Vol.13(4), pp.

273-279 October-December 2021

DOI: 10.5897/JAERD2021.1282
Articles Number: 12CF68C68321
ISSN: 2141-2170
Copyright ©2021 Journal of Agricultural Extension and
Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
http://www.academicjournals.org/JAERD
Rural Development

Full Length Research Paper

Agripreneurship development among small scale

farmers In Anambra State, Nigeria
Nwankwo Eucharia Chijindu1, Chiekezie Njideka Rita2* and Offiah, Ebere Obianuju1
1
Department of Agricultural Economics and Extention, Faculty of Agriculture, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu
University, Igbariam, Nigeria.
2
Department of Agricultural Technology, School of Agriculture and Related studies, Anambra State Polytechnic,
Mgbakwu, Nigeria.
Received 22 September 2021; Accepted 22 November 2021

The continuing decline in the price of the crude oil in the international market is a pointer to the fact
that oil sector can no longer guarantee economic viability and sustainability in any nation. In Nigeria,
this realization has led to increased urgency of the need to revitalize the agricultural sector, possibly
return to its glorious days in the immediate post- independence. To drive the process, scholars argue
for a shift from agriculture to agripreneurship. Using small scale farmers of Anambra as a case, this
study interrogates existence and contribution of agripreneurial activities to the rural economy. The
study employed multistage, purposive and random sampling techniques to generate relevant data
using a structured questionnaire administered to 144 small scale farmers. The data generated were
analyzed using descriptive statistics, Probit regression analysis, and factor analysis. The results
revealed that majority (61.1%) of agripreneurs were female with a mean age of 43.14 years and an
average household size of 6 persons. The results from the Probit analysis showed that household size,
educational level, agripreneurship experience, level of annual income and non- farm income were
statistically significant and influenced agripreneurship development. The study further identified
various factors driving agripreneurship. Based on the findings, the study recommended, among others
the establishment of functional micro-finance scheme that can boost the capital base of agripreneurs
and streamlining government taxes, levies and checkmating illegal collections.

Key words: Agriculture, Agripreneurship, economic development.

INTRODUCTION

The economy of every country anchors on the three vital Domestic Product (GDP) stood at 90% (CBN, 2014) and
processes of production, consumption and growth had generated over 80% of export earnings and
(Debertin, 2012). This was the case of Nigeria in the employment (Ahungwa et al., 2014). The oil boom of
1960s, when agriculture`s contribution to the Gross 1970s relegated agriculture to background. Consequent

*Corresponding author. E-mail: chiekezienjideka@gmail.com.

Author(s) agree that this article remain permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 International License
274 J. Agric. Ext. Rural Dev.

