Issue 3 (203)/2025

ALSE and ACS Style
Alabi, D.L.; Awoleye, O.M.; Taiwo, K.A.; Morakinyo, T.A.; Gbadamosi, O.; Olawoye, B.; Alagbo, O.O.; Koya, O.; Akanbi, C.T. Assessment of rice processing and marketing practices: the case of Nigeria. Journal of Applied Life Sciences and Environment 2025, 58 (3), 451-468. https://doi.org/10.46909/alse-583185

AMA Style
Alabi DL, Awoleye OM, Taiwo KA, Morakinyo TA, Gbadamosi O, Olawoye B, Alagbo OO, Koya O, Akanbi CT. Assessment of rice processing and marketing practices: the case of Nigeria. Journal of Applied Life Sciences and Environment. 2025; 58 (3): 451-468.
https://doi.org/10.46909/alse-583185

Chicago/Turabian Style
Alabi, Dorcas Lola, Olusesan Michael Awoleye, Kehinde Adekunbi Taiwo, Tunde Afolabi Morakinyo, Olasunkanmi Gbadamosi, Babatunde Olawoye, Oyebanji Olubunmi Alagbo, Olufemi Koya, and Charles Taiwo Akanbi. 2025. “Assessment of rice processing and marketing practices: the case of Nigeria.” Journal of Applied Life Sciences and Environment 58, no. 3: 451-468. https://doi.org/10.46909/alse-583185

Assessment of rice processing and marketing practices: the case of Nigeria

Dorcas Lola ALABI^1*, Olusesan Michael AWOLEYE², Kehinde Adekunbi TAIWO³, Tunde Afolabi MORAKINYO³, Olasunkanmi GBADAMOSI³, Babatunde OLAWOYE⁴, Oyebanji Olubunmi ALAGBO⁵, Olufemi KOYA⁶ and Charles Taiwo AKANBI³

¹Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria

²African Institute for Science Policy and Innovation (AISPI), Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria; email: mawoleye@oauife.edu.ng

³Department of Food Science and Technology, Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria; email: ktaiwo@oauife.edu.ng ; tmorakinyo@oauife.edu.ng; sunkanmig@yahoo.com; ctakanbi@oauife.edu.ng

⁴Department of Food Science and Technology, Abiola Ajimobi Technical University, Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria; email: babatunde.olawoye@tech-u.edu.ng

⁵Department of Crop Production and Protection, Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria; email: oyebanjialagbo@oauife.edu.ng

⁶Department of Mechanical Engineering, Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria; email: femikoya@oauife.edu.ng

*Correspondence: alabidorcas@oauife.edu.ng

Received: Jul. 18, 2025. Revised: Sep. 19, 2025. Accepted: Sep. 30, 2025. Published online: Oct. 23, 2025

ABSTRACT. This study investigated the category of scale-level rice processing across selected states in different geopolitical zones in Nigeria, factors motivating participation in rice processing, the characteristics of rice processing enterprises, and the marketing outlets employed for the distribution and sale of finished rice products. In October 2023, 168 rice processors were selected for the study using a multi-stage sampling procedure. Data were collected using a validated questionnaire, with simple descriptive statistics being employed in the data analysis. The results showed that most microprocessors (80.0%) and small-scale processors (58.3%) in the study area were located in Ekiti State, while medium-scale (41.2%) and large-scale (50%) ones were found in Kwara and Kano States, respectively. Profitability, which ranged between mean of 4.58 in Kwara and 4.89 in Ebonyi, was the most important motivating factor in all states. The characteristics of the enterprise revealed variations in start-up capital, association membership and the number of household members involved in the business. Kano State dominated all the market outlet categories, registering the highest percentage (63.4%) total sales. The study concluded that a higher percentage of rice production in these study areas was processed by the microprocessors and small-scale processors characterized by inadequate rice processing machines, and the distribution network has greater internal strength.

Keywords: geopolitical zones; post-harvest technology; rice value chain; small-scale processors.

 

INTRODUCTION

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is an important staple food for almost half of the global population, with the world producing 509.87 billion kilogrammes (kg) of rice in 2021/22 (Shahbandeh, 2022). The crop is highly valued in Nigeria because of the significant contribution it makes to alleviating the problem of food insecurity. It used to be a ceremonial food item but has metamorphosed into a staple in many Nigerian homes (Bose et al., 2020). Agritech company ThriveAgric (2020), cited in Alabi et al. (2024), reported that Nigeria produces an average of 8 billion kg of rice, which makes the country the second largest rice producer in Africa, next to Egypt; and in 2019, the country produced about 55% of Africa’s total rice volume of 14.6 billion kg and also ranked as the 14th largest rice producer in the world. Despite this production capacity, the country ranks as the world’s second largest rice importer (Aminu et al., 2017) due to the volume of its rice consumption. For instance, Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler (KPMG, 2019) noted that Nigeria is the 11th largest rice consumer globally and consumes 6.7 billion kg of rice annually, of which only about 57% is produced locally, leaving a supply deficit of about 3 billion kg. ThriveAgric (2020) also reiterated that Nigerians consume almost 7 billion kg of rice every year.

