Ebonyi State by geographical placement is within the region where rain-fed agriculture is the norm. By estimation, about ninety per cent of cultivated farm lands in Nigeria are rain-fed and many rice producing farms are in the rain-fed lowlands which accounts for about half the total rice production in the country. Nigeria’s rice production capacity is estimated at three million tonnes which is far below the national demand rating of about five million tonnes. The evident deficit in production and supply made successive Nigerian governments initiate intervention programmes in the rice subsector such as the establishment of the River Basin Development Authorities (RBDA) in 1976 to articulate on how to harness Nigeria’s water resources and enhance agricultural resources towards food self- sufficiency [1]. These developments in the agricultural sector where ever it occurs normally targets enhancing farmer’s welfare and invigorate other sectors in the economy to induce economic growth [2]. Globally, rice is noted as an important food crop in the war against hunger. In reference to Ogundele and Okoruwa Mwatete [3, 4] noted that unlike maize and wheat, rice is the most consumed of all grains by humans. Therefore, increases in rice production offer an opportunity to reduce food insecurity which they noted was estimated at 816 million as at 2015. Rice production has witnessed remarkable growth in Nigeria consumption is growing at a faster rate than other staples across all socio-economic class and, growth in demand was estimated at an annual rate of 5.6% as far back as 1960s and 1990s as reported by Osiname, 2002 in Okoruwa and projected further growth in rice consumption in Nigeria will even be higher in the twenty first century. The federal government’s responses to the rising demand for rice previously were seen to be cosmetic by some scholars. In spite of various policy measures adopted, domestic rice production has lagged behind in meeting the increased demand [3]. Presently though, Nigeria has made some progress in rice production, this however remain a far cry compared to contemporary demand. Rice gradually has evolved from being a ceremonial food to a major component of Nigeria’s dietary system. Presently, it is the most consumed staple and the most preferred especially by city dwellers. Presently, statistical comparative projections at the global level show that consumption of rice in Nigeria has grown from 2% in the 70s to 9% in 2001, that of Asia has fallen and remained fairly stable in South America, United States and Europe. Contemporary per capita consumption of the product in Nigeria is still increasing at a faster rate than what was obtainable in some West African countries way back to the 1960s. Per capita consumption in the 1980s averaged 18kg. This rose to 22kg in 1995 -2000.

Presently, it is about 25kg per annum. The trend suggest rice can no longer be seen as a luxury food, it has become a significant source of calories for the city poor especially [5]. Over 95% of rice production is from the developing countries including Nigeria. Within the last 30years, rice production has gone up by 85%, with Africa registering the highest increase and Nigeria, the highest producer in West Africa producing about 44% of the total output. However, the observed increase is not enough to meet the increase in demand. The supply gap in most cases is filled with imported brands. Today, Nigeria is the highest importer of rice in the West African sub-region, moving from 345,500 metric tonnes in 1996 to 2,456,565 metric tonnes in 2003; and in 2000-2001 Nigeria became the leading importer of rice in the world and second after Indonesia; however, in 2002 she emerged as the largest importer in the world. Erhabor and Ahmadu To keep pace with the rising demand for rice in Nigeria and reduce foreign importation of the commodity, efficient resource utilization and upgrade in production technology and capacity must be pursued because, rice production and consumption apparently is impacting the economy in more ways than one. In times past, the place of agriculture in economic development has been demonstrated by many researchers and writers and the adoption of new production technologies is viewed as a priority in many developing countries. In spite of this however, growth in agricultural production cannot be dependent on technology alone, the level of efficiency in the use of the given technology or available production capacity must be considered. Keolaui 2019 considers capacity utilization as an important concept a business must prioritise because it plays crucial role in cost as a factor of production as well as profits that may be made.   Every business has a capacity, how this capacity is utilized is what is important in making a business profitable. He believes that capacity utilization hinges on utilizing most of capacity which gives any business establishment the vantage opportunity to make profit and efficiently use resources and other factors of production. Technical efficiency should be a crucial factor to consider in capacity utilization because it looks at a firm’s ability to attain maximum output from given unit or units of inputs. However, technical efficiency measures uses inputs and output quantity without regards to their prices. It can be segregated into scale efficiency (the potential productivity gain), congestion and pure technical efficiency [6]. Referring to Battese and Coelli [7] expressed the technical efficiency of any firm as a ratio of its output to that of the input if factors of production were utilized most efficiently. Production efficiency is divided into technical and allocative efficiencies and considered technically efficient when production is within the boundary of its production possibility curve and, allocatively efficient when a production possibility is such that outputs are or is produced at the point where output price per unit and that of unit input are equal or almost equal. Economic efficiency on the other hand considers increases in output without using more inputs.