to this; Nigeria was plunged into massive food government has adopted an integrated approach to
importation, high poverty rate, hunger and unemployment agripreneurial development, engaging in the Public
(Obasesam, 2019). With the fall in the price of crude oil in Private Partnership (PPP) with the large investors and
the international market the oil sector could no longer provision of support to small scale farmers. The
guarantee economic viability and sustainability (Akinlo, government mapped out strategies for improving small
2012). This development led to calls for diversification scale farming which he believes is the backbone of the
and revitalization of agricultural sectors for economic state economy. Its interventions include distribution of
growth and development. Price water house (PwC, 2016) inputs to small scale farmers; training on bee-keeping
affirmed that an increase in Nigeria`s real GDP in Fourth farming and School farming programme, which it believes
Quarter of 2015, was as a result of improved mechanized could impact, at an early stage, agricultural skills in the
farming and introduction of agribusiness value chain in school children.
agricultural system. Therefore, to drive the process of In spite of the aforementioned opportunities in the
development, Ahungwa et al. (2014) argued, there must state, agripreneurship has not measured up to
be a shift from agriculture to agripreneurship as a expectations, evidence from the high cost of agricultural
pathway to revitalize Nigerian agriculture and to make it a produce, both during peak and lean periods, rising
sustainable means of economic development. unemployment rate and hunger. This however; can be
Anambra state is dominated by people with high attributed to some constraining factors. Carr and Rollin
achievement motivation and naturally endowed with (2016) as cited in UNCTAD (2015) identified some
agripreneurial opportunities. About 80% of farmers are challenges to agripreneurial development to include: -
small scale farmers and are the main producers of 98% inadequate information, limited skills, insecurity,
of the food consumed (Mgbenka and Mba, 2015). They inadequate resources, and infrastructure among others.
are involved in the production, processing, storage and Also Nwibo et al. (2016) observed some impeding factors
marketing of several agricultural products in varying as socio-cultural, knowledge-base, and economic factors.
degrees and have contributed to employment creation, Notwithstanding, agripreneurship opportunities abound in
poverty and hunger alleviation among rural house hold. all parts of Nigeria and can contribute to a range of social
Eze (2011) acknowledged the existence of and economic development such as employment
agripreneurship opportunities in all 21 Local government generation, income generation, poverty reduction and
areas of the state, stating that production, processing and improvement in nutrition, health and overall food security
marketing of yams, cassava and livestock are the in the national economy (Otache, 2017). In fact a well-
common agricultural activities observed in most of the developed agripreneurship is capable of contributing to
local government areas. Fish is predominantly produced the country`s economic growth and development in
in Anambra East and West, Onitsha North and South, general and Anambra State in particular. It is against this
and in all the areas with natural water bodies. Upland fish background that the study sought to investigate the
production has also become an accepted business existence and contribution of agripreneurial activities to
enterprise in many communities. These developments the rural economy. To drive the process, it specifically
have greatly ushered in changes in the food markets and sought to;
created new opportunities for the farmers.
At the input production level, there are many enterprise i) the socio-economic characteristics of the farmers;
opportunities - bio-fertilizers, bio-pesticides, plants of ii) ascertain factors propelling the farmers to becoming
different species of fruits, vegetables, ornamentals and agripreneurs
root media for raising plants in pots. Farmers engage iii) examine the effects of socio-economic characteristics
also in agri-processing, with their local technology, they of the farmers`decision in becoming agripreneurs;
are able to convert maize, cassava, palm oil etc into more
refined forms. Post-harvesting and marketing also
abound as well as electronic marketing CONCEPTUALISING AGRIPRENEURSHIP
(telecommunication) which directly connects farmers to
the customers thereby minimizing the role of middlemen Agripreneurship is a new concept in global agriculture,
in the supply chain. Nwibo et al. (2016) also geared towards transforming agriculture from its largely
acknowledged the existence of cold supply chain subsistence status to becoming a competitive enterprise.
business which integrates the whole supply chain for According to Nwibo et al. (2016), agripreneurship is a
perishable products and minimizes the wastage at the profitable fusion of agriculture and entrepreneurship
production and storage centre. whereby farmers can become determined, creative,
A number of factors including what Mukembo and innovative, willing to take calculated risks and always
Edward (2016), Tripathi and Agarwal (2015) identified as looking for opportunities to improve and expand a
push and pull as drivers of people into agripreneurship. business. Shailesh et al. (2013), described agripreneurship
Having realized the enormous potentials of as a dynamic process of creating incremental wealth from
agripreneurship in the economic growth of the state, agricultural sector. The above definitions suggest that
 Nwankwo et al. 275