Rice processing consists of several operations that convert paddy into milled white rice, with its quality being dependent upon the management capability of the processor (Ibitoye et al., 2014). The rice processing enterprise has assumed greater significance in improving the employment opportunities and standard of living in Nigeria (Gabdo et al., 2020). Despite being a capital-intensive industry, its importance to the national economy cannot be overemphasized, as both small- and large-scale paddy processing have contributed immensely to the economy of the country. Muthayya et al. (2014) reported that medium-sized and large modern mills have a processing capacity of between 60,000 and 220,000 kg of paddy rice per day, and Pham (2016) stated that most of the rice mills investigated were operating machines with a medium installed capacity of an average of 1,400 kg per hour in line with the recommendation of the Competitive African Rice Initiative (CARI) project, which proposed business models of rice mills with milling capacities ranging between 1,000 kg per hour and 2,500–3,000 kg per hour.

The rice market plays a central role in the development process as the link between producers and consumers. It has a significant function in the performance of supply chains and assumes greater importance in the Nigerian economy as the channel through which excess production is disposed of, to enable producers to earn some income for purchasing other needed goods and services (Oladapo et al., 2007). Market outlets include wholesalers, retailers, middlemen, processors, cooperative societies, and other marketing agents who ensure that agricultural products get to the final consumers (Donkor et al., 2021).

Rice marketing involves all the business activities performed in the flow of paddy and milled rice from producers to consumers. Aderibigbe (1997) divided the marketing of local rice in Nigeria into four stages, namely: marketing activities that occur during production through harvesting, during the movement of the paddy from the farm to processing centres, during the movement of the milled rice from processing centres to urban consumption centres, and finally the wholesaling and retailing activities in urban centres. However, Zalkuwi (2019) identified retailers and wholesalers as the two main market intermediaries. Udah et al. (2021) described a normal market route as one in which rice farmers sell their paddy and processed rice to wholesalers, who resell to retailers, before the retailers sell to consumers. However, they observed what they termed a “zero-level” or “one-level” marketing channel in their study area. This is a type of marketing with no specific direction as it follows different routes due to changes in market conditions. It is a situation where rice farmers sell directly to wholesalers, retailers and consumers and is characterized by skipping the normal route as retailers bypass the wholesalers and buy directly from the farmers, and consumers also buy directly from the wholesalers or farmers, skipping the retailers. The reason behind skipping is the opportunity to purchase goods at a reduced price.

Previous works have focused on the methods, profitability and challenges of rice processing in Nigeria; however, the availability of information on the current status of the rice processing and marketing activities in Nigeria is very germane to reducing the country’s dependency on rice importation – hence this study. The specific objectives of this study were to determine the processing capacity of rice processing establishments across the selected states in Nigeria, to examine the motivations for participating in rice processing, investigating the factors influencing rice processing in Nigeria, and to examine the marketing outlets employed for the distribution and sales of finished rice products – all with a view to analysing the rice processing and marketing outlook in Nigeria.

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was carried out in Nigeria in October 2023, with a descriptive and cross-sectional research design being adopted, and a multi-stage sampling procedure being used to select respondents.

In the first stage, two-thirds of the six geopolitical zones of the nation were proportionately selected for the study, translating to four states as shown in Figure 1, namely: the North West and North Central representing the northern region together with the South East and South West representing the southern region.

In the second stage, one state was selected from each geopolitical zone, viz.: Kano (from the North West) and Kwara (from the North Central), along with Ebonyi (from the South East) and Ekiti (from the South West). In the final stage, a purposive sampling technique was adopted, and a reconnaissance survey was conducted to identify the rice milling enterprises in Kano, Kwara, Ekiti and Ebonyi States. A total sample size of 168 rice processors comprising 58 from Kano State, 45 from Kwara, 35 from Ekiti and 30 from Ebonyi were identified and purposively selected for this study. Primary data were used for this research study, with the data being collected through the use of a well-designed and well-structured closed-ended questionnaire, which was administered to rice processors by well-trained enumerators. The data collected were analysed through the use of descriptive statistics such as means, frequency distributions and percentages to achieve the objectives of the study.

To achieve the first objective, which was to determine the rice processing capacity across the selected states, respondents were asked to indicate the range of daily rice processing output in their familiar processing centres. The responses were categorized into small, medium and large scale with outputs of 1,000–5,000 kg, 6,000–10,000 kg and more than 10,000 kg per day, respectively.

 

 

To investigate the rice processing characteristics of the respondents, they were asked to indicate how much they started their rice processing business with in Nigerian naira, how old their business was in years, whether or not they belonged to any rice processing association, how many of their household members were involved in rice processing activities and how many 50 kg bags of rice they processed per season?

To measure the motivations for participating in rice processing, respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the following factors as influencing their involvement in rice processing activities on a five-point Likert scale (where 5 represents strongly agree, and 1 strongly disagree): (a) interest in the most lucrative business in the locality; (b) children’s school fees; (c) family subsistence; (d) profit making; (e) self-employment generation; (f) leaving legacy for children; (g) need to generate employment during agricultural off season; (h) social welfare; (i) acquired parents’/family business, in line with Alabi et al. (2017).

