International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)

Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023

Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Structural Analysis of Soybean Marketing in Niger State, Nigeria

Abdullahi, A. S., *Abu, G. A. and Ezihe, J. A. C.

Joseph Sarwuan Tarka University, Makurdi, Benue State. P.M.B 2373

*Corresponding author email: [email protected]

Abstract

The study is a structural analysis of soybean marketing in Niger State, Nigeria. Purposive multistage
and simple random sampling techniques were used to select 388 soybean marketers categorized into
producer marketers, marketer retailers and marketer wholesalers. Data was collected with the aid of
a structured questionnaire. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for data analysis. The
socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents revealed mean ages of 42.47 years for the producer
marketers, 43.32 years for marketer retailers and 47.29 years for marketer wholesalers. Respondents
were mostly married with 89.31% among the producer marketers, 89.92% among the marketer
retailers and 97.7% among the marketer wholesalers. The average household size of the categories of
marketers was found to be 12 persons per household. The categories of marketers were literate with
cumulatively, 69.4% of producer marketers, 57.54% of marketer retailers and 76.38% of marketer
wholesalers attended either primary, secondary or tertiary form of western education. The Gini-
Coefficient estimates of 0.132, 0.184 and 0.345 for the producer marketers, marketer retailers and
marketer wholesalers respectively, implied inequitable distribution of sales income and high level of
market competition among the marketers. The Lorenz curve revealed high market concentration for
the categories of marketers. The study recommended that the government through the extension
agents and Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) in the state should collaborate and organize
marketing trainings for the categories of marketers to improve their information base about
marketing and pricing which subsequently, will translate into increased soybean marketing efficiency.

KEYWORDS: Soybean, marketer’s category, sales, Gini-coefficient, Lorenz curve

1.0 Introduction

Soybean (Glycine max (L) Merrill), originated from China, and belong to the family leguminoceae, in
the sub-family of papiplonaceae (Ogbanje, 2023). After wheat, maize and rice, soybean is the fourth
most cultivated cereal crop (Grassini et al., 2021). In Africa, the preponderance of soybean cultivation
is centered around South Africa, Nigeria, Uganda, Tanzania, Zaire, and Zimbabwe with some
scattered productions in the francophone countries. The current annual soybean production figure in
Nigeria stands at 680,000MT, ranked second after South Africa amongst producers of soybean in
Africa (Khojely et al., 2018 and Akah et al., 2021). Niger state contributes between 25 – 100MT
annually to the total annual production in Nigeria hence, a major soybean producing state (Sahel
Capital Partners, 2017). The comparative advantage of high return of investment the crop offers
relative to other arable crops, less demanding cultural practices, ability to thrive well in soils with low
fertility due to presence of root noodles and being a viable source of income, influences the
preponderance of smallholder farmers to soybean production (Ogaje and Abu, 2020, Ali and Wasiu,
2020).

115
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Soybean holds immense economic significance in Nigeria (Pagano and Miransari, 2022). Soybean
have become a crucial component of Nigeria agricultural landscape as it contributes significantly to
the livelihoods of smallholder farmers, a major cash crop, source of cheap and high protein-rich
alternative compared to animal protein hence, an important and popular component of vegetarian diet
(Upev et al., 2015 and Udeh et al., 2018). The dry matter content of soybean contains approximately
40% protein, and 20% oil content which contains essential amino acids, rich in healthy omega-3
unsaturated fats and cholesterol free (Mairabo et al., 2023). Omoigui et al. (2020) and Akah et al.
(2021) contended that, soybean meal constitutes a vital and preferred source of protein in
compounding poultry and fish feeds with composition up to 20 - 30% and 20% respectively, while the
haulms are a suitable feed for goats and sheep. Furthermore, soy milk, soy cheese, vegetable oil, soy
flour and food seasoning (dadawa) are all high calorie and rich protein soybean-based food consumed
by humans. At the industrial level, soybean is utilized to produce wood veneer, paper coatings,
printing ink, adhesive, alkyd resins, anti-corrosion agent, core oil, bio-fuel due to less or no nitrogen
element in the oil, disinfectant, pesticides, paints, antibiotics and cosmetics (Ngalamu et al., 2012).