sustainable development in agriculture requires the rice, cassava, yam, cocoyam, okro, palm oil and melon. Agricultural
development of agripreneurial and organizational produce is widely sold in assembled markets in the villages,
communities and cities. Each assembled market is identified with
competencies among farmers. Suffice it to say that one of the four Igbo market days namely Eke, Oye, Afor and Nkwo.
agripreneurship is all about inventions capable of
generating aggregate income, earning country’s foreign
exchange through value addition and community export Population, sampling technique and data collection
(Mukembo and Edward, 2016).
The study population comprised of all small scale farmers in
Anambra state. Multi-stage, purposive and random sampling
techniques were used to select 144 respondents for the study. In
THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK stage 1, two agricultural zones (Anambra and Awka zones) were
purposively selected from the four zones in the state. The selection
The views of Max and David (1959) were used to drive was based on the concentration of agripreneural (farming and food
home the message of agripreneurship development. marketing) activities. In stage 11, two Local Governments areas
were randomly selected from each zone making a total number of
Weber in his book titled Protestant Ethics and Spirit of
four LGAs. In stage 111, three communities were randomly
Capitalism, in the year 1930, tried to establish selected from each four LGA to obtain 12 communities. Finally, 12
entrepreneurship as an offspring of socio-economic agripreneurs were randomly selected from each of the 12
behavour. He argued that social and cultural values, communities to obtain a total of 144 respondents for the study.
ideas and beliefs prevailing in a society propel their
economic development. Weber opined that the ancient
capitalists were not interested in the maximizing their Method of data analysis
daily wage but in earning enough to satisfy their Primary source of data was used for the study. With the aid of
traditionally established needs. In the modern capitalist research assistants, structured questionnaires were administered
system, however, Weber maintained that individuals were personally to the respondents and their responses recorded. This
more concerned with the continual accumulation of was to quicken the process and maximum return. Descriptive
wealth, by investing and reinvesting. Ahule (2018), in statistics such as mean, frequency and percentage were employed
trying to explain Weber’s approach, states that to realize objective i, objective ii was realized using factor analysis
and objective iii was realized using Probit regression analysis.
entrepreneurship can only be achieved with rational
capitalism combined with the drive to accumulate wealth.
Further on Weber’s views, David in 1959, emphasized Model specification
on the psychological motives approach, that is, people
being able to exploit an opportunity to shape their Probit model is employed when the response takes one of only two
destiny. David was referring to people who are willing to possible values representing presence or absence. This is
expressed by Gujarati (2003) and used by Anyiro and Oriaku
work hard to achieve greatness when confronted with (2011).
opportunity. This desire, he called high achievement
motivation or need for achievement, that is to say the Pi[y=1]=f [Z] (1)
desire to do well, not only for sake of social recognition or
prestige but also to attain an inner feeling of personal Where:
accomplishment. On the whole, however, according to
Zi = 𝛽ο+𝛽1 Χi
Ahule (2018), the above theories suggest that values and yі= 𝛽₁+ 𝛽2Χ2i +……………………+k𝛽𝛸ki+ 𝜇I (2)
position of inner self are crucial to entrepreneurial
development. In other word, suffice to say that y* is unobserved but yi = 0 if yi* < 0,
entrepreneurship or agripreneurship is not a product of yi= 1 if yi* ≥0
hereditary, but socio-cultural, supporting the argument of
P (yi =1) = P (yi* ≥ 0) = P (𝜇1≥ −𝛽1−𝛽2Χ2i−∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙−𝛽kΧki) (3)
Tripathi and Agarwal (2015), those agripreneurship skills
are learned through formal and informal experiences. i = 1, 2…………144 small scale farmers

Where: yi = farmers decision to become an agripreneur

METHODOLOGY (Dichotomous variable 1= yes; 0=No); β = A vector of unknown
coefficients. Χi = vector of characteristics of ith individual, and is the
Study area independent variables, which are defined as follows;

The study was carried out in Anambra state in the South-Eastern AD=β0 + β1AG + β2GEN + β3MS + β4HS + β5EL + β6AE + β7LI + β8NFI + μi
part of Nigeria. There are four agricultural zones in the state: Awka,
Anambra, Aguata, and Onitsha. It was reported to have a total land Where:AD=Agripreneurship decision- measured as a dummy
area of 4,865 sq km with an estimated population of 5,846,198 variable 1 for yes, 0 for no.AG=Age of the respondents measured in
(Anambra State Agricultural Development Programme (ASADEP, years; GEN=Gender measured as a dummy variable 1 for male, 0
2011). Vegetation is tropical rainforest. The major occupation of the for female; MS = Marital Status measured as a dummy variable 1 if
people are trading and farming. Majority of the farmers are small married, 0 otherwise; HS=House hold size measured in number of
scale farmers and are majorly known for growing such crops as dependents; EL=Educational level measured in number of years
276 J. Agric. Ext. Rural Dev.