The mean scores generated for each criterion were compared across the selected states. To determine the marketing outlets employed for the distribution and sales of finished rice products, respondents were asked to indicate who the buyers of their products were, i.e. the consumers, retailers, wholesalers or companies, in line with Donkor et al. (2021). To determine the spread of rice market outlets, respondents were asked to indicate where they sold their finished rice, i.e. within their states, in other states within Nigeria, or for export.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Rice processing output

The distribution of rice processing establishments as observed across the four states selected for this study provides useful insights into the production output and industrial landscape of the rice processing industry in Nigeria. Processing establishments with an output that did not exceed 1,000 kg per day were categorized as micro, those with an output of > 1,000 to 5,000 kg as small, those with an output of > 5,000 to 10,000 kg as medium, and those with an output > 10,000 kg per day as large-scale establishments. Figure 2 shows that Ekiti State has the majority (80.0%) of the micro rice processing establishments and 58.3% of the small-scale (> 1,000 to 5,000 kg) ones across the study area. The state also has some 23.5% of the medium-sized establishments (> 5,000 to 10,000 kg) and a few (11.2%) of the large-scale ones (> 10,000 kg) in the study area. This distribution suggests that Ekiti State is predominantly dominated by small-scale rice processing operations, in line with Aremu and Akinwamide (2018), who reported that rice processing activities in Igbemo, Ekiti State, are mostly small scale. On the other hand, Ebonyi State shows a different distribution pattern, with no micro processing category recorded and a few (8.3%) small-scale rice processing establishments. The majority of the establishments in Ebonyi are medium-sized, accounting for 35.3% of the total, while 18.1% are large-scale establishments, indicating a higher level of industrialization and a larger production capacity in Ebonyi than in Ekiti State.

 

 

Kano State stands out with a high concentration of large-scale rice processing establishments, while none of the establishments in this state fall into the micro, small or medium categories. The state recorded half (50.0%) of the total number of large-scale establishments (> 10,000 kg), signifying a high level of industrialization and a significant production capacity. However, in Kwara State, the distribution of rice processing establishments is more balanced, as the state accounted for 20.0% and 33.3% of micro and small-scale establishments, respectively, in the study area. There is also a considerable presence of medium-sized establishments, accounting for 41.2% of the total, while 20.7% are large-scale establishments. This suggests a moderate level of industrialization and a moderate production capacity in the state. The findings are in line with Basorun (2013), who reported that the rice processing capacity in Ekiti State (South West Nigeria) was far lower than that found in Ebonyi (South East) and Nasarawa (North Central) States.

Motivations for participating in rice processing

Table 1 presents a comparative analysis of motivations driving participation in rice processing across the study area. These motivations include lucrative job opportunities in rice activities, supporting children’s school fees, family subsistence, profit making, self-employment, leaving a legacy for children, generating employment during the off season, contributing to social welfare and engaging in a family business. Interest in the enterprise as a lucrative job opportunity is high across all states, with Ekiti and Ebonyi demonstrating similar mean scores of 4.78 ± 0.73 and 4.79 ± 0.50, respectively. Kano and Kwara also present high mean scores, albeit slightly lower than Ekiti and Ebonyi. This corroborates Oyebanjo (2024), who claimed that rice processing is a lucrative enterprise. With regard to the motivation to support children’s school fees, Ekiti recorded the highest mean score of 4.80 ± 0.72, indicating that many rice processors in the state are motivated to work in this business because of the need to support their children’s education. The same trend was reported by Odutuyu (2014), who postulated that Ekiti State is known for its commitment to education as it is often referred to as the “fountain of knowledge”. This implies that interventions targeting support for rice processors’ children’s education could be particularly effective in encouraging participation in rice processing in Ekiti State. On the other hand, Ebonyi has a relatively lower mean score of 4.00 ± 0.92, suggesting that supporting children’s education may not be as significant a motivator for rice processors in Ebonyi State as in Ekiti State. In addition, both Kano and Kwara States achieve moderate mean scores of 3.76 ± 1.59 and 3.89 ± 1.21, respectively, for this motivational factor. Family subsistence is also a strong motivation for participating in rice processing across the study area, with Ekiti (mean = 4.78 ± 0.73) and Kano (mean = 4.53 ± 1.06) leading the way. Respondents across the selected states firmly agreed that profit making was a strong motivation for participating in rice processing, with Ebonyi State recording the highest mean score of 4.89 ± 0.58. This affirmed the claim of Ibitoye et al. (2014) that rice processing is a profitable enterprise in Nigeria, underlining its economic importance, and implying that initiatives aimed at increasing profitability and market access could enhance participation in the sector. Rice processors in Kano State have the highest mean score for self-employment (4.69 ± 0.63), while Ekiti and Kwara States also record high mean scores for this motivation factor. This is an indication of the strong inclination towards entrepreneurship and self-reliance and highlights the importance of fostering an entrepreneurial ecosystem to support rice processing activities in line with the submission of Bygrave and Zacharakis (2010) that entrepreneurship creates wealth through innovation and employment.

Ebonyi State has the highest mean score (3.81 ± 1.13) for leaving a legacy for children, indicating a strong desire among rice processors in the state to build a sustainable future for their children within the sector. According to Dohmen et al., 2012), this could be described as an intergenerational effect whereby the older generation influences the next generation in terms of their abilities and perceptions. On the other hand, Ekiti and Kwara States have lower mean scores for this motivation factor, suggesting that in states like Ebonyi, where intergenerational wealth creation is a significant motivator, initiatives supporting legacy building and succession planning could be valuable. Generating employment during the agricultural off season is particularly important for rice processors in Kano, as indicated by the highest mean score of 4.60 ± 0.62. Ekiti and Kwara States also exhibit relatively high mean scores for this motivation. This observation is contrary to the finding of Basorun (2013), who reported seasonal operation among rice processors in Ekiti State. However, the implication of this is that interventions aimed at promoting year-round employment opportunities in the rice processing sector could be particularly impactful in these states. Kano also has the highest mean score for the motivation of contributing to social welfare (4.55 ± 0.75), while Ekiti and Kwara States have lower mean scores for this. This suggests that in states like Kano, where social welfare contributions are highly valued, initiatives emphasizing the societal benefits of rice processing could be effective in motivating individuals to participate. Ekiti State has the highest mean score for the motivation of engaging in a family business (4.10 ± 1.61), suggesting that rice processing is often perceived as a family business in the state. This correlates with Basorun (2013), who reported that more than 95% of rice processing activities in Ekiti State are managed by family members. Kano also shows a relatively high mean score for this motivation. Based on the scale of measurement, the findings of this study indicated that respondents were mostly in agreement with the identified motivational factors regarding participation in rice processing. These findings followed the same trend as Obaniyi et al. (2014), who identified profitability, increased income, self-reliance, and personal and household needs as being among the motivations for farmers to participate in rice production programmes.

