Comparative Statistics on the Activities Agricultural Credit Guarantee Scheme Fund (ACGSF) Among Oil Producing States of Nigeria

Abstract

This paper reviewed the activities of the Agricultural Credit Guarantee Scheme Fund (ACGSF) in the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) covered states for the period 1991 to 2011. The objectives were to compare variation in the number and value of loans guaranteed to these states and to determine the stability or otherwise of the relationship between number of loan beneficiaries and the value of loans guaranteed to beneficiaries with the introduction of the NDDC in 2000. The hypothesis was that the relationship between the value and number of loans guaranteed to farmers in these states under the ACGSF did not undergo structural change with the introduction of NDDC. Time series data were obtained from the Statistical bulletin of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN, 2011) for the period 1991 to 2011 on the total number and value of loans guaranteed. They were analyzed using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics, namely; ANOVA and Chow test. Among the findings were: that there was no significant variation in the number and value of loans guaranteed among the nine states in the period under review; that CV were particularly high in value of loans guaranteed for all the states and in both variables for Delta State; that number of loans guaranteed were under 1000 units for all the states in the period reviewed but the value of loan increased dramatically since 2004, thus farmers coverage was low and static; that the null hypothesis of no structural break was accepted for Akwa Ibom, Delta, Imo and Rivers States but rejected for Abia, Cross River, Edo and Ondo States. The conclusion was that ACGSF can do better. It was recommended that ACGSF should minimize variability in annual total value of loans disbursed and that there should be a closer institutional linkage between the financiers of ACGSF and NDDC to facilitate farmers maximization of the benefits from these two institutions.

DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2017.v8n1p105