spent in formal education, AE=Agripreneuship experience measured economic, socio-cultural and institutional using what was
as number of years; TI= Total income measured in naira, NFI=Non- described as the Kalsers rule of thumb as applied by
farm income measured in naira as income from non-farm activities.
Uche and Familusa (2018) in which any factor that
weighs 0.4 and above was taken to have a significant
influence on agripreneurship development drive. Analysis
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
of these factors indicated that economic components
which are income level (0.521), social amenities,
Socio-economic characteristics of the respondents
geographical location (0.534) and a place to retire (0.423)
were found to influence respondents into becoming
The socio-economic characteristics of the small scale
agriprenuers. Okeke et al. (2015) were of the same
farmers, described and analyzed include; age, gender,
opinion that sufficient returns in a business venture
marital status, educational level, household size, total
influences individuals into further investment.
annual income and agripreneurship experience. The
Geographical location on this note includes market
result (Table 1) indicates that the majority of the farmers
availability and proximity, availability of productive and
(61.1%) were female. The high proportion of female
distribution of resources, all can spur economic activities
agripreneurs in the area can be attributed to the fact that
in an area and consequently agripreneurship
women constitute about 80% of the small-scale farming
development. Ito and Mbanosori (2011), Simonov and
workforce. This finding is consistent with Oyemik et al.
Giannetti (2004) affirmed that market proximity has the
(2017) who opined that women have done a lot in the
advantage of increased productivity, because of reduced
development of agriculture. From the analysis, it was
transportation costs.
observed that the mean age of the agripreneurs was
The result also indicated that socio-cultural factors that
43.14 years which implied that they are still within the
positively influence agripreneurship drive were: desire for
active productive age. This refuted the report of FAO
financial independence (0.403), background
(2008), that the active age of the agricultural work force is
characteristics (0.665) and desire for greatness/
between 31-40 years but was consistent with Nwibo and
achievement (0.542). The findings were pointing to the
Okorie (2013) who reported 43 mean age of active
fact that agripreneurship development is rooted in the
entrepreneurs in southeast Nigeria. Meanwhile, 68.5% of
people’s way of life. Ahule (2018) affirmed that the
the agripreneurs are married with an average household
environment where people are born and bred has
size of 6 persons who constitute to the family labour
fundamental impact on attitudes and dispositions towards
force. This supported the argument of Erenstein (2003)
doing things. This equally confirmed the theory of
who posited that high household size could serve as a
McClelland (1959: 74-75) that the development of the
source of farm labour. Majority (47.2%) of them
right values or virtues for entrepreneurship underscores
completed primary education (Table 1).
the role of family. Agbaeze (2007) equally reported that a
Again, it was observed that the agripreneurs earned an
quest for financial independence portrays a desire to
average annual income of seventy-nine thousand, seven
become “one’s boss” propels one into becoming self-
hundred and one naira (N69, 944) which according to
employed.
Nwibo and Okorie (2013) was far below the annual
The institutional components: access to credit (0.492),
income of general entrepreneurs in the South-East,
tax rate (0.422) and government policy (0.406) were
Nigeria. The result further revealed that the majority
observed to have a positive relationship with
(43.1%) of agripreneurs have reasonably stayed in
agriprenuership development in the area. This result
agribusiness at mean years of 10. This implies that most
concurs with the findings of Evans and Jovanovic (1989)
of the agripreneurs have been exposed to agribusiness
who argued that access to capital for initial business
activities and have relevant experiences. This finding
start-off is very essential. Favourable government
concurs with Nwibo et al. (2016) who reported that higher
policies, programmes, low tax rate are major determinants
experience in business exposes an individual to
for agripreneurship development.
strategies for effective management of one’s own
business.
Effects of socio-economic characteristics of small
Propelling factors in becoming agripreneurs scale farmers in becoming agripreneurs

Agriprenuerial motivations as factors propelling farmers Socio-economic attributes analysed include age, gender,
to agripreneurs, was one of the items of questionnaire in marital status, household size, educational level,
the instrument of data collection. A lot of motivating agripreneurship experience, level of annual income and
factors were identified to propel household farmers to non- farm income. Out of eight variables analysed, five
become agripreneurs as shown in Table 2. Agriprenuerial (household size, educational level, agripreneurship
motivations are those factors that propelled individuals to experience, level of annual income and non- farm
become agripreneurs. The factors were categorized into income) were found to be statistically significant and
 Nwankwo et al. 277

Table 1. Socio-economic characteristics of the respondent farmers.