Rice processing characteristics in Nigeria. Start-up capital

Table 2 shows the start-up capital required for rice processing, which varies significantly across the selected states. Ekiti State recorded the lowest mean start-up capital of N396,000 ± 655, ranging from N5,000 to N3,5000. This supports the finding of Aremu and Akinwamide (2018) that people participating in the rice industry in Ekiti State suffer from inadequate funding and a poor credit system, which deter large-scale commercial rice production in the area. Next came Ebonyi State with a mean start-up capital of N1,519,620 ± 2,530, ranging between N10,000 and N15,000,000.

 

Table 1
Motivations for participating in rice processing

Motivation	Ekiti State		Ebonyi State		Kano State		Kwara State
	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Interest (a lucrative job)	4.78	0.73	4.79	0.50	4.37	1.06	4.40	0.92
Children & school fees	4.80	0.72	4.00	0.92	3.76	1.59	3.89	1.21
Family subsistence	4.78	0.73	4.19	1.00	4.53	1.03	4.11	0.99
Profit making	4.80	0.79	4.89	0.58	4.83	0.43	4.58	0.66
Self-employment	4.58	0.72	4.48	0.85	4.69	0.63	4.55	0.71
Legacy for children	2.08	1.67	3.81	1.13	4.69	0.60	4.07	1.19
Generating employment during off season	3.88	1.63	4.11	1.19	4.60	0.62	4.33	0.97
Social welfare	2.06	1.59	2.58	1.33	4.55	0.75	4.02	1.18
Family business	4.10	1.61	3.08	1.47	4.16	1.18	3.52	1.70

Key:  0–1.0 Strongly Disagree (SD); 1.01–2.0 Disagree (D); 2.01–3.0 Undecided (U); 3.01–4.0 Agree (A); 4.01–5.0 Strongly Agree (SD)

 

Kwara State had a mean start-up capital of N1,674,910 ± 2,453, ranging from N15,000 to N11,000,000, while Kano State recorded the highest start-up capital among the selected states, with a mean of N25,144,230 ± 11,442 and a range of N7,000 to N60,000,000.

Overall, the total mean start-up capital across all states was N7,554,980 ± 12,242, ranging from N5,000 to N60,000,000.

Based on the overall mean age of rice businesses across all states, the corresponding average exchange rate was 1USD = N159. By implication, the variation in start-up capital requirements reflects differences in the scale of operations and the level of investment needed in rice processing across the states. Higher start-up capital requirements in certain states like Kano might indicate a more industrialized or large-scale approach to rice processing. On the other hand, low start-up capital requirements in states like Ekiti might suggest more opportunities for small-scale and individual entrepreneurs to enter the rice processing industry. However, the findings reveal a lower level of investment when compared with the report of This Day (2020), which indicated capital investment of between N550,000 and N10.2 million for establishing a cottage rice processing unit, and N57 million for medium-scale and more than N500 million for large-scale industry (1USD = N380).

Age of the business

The age of a business shows how long the business has been in existence and has been able to compete and take advantage of business opportunities in an economy (Istanti, 2009). A business that has been established for a long time is likely to have gained a lot of experience and have better strategies for sustainability (Hastuti et al., 2019). The results in Table 2 show that the mean age of rice processing businesses varies significantly across the states. In Ekiti State, the mean age of businesses was 12.56 years ± 9.0, ranging from two to 50 years, in line with Aremu and Akinwamide (2018), who traced the history of the Igbemo rice industry in Ekiti State to the year 1945. Ebonyi State follows with a mean age of 11.82 years ± 8.53, with a minimum of 2 years and a maximum of 40 years. Kano State has the lowest mean business age of 7.12 years ± 3.23, ranging from 2 to 15 years. Kwara State has a mean age of 12.62 years ± 10.01, with a minimum of 2 years and a maximum of 40 years. The overall mean age of the businesses across all states is 10.97 years ± 8.364, ranging from 2 to 50 years. By implication, the age of a business often reflects its stability, experience, and resilience within its industry as reported by Bookchin (2022) that the sustainability of a business is considered by the amount or length of time it has survived.

Older businesses may have established customer bases, streamlined operations, and deeper industry knowledge. In Ekiti, Ebonyi, and Kwara States where the mean ages of businesses range between 11.82 and 12.62 years, the rice processing industry seems to be well-established, with businesses having operated for over a decade on average. This suggests stability and resilience within these states’ rice processing sectors. On the other hand, Kano has a significantly lower mean business age of 7.12 years. This suggests that the rice processing industry in Kano may be relatively newer compared to the other states, possibly experiencing growth and development in recent years. This is because despite the fact that kano state has the least mean business age, it has the highest concentration of large-scale rice processing establishments accounting for half of the total large- scale establishments in the study area and recorded the highest quantity of processed rice (mean = 300,269.48 ± 459,647.63 bags/ per season). A younger average business age in Kano could imply more recent investments in the rice processing industry, possibly due to increased interest or government incentives.