The marked decline in soybean productivity in Nigeria (lower than the optimum yield of 3mt/ha
which is approximately 1mt/ha on the average) remained a major source of concern (Ronner et al.,
2016 and Goldsmith, 2019). Several challenges characterized soybean production and account for
aforementioned assertion. Droughts, lack of credit access, inadequate access to improved seeds, low
extension contacts, high production cost, lack of market infrastructures, insecurity inform of farmers-
herders clash, pest and disease, post-harvest losses and low level of irrigation and reliance on rain fed
agriculture have all been indicted as obvious reasons for the low productivity in smallholding farming
(Mgbenka and Mbah, 2016 and Hazell et al., 2016), Although, the government coupled with efforts
from research institutes like International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) Ibadan and National
Cereal Research Institute (NCRI) Baddegi had over the last decades attempted to address the
agricultural inefficiencies and harness the potentials of the sector evidenced by the different
government policy reforms and farm level technologies and development of high yielding improved
soybean varieties to boost productivity respectively, the problem still lingers (Kamara et al., 2022).
Consequently, the dynamics triggered importation of soybean due to huge domestic deficit supply
created as domestic production is unable to match up with domestic demand of soybean.

Kumar (2018) emphasized that, production and marketing in agriculture are closely related concepts
and the choice of the commodity to produce is determined by the market. It can be argued that in
production, such decision as the variety of crops to grow or breed of animal to keep are all marketing
decisions and, the concept of utility is central (Abu, 1997). In addition, marketing by nature is an
emotive subject with a range of viewpoints concerning its scope and importance. At the simplest
level, it might be assumed that marketing is an activity that takes place in the market. It is a collective
term used to describe exchange between buyers and sellers, who are attempting to maximize profit or
objective utility (Bwala and Alani, 2020). Though a long time ago, the definition of marketing by The
National Commission for Agriculture (NCA) still stands tall amongst the various attempt to define the
concept. Agricultural marketing is a process which starts with a decision to produce a saleable farm
commodity, involves all the aspects of market structure or system, both financial and institutional,
based on technical and economic considerations, and includes pre- and post-harvest operations,
assembling, grading, storage, transportation and distribution (NCA, 1976).

Marketing covers all business functions including production and its broadest sense, production
decisions. Sani (2018) stressed that agricultural marketing system possesses the tendency to catalyze
116
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

improved socio-economic status and enhance the production system of smallholder farmers in any
given rural location. An efficient agricultural marketing as opined by Ajibade et al. (2021), enhances;
market participation of smallholder farmers, alleviate poverty in the rural area, an important
livelihood option, optimize resource use and out management, improve net farm income, broadening
of market, growth of agro-based industries, price signals, and creates utility of form, place, time and
possession of the agricultural commodity. From the foregoing, agricultural marketing is an important
multiplier of economic development and its advancement makes possible economic integration and
the optimum utilization of whatever assets and productive capacity an economy already possessed.
Since soybean is a highly differentiated product and the market is highly segmented, the soybean
value chain in Niger State is of great interest to major stakeholders due to its organized governance
structure where major actors and market forces determine how much of the product to be sold and at
what price (Lukman et al., 2021).

2.0 Objectives of the Study

The broad objective of the study is to conduct the structural analysis of soybean marketing Niger
State, Nigeria. The specific objectives of the study are to:

describe the socioeconomic characteristics of soybean marketers in the study area; and to analyze the
structure of soybean marketers in the study area;

3.0 Methodology

The study is cross-sectional research which adopted the survey design. Structured questionnaire was
developed and used to elicit responses from soybean marketers in the study area based on the specific
objectives developed for the study. The study was conducted in Niger State, Nigeria. Niger State was
created on the 3rd February 1976, with Minna as the headquarter. Niger State is located in the North-
Central part of Nigeria, and lies between Latitude 8°20ꞌ and 11°30' North, and Longitude 3°30' and
7°40ꞌ East of the equator. The state covers an estimated land area of approximately 76, 469 square
kilometers, with a human population of 3,954,772 people comprising 2,032,725 males and 1,922,047
females and, consists of twenty-five (25) Local Government Area, divided into three (3) senatorial
zones; A, B and C National Population Commission (NPC, 2006). However, the population was
projected in 2019 using 3.2% growth rate of National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) to be 5,960,112
people. The United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs Population Division
(UNESAPD, 2024) projected the population of Niger State to be 27.2 million people utilizing 3.34%
yearly growth rate. The state experiences two distinct seasons namely; wet and dry, with annual
rainfall varying from 1,100mm2 - 1600mm2 in the Northern and Southern part respectively, with an
average daily temperature which ranges from 23°C - 37°C (Niger State Agricultural and
Mechanization Authority (NAMDA, 2018). Niger State is bordered with Kebbi State to the North-
West, Zamfara State to the North, Kaduna State to the North-East, Kogi State to the South-East,
Kwara State to the South-West, Federal Capital Territory, Abuja to the South-East and an
international border with Republic of Benin to the West (Niger State, 2007). Niger State is inhabited
predominantly by the Nupe, Hausa and Gbagyi which are the major ethnic groups, and host of other
tribes which includes Kadara, Koro, Bassa, Kamuku, Ingwai, Fangu, Kambari, Dukkawa, Fulani,
Abewa, Bisan, Gungawa, Bauchi, Bariba, Urah, Boko, Bokobaro, Bauchnu, Achifawa, Dakarkari,
Kakanda, Ganagana, and Dibo and numerous non-native tribes leaving peacefully and contributing
their quota to the development of the state.