Economic efficiency is attained with the attainment of both technical and allocative efficiencies because technical efficiency measures the ability of a farmer to attain maximum output with given technology, while allocative efficiency captures a farmer’s ability to use inputs in optimal proportions with respect to input and output prices [6]. In spite of the evident potentials that exist for rice production in Nigeria, domestic demand remains way beyond supply because of the limited production capacity of the farmers. This limited capacity of Nigeria in rice production to match domestic demand raises some questions in the policy circle and among researchers and the underlying causes have not been adequately addressed to factor out why domestic rice production has been lagging behind the demand in Nigeria for a long time in spite of seemingly well articulated production plans over the years and, most literature reviews largely have either looked at the constraints or profitability issues. The efficiency of the rice farmers in the use of resources may have been a culprit in this scene of limited production capacity. Upland and lowland rain-fed rice in Nigeria averages 1.8ton/ha in output and the one from irrigated system 3.0ton/ha. This output level is low when compared to 3.0ton/ha obtained from upland and lowland farms and 7.0ton/ha from irrigated ones in countries like Cote d’ Ivoire and Senegal WARDA and NISER, 2001in Okoruwa [3] This suggests that farmers in Nigeria are not attaining maximum output from resource inputs. Ayedun and Adeniyi [1] have also noted that despite the various efforts and policies aimed at stepping up rice production in Nigeria, progress has not been significant. These difficulties they suggest could be attributed to the inefficiencies in farm management in spite of the intensive use of inputs. They believe the analysis of technical efficiency in the agricultural sector as a whole can be used in enhancing productivity economic development.   This study therefore aims at evaluating the efficiency level of upland rice farmers in Ebonyi State under the rain-fed system and the factors determining the levels of efficiencies and inefficiencies.

The study was carried out in Ebonyi State. The State was chosen because of its position in the rice production map of Nigeria. Data for the study were generated from a survey of 120 individual rice farmers chosen by multi stage sampling method. Stochastic Frontier Production Function was used to generate the farm production coefficients needed in assessing the degree of technical efficiencies, inefficiencies and resource uses in rice producing farms. The production technology of the rice farmers in the study Area was specified by the frontier production function as:

Where ln= Natural logarithm.

Y = Numeric number of broilers (and layers as the case may be) within the production period

X1= farm size X2 = labour X3 = seed type X4= Fertilizer X5= Pesticide X6= Herbicide

= constants

= Regression Coefficients (parameters to be estimated) Vi = random error term/variable which is assumed to be identically and independently distributed normal mean of zero and independent of Ui

Ui = Non-negative random variable which is assumed to account for technical inefficiency of the farm

The inefficiency factors in production were modelled and assumed to be independently distributed with variance ?² and Mean U where the mean is defined by

Where:

Z0 = a vector of unknown parameter to be estimated Z1= age of farmers in years

Z2 = educational attainment

Z3 = farming experience Z4 = household size

Z5= access to credit Z6= seed varieties

The constraining factors were assessed using the likert scale.

Estimate of the production function (capacity utilization) of rice farms in the study Area

Capacity utilization can and do have effects on whatever a firm produces. Capacity utilization rate of below 50-70 percent is assumed inefficient and in some cases, may suggests weak demand for the given product or service. Low capacity rate may result from inefficient uses of resources, equipment and inadequate staffing, which can impact on the ability of any give firm to make profit. The capacity utilization of the rice farms in the study Area reflected by the various coefficients in the use of various production inputs is shown in the table below.

Table 1: Estimated Production Function of rice Farmers in the study Area.

Source: Obila, 2019

Figures in parenthesis are t-ratio; ** = significant at 1%, *= significant at 5% and Returns to scale :>1 = increasing returns, <

= decreasing returns, 0 = constant returns

The rice farmers had an estimated sigma square of 35.332 and statistically significant at 1% probability giving credibility to goodness of fit and validity of the composite error term. The magnitude of the variance ratio gamma (γ) is seen to be high at 0.981 however; it is significant at 1% implying that 98.1% of the variations in output were due to inefficiencies of the farmer rather than random variability. The coefficients of farm size (0.71), labour (0.13), seed type (0.25) and pesticides (0.81) are all positive and significantly influenced output of rice (P< 0.05). By implication, increasing these factors will increase output. Should input amount be increased by just 10%, output will rise

for each of the factors by 7.1, 1.3 2.5 and 12.35 respectively. 