Membership of rice processors’ associations

Belonging to an association enables rice processors to pool their resources together and thereby achieve the economies of large-scale production. It also enhances their power to negotiate better trade agreements for improved pricing for their products (Afolami et al., 2012). Membership of rice processing associations is high across all the states, as shown in Table 2 – for example, in Ekiti State, the mean membership is 0.97 ± 0.17, indicating almost full membership within the association, the implication being that there is a strong sense of community and collaboration within the industry. The full association membership observed in Kano and Kwara States implies a high level of organization and probably stronger business regulations and standards in these states. Among the benefits of high-level association membership are the facilitation of knowledge sharing, skills development and collective bargaining, which are absolutely vital to the sustainable growth and development of the rice processing industry. Furthermore, the fact that all rice processors in Kano and Kwara States belong to rice processors’ associations suggests that these associations may play a significant role in representing the interests of the entire industry within these states. In addition, the almost complete association membership in Ekiti and Ebonyi States also indicates a strong network within the rice industry in these states and the potential for collective action to enhance competitiveness and sustainability.

Number of household members involved in rice processing

The results in Table 2 show that the number of household members involved in rice processing as presented varies significantly across the states, ranging from one to 50 members. In Ekiti State, the mean number of household members involved in rice processing is 3.07±1.72, indicating a moderate level of family involvement. Similarly, in Ebonyi State, the mean is 1.92±1.84, suggesting a relatively low level of family involvement. The lower mean numbers of household members involved in rice processing in Ekiti and Ebonyi might imply that the rice processing industries in these states are less reliant on family labour or that the scale of operation is smaller, possibly due to resource constraints or market demand in these southern states compared to Kano and Kwara in the northern region. Any strategy aimed at supporting the rice industry in Ekiti and Ebonyi States might focus on encouraging more family involvement and supporting smaller-scale operations. On the other hand, Kano State has the highest mean (11.86 ± 8.64) number of household members involved in rice processing, indicating a larger-scale operation or possibly more family involvement in rice processing activities than in other states. This high level of family involvement in Kano State could be an indication that rice processing is a major source of income and employment for families in the state. It could also indicate a strong tradition of family businesses or necessity-driven participation due to the scale of operations. Policymakers might focus on providing assistance to larger-scale operations that rely heavily on family labour in Kano. Kwara State falls in between Kano and Ekiti/Ebonyi in terms of family involvement with a mean of 4.20 ± 4.70 members, which indicates a moderate level of family involvement in rice processing and a moderate scale of operation in Kwara State. While rice processing in Kwara State might not be on a large scale as in Kano, it still demonstrates significant involvement of family labour and could serve as an important source of family income. Strategies aimed at supporting the rice processing industry in Kwara State might focus on maintaining this moderate level of family involvement and possibly encouraging further growth. The overall mean number of household members involved in rice processing across the states is 6.54 ± 7.3, showing the diverse nature of the rice processing industry in Nigeria. This finding is in line with that of Bose et al. (2020), who reported an average household size of seven among rice processors in their study areas and that they served as a source of family labour. When family members are involved in a business, it provides a form of succession plan that could enhance the sustainability of the business because, according to Wu et al. (2020), the willingness of successors to become heirs to family enterprises is a critical factor in deciding the future viability of such businesses since successors who grew up with a business are believed to have a robust entrepreneurial orientation. Olson et al. (2003) also observed a positive association between an enterprise’s age, employees born in the family and contract workers with interests in the family enterprise.

Quantity of 50 kg bags of rice processed per season

The standard packaging for processed rice in the study area is 50 kg/bag, but the quantity of 50 kg bags of rice processed per season varies greatly across the states. The results in Table 2 show that in Ekiti State, the mean number of 50 kg bags processed per season was 4,255.18 ± 24,295.36, while in Ebonyi State it was 3,821.00 ± 4,102.06. Kano State has the highest mean at 300,269.48 ± 459,647.63, followed by Kwara State with a mean of 1,074.73 ± 2,001.030. Overall, the total mean quantity of 50 kg bags of rice processed per season across all states is 215,267.45 ± 1,025,739.393, ranging from 10 to 10,000,000. This finding differs from that of Bose et al. (2020), who report that an average of 97.5 bags of rice is processed per week in their study area. The highest processing output recorded in Kano State could be an indication of large-scale operations or a higher level of rice processing machinery compared to other states. It also indicates a strong potential for rice commercialization and export in the state. In contrast, Ekiti and Ebonyi States have moderate processing outputs, suggesting smaller-scale operations probably for local or regional consumption. Strategies aimed at supporting the rice processing industry in Ekiti and Ebonyi States should focus on improved production and local processing techniques. The processing output observed in Kwara State falls in between that of Kano and Ekiti/Ebonyi States, implying a moderate level of industrialization and market penetration. The significant variation in the quantity of 50 kg bags of rice processed per season across different states suggests a need for formulating policies that address the specific challenges facing each of the states. These could focus on providing financial support to rice processors in the form of credit facilities and subsidies, which could enhance their ability to invest in modern processing equipment capable of improving their processing capacities. Output variations similar to this finding have been reported by Onyenwaku et al. (1982), based on the assertion that the northern part of Nigeria has a relative advantage over the southern states in terms of land availability for cultivating cereal crops, including rice. However, further studies should probe the causes of the variation in rice processing outputs across the states in Nigeria.