117
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

3.1 Population of the Study

The population for the study comprises 12,850 major soybean marketers in selected 11 Local
Government Areas (LGA) in Niger State, Nigeria, with particular interest on 3 categories for the
purpose of this study:

a. Producer marketers: These are farmers who are either small-holder or large-scale producer and
marketers of soybean seed;

b. Marketer retailers: These are soybean marketers who form network with the village agents or
sometimes, deals directly with the small-holder or large-scale farmers to purchase soybean seed either
in the rural or urban area;

c. Marketer wholesalers: These are either licensed or unlicensed marketers who generally buy
soybean seed in large volumes, and are independent individual agents and or commissioned agents to
exporters or processors.

3.2 Sample and Sampling Techniques

However, due to the enormity of the population, a purposive multistage and simple random sampling
technique was used to select the sample size for the study based on preponderance of soybean
production and marketing in the study area. The first stage involved selection of the three (3) Agro
Ecological Zones (AEZ); A, B and C in the study area. The second stage involved purposive selection
of four (4) LGAs each from AEZ A and B and, three (3) LGAs from AEZ C, identified for their
preponderance of soybean production and marketing in the study area. The third and final stage
involved simple random selection of the 388 soybean marketers utilizing the Taro Yamane method
(Yamane, 1967) and the Bourley proportion allocative formula (Bourley, 1926).

Mathematically, the Taro Yamane method is represented as;

N
n= ……………………………….. ( i )
1 + N ( e2 )

Where,

n = Sample size

N = Population size

e = Margin of error (MoE = 0.05)

1 = Constant

Mathematically, Bourley’s proportion allocative formula is represented as:

Ni
ni = n ………………………………………….(ii)
n

118
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Where,

ni = Sample size for the ith stratum

n = Total sample size

Ni = Population for the ith stratum

N = Total population

Table 1: Sample Size Selection Plan

Sample Size Selection

S/n Agro Ecological Zones LGAs Sampling Frame Sample Size

1 Agaie 1050 32

2 Gbako 977 30
A
3 Lapai 1020 31

4 Mokwa 1503 45

1 Bosso 1388 42

2 Gurara 980 30
B
3 Munya 1200 36

4 Paikoro 1100 33

1 Borgu 1407 42

2 C Kontagora 1205 36

3 Mashegu 1020 31

Total 11 12,850 388

3.3 Model Specification

The Gini index is defined as a ratio of the area on the Lorenze curve diagram. If the

area between the line of perfect equality and Lorenz curve is A, and the area under the Lorenz

curve is B, then the Gini index is A/(A + B). Since (A + B) = 0.5, the Gini Index is G = 2* A

or G = 1 – 2B. Following Shafaatu, (2017), Gini coefficient model is expressed as;

119
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

n-1

GC = 1−∑ ( Y K −1−Y K ) ( X K − X K −1 ) ………………… …..(iii)

i=0

Where,

GC = Gini coefficient

Y = Cumulative percentage of soybean marketers

X = Cumulative percentage of their sales

Lorenz curve refer to the ratio of the egalitarian line or line of perfect equality (which forms 450
angles with both the X and Y axis) to the area of the entire triangle formed by the egalitarian line and
x and y axis and is expressed as;

GC = 10,000 - X

10,000 ………………………………..……………(iv)

Where;

10,000 = A constant (i.e the total area of the square (100 x 100))

X = The trapezoidal area

4.0 Result and Discussion

4.1 Socioeconomic Characteristics of Soybean Marketers in the Study Area

The socioeconomic variables considered in this study includes age, sex, marital status, education
level, market experience, household size, cooperative membership, ownership of transport and annual
income and the breakdown of the analysis is presented in Table 2. Among the categories of marketers,
the modal age of the producer marketers was 45 years with 42.47 years as the mean age, the modal
age of the market retailers was 35 years with 43.32 years as the mean age and the modal age of the
marketer wholesalers was 45 years with 47.29 years as mean age. The result showed that respondents
were in their middle ages regarded as the active and productive age for soybean marketing consistent
with the result obtained by Ani et al. (2017) in their survey. The implication of the findings is that the
young and productive active age predisposes the respondents to quickly adopt new and improved
marketing strategies and techniques which will efficiently enhance their marketing activities (Girei et
al., 2013).

