for Tolerant status to pod
rot and insect pest infestation.p.1, 2000 Ann. Rept. In: CRIN Mandate crops stake holders Forum. Cocoa
Res. Inst. Nigeria. Ibadan, 27-29 March,2001.

Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davies, I., Wisner, B. (1994). At risk – natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and
disasters. London: Routledge

Bowers J.H, B.A. Bailey, P.K. Hebbar, S. Sanogo, R.D. Lumsden (2001). The Impact of Plant Diseases on World
Chocolate Prod. 2001 Plant Health Progress (Peer-Reviewed).

Brasier C.M., M.J. Griffin (1977). Taxonomy of Phytophthora palmivoraon Cacao.Trans. Br.Mycol. Soc. 72 (1):
111-143.

Building Nigerian Response to Climate Change. (BNRCC) 2008: 2008 Annual Workshop.

13
Nigerian Environmental Study Team (NEST): The Recent Global and Local Action on Climate Change, held at
Hotel Millennium, Abuja, Nigeria; 8-9th October, 2008.
Burton, I. (2004) Climate change and the adaptation deficit Adaptation and impacts research Group,
Meteorological Service of Canada, Environment Canada. Occasional paper1, November 2004.
CAST. (1992). Council for agricultural science and technology. Preparing US agriculture for global climate
change. Task Force Report, No. 119.
Christiaensen, L. and K. Subbarao (2004) Towardan Understanding of Household Vulnerability in Rural Kenya,
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3326.
Chaudhuri, S., J. Jalan, and A. Suryahadi (2002), Assessing Household Vulnerability to Poverty from Cross-
sectional Data: A Methodology and Estimates from Indonesia, Columbia University and Discussion Paper
0102-52.
Chow, G., 1983. Econometrics. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York. Commission for sustainable
development. Annual report on the impact of climate changeon Agricultural production in rural Africans.
Dixon, J, Gulliver, A & Gibbon, D, 2001.Farming systems and poverty: Improving farmers Livelihood in a
changing world. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), Rome, and World Bank, Washington, DC.
Dubin, J. A., McFadden, D. L., 1984. An econometric analysis of residential electric appliance holdings and
consumption. Econometrical 52(2), 345–362.
Duguma, B., Gockowski, J. &Bakala, J. 1998.Smallholder cocoa (Theobroma cacao) Cultivation in agro forestry
systems of west and central Africa: challenges and Opportunities. Paper from workshop held in Panama,
3/30-4/2, 1998. Smithsonian Institution. Washington, D.C.
Essop 2007 living with environmental change: social vulnerability, adaptation and resilience in Vietnam,
Routledge, London.
Fanaye, A.O., Adeyemi, E.A. and Olaiya, A.O. 2003. Spacing Experiments in Cocoa/kola/citrus intercrop.
(Poster).14th International Cocoa Research Conference,13 – 18 October 2003 Accra Ghana.FAO (1997).
State of the world’s forests 1997. Rome: FAO
Fischer G., Shah M. and van Velthuizen H. (2002) Climate change and agricultural Vulnerability: International
Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. Report prepared under UN Institutional Contract Agreement 1113
for World Summit on Sustainable development. Laxenburg, Austria.
Franzel, S., Jaenicke, H. ET Janssen, W. 1996.Choosing the right trees: setting priorities for multipurpose tree
improvement research. Report 8. ISNAR, The Hague.
Freeman, et al., 2006; Watson, 2008Linkages between vulnerability, resilience and adaptive capacity. Global
Environ Change 16 (3):293-303
Gibson, A Sweetmore (Eds.) Proceedings of a seminar on Crop Protection for Resource-Poor framers ’Page 17-
23. Isle of Thorns Conference Centre, East Sussex, United Kingdom. November 4-8, 1991.
Gorenz AM, EK Okaisabor (1971). Phytophthorapod rot disease in Nigeria pp.124 133.Progress in Tree Crop
Research in Nigeria (2nd Edition), Cocoa Research Institute, Nigeria. Ibadan.
Hassan, R and Nhemachena, C 2008: Determinants of African farmers’ strategies for adapting to climate change:
Multinomial choice analysis. African Journal of Resource Economics; Volume 2 No 1 March 2008, Pp 83-
104
Heckman, J. J., 1979. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrical 47(1), 153–162.
Herzog, F. 1994. Multipurpose shade trees in coffee and cocoa plantations in Côte D’Ivoire Agro-forestry
Systems. 27:259-267
Idowu OL (1989).Controlof Economic insect Pests of Cacao .pp. 89- 102.In Progress in Tree Crop Research in
Nigeria (2nd Edition).Cocoa Research Institute Nigeria. Ibadan.
IFAD (2009a), Governing Council Roundtables: Smallholder Agriculture and Food Securityin the twenty first
century. Rural Poverty Portal.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2007: Climate Change2007: Impacts, Adaptation, and
Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II toTheThirdAssessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change [Parry,MartinL., Canziani, Osvaldo F., Palutikof, Jean P., van der Linden, Paul
J., and Hanson,ClairE. (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1000pp.
IkuomolaA.D.. 2007. Child Labouring Fostering Practices: A Study of Four Areas inSurulere Local Government
Area Lagos State. A Master’s Thesis, Department ofSociology. University of Ibadan.