 

Table 2
Comparative analysis of rice processing characteristics in Nigeria

	State	Mean	S.D.	Std Error	95%Confidence Interval L. Bound U. Bound		Min.	Max.
Start-up capital (000 naira)	Ekiti	396	654.65	94.491	205.91	586.09	5	3.50
	Ebonyi	1,519.62	2,530.21	390.42	731,151	2,308.09	10.00	15,000.00
	Kano	25,144.23	11,441.81	1,586.693	21,958.81	28,329.65	7,000.00	60.000.00
	Kwara	1,674.91	2,452.89	333,796	1,005.40	2,344.42	15.0	11,000.00
	Total	7,554.98	12,241.80	874,414	5,830.46	9,279.51	5.00	60,000.00
Age of business	Ekiti	12.56	9.006	1.274	10.00	15.12	2	50
	Ebonyi	11.82	8.528	1.129	9.56	14.09	2	40
	Kano	7.12	3.229	.424	6.27	7.97	2	15
	Kwara	12.62	10.005	1.314	9.99	15.25	2	40
	Total	10.97	8.364	0.560	9.87	12.08	2	50
Membership of association	Ekiti	0.97	0.169	0.029	0.91	1.00	0	1
	Ebonyi	0.95	0.226	0.037	0.87	1.00	0	1
	Kano	1.00	0.000	0.000	1.00	1.00	1	1
	Kwara	0.99	0.183	0.033	0.97	1.10	0	1
	Total	0.98	0.18	0.02	0.95	1.0	0	1
Number of household members involved in rice processing	Ekiti	3.07	1.721	0.314	2.24	3.71	1	8
	Ebonyi	1.92	1.840	0.376	1.14	2.69	0	7
	Kano	11.86	8.644	1.135	9.59	14.13	0	50
	Kwara	4.20	4.697	0.743	2.70	5.70	1	25
	Total	6.54	7.288	0.591	5.37	7.71	0	50
Quantity of 50 kg bags of rice processed per season	Ekiti	4,255.18	24,295.36	3,941.23	– 3,730.50	12,240.87	10	10,000,000
	Ebonyi	3,821.00	4,102.06	748.93	2,289.27	5,352.73	30	15,000
	Kano	300,269.48	459,647.63	60,354.69	179,411.30	421,127.67	650	2,000,000
	Kwara	1,074.73	2,001,030	316.39	434.76	179,411.30	18	10,000
	Total	215,267.45	1,025,739.393	79,612.817	58,076.27	372,458.62	10	10,000,000

 

Marketing linkages and distributions

Market outlets by type of buyers across the states

Figure 3 illustrates the distribution of buyers across different sectors in the selected states, i.e. Ekiti, Ebonyi, Kano and Kwara States. The data are presented based on the type of buyers that purchase the finished rice products. Kano State has the largest proportion (39.5%) of the total direct consumer base, followed by Ekiti State with 25.8%, Ebonyi State with 19.4% and Kwara State with 15.3%, suggesting that a significant proportion of rice produced in Kano State is directly purchased by consumers. This indicates a need to establish direct sales outlets or online platforms in Kano State to enhance this market avenue. Kano State has the highest proportion (34.1%) of total sales to retailers, followed by Ekiti (33.3%), Kwara (22.0%) and Ebonyi (11.0%), which shows the importance of retail outlets in rice distribution in Kano and Ekiti States. It is therefore essential for rice producers and marketers in these states to establish and maintain strong relationships with retailers. Kano State also leads the way in sales to wholesalers with 47.0% of the total amount of wholesale purchases, followed by Ekiti (23.5%), Ebonyi (15.7%) and Kwara (13.9%). This suggests a significant level of bulk purchasing in these states and the need for producers and marketers to maintain strong relationships with wholesalers. Kano State also has the highest market share (63.4%) of the total sales to companies, which is significantly than that of the other three states: Ebonyi (19.7%), Ekiti (15.5%) and Kwara (1.4%). This also suggests a bulk demand for rice, possibly for industrial use, in Kano State, and rice processors and marketers may need to focus on supplying to companies in Kano to capitalize on this demand.

Generally, the findings reveal variation in the distribution of buyers across the study area, which could be a reflection of the level of urbanization or the dynamics of economic activities in each of the states. Kano State leads the way in the number of buyers from direct consumers, retailers, wholesalers and companies; Ekiti State has recorded the second highest number of patronages from direct consumers, retailers and wholesalers; while Ebonyi and Kwara States show more balanced distributions across the different buyer sectors. Understanding these variations is crucial for the growth and development of businesses along the rice value chain in Nigeria, as it highlights the importance of tailoring marketing and distribution strategies to suit the specific preferences and purchasing behaviour of buyers in each state. This finding is in line with Mauki et al. (2023), who identified multiple selling outlets for rice in Tanzania, including wholesalers, retailers, middlemen and private buyers. 

Outlook of the spread of market outlets

The results in Table 3 exhibit rice sales within each of the selected states, outside these states but within Nigeria and exports. In terms of sales within the states, Kano leads the way and accounts for 35.6% of the total sales, followed by Kwara (5.0%), Ekiti (21.9%) and Ebonyi States (17.5%), indicating a strong demand for rice within Kano State, and suggesting a robust local market. In a similar vein, Kano State leads in sales outside the state, accounting for 46.3% of the total sales, followed by Ebonyi (22.3%), Ekiti (19.8%) and Kwara States (11.6%). The high percentage of sales outside the state observed in Kano suggests that the state has a well-established distribution network and brand recognition in neighbouring states. As for exports, all four states have similar percentages of rice exported with only one firm each, accounting for 33.3% of the total export sales per state. This shows that most of the rice produced in Nigeria is consumed locally, in line with Aminu et al. (2017), who observed that despite the production capacity, the country is a major rice importer due to the volume of its rice consumption. Understanding the distribution of rice sales within the state, sales outside the state and export figures is crucial for rice producers and marketers in Nigeria. The data indicate the strength of internal markets, the potential for external market penetration and the opportunity for rice exports in these four states. By leveraging this information, rice producers and marketers can tailor their strategies to maximize sales and revenue potential, both domestically and internationally, thus contributing to the continued growth and development of the rice industry in Nigeria.