In terms of sex, soybean marketing activities is male dominated among the producer marketers
(89.31%), market retailers (56.92%) and marketer wholesalers (81.89%) however. The result is in
conformity with the study by Udeh et al. (2018), who documented male dominated soybean
marketing activities and attributed it to the large capital and labour intensive requirement of soybean
marketing and direct production of the crop.

120
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

The marital status showed a significant proportion of the producer marketers (89.31%), market
retailers (89.92%) and market wholesalers (97.7%) are married. The result corroborates with the study
by Oladejo (2015) and Offor et al. (2016), who contended that being married among marketers
confers to a high degree of responsibility and a depiction of the stability of their households signifying
the availability of family labour for marketing activities and the cultural background of the region
with a significant population practicing Islam, early marriages and sometimes inclined towards
polygamy could be rampant accounting for the high degree of married respondents.

The education level indicated that, majority of the categories of marketers were literate and attended
at least, one form of western education with cumulatively, 69.47% of the producer marketers, 57.54%
of the marketer retailers and 76.38% of the marketer wholesalers attended at least, primary, secondary
and tertiary schools. The result showed a high level of literacy amongst the soybean marketers and the
finding is in tandem with the surveys undertaken Alabi et al. (2020) and Olayinde et al. (2020) who
both reported significant percentage of respondents who are literate and attended at least, one form of
western education which is expected to enhance their decision-making process in the market, market
performance and early adoption of marketing innovations.

Further, most of the category marketers with 69.4% of the producer marketers, 51.54% of the market
retailers and 66.93% of the market wholesalers are members of cooperative association. Also, the
result revealed mean number of years as a member of cooperative association among producer
marketers to be 11.82 years, market retailers to be 12.78 years and market wholesalers 14.62 years,
demonstrating a fairly high years of membership amongst the categories of soybean marketers. The
result agrees with the research conducted by Adesoji et al. (2020) who opined that being a member of
a cooperative association offers privileges of easy access to market information, access to capital and
credit facilities to conduct marketing business which naturally, will enhance their various marketing
activities positively.

The marketing experience of the categories of marketers as revealed that, an average producer
marketers’ marketing experience ranged from 2 to 40 years with 14.42 years mean marketing
experience; an average marketer retailers’ marketing experience ranged from 2 to 40 years with 12.22
years mean marketing experience and, an average marketer wholesalers’ marketing experience ranged
from 2 to 35 years with 14.42 years mean marketing experience. The marketing experience amongst
the categories of marketers is fairly high and the result is consistent with the study conducted by Biye
et al. (2018) who documented a fairly high level of marketing experience amongst soybean marketers
implying that they can handle their marketing activities more efficiently and influence them to be
convenient with the marketing systems being utilized in the markets where they sell their products.

In terms of household size, producer marketers and marketer retailers’ average household size ranged
from 2 to 22 people and a mean of 12 people per household respectively, while an average marketer
wholesalers’ household size ranged from 2 to 25 people and a mean of 12 per every household. The
fairly large household sizes of the categories of marketers conforms to the result by Lukman et al.
(2021) who posited that large household size could be a reflection of the practice of early and
polygynous marriages due to cultural background and, a direct relationship between marital status and
household size as the children could act as additional hands to provide labour for various marketing
operations.

121
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Analysis revealed the producer marketers with 40.46%, the marketer retailers with 29% and the
marketer wholesalers with 59.06% owned a means of transportation which is very vital considering
that, transportation cost accounts for a large share of the total cost of soybean marketing and could
enhance market efficiency through reduce transport cost thus, positioning the marketers to earn extra
margin in the long-run.