Noticeably, the coefficient of herbicide was significant at 5% but that of fertilizer was not at all conventional levels. With a return to scale of 1.85, production was at increasing returns and at stage one of the production surface therefore, there is still room for increasing input application. The signs and significance of the estimates of the coefficients in the inefficiency factors have notable implications on the technical efficiency of the farmers. The analysis shows that age (-0.06), farming experience (-2.38) and access to credit (-0.49) were negative. Having a negative sign implies that they decreased technical inefficiency and by implication increased efficiency. Notably, coefficients of farmer’s educational attainment and household size were not negative implying that they increased inefficiency, decreasing technical efficiency of the farmers. The reason for this however is outside the purview of the study.

Constraining factors in rice farming in Afikpo-North Local Government Area of Ebonyi state

 Agricultural productivity is adjudged a key determinant of sustained agricultural growth on a long term bases. For developing nations, agriculture’s relative share in their gross domestic product is however smallest. This is because of both institutional and economic constraints that have forced agriculture to remain less Productive, subsistence and a Small scale rural household venture and in many instances resulted to Shortages in food and other basic needs supply. The smallholder farmers, who provide a larger share of the agricultural output in these nations use obsolete production technologies and limited modern inputs in the face of growing pressure on land and limited purchasing power to acquire inputs. These constraining factors may in real terms be critical [8]. The constraining factors identified in the study area among the rice farmers are shown and rated as either a major or minor constraint in the table below.

Table 2: Factors constraining rice farming in Afikpo-North Local Government Area of Ebonyi state.

Source: Obila, 2019

Keys: SA = strongly agree, A = agree, D = disagree, SD = strongly disagree

The constraining factors contending the productivity of rice farmers in the study Areas is ranked according to their magnitude or weight and presented in table 2. These constraining factors can be segregated into input insufficiency, inadequate infrastructure

and funding limitations.  Theft and weather variations can be contained with good management and technology and so were not included as a constraint.

Agricultural Credit

Agricultural production is primarily the transformation of inputs into output and this is influenced by a considerable time lag. Farmers within this time lag may need to engage in alternative activities like processing or input acquisition. With limited access to credit which can facilitate input acquisition to continue production or initiate alternative income yielding ventures such as processing, their budget balance can become a constraint to any form of agricultural activity [9]. Many researchers have commented on funding agriculture because of the importance of credit to agricultural development, for the smallholder farmers especially, already constrained by limited access to credit, the need is critical to boost their capacity holding and productivity level [10] Funding/credit limitations is seen as a formidable problem of small scale agricultural ventures in Nigeria. Fashola 2005 has argued that the extent and effect of credit limitation is pervasive and ranges from sourcing of credit to obtaining it, from decisions concerning the stage of production when the credit is needed to its use. Most farmers and other small scale enterprises in our clime start off with personal savings, loans from friends and relations and other mostly private sources that in real terms can provide paltry amounts compared to the required funding. Funding from banks and other financial institutions are only on conditions which they hardly meet. Most of these smallholder farmers do not have the collateral needed by the financial institutions and this constitute a major obstacle in dealing with banks. Fashola 2005 noted that other factors hindering credit accessibility from banks include inadequacies in project proposals, poor and deficient financial documentations, poor equity contributions and the lack of continuity prospects even after the demise of the vision bearers.

Rural Infrastructure

Lokesha and Mahesha cithing Ghose and Ahmed [11] observed a significant relationship exist between the level of physical infrastructure and per capita net domestic product and argued that there is noticeable effect of infrastructure development on even the attitude and values of rural households pointing out that the development of transport and communication infrastructure alone can enhance the mobility of people and information thereby reducing cost of production and time. In the same vein and commenting on Majumdar’s (2002) work on the regression analysis of a State level cross-section data in his study Area for some years indicated that transport infrastructure alone significantly affected agricultural output level and the agricultural development index in the study Area. Outside physical infrastructure, they observed that social infrastructure also positively impacted other dependent variables noting that agriculture enhancing and transport infrastructure were important determinants of agricultural output and development index. Noticeably, with reference to the work of Singh (1983) they observed a positive correlation between infrastructure and agricultural development which was strongly correlated with agricultural infrastructure index. Contemporary literature points to the significant role rural infrastructure will play in improving agricultural productivity in the economic activities of developing economies. Quality of rural infrastructure however can never be substituted for good macroeconomic and agriculture skewed policies and articulated implementation of such policies, it is worthy of note that inadequate infrastructure can be a serious constraint to growth and productivity. Rural infrastructure raise agricultural productivity, initiates economic growth in the rural areas, and bring about increased agricultural wages and opportunities for non-farm labor. Enhanced agricultural productivity will reduce food prices which will be of benefits to both the urban and rural inhabitants who do not produce food and are net food buyers. Summarily, agricultural productivity can significantly reduce the effects of poverty (and guarantee food security) [12, 13]. Rural infrastructure such as rural roads and markets, water and electricity supply, health and other ancillary facilities are seen to be basic to quality of life in rural environments. EARRNET (2006) observed that in spite of the importance of other infrastructures and the critical roles they play in agricultural development, rural roads are considered fundamental for agricultural development. Road infrastructure in particular plays significant roles in agricultural production and rural roads connectivity is a key component in rural development because it promotes access to economic and social services, generates increased agricultural incomes and employment opportunities.   Access roads have the propensity to bring the rural population to the main stream of economic activities because good road networks will reduce transport cost, encourage efficient delivery of farm inputs and agricultural production and distribution of the farm produce. A direct relationship exists between increase in export crop cultivation and the quality of roads and its distance from commercial centres. The presence of good roads enhances entrepreneurship activities, reduces freight and passenger charges and improves services Bonney, in Lokesha and Mahesha. El-Wahab in his report on the state of rural roads in Nigeria stated rural road systems are mostly unpaved and in addition, the rural transport system in general is inadequate and existing road networks are in poor state of repairs and requires substantial rehabilitation. Agricultural growth and development to a large extent depends on the availability of basic infrastructure.