 

 

Table 3
Share of spread of market outlets

State	Sales within the state	Sales outside the state	Export	Total (N)
Ekiti	35 (21.9%)	24 (19.8%)	1 (33.3%)	35
Ebonyi	28 (17.5%)	27 (22.3%)	1 (33.3%)	30
Kano	57 (35.6%)	56 (46.3%)	1 (33.3%)	58
Kwara	40 (25.0%)	14 (11.6%)	0 (0.0%)	45
Total	160 (100%)	121 (100%)	3 (100%)	168 (100%)

 

With the current situation of the rice sector in Nigeria being revealed in this study, both short- and long-term strategies have been proposed with a view to reducing the country’s dependency on rice importation and striking a balance between the regional rice processing capacity and the rapidly growing population of the nation. Potential short-term strategies include improving the access of processors to finance through the provision of credit facilities by financial institutions, the provision of subsidies on inputs by the three tiers of government, and upgrading the existing facilities to increase the efficiency and capacity of rice processing. Market linkages should also be enhanced to strengthen the relationships among processors, traders and buyers. Long-term strategies include the development of infrastructural facilities and the formulation of supportive policies and regulations aimed at promoting the growth and development of the rice industry. The capacity building and training of processors, marketers and other relevant stakeholders in best practices would also assist in meeting the growing demand for rice in the country.

 

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study, supported by the data presented in Tables 1–3 and Figures 1–3, together with the references, underscore the fact that rice processing output across the study area is relatively low for a fast-growing population like Nigeria, where rice is a staple food for most households. In addition, profit making is the most important motivation for rice processors across the study area, underlining the economic significance of rice processing activities. There is also wide variation in the start-up capital among processors across the study area. Furthermore, the market landscape tends towards local distribution rather than external market penetration. Despite several interventions by successive governments over the years, rice output is still low, and with the growing population, the study recommends an urgent review of strategies and interventions that have hitherto proved to be counterproductive.

Providing an enabling environment that would allow access to start-up capital, modern processing facilities and markets (for inputs, outputs and information) would not only improve the efficiency of processing but also make the rice industry in Nigeria more attractive. Moreover, policymakers could focus on states like Kano that have a relative production advantage and higher output in the effort to boost the production, processing and marketing of rice in Nigeria.

 

Author contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, literature review, part of data collection, data interpretation, and manuscript drafting: DLA; Part of data collection, statistical analysis and data visualization: MA; Supervision and reviewing of the manuscript: KAT; Editing of the manuscript: TAM; Collection of part of data and data validation: OG, BO and OOA; Guidance and data organization: OK and CTA. All authors declare that they have read and approved the publication of the manuscript in this present form.

Data availability statement: Data cannot be shared openly, but can be made available upon request.

Funding: This research was funded by Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETF/ES/DR&D-CE/NRF-2021/CC/STI/ 00131/VOL.I.).

Conflicts of interest: The authors declared no conflicts of interest on this article, its authorship and publication. The financer played no role in the process of research design; data collection, analysis, interpretation and manuscript preparation.

 

REFERENCES

Aderibigbe, O.T. An econometric analysis of rice processing and marketing in Osun and Ogun States of Nigeria. PhD Thesis, Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife, Nigeria,7/11/1997.

Afolami, C.; Obayelu, A.E.; Agbonlahor, M.U.; Lawal-Adebowale, O.A. Socioeconomic analysis of rice farmers and effects of group formation on rice production in Ekiti and Ogun States of South-West, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Science 2012, 4(4), 233-244. https://doi.org/10.5539/jas.v4n4p233

Alabi, D.L.; Famakinwa, M.; Ogunjimi, S.I. Gender Analysis of Problems and Prospects of Rural Household-based Enterprises in Osun State, Nigeria. Scientific Papers Series “Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development”, 2017, 17(1), 31-37.

Alabi, D.L.; Alao, O.T.; Olagunju, I.B. Rural Households’ Youth Participation in Rice Agribusiness Value Chain Activities: Implications for Employment Opportunities. The Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2024, 19(1), 14-30. https://doi.org/10.4038/jas.v19i1.9763

Aminu, A.; Adnan, A.A.; Abdullahi, Z.A.; Halliru, M. Identification and Mapping of Rice Production Clusters in Nigeria: Production Estimations and Cross-cutting Issues. GEMS4/ Coffey International Development LTD, Abuja-Nigeria. 261pp, 2017. https://doi.org/10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.7796486

Aremu, J.O.; Akinwamide, B. Prospects and challenges of sustainable rice production in Igbemo Ekiti, Southwest Nigeria. European Journal of Educational and Social Sciences 2018, 3(2), 125 – 143.

Basorun J.O. Expository Analysis of Rice Processing Activities in Igbemo, Rural Nigeria. American Journal of Social Issues and Humanities 2013, 3(2), 78-85.

Bookchin, M. The philosophy of social ecology: Essays on dialectical naturalism. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=1ThIEAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=id#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed on 11 June 2022).