Gender Frequency Percent Mean

Male 46 31.9
Female 98 68.05
Age
21- 30 9 6.25
31 - 40 38 26.4 43.14
41 - 50 75 52.08
51 - 60 22 15.3

Marital status
Married 128 88.9
Single 14 9.7
Divorced 2 1.4
Household size
1-3 12 8.3
4-6 82 56.9 6
7-9 42 29.2
10 - 12 8 5.6

Educational level
No formal education 38 26.4
Primary education 68 47.2
Secondary education 29 20.1
Tertiary education 9 6.3

Total annual income

31, 000 - 60,000 41 28.5
61,000 - 90,000 66 45.8 69,944
91,000 - 120,000 28 19.4
121,000 - 150,000 9 6.3

Farm business
experience
1-5 17 11.8
6 - 10 62 43.1 10.67
11 - 15 36 25
15 - 20 29 20
Source: Field survey (2019).

influenced agripreneurship development in the area. The coefficient of agriprenuership experience (2.0611) had a
coefficient of household size (-2.1123) is inversely related positive relationship with agriprenuerial skills at 1% level
to agripreneurship at 1% level of probability. The of probability and this implies that the higher the
implication is that the pressure of large household size on experience, the higher the wealth of business intrigues
household resources increases the dependency ratio of and resource management skills (Table 3).
farmers. This is in contrast to the findings of Nwibo et al. A similar finding was also reported by Abiodu (2016).
(2016) who argued that large household can be a good The result further indicated that the coefficient of the level
source of labour. Educational level (1.3870) is positive at of annual income (1.183) was positive and significant at
5% level of probability. This is in line with Nwibo and 10% level of significance. This implies that as the income
Okorie (2013) that education is a driving force in of the household increases, the tendency to engage in
agripreneurial success. Hence education is necessary in agripreneurship becomes higher. Non-farm income
understanding the intrigue in any business venture. The (1.4567) gave a positive significant effect on the drive for
278 J. Agric. Ext. Rural Dev.

Table 2. Factors propelling small scale farmers in becoming an agripreneur.

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3

Variable
Economic Socio-cultural Institution
Income level 0.521 0.276 0.189
Fertility of soil 0.021 0.149 0.075
Geographical location 0.632 0.023 0.342
Number of competitors 0.084 0.102 0.016
Availability of social amenities 0.534 0.013 0.094
Type of farming system 0.046 0.032 0.233
Unsatisfactory work environment 0.0282 0.051 0.099
A place to retire 0.423 0.061 0.109
Unemployment 0.386 0.017 0.056
Need for achievement 0.041 0.542 0.049
Financial independency 0.011 0.403 0.05
Background characteristics 0.015 0.665 0.082
Access to credit 0.118 0.061 0.492
Tax rate 0.055 0.092 0.422
Agripreneurial training 0.228 0.196 0.017
Government policy 0.384 0.099 0.406
Source: field survey (2019).

Table 3. Determinants of small scale farmers in becoming agripreneurs.

Variable Estimated co-efficient Standardized error t-value

Constant 29.8192 2.0511 15.718*
Age 0.3121 0.0023 0.0300
Gender 0.0470 0.0065 0.0286
Marital status 0.3047 0.0059 0.0114
Household size -2.1123 0.0007 1.9037***
Educational level 1.3870 0.0294 1.336**
Agripreneurship experience - 2.0611 0.0171 2.216***
Level of income 1.1830 0.0422 1.264*
Non-farm income 1.4567 0.0058 2.732**
Chi2 0.0632 72.121*
Number of obs. = 144
Pseudo R2 = 0.5330
Log likelihood = -72.001
, ,
*** ** * are significant at 1, 5 and 10% respectively.
Source: Computed from survey data (2019).

agripreneurship at 5% level of probability. This suggests good fit since the higher the log likelihood the better the
that farmers will be able to take advantage of the fund model fit
from other sources to increase the scope and hence
increase their income. The Chi2 has a t-value of 72.121;
significant at 10% level of probability reveals a high CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
degree of confidence and goodness of fit. A Pseudo R2
value of 0.5330 means that the small scale farmers Agripreneurship development is a key to a sustainable
socioeconomic characteristics explains 53.03% of the economy. The study indicated that economic, socio-
variation in their decision to become an agripreneur while cultural and institutional factors constituted a driving force
the remaining 46.97% was as a result of error beyond to agripreneurship among small scale farmers. However,
their control and a log likelihood of (-72.001) indicates a its realization is constrained by lack of capital, high costs
 Nwankwo et al. 279