Input Limitations

Access farm households to farm inputs such as land, seeds, fertilizers, agro-chemicals have significant roles in determining productivity and profitability of small scale farmers Tilahun.

The rice producing sector in the agricultural geography of the study Area is still a smallholder concern and, at a budding developmental stage judging from the findings. The results suggest they are within the increasing returns stage of a production surface with growth prospects, however, there are serious constraints that must be attended to and these constraints range from input insufficiency, poor infrastructure to limited or absent access to credit. Infrastructure deficit the study suggests may be pervasive and should be tackled head on because, in Nigeria, rice production has become a principal economic activity and inputs supply, adequate infrastructure and access to credit will ensure enhanced production and productivity. The availability of some of these production enhancing factors are constrained. Infrastructure facilities in the rural Areas should be seen as part of the wealth of a nation, instruments of social inclusion and evident evidence to economic development. Therefore, it should be given the attention it deserves in policy articulation and implication.

1. Ayedun B, Adeniyi A. Efficiency in Rice Production in Nigeria. Acta Scientific Nutritional 2019; 3: 86-94.
2. Mashudi H, Iwan N, Srdm RH. Analysis of efficiency on rice Agricultural Socio-Economic Journal. 2016; 16: 31-37.
3. Okoruwa VO, Ogundele OO, Oyewus Efficiency and productivity of farmers in Nigeria: a study of rice farmers in North Central Nigeria. Poster paper prepared for presentation at the International Association of Agricultural Economists Conference,Gold Coast Australia. 2006; 12-18
4. Mwatete GKK, Kipkoech AK, Kipkorir EC, Sumukwo Technical efficiency differentials between rice production methods: the case of Conventional and System of Rice Intensification in West Kano Irrigation Scheme, Kenya. Journal of Agricultural and Crop Research. 2015; 3: 130-140.
5. Erhabor PO, Ahmadu Technical Efficiency of Small-Scale Rice Farmers in Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture and Allied Sciences. 2013.
6. Huynh VK, Mitsuyasu Y. Technical efficiency analysis of rice production in J. ISSAAS 17. 2011; 1: 135-146.
7. Piya S, Kiminami A, Yagi Comparing the Technical Efficiency of Rice Farms in Urban and Rural Areas: A Case Study from Nepal. Trends in Agricultural Economics. 2012; 5: 48-60.
8. Tilahun K, Ahimed U, Zinabu Constraints of Agricultural Input Supply and Its Impact on Small Scale Farming: The Case of Ambo District, West Shewa, Ethiopia. International Journal of Agricultural Economics. 2019; 4: 80-86.
9. Dong F, Liu J, Featherstone A. Effects of Credit Constraints on Productivity and Rural Household Income in China. Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University 2010.
10. Olatomide WO, Olowa Issues, Problems and Policies in Agricultural Credit: A Review of Agricultural Credit in Nigeria. Bangladesh e-Journal of Sociology. 2011; 8.
11. Lokesha MN, Mahesha Impact of Road Infrastructure on Agricultural Development and Rural Road Infrastructure development programmes in India. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention. 2016; 2319-7722.
12. Kaleonui Capacity Utilization and Effects on Product and Profit. 2019.

          Lianto GM. The impact of infrastructure on agricultural productivity. Discussion paper series No. 2012-12. Philippine Institute for Development Studies. 2012.