Bose, A.A.; Jatbong, J.N.; Danwanka, H.A.; Zayyad, B. Assessment of Small-Scale Paddy Rice Processing and Marketing in Dass Local Government Area, Bauchi State, Nigeria. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science 2020, 5(2), 29-39.

Dohmen, T.; Falk, A.; Huffman, D.; Sunde, U. The Intergenerational Transmission of Risk and Trust Attitudes. The Review of Economic Studies 2012, 79(2), 645-677. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdr027

Donkor, E.A.; Garnevska, E.; Siddique, M.I.; Donkor, E. Determinants of Rice Farmer Participation in Direct Marketing Channel in Ghana. Sustainability 2021, 3(9), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095047

Gabdo, B.H.; Ntasimda, S.; Madu, U.A. Comparison of Technical Efficiency across Scale of Paddy Processing in Adamawa State, Nigeria. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science 2020, 5(7), 2454-6194.

Hastuti, T.D.; Sandjaya, R.; Koeswoy, F. The effect of business age, financial management, potential investment and information technology on the financial performance of smes. 5^th International Conference on opportunities and challenges in Management, Economics and Accounting, 29- 31 August 2019, Berlin, Germany. https://www.dpublication.com/abstract-of-5th-omea/19-519/

Ibitoye, S.J.; Idoko, D.; Shaibu, U.M. Economic Assessment of Rice Processing in Bassa Local Government Area of Kogi State, Nigeria. Asian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 2014, 1(2), 8-17.

Istanti, L.N. Effects of Stock Prices, Trading Volume Activity and Stock Risk on Bid Ask Spread (Study on LQ-45 Companies on the Jakarta Stock Exchange). Journal of Modernization Economics 2009, 5 (3), 199-210.

KPMG. Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler Advisory Services. A Nigerian member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. https://kpmg.com/xx/en.html (accessed on 30 February 2022).

Mauki, C.; Jeckoniah, J.; Massawe, G. Determinants of Smallholder Rice Farmers’ Market Outlet Selection in Mbarali and Mvomero Districts, Tanzania. Tanzania Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2023, 22(02), 169-179.

Muthayya, S.; Sugimoto, J.D.; Montgomery, S.; Maberly, G.F. An Overview of Global Rice Production, Supply, Trade, And Consumption. Annals of The New York Academy of Sciences 2014, 1324(1), 7-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12540

Obaniyi, K.S.; Akangbe, J.A.; Matanmi, B.M.; Adesiji, G.B. Factors motivating incentives of farmers in rice Production training programmes (A case study of Olam/USAID/ADP/First Bank Programme). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 2014, 5, 74-81.

Odutuyo, A. We Ranked The 25 Most Educated States in Nigeria in 2024. https://www.zikoko.com/aluta-and-chill/most-educated-states-nigeria-2024/#:~:text=Ekiti%20State%2C%20often%20referred%20to,a%20literacy%20rate%20of%2095.79%25 (acessed on 16 January 2024).

Oladapo, M.O.; Momoh, S.Y.; Awoyinka, Y. Marketing Margin and Spatial Pricing Efficiency of Pineapple in Nigeria. Asian Journal of Marketing 2007, 1(1), 14-22. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajm.2007.14.22

Olson, P.D.; Zuiker, V.S.; Danes, S.; Stafford, K.; Heck, R.K.; Duncan, K.A. The Impact of Family and Business on Family Business Sustainability. Journal of Business Venturing 2003, 18(5), 639-666. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00014-4

Oyebanjo, O. Value Addition and Profitability of Local Rice Processing in Obafemi-Owode Local Government Area, Ogun State, Nigeria. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies & Management 2024, 17(1), 42-54. https://ejesm.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/ejesm.v17i1.4.pdf

Onyenwaku, C.E.; Ogunfowora, O.; Falusi, A.O. An inter-regional programming model for agricultural planning in Nigeria. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 1982, 37, 483-493. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.269869

Pham, V.T. Assessment of Processing Efficiency of SME Rice Mills in Nigeria, Competitive African Rice Initiative, Abuja, Nigeria, 2016.

Shahbandeh, M. World Production Volume of Milled Rice from 2008/2009 to 2021/2022. https://www.statista.com/statistics/271972/world-husked-rice-production-volume-since-2008/ (accessed on 20 January 2023).

ThriveAgric. Statistics: Rice Production in Nigeria. https://www.medium.com/thrive-agric/ rice-production-in-nigeria-7ef4918ced6a (accessed 21 February 2020).

This Day. Investing in Rice Production, Processing Business. https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2020/03/12/investing-in-rice-production-processing-business/ (accessed 21 February 2020).

Udah, S.C.; Ijioma, J.C.; Ani, M. Analysis of rice marketing in ohaozara local government area of Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Research Advances Research Advances 2021, 3(4), 12-24/12.

Wu, M.; Coleman, M.; Abdul Rahaman, A.R.; Edziah, B.K. Successor selection in family business using theory of planned behaviour and cognitive dimension of social capital theory: evidence from Ghana. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 2020, 27(6), 905-926. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-05-2019-0152?urlappend=%3Futm_source%3Dresearchgate

Zalkuwi, J. Economics analysis of rice marketing in Mubi North Local Government Area of Adamawa State, Nigeria. Agricultural Science and Technology 2019, 11(4), 356-359. https://doi.org/10.15547/ast.2019.04.061

 

Academic Editor: Dr. Isabela Maria SIMION

Publisher Note: Regarding jurisdictional assertions in published maps and institutional affiliations ALSE maintain neutrality.