Table 2: Distribution of Soybean Marketers Based on their Socioeconomic Characteristics (N =

388)

Producer Marketer
Marketer Retailer
Variable Marketer Wholesaler
(n = 130)
(n = 131) (n = 127)

Frequency Frequency Frequency

Age

18 – 35 22 (16.79) 29 (22.31) 5 (3.94)

36-45 64 (48.85) 53 (40.77) 45 (35.43)

above 45 45 (34.36) 48 (36.92) 77 (60.63

Total 131 130 127

Minimum 18 18 25

Maximum 65 75 64

Mean 42.57 43.32 47.29

Standard Deviation 8.62 8.57 6.87

Sex

Male 117 (89.31) 74 (56.92) 104 (81.89)

Female 14 (10.69) 56 (43.08) 23 (18.11)

Total 131 (100) 130 (100) 127 (100)

Marital Status

Single 2 (8.4) 6 (4.62) 3 (2.36)

Married 117 (89.31 113 (89.92) 119 (97.7)

Divorced 1 (0.76) 4 (3.08) 2 (1.58)

Widowed/Widower 2 (1.53) 7 (5.38) 3 (2.36)

122
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Producer Marketer
Marketer Retailer
Variable Marketer Wholesaler
(n = 130)
(n = 131) (n = 127)

Total 131 (100) 130 (100) 127 (100)

Education Level

No formal education 19 (14.50) 35 (26.92) 16 (12.60)

Adult education 5 (3.82) 6 (4.62) 7 (5.51)

Qur’anic education 21 (16.03) 20 (15.38) 17 (13.39)

Primary education 18 (13.74) 15 (11.54) 14 (11.02)

Secondary education 38 (29.01) 41 (31.54) 52 (40.94)

Tertiary education 30 (22.9) 13 (10.00) 21 (16.54)

Total 131 (100) 130 127 (100)

Market Experience

1–5 21 (16.03) 25 (19.23) 15 (11.81)

6 – 11 43 (32.82) 46 (35.38) 54 (42.52)

11 – 15 21 (16.03) 34 (26.15) 29 (22.83)

16 – 20 17 (12.98) 10 (7.60) 12 (9.45)

21 and above 29 (22.14) 15 (11.54) 17 (13.39)

Total 131 (100) 130 (100) 127 (100)

Minimum 2 2 2

Maximum 40 40 35

Mean 14.42 12.22 12.54

Standard Deviation 9.31 7.97 7.49

Household Size

1–5 12 (9.16) 15 (11.54) 7 (5.51)

6 – 11 39 (29.77) 48 (36.92) 41 (32.28)

11 – 15 48 (36.64) 39 (30.00) 53 (41.73)

123
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Producer Marketer
Marketer Retailer
Variable Marketer Wholesaler
(n = 130)
(n = 131) (n = 127)

16 – 20 30 (22.9) 24 (18.46) 21 (16.54)

21 and above 2 (1.53) 4 (3.08) 5 (3.94)

Total 131 (100) 130 (100) 127 (100)

Minimum 2 2 2

Maximum 22 22 25

Mean 11.82 11.24 12.06

Standard Deviation 4.46 4.89 4.42

Cooperative
membership

No 40 (30.53) 63 (48.46) 42 (33.07)

Yes 91 (69.47) 67 (51.54) 85 (66.93)

Total 131 (100) 130 (100) 127 (100)

Number of years as member

Minimum 2 2 2

Maximum 40 40 40

Mean 11.82 12.78 14.62

Standard Deviation 7.75 8.32 8.76

Ownership of transport

No 78 (59.54) 92 (70.77) 52 (40.94)

Yes 53 (40.46) 38 (29.23) 75 (59.06)

Total 131 (100) 130 (100) 127 (100)

Type of Transport

Motorbike 47 (88.68) 27 (71.05) 40 (53.33)

Vehicle 6 (11.32) 11 (28.95) 35 (46.67)

124
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Producer Marketer
Marketer Retailer
Variable Marketer Wholesaler
(n = 130)
(n = 131) (n = 127)

Total 53 (100) 38 (100) 75 (100)

Figures in parenthesis represents percentages

Source: Field Survey, 2024

4.2 Structure of Soybean Market in the Study Area

4.2.1 Degree of market concentration

Market concentration is a term used to describe the number of sellers and buyers in the market. The
study analyzed the degree of market concentration for soybean marketers in Niger State where,
producer marketers, marketer retailers and marketer wholesalers of soybean are significantly involved
in the marketing process using the Gini Coefficient and Lorenz curve.

(i) Gini coefficient

The market concentration of the categories of soybean marketers was computed using the Gini
Coefficient as revealed in Tables 3, 4 and 5. The soybean marketers’ annual sales was classified into 3
categories viz; 1001 – 30,000, 30,001 – 60,000, 60,001 and above. Among the producer marketers, a
total of N9,572,706.2 was generated and, 10% of the total marketers in this category contributed
N265,507.7, 14% of the total marketers in this category contributed N215,582.35 and 76% of the total
marketers in this category contributed N9,091,616.14 to the total amount generated from sales.

Among the marketer wholesalers, a total of N841,914.5 was generated and, 15% of the total marketers
in this category contributed N313,346, 19% total marketers in this category contributed N183,946.7
and 66% of the total marketers in this category contributed N8,564,545.5 to the total amount
generated from sales.