of production, insufficient infrastructure, high government Otache I (2017). Agripreneurship development: a strategy for revamping
the Nigeria`s economy From Recession. African journal of Economic
levies and taxes, poor access to investment loan and
and Management Studies 8(4):474-483.
market imperfection. Therefore, the study recommends Pricewater house Coopers LLP (PwC) (2016). PwC Agribusiness report.
that farmers should make use of micro credit scheme to African Press Organization.
increase their capital base for efficient production. Shailesh K, Gyanendra S, Yadav VK (2013). Factors Influencing
Entrepreneurial Behaviour of Vegetable Growers. Indian Resource
Inadequacy of power and water can be improved through
Journal of Extension Education 13(1).
direct intervention of government in those sectors. Simonov A, Giannetti M (2004). The Determinants of Entrepreneurial
Government should as a matter of necessity streamline Activity: Social Norms, Economic Environment and Individual
levies and taxes being paid by farmers. There is need to Characteristics. Swedish Economic Policy Review 11(2):269-313.
Tripathi R, Agarwal S (2015). Rural development through
introduce agripreneurship in the school curriculum so as
Agripreneurship: study of farmers in Uttar Pradesh. Global Journal of
to inculcate the spirit of agripreneurship among our young Advanced Research 2(2):534-542.
ones at an early stage. Uche C, Familusi LC (2018). The Adoption of Agripreneurship as a
Mitigating Measure to Unemployment in Nigeria: A Topical Review.
Global Journal of Management and Business Research: G
Interdisciplinary 18(2).
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD),
(2015). Annual Report Delivering on a Sustainable Agenda.
The authors have not declared any conflict of interests.

REFERENCES

Agbaeze EK (2007). Development of Entrepreneurship: The Nigerian

Perspective Precision Publishers Limited, Enugu.
Ahule BG (2018). Developing the Entrepreneurship Spirit in Nigeria: A
Sociology of Development Approach. Journal of Entrepreneurship
Studies 1(1):419-439.
Ahungwa G, Haruna U, Abdsalam YR (2014). Trend analysis of the
contribution of agriculture to gross domestic product (1960-2012).
Journal of Agricultural and Veterinary Science 7(1):50-55.
Akinlo AE (2012) how important is oil in Nigeria’s Economic Growth.
Journal of Sustainable Development 5(4):162-173.
Erenstein O (2003). Smallholder conservation farming in the tropics and
subtropics: a guide to the development and dissemination of
mulching with crop residues and cover crops. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment 100(1):17-37.
Eze AN (2011). Increasing the Value of Agricultural Products in the
Face of Global Economic Recessions: Anambra Experience. An
International Multi-Disciplinary Journal Ethiopia 5(3):171-183.
Debertin DL (2012). Applied Microeconomics: Consumption, Production
and Market. Agricultural Economics Text book Gallery 3. Retrieved
from http//uknowledge.uky.edu
Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) (2008). The State of Food
and Agriculture. FAO Report.
Mgbenka RN, Mba EN (2016). A Review of Small holder Farming in
Nigeria: Need for Transformation. Agricultural Engineering 5(2):19 -
26.
Mukembo SC, Edwards MC (2016). Project-based Learning: Equipping
Youth with Agripreneurshipby Linking Secondary Agricultural
Education to Communities. USAID/BFS/ARP-Funded Project.
Nwibo SU, Mbam BN, Biam CK (2016). Determinants of Agripreneurship
among the Rural Households of Ishielu Local Government Area of
Ebonyi State. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare 6(13):3-
10.
Nwibo SU, Okorie A (2013). Determinants of Entrepreneurship among
Agribusiness Investors in South East, Nigeria. European Journal of
Business and Management 5(10):115-123.
Obasesam O (2019). The Paradox of Nigerian Oil Dependency.
Retrieved from www.Africaportal. Org.
Okeke AM, Oraka EO, Obasi CC (2015). Analysis of Factors Influencing
Entrepreneurship Behaviour among Yam Agribusiness Entrepreneurs
in Benue State, Nigeria. Journal of Business and Management
17(10):86-89.