14
IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: Fourth Assessment Report. Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change,
Geneva. Switzerland.
Krauss U, Hebbar P (1999). Research Methodology in Bio-control of Plant Diseases. Workshop Manual. CATIE,
Turrialba, Costa Rica, June 28 – July 4, 1999.
Koch H, Vögele S (2009) Dynamic Modelling of Water Demand, Water Availability and Adaptation Strategies
for Power Plants to Global Change. Econ 68: 2031-2039.

Kovats, S. and Akhtar, R. 2008. Climate, Climate Change and Human Health in Asian Cities. Environment and
Urbanization 2008; 20; 165-176.
Ligon, E. and L. Schechter (2003) „Measuring Vulnerability‟, Economic Journal, Vol. 113. No. 486, C95-C102
Lana AF, MOK Adegbola (1977). Important virus diseases in West African Crops. Review of Plant Pathology
56(1): 849-868.
Lobell DB, Burke MB, Tebaldi C, Mastrandrea MD, Falcon WP, Naylor RL (2008). Prioritizing climate change
adaptation needs for food security in 2030". Science 319(5863): 607–10
Maddison AC, KE Bicknell (1979). Outbreak and spread of Phytophthora Palmivorain Cacao: Examination by
sequence analysis. Proc. 6th Int. Cacao Res. Conf. Caracas, Venezuela 1977. pp. 14-156.
Mansur R, Muhammad N, and Liman IR. 2007. Prevalence and Magnitude of Trachoma.
McFadden, D. L., 1999. Chapter1, Discrete response models. University of California at Berkeley, Lecture Note.
Mendelsohn, R., Nordhaus, W. D., Shaw, D., 1994. The impact of global warming on agriculture: a Ricardian
analysis. Am. Econ. Rev. 84, 753–771
Mendelsohn, R. (2000). Measuring the effect of Climate Change on Developing Comity Agriculture: Two Essays
on Climate Change on Agriculture: Two Corporate
Document Repository
Murray DF (1985). Progress Report of the Nigeria Cocoa Survey, April 1984-March 1985. (Mimeographed).
National Cocoa Development Commission, NCDC Annual report on Cocoa production in Nigeria. 2010
Olaniran Y. A, Atanda OA, JA Williams (1977). Pod production and black pod incidence in selected F2 Amazon
Cacao in Nigeria. Procedures. 5th Int. Cacao Res. Conf. Ibadan, Nigeria.1975: 157-166.
Overseas Development Institute (ODI) (2007) Climate change, agricultural policy and Poverty reduction how
much do we know? Overseas Development Institute (2007).
Olunloyo OA (1997a, 1997b). Efficiency of a single spray application of fungicide/insecticide combination in the
control of inflorescence blight disease of cashew. Annual. Report. Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria. pp.
64-65.
Opeke LK (1982). Tropical Tree crops, Spectrum books, Ibadan, Nigeria.p.327.
Pereira JL (1996). Prospects for effective control of cocoa diseases. pp. 81-86. In: Proc. 12thInternational Cocoa
Research Conference, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, and November17-23, 1996.
Purdy LH (1999). Fungal diseases of cacao. pp. 7-18 In: Research methodology inBio-control of Plant diseases
with special reference to fungal diseases of Cocoa Workshop Manual CATIE, Tirrialba, Costa Rica, 28
June - 4 July, 1999.
Sansome E, Brasier CM, MJ Griffin (1975) Chromosome size difference in P. Palmivora,a pathogen of cacao.
Nature 255:104- 105
Sengooba, T. (1992) Crop protection strategies for resource-poor farmers
Seo, S. N., Mendelsohn, R., 2007. Climate change adaptation in Africa: a microeconomic analysis of livestock
choice. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4277, Washington, DC.
Segerson K, and Dixon, B. (1998). Climate change and agriculture: the role of farmer adaptation. In: Mendelsohn
R, Neumann J (Eds) The economic impacts of climate Change on the U.S. economy. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
SPORE, 2008; Climate Change, Spore Special Issue-August, 2008.
Taylor M (1998). The World Cocoa Situation. International Forum in Cocoa, Lima, Peru, 28-29th October, 1998.
LMC Intl. Ltd. London. UK.

UNEP (2006). Adaptation and Vulnerability to Climate Change: The Role of the Finance Sector. CEO Briefing.
New York and Geneva

15
Wandel, J. (2006). Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global Environ Change16: 282-292.
World Health Organization. (WHO). Policy agenda. The Urban Poor’s Vulnerability to the Impacts of Climate
Change in Sub – Saharan Africa.
Zapfack, L., S. Engwald, B. Sonké, G. Achoundong, and B.A. Madong, 2002. The impactof land use conversion
on plant biodiversity in the forest zone of Cameroon. Biodiversity and Conservation 11(11): 2047-2061.

16