Among the marketer wholesalers, a total of N9,841,914.5 was generated and, 10% of the total
marketers in this category contributed N15,368.4, 40% total marketers in this category contributed
N194,774.4 and 50% of the total marketers in this category contributed N731,771.7 to the total
amount generated from sales.

Based on the computation, the producer marketers, marketer retailers and marketer wholesales’ Gini
Coefficient were 0.132, 0.184 and 0.345 respectively. It is observed that the values of Gini Coefficient
for all the categories of soybean marketers are lower than 0.35 hence, it indicates inequitable

125
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

distribution of sales income amongst the soybean marketers. The result of the Gini Coefficient is
consistent with the studies undertaken by Rabirou et al. (2018) and Ekine et al. (2018) who both
recorded low values of estimated Gini Coefficient for yam marketers and fish marketing.

126
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Table 3: Gini Coefficient for Producer Marketers (n = 131)

Range of Number Proportion Cumulativ Cumulative Total sales Proportion Cumulativ XY

Income of of e Proportion of sale e
Marketers Marketers Frequency Proportion
Frequency (X) of Sale

(Y)

1,001 - 30,000 13 0.10 13 0.10 265507.71 0.03 0.03 0.003

30,001 - 60,000 5 0.04 18 0.14 215582.35 0.02 0.05 0.002

60,001 and
above 113 0.86 131 1.00 9091616.14 0.95 1.00 0.864

Total 131 1 9572706.2 1.00 0.868

Gini Coefficient =1 – (Sum of XY) = 1 – 0.868 = 0.132; 0.132 < 0.35 indicating equality distribution (concentration) of soybean marketers

Source: Field Survey, 2024

Table 4: Gini Coefficient for Marketers Retailers (n = 130)

127
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Range of Number of Proportion Cumulativ Cumulative Total sales Proportion Cumulativ XY

Income Marketers of e Proportion of sale e
Frequency Marketers Frequency Proportion
(X) of Sale

(Y)

1,001 - 30,000 20 0.15 20 0.15 313346 0.03 0.03 0.005

30,001 - 60,000 5 0.04 25 0.19 183946.7 0.02 0.06 0.002

60,001 and 105 0.81 130 1.00 8564545.5 0.95 1.00 0.809
above

Total 130 1 9061838.2 1.00 0.816

Gini Coefficient =1 – (Sum of XY) = 1 – 0.816 = 0.18; 0.18 < 0.35 indicating equality distribution (concentration) of soybean marketers

Source: Field Survey, 2024

Table 5: Gini Coefficient for Marketers Wholesalers (n = 127)

128
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-133, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Range of Income Number of Proportio Cumulativ Cumulativ Total sales Proportion Cumulativ XY
Marketers n of e e of sale e
Frequency Marketers Frequency Proportion Proportion
(X) of Sale

(Y)

1,001 - 30,000 13 0.10 13 0.10 15368.4 0.02 0.018 0.002

30,001 - 60,000 38 0.30 51 0.40 94774.4 0.13 0.148 0.044

60,001 and above 76 0.60 127 1.00 731771.7 0.87 1.017 0.609

Total 127 1 841914.5 1.02 0.655

Gini Coefficient =1 – (Sum of XY) = 1 – 0.655 = 0.34; 0.34 < 0.35 indicating equality distribution (concentration) of soybean marketers

Source: Field Survey, 2024

129
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-29, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.
(ii) Lorenz curve

The degree of market concentration in the study area can equally be represented utilizing the Lorenz
curve. Figures 1, 2, and 3 represents the Lorenz curves of the producer marketers, marketer retailers and
marketer wholesalers respectively. The Lorenz curve is represented by a diagonal straight line referred to
as the line of perfect equality in income or wealth distribution. Observing the Lorenz curves carefully, it
can be deduced that the Lorenz curve for the marketer wholesalers assumes a more convex shaped,
followed by that of the marketer retailers and the then, that of the producer marketers in that order. The
implication of the results of the Lorenz curves of the different categories of soybean marketers is that,
both the market concentration and equality in sales of income for the wholesaler marketers tends to be
higher than that of the marketer retailers and producer marketers in the study area.

Producer Marketers Lorenz Curve

1.20
Cumulative % Income

1.00
Figure 1:
0.80
Lorenz
0.60 Equality
Curve for
0.40 Lorenz
Producer
0.20
Marketers
0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
Source:
Cumulative % Frequency Field
Survey,
2024

129
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-29, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.

