EFFECTS OF FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL ON ARABLE CROP PRODUCTION IN SOUTHWEST, NIGERIA

This study investigated the effects of fuel subsidy removal on arable crop production in Southwest Nigeria. A multi-stage sampling procedure was employed to select 120 respondents, and data were analyzed using descriptive statistics—frequency counts, percentages, means, and Weighted Mean Scores (WMS)—as well as Pearson Product Moment Correlation (PPMC). The majority of respondents (93.33%) were married, with an average age of 46 years, a household size of eight persons, and a mean farm size of 6.7 hectares. Major livelihood activities included crop farming (WMS = 2.97), livestock farming (WMS = 2.54), livestock processing (WMS = 2.37), and trading (WMS = 1.98). The most prominent perceived effects of subsidy removal on arable crop production were reduced profits from produce (WMS = 3.16), decreased hectares cultivated (WMS = 2.98), high production costs (WMS = 2.81), increased produce transportation costs (WMS = 2.79), and elevated food prices (WMS = 2.63). Based on the perception index (x̄ = 10.16, σ = 4.88), 73.3% of respondents were categorized under a high perception index, indicating severe impact. Coping strategies adopted included reducing farmland size to manageable levels (WMS = 1.97), reverting to manual cultivation (WMS = 1.60), engaging in additional economic activities (WMS = 1.48), and using family labour for farm operations (WMS = 1.12). PPMC analysis revealed significant relationships between perceived effects of subsidy removal and age (r = 0.331, p < 0.05), household size (r = 0.242, p < 0.05), farm size (r = 0.305, p < 0.05), income (r = 0.400, p < 0.05), and farming experience (r = 0.514, p < 0.05). Similarly, coping strategies were significantly associated with age (r = 0.309, p < 0.05), household size (r = 0.210, p < 0.05), farm size (r = 0.334, p < 0.05), income (r = 0.497, p < 0.05), and farming experience (r = 0.306, p < 0.05). Respondents proposed solutions such as provision of farm implements at subsidized prices (WMS = 2.61), extension worker training (WMS = 2.16), household palliatives (WMS = 1.78), and subsidized farm inputs (WMS = 1.51). The study concluded that fuel subsidy removal has had a severe adverse effect on arable crop production in the region. It is recommended that government and relevant stakeholders provide targeted palliatives to arable crop farmers and implement farm input subsidy programs to cushion the impact.