Marketer Retailer Lorenz Curve

1.20

1.00
Cumulative % Finance

0.80

0.60 Equality
Lorenz
0.40

0.20

0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Cumulative % Frequency

Figure 2: Lorenz Curve for Marketers Retailers

Source: Field Survey, 2024

Marketer Wholesaler Lorenz Curve

1.20
Cumulative % Finance

1.00
0.80
0.60
Lorenz
0.40
Equality
0.20
0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
Cumulative % Frequency

Figure 3: Lorenz Curve for Marketers Retailers

Source: Field Survey, 2024

5.0 Conclusion and Recommendation

Based on the findings of the study, it can be concluded that soyabeans marketing in the study area is
predominantly dominated by male traders who are in their active and productive age for marketing
activities, are experienced and belonged to cooperative association. The market structure is inclined
towards a competitive market with a good level of organization. The study recommended that the
government through the extension agents and Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) in the state should
collaborate and organize marketing trainings for the categories of marketers to improve their information

130
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-29, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.
base about marketing and pricing which subsequently, will translate into increased soybean marketing
efficiency.

References

Abu, G. A. (1997). The structure, conduct and performance of soybean marketing in Benue State,
Nigeria. (Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis Submitted to the Department of Agricultural Economics, Ahmadu
Bello University, Zaria.

Ajibade, Y. E., Oyibo, F. O., Ameh, O. E., Odiba, A. J. and Ibrahim, M. S. (2021). Cashew Nuts
Marketing Functions and Profitability among Produce Buyers in Dekina Local Government Area, Kogi
State, Nigeria. Proceeding of the 20th Annual Conference of Nigerian Association of Agricultural
Economists. Held at the University of Uyo, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. 1th – 18th March, 2021.

Akah, N.P., Kunyanga, C. N., Okoth, M. W. and Njue, L. G. (2021). Pulse Production, Consumption and
Utilization in Nigeria within Regional and Global Context. Sustainable Agriculture Research, 10, 48-64.

Alabi, O. O., Oladele, A. O. and Maharazu, I. (2020). Profitability Analysis and Marketing Efficiency of
Soyabean (Glycine max) Value Chain Among Actors in Abuja, Nigeria. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture,
36(4), 1010-1019.

Ali, B.M. and Wasiu, A. 2020. Comparative profitability analysis of cowpea and soybean enterprises in
Niger State of Nigeria. Journal of Bangladesh Agricultural University, 18(2), 567-574.

Ani, D. P., Chidebelu, S. A. N. and Anselm A. Enete, A. A. (2017). Spatial Price Differential: An
Analysis of Soyabeans Marketing in Benue and Enugu States, Nigeria. Journal of Biology, Agriculture
and Healthcare, 7(2), 31-42.

Biye, S. U., Mu’azu, L. Y. and Danladi, B. B. (2018). Economic Analysis of Soybeans Marketing in
Billiri Local Government Area of Gombe State, Nigeria. Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic
Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, 18(4), 59-64.

Bwala, M. A. and Alani, W (2020). Comparative profitability analysis of cowpea and soybean enterprises
in Niger State of Nigeria. Journal of Bangladesh Agricultural University, 18(2), 471-478.

Ekine, D. I. and Binaebi, E. (2018). Structure and performance of Fresh Fish Marketing in Yenagoa Local
Government Area of Bayelsa State, Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science, 16(4), 26-32.

Grassini, P., La Menza, N. C., Edreira, J. I R., Monzón, J. P., Tenorio, F. A. and Specht, J. E. (2021).
Soybean. In Sadras, V.O. and Calderini, D. F. (Eds.), Crop Physiology Case Histories for Major Crops
(pp. 282-319), Academic Press.

Hazell, P., Ricker-Gilbert, J., Wiggins, S., Sahn, D. and Mishra A (2016). The Role of Smallholder Farms
in Food Security in Developing Countries. In: Riesgo L., Louhichi, K. and Paloma, S.G. (eds.), Food and
Nutrition Security and Role of Smallholder Farms: Challenges and Opportunities. Procurement and

131
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-29, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.
European Commission, JRC Conference. Workshop Reports. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.2791/653314, on the 2nd May, 2024.

Khojely, D. M., Ibrahim, S. E., Sapey, E. and Han, T. (2018). History, Current Status, and Prospects of
Soybean Production and Research in Sub-Saharan Africa. The Crop Journal, 16, 226-235.

Kumar, M. (2018). Problems of Agricultural Marketing in India. International Journal of Research and
Analytical Reviews, 5(4), 2349-5138.

Lukman B. O., Bwala M. A., Baba K. C., Dauda S. N., and Yunusa J. B. (2021). Evaluation of
Governance Structure in Soyabean Value Chain in Niger State of Nigeria. Russian Journal of
Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 8(16), 178-83.

Mairabo, A., Jibrin, S., Audu, H., Salihu, M. Y. and Elisha, Y. (2023). Technical Efficiency of Soybean
Production in Niger State, Nigeria. FUDMA Journal of Sciences, 7(1), 201 – 206.

Mgbenka, R. N. and. Mbah, E. N. (2018). A Review of Smallholder Farming in Nigeria: Need for
Transformation. International Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development Studies, 3(2), 43-
54.

Niger state Agricultural and Mechanization Development Authority (NAMDA, 2018). Prospect of Niger
State Agricultural and Mechanization Development Authority (NAMDA), Minna, Niger State, pp 1819.

National Commission on Agriculture, (NCA). (1976). Agricultural Marketing and Perspectives, XII
Report. Retrieved from http://www.eagri.org/eagri50/AECO242/lec01.html. 5th May, 2024.

NPC (2006). National Population Commission. National Population Census, Federal Republic of Nigeria
official gazette, 94 (4) Lagos, Nigeria.

Ngalamu, T., Meseka, S and Ashraf, M. (2012). Performance of Soybean (Glycine max L Merrill)
Genotypes under Different Planting Dates in Sennar State of the Sudan. Journal of Applied Biosciences,
49, 3363-3370.

Offor, E. I., Nse–Nelson, F. A. and Asokome, F. (2016). Determinants of Marketing Efficiency of Yam
Market in Umuahia North Local Government Area of Abia State, Nigeria. Agro-Science Journal of
Tropical Agriculture, Food, Environment and Extension, 15(2), 54-58.

Ogbanje, E. C. (2023). Financial Performance of Soybean Farmers in Vandeikya Local Government Area
of Benue State, Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences, 21(1), 128-146.

Ogaje, E. C. (2020). Conduct and Structure of Soyabean Marketing in North Central States of Nigeria.
International European Extended Enablement in Science, Engineering and Management Journal, 8(4),
10-22.

Ogaje, A. E. and Abu, O. (2020). Market Performance of Categorized Soybeans Marketers in Benue and
Nasarawa State, Nigeria. International Journal of Innovative Research and Development, 9(2), 329-344.

132
www.ijaams.org
International Journal of Applied Economics, Agriculture and Management Sciences (IJAAMS)
Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 115-29, 2023
Abdullahi A.S., Abu G.A. & Ezihe J.A.C.
Pagano, M. C. and Miransari, M. (2022). The importance of soybean production worldwide. Abiotic and
Biotic Stresses in Soybean Production, December 2016, 1–26. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801536-0/00001-3. Accessed on the 12th April, 2024.

Rabirou, K., Abdulhameed, A. G. and Ismaila, D. S. (2018). Analysis of Yam marketing in Akoko North-
East Local Government of Ondo State, Nigeria. International Journal of Agricultural Marketing, 5(1),
170-177.

Ronner, E., Franke, A. C., Vanlauwe, B., Dianda, M., Edeh, E., Ukem, B., Bala, A., van Heerwaarden, J.,
and Giller, K. E. (2016). Understanding Variability in Soybean Yield and Response to P‐fertilizer and
Rhizobium Inoculants on Farmers’ Fields in Northern Nigeria. Field Crops Research, 186, 133-145.

Sahel Capital Partners (2017). Soybean: on Becoming a highly Coveted Crop. Retrieved from
http://sahelcp.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Sahel-Capital-Newsletter-Volume-16. Accessed on the
14th April, 2024.

Sani, H. (2018). Profitability of Soybean Production by Smallholder Farmers in Nigeria: Impact of an

Agricultural Programme in Zamfara State, Nigeria. International Journal of Agricultural Science and
Research, 8(2), 59-70.

Udeh, M., Ogbanje, C. E. and Ayopo, O. O. (2018). Analysis of the Marketing Margin of Soyabean in
Benue State, Nigeria. International Journal of Environment, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 3(3): 944 –
950.

UNESAPD (2024). United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs Population
Division_Niger_State. Retrieved from https://population.un.org/wpp/nigerstate. Accessed on the 14th
April, 2024.

Upev, S. K., Haruna, L. and Giroh, D. Y. (2015). Analysis of Resource Use Efficiency among Soybean
(Glycine max) Farmers in Gboko Local Government Area of Benue State, Nigeria. Global Journal of
Agricultural Sciences, 15, 57 – 63.

133
www.ijaams.org