Multidisciplinary Journal Supported by TETFund. The journals would publish papers covering a wide range of subjects in journal science, management science, educational, agricultural, architectural, accounting and finance, business administration, entrepreneurship, business education, all journals

1. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
82
ANALYSIS OF CONTRIBUTION OF BEEKEEPING PRACTICES TO POVERTY
ALLEVIATION IN ZANGON-KATAF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA, KADUNA
STATE, NIGERIA
Dauda La’ah1
*, Daniel Audu2
, Biong’ahu Danladi2
,
Useni Sambo2
& Sylvester Garba Birat2
1. Department of Agricultural Extension & Management
2. Departmement of Basic & Remedial Studies2
School of Agricultural Technology
Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Zaria
Samaru-Kataf Campus, Zonkwa, Kaduna State, Nigeria
* Corresponding Author: laahdauda@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
The study analyses contribution of beekeeping practices to poverty alleviation in Zangon-Kataf
LGA. One hundred and forty one (141) questionnaires were administered to respondents in the
study area. The results proved that majority of the bee farmers were men (73.1%), from 21 to 30
years (27.6%), not educated (43.5%), experienced beekeepers (53.8%), participating in honey
production as part-time enterprise (90%), depending mostly on personal savings to acquire bee
inputs and adopt beekeeping innovation (45.8), using inherited land for beekeeping practices
(40.7%), using traditional equipment (74.1%), average number of beekeepers that owned
traditional hives were 65.2% and the contribution of beekeeping practices to poverty among
farmers in the study area ranged from 14.3% to 56.2%. Therefore, the results for contribution of
beekeeping practices to poverty alleviation in Zangon-Kataf revealed that there is significant
association by measures of contributions among professionals of beekeeping practices to poverty
alleviation in Zangon-Kataf LGA and beyond. When the hypothesis was subjected to test, the
outcome was statistically not significant. Hence, it is recommended that beekeepers should be
provided with common facilities and adequate training on the basics of low bee farming
technology using community based/informal education.
Key words: Agriculture, Beekeeping practices, Poverty alleviation.

2. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
83
INTRODUCTION
An important area of agriculture, which has not received sufficient attention in the past, is
beekeeping – which is the practice and management of honeybees in the hive. The six important
products identified from the bee include honey, comb/beeswax, propolis, pollen, bee venom and
royal jelly. There are basically two methods of honey gathering. These are the bee hunting and
modern beekeeping.
Bee hunting involves sideline beekeeping with just a few hives to harvest the colony. Traditional
beekeepers in Nigeria use log hives, baskets, mud pots, gourds and other materials that cannot be
opened for easy inspection and harvest (Matanmi at el., 2008). This exercise of bee hunting has
been criticized on the ground that it is destructive both to the surrounding and the stability of the
ecosystem.
Modern beekeeping involves the science and culture of honeybees and their management. In the
modern practice, housing the bees is not difficult to embark upon because investment needed to
procure artificial equipment to rear honeybees for highly desirable products is small. It has low
start-up costs and occupies negligible land space (Oluwole, 1999). The bees are reared in
sophisticated hives that allow combs to be easily removed while the uncapped ones are thrown
away. In the modern type of beekeeping practice, bees are encouraged to construct their combs
from the underside of a series of top bars, thus allowing for periodic inspection of combs so as to
monitor the performance of established colonies by the beekeepers (Matanmi at el., 2008). Honey
is extracted either by squeezing it out of the combs using hand or honey extractor – which allows
for large-scale bee farming. Modern beekeeping also involves the use of bee suit consisting of bee
dress, hand gloves, boots and veil (all these protect the bee farmer against bee sting). In modern
beekeeping, bees could be fed with sugar solution or diluted honey which is provided in a trough.
In the dry savannah region of Nigeria where the atmosphere is dry, it may be necessary to provide
bees with drinking water which is provided with a trough to avoid bee drifting or absconding.
Between 1000 and 1500 AD Arab travelers in West Africa, which included the present day
Northern region of Nigeria were involved in the trade. One of the valuable items of trade recorded
was the use of honey as a fermented beverage made of water and honey (mead or locally known

3. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
84
as Buza) and the presence of honey in the region acknowledged the existence of bee hives, from
where honey was produced (Azaiki, 2013).
This discovery eventually progressed to beekeeping in Zangon-Kataf LGA. Gradually, the practice
of beekeeping spread to so many villages and farmers adopted various practices. Beekeeping in
the traditional practice is well known in Zangon-Kataf Local Government Area (LGA). As early
as 1941, modern practices in beekeeping and honey extraction were introduced in Zaria and parts
of Zangon-Kataf LGAs (Oyekan, 2003). Although they started with native skep whereby the inner
part would be lined with cow dung, this hive was later improved upon by introducing another
basket disc to serve as a queen excluder to confine the queen to the bottom part.
Today, many areas of Kaduna State are involved in the deliberate process of Beekeeping. Although
modern Beekeeping is still young in the agricultural system, it is gradually growing especially
when viewed against the background of the usefulness of honey, a valuable by-product of bee
farming. In fact, there are model apiaries set each at the three (3) zonal headquarters of KADP
located in Birnin Gwari, Lere and Samaru-Kataf. As part of Kaduna State Government’s effort to
promote modern beekeeping practices and foreign exchange earnings, the Kaduna State Ministry
of Agriculture in collaboration with Food Advancement Initiative and RQ-Honey (Gidan-Zuma)
Afaka-Kaduna also trained and empower traditional beekeepers, village extension Agents, youths
and women in 2012 to set up apiaries (Bee farms) at villages in and around Zangon-Kataf LGA
(Obed, 2013). This has contributed immensely to the development of beekeeping in the area. In
realization of this fact the Government of Kaduna State (Agricultural Development Project) and
Leventis Foundation in Dogon Dawa in collaboration with the IITA Ibadan drew out programmes
that trained bee-hunters in modern practices of beekeeping.
Ojeleye (2003) observed that, modern beekeeping was almost non-existent in Zangon-Kataf LGA
despite the potentials of honey production like flora and fauna diversity until recently. The local
government had relied on honey from other areas to meet the growing domestic demand for this
product. Many bee farmers run away from honey hunting because of the fear of honeybee sting.
The local output of honey comes only from the few honey hunters and traditional bee farmers.
These farmers use traditional harvesting and processing practices, which always lead to poor-

4. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
85
quality honey even when undiluted. The practice also does not sustain the hive system, as the
young bees are destroyed.
In most cases, the rural areas harbour the larger majority of the poor, accounting for more than
70% of the world total population of this category of people (World Bank, 1999). Reducing rural
poverty has for this reason been a long-standing concern, motivating an array of initiatives by
governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and international development agencies.
Beekeeping for honey production has been identified as one of the activities that could serve both
purposes of providing employment and reducing poverty among rural dwellers in Nigeria. In the
19th century, when refined sugar became available, honey was the world’s most popular sweetener
and today, it is still being use as cake, tea, cereals, jam and jelly sweetener – which is a major
source of extra income to the farmers.
The objectives of the paper are two-fold. First, we assessed the socio-economic characteristics of
small-scale beekeepers in Zangon-Kataf LGA. Second, we analysed the contribution of
beekeeping practices to poverty alleviation.
METHODOLOGY
Study area
The study was carried out in Zangon Kataf Local Government Area (LGA) of Kaduna state.
Geographically, it is located between 90
25/
N and 100
20/
N and longitude 70
45/
E and 80
40/
E is
bounded by Kaura LGA in the North, Jama’a in the South, Kachia in the West and Kauru LGA in
the East. The local Government has an area of 5,625 Square Kilometers (The Information Division
of Zangon-Kataf Secretariat, 1999). The population size is 316,370 persons [National Population
Commission (NPC), 2007]. The area was chosen due to the fact that honey production is growing
because of the prevalence of smallholder beekeepers. Farm enterprises are generally small-scaled,
so that farming families often engage in other income generating activities, like beekeeping, to
supplement farm income.

5. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
86
Sampling technique and sample size
The study builds on a purposeful sample of one hundred and forty one (141) smallholder
beekeepers selected from eight (8) districts in Zangon-Kataf LGA.
Data Collection
Data were collected in 2015, using Likert questionnaire with a scale ranged of 1 for Strongly Agree
(SA), 2 for Agree (A), 3 for Undecided (UN), 4 for Disagree (D), and 5 for Strongly Disagree
(SD). Information on socio-economic characteristics of beekeepers and the contribution of
beekeeping practices in honey production to poverty alleviation were collected. Personal data,
socio-economic characteristics of beekeepers and contributions of beekeeping practices to poverty
alleviation in Zangon-Kataf LGA were collected and analysed.
Statistical analysis
The data collected for the study was subjected to the both descriptive and quantitative analysis.
The descriptive statistics; frequencies, percentages and mean tables was used to compute the socio-
economic characteristic of Beekeepers in Zangon-Kataf LGA, While, the Chi-square test of
significance was also used to analyze the subsidiary occupations of traditional beekeeping
practices to poverty alleviation in the study area.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Socio-Economic Characteristic of Beekeepers in the Study Area
Majority of the beekeepers are males, nevertheless about 26.9% of these beekeepers are women
(see table 1). Table 1 show the mean age of the beekeepers ranged from 21 to 30 years with a
percentage of 27.6.

6. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
87
Table 1: Socio-Economic Characteristics of Beekeepers in the Study Area
S/N Characteristics Frequency Percentages Mean Value
1. Gender:
a. Male 103 73.10
b. Female 38 26.90
Sub-Total 141 100.00 70.5
2. Age of Beekeeper:
a. Less than 20 years 15 10.34
b. 21 – 30 39 27.59
c. 31 – 40 29 20.69
d. 41 – 50 34 24.14
e. 51 years and above 24 17.24
Sub-Total 141 100.00 54.4
3. Education of Beekeeper:
a. No formal education 61 43.48
b. Primary Education 49 34.78
c. Secondary Education 18 13.04
c. Tertiary education 13 8.70
Sub-Total 141 100.00 2.3
4. Experience in Beekeeping:
a. Less than 2 years 22 15.39
b. 3 – 5 years 76 53.84
c. 5 years and above 43 30.77
Sub-Total 141 100.00 4.8
5. Nature of Honey Production:
a. Part-time 127 90.00
b. Full-time 14 10.00
Sub-Total 141 100.00 1.1
6. Sources of Financial Capital:
a. Personal savings 65 45.83
b. Cooperative loans 41 29.17
c. Bank loans 24 16.67
d. Other loans 11 8.33
Sub-Total 141 100.00 2.2
7. Non-Beekeeping Income:
a. Other farming activities 83 58.6
b. Carpentry 19 13.1
c. Blacksmith 25 18.2
d. Salary Earner 10 7.6
e. Trading 4 2.5
Sub-Total 141 100.00 1.5
Source: Data Analysis, 2015

7. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
88
This implies that beekeeping is prominent among young people. Ceteris paribus, labour
productivity is a function of age because it is believed that old people tends to adhere strictly to
traditional methods of production while young people tends to be more willing to adopt new
production methods in order to increase their output. The adoption categories of the beekeepers in
the study area revealed that 34.8% bee-farmers accepted modern beekeeping at an early stage,
while 1.4% where probably civil servants or innovators engaged in beekeeping practices (table 2).
Table 2: Adoption Categories of the Beekeepers in the Study Area
Category Frequency Percentage (%)
Innovators 2 1.4
Early Adopters 14 9.9
Early Majority 49 34.8
Late Majority 50 35.5
Leggards 26 18.4
Total 141 100.00
In addition, if productive age group is defined as 20 − 60 years, the mean age of 54 years implies
that majority of beekeepers though, in active age, but tends towards the unproductive age and,
therefore may not be able to imbibe new ideas and innovations to enhance increased productivity
in the bee industry. This implies that majority of beekeepers were above middle age. The finding
is similar to Chala et al. (2013). The maximum percentage of the education of beekeepers in the
study area was 43.48% for ‘no formal education’. The maximum value falls below 2009−2012
UNDP percentage education index of 5 years for Nigeria, which includes Zangon-Kataf LGA.
This could have affected their chances of shifting from traditional beekeeping to modern
beekeeping practices. Modern beekeeping requires skilled training and modern techniques. Since
studies have shown that education is positively related to adoption of innovation (Balogun, 2000).
These skills are required to enable beekeepers in the area boost bee practices and hence, alleviate
poverty to its barest minimum; all other factors remaining unchanged. This is synonymous with
Ajao and Oladimeji (2013). The length of time during which beekeepers had been engaged in bee
culturing is a measure of their experiences and also a reflection of their skills in beekeeping
practice. The average value of beekeeping experience was approximately 6 years with a percentage

8. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
89
of 53.84%. The mean value for access to credit was ₦10,000.00 and ranges from zero to
₦20,000.00. The proceed from non farm income can assist the farmers to procure the needed
inputs such as hive box, boots, bee suits, baits and hired labour which are timely required in
beekeeping practices. The result was similar to finding by Babatunde et al. (2013). However, small
scale beekeepers have largely been by-passed by formal financial lenders because, among other
problems, they lack the collateral demanded by financial institutions. This category of beekeepers
is therefore left to their own devices to overcome shortages of capital in farming operations.
Table 3: Characteristics of the Beekeepers in the Study Area
S/N Characteristics Frequency Percentages Mean Value
1. Household Size:
a. Less than 4 people
b. 5 – 9 111 78.7
c. 10 – 14 19 13.5
d. 15 – 19 8 5.7
e. 20 – 24 3 2.1
Sub-Total 141 100.00 8.6
2. Sources of Land Where Bees are Kept:
a. Inherited land 57 40.74
b. Gifted land 47 33.3
c. Rented land 11 7.4
d. Purchased land 26 18.5
Sub-Total 141 100.00 5.2
3. Types of Hives Use in Beekeeping:
a. Traditional Hives 105 74.1
b. Kenyan/Tanzania-Top-Bar 31 22.2
c. Langstroth 5 3.7
Sub-Total 141 100.00 21.0
4. Ranges of Hives Owned:
a. 1 – 20 92 65.2
b. 21 – 40 37 26.1
c. 41 and above 12 8.7
Sub-Total 141 100.00 7.7
Source: Data Analysis, 2015.

9. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
90
The result for access to credit shows that beekeepers depend largely on personal saving to purchase
bee inputs and adopt beekeeping innovation. On nature of honey production practices, majority of
the respondents were part-time beekeepers that spent more than 7 years of experience in
beekeeping practices. Their personal saving is the major source of financial capital in beekeeping
with a maximum percentage of 43.5 (table 1). Close to half of the beekeepers in Zangon-Kataf
LGA rely on their own capital for financing beekeeping enterprises. These bee farmers have their
apiaries on inherited (40.7%) and gifted (33.3%) land, the other half are using rented and purchased
land. A similar result was observed by Oladimeji et al., (2013) who confirmed that most artisans
in Zangon-Kataf LGA particularly beekeepers do not have access to production loan from formal
credit institutions. The table 3 also presents the types and occurrence of hives as reflected by the
respondents in the study area. Table showed that the respondents used more traditional hives
(74.1%) as bee hive than Kenyan or Tanzanian (22.2%). This showed that most of the traditional
beekeepers still depend on local materials as these cost less than materials used for the construction
of modern beehives. The modern hives such as Langstroth, Kenya-top-bar and Tanzania-top-bar
are very costly and not within the reach of the bee farmers.
Given the opportunities to employ the modern beehives and new developments techniques, bee
farmers in the study area could make the sector highly commercially viable enterprise for export.
In addition, majority of the Bee farmers had advantages of using inherited land for beekeeping
practices (40.7%). Because most of the beekeepers have access to free land of their own or donated
by neighbours, it reduced the cost of production, increased the income from honey production and
thereby alleviating the poverty of so many farm families engaged in the practices of beekeeping in
the area of study.

10. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
91
Table 4: Contribution of Beekeeping Practices to Poverty Among the Farmers
Chiefdom
Districts:
Totally
Poor (%)
Moderately
Poor (%)
Non Poor
(%)
Percentages
(%)
No. Sample B A B A B A B A
Atyap 16 Gan-Gora 1.7 2.0 5.0 6.1 2.1 3.3 8.8 11.4
Manyi-Aghui 3.2 3.6 2.5 3.0 0.9 1.3 6.6 7.9
Bajju 18 Fadan Kaje 3.9 4.5 4.4 5.4 1.9 2.9 10.2 12.8
Fadia 4.8 5.5 1.9 2.4 1.0 1.6 7.7 9.5
Ikulu 10 Boto 9.8 11.3 0.9 1.1 0.5 0.6 11.2 13.0
Gidan Bako 8.6 10.0 3.7 4.5 1.5 2.4 13.8 16.9
Kamantan 8 Tudun Wada 7.1 8.3 4.1 5.1 1.7 2.7 12.9 16.1
Yangal 8.2 9.5 1.6 1.9 0.6 1.0 10.4 12.4
Total 52 47.3 54.7 24.1 29.5 10.2 15.8 81.6 100
56.2 29.5 14.3 100.00
Source: Data Analysis, 2015. A = After beekeeping, B = Before beekeeping practices.
The contribution of beekeeping practices to poverty among farmers in Zangon-Kataf LGA ranged
from 14.3% to 56.2% (see table 4). This is in agreement with Oladimeji et al., (2013) that, for
farmers that rely on single crop farming, diversification of income generating activities helps to
break out of the cycle of poverty.

11. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
92
Table 5: Subsidiary Occupations of Traditional Beekeeping Practices to Poverty Alleviation in
the Study Area
Position of respondent:
C/Servants Farmers Sellers Consumers
Respons
e
Oif Eif Oif Eif Oif Eif Oif Eif RT DF Χ2
c Χ2
p
Decisio
SA
2 (2.66) 3 (3.01) 9 (7.45) 11 (12.23
)
25 12 130.3 21.
0
NS
A
4 (7.49) 7 (8.44) 10 (20.85
)
49 (34.26
)
70
U
N
1 (1.06) 2 (1.21) 3 (0.99) 4 (4.89) 10
D
3 (1.91) 1 (2.17) 12 (1.79) 2 (8.81) 18
S
D
5 (1.91) 4 (2.17) 8 (1.79) 1 (8.81) 18
CT
15 17 42 69 141
N
Level of significance (α) at P ≤ 0.05.
In table 5, results reveal that the association is not significant (N. S.) as Χ2
c (130.3) was greater
than Χ2
p (21.0). This means that there is significant relationship by measures of contributions of
beekeeping practices to poverty alleviation in Zangon-Kataf LGA and beyond. Thus, the study
confirms that beekeeping practices have the potential for poverty reduction among farm families.
Lalaka et al. (2009) confirm that this study demonstrated the economic and social contributions of
beekeeping practices as it is considered to be a means of obliterating poverty and of raising the
standard of living of farm families in the study area. This is achieved through increases in
household income, biodiversity conservation, food and nutritional security, raw material for
industries and enhances environmental resilience. Despite the significant contribution of
beekeeping practices to household income and poverty alleviation in Zangon-Kataf LGA, the

12. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
93
ability to produce maximum output from a given set of inputs, given the available beekeeping
technology has not been fully understood by bee farmers in the study area.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusion
The study analyses the socio-economic characteristics and contributions of beekeeping practices
to poverty alleviation in randomly selected bee farmers of Zangon-Kataf LGA. Also, the result
revealed that honeybee farming is a major and most important occupation that alleviates poverty
in the study. The estimated mean years of schooling of beekeepers in the study area was 2 years,
which has fallen below 2009−2012 UNDP mean education index of 5 years for Nigeria. This could
have affected their chances of shifting from traditional beekeeping to the modern practice. The
results for contribution of beekeeping practices to poverty alleviation in the study area shows that
there is significant association by measures of contributions among professionals of beekeeping
practices to poverty alleviation in Zangon-Kataf LGA and beyond.
Recommendations
Based on the findings of this study, it is recommended by the researchers that:
1. there should be provision of social services and adequate training on the rudiments of
traditional bee farming using community based/informal education. This will ensure proper
understanding of modern equipments and adopt technology capable of alleviating not only the
poverty bee farmers but also improve the standard of living of farm families;
2. there should be establishments of beekeepers’ co-operative societies for annexing financial
aids, marketing information and inputs from government and non-government organizations
through poverty alleviation Agencies;
3. there should be creation of market channels that will take care of commensurate prices for
contributions/products of new beekeeping enterprises;
4. Government at all levels should endeavour to stimulate farmers to boost beekeeping practices
by providing and subsidize if need be, necessary infrastructures and enabling environment
from traditional to modern beekeeping easy.

13. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
94
REFERENCES
Ajao, A. M. and Oladimeji, Y. U. (2013). Assessment of Contribution of Apicultural Practices to
Household Income And Poverty Alleviation in Kwara State, Nigeria. International Journal
of Science and Nature. Published by Society for Science and Nature (SFAN).
www.scienceandnature.org, 4(4).
Akachuku, E. A. (1993). Beekeeping for Honey and Wax Production in Nigeria. Published by The
Green: Magazine of National Association of Agricultural Students, University of Ibadan.
Azaiki, A. S. (2013). Inequalities in Nigerian Politics. The Niger Delta Resource Control,
Underdevelopment and Youth Restiveness. Published by Treasure Communications
Resources Limited.
Babatunde, R. O., Olorunsanya, E. O., Omotesho, O. A. and Alao, B. I. (2007). Economics of
Honey Production in Nigeria: Implications for Poverty Reduction and Rural Development
Global Approaches to Extension Practice (GAEP), 3(2).
Balogun, A. L. (2000). Adoption of Alley Farming Among the Farmers in Osun State, Nigeria.
Unpublished PhD Thesis, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria, pp 291.
Bradbear, N. (2009). Bees and their Role in Forest Livelihoods. Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations.
Chala, K., Taiye, T. and Kebede, D. (2013). Assessment of Honey Production and Marketing
System in Gomma District, South Western Ethiopia. Greener journal of Business and
Management Studies. 3(3) pg. 99-100.
Lalaka, M. C. S. (2009). Beekeeping for Income Generation and Costal Forest Conservation in
Tanzania. Bees for Development Journal, 8(8).
Matanmi, B. M., Adesiji, G. B. and Adegoke, M. A. (2008). An Analysis of Activities of Bee
Hunters and Beekeepers in Oyo State, Nigeria. Published by African Journal of Livestock
Education, Vol. 6.
National Population Commission (NPC) (2007). Legal Notice on Publication of the Details of the
Breakdown of the National and State Provisional Totals of 2006 Census. Printed and
Published by the Federal Government Printer, Lagos, Nigeria, Vol. 94, No. 24.

14. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
95
World Bank (1999). World Development Indicators. Published by Washington, DC: The World
Bank.
Obed, G. (2013). Training Manual on Modern Beekeeping Techniques for Traditional Beekeepers,
Rural Youth and Women in 2012/2013. Published by Kaduna State Ministry of
Agriculture in Collaboration with Food Advancement Initiative and RQ-Honey (Gidan-
Zuma) No. 15 Shehu Shagari Road Mando-Afaka Kaduna.
Oladimeji, Y. U., Abdulsalam, Z., Damisa, M. A. and Omokore, D. F. (2013). Estimating the
Determinant of Poverty Among Artisanal Fishing Households in Edu and Moro Local
Government Area of Kwara State, Nigeria. Agriculture and Biology Journal of North
America, 4(4).
Ojeleye, B. (2003). Honey Production in Nigeria. A 3-day Beekeeping and Honey Production
Training Workshop Conducted by Centre for Bee Research and Development
(CEBRAD), Ibadan, Held at the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ilorin, Nigeria.
Oluwole, J. S. (1999). ‘Completing Farm Children Programme Development Through Agricultural
Education in Nigeria’ in Williams, S.B., Ogbimi, F. E., and Farinde, A. J. (Eds.) Farm
Children and Agricultural Productivity in the 21st Century, Book of Proceedings.
Oyekan, P. O. (2003). Manual: Small-Scale Farming in West Africa for Improved Production and
Better Family Living (Revised Edition). Published by Heinemann Educational Books
(Nigeria) Plc in Association with Leventis Foundation (Nigeria) Limited/GTE.
The Information Division of Zangon–Kataf Secretariat (1999). Zangon- Kataf Local Government,
Kaduna State–Nigeria. Published by FASCOS Media Ventures, Kaduna.

15. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
96
APPENDIX
Chi-Square Computations
1. Expected Frequencies:
Eif = 15 x 25 + 15 x 70 + 15 x 10 + 15 x 18 + 15 x 18 +
141 141 141 141 141
17 x 25 + 17 x 70 + 17 x 10 + 17 x 18 + 17 x 18 +
141 141 141 141 141
42 x 25 + 42 x 70 + 14 x 10 + 14 x 18 + 14 x 18 +
141 141 141 141 141
69 x 25 + 69 x 70 + 69 x 10 + 69 x 18 + 69 x 18
141 141 141 141 141
Eif = 2.66 + 7.45 + 1.06 + 1.91 + 1.91 +
3.01 + 8.44 + 1.21 + 2.17 + 2.17 +
7.45 + 20.85 + 0.99 + 1.79 + 1.79 +
12.23 + 3426 + 4.89 + 8.81 + 8.81
2. Chi-Square:
Χ2
c = (Oif – Eif)
Eif
= (2 – 2.66)2
+ (4 – 7.45)2
+ (1 – 1.06)2
+ (3 – 1.91)2
+
2.66 7.45 1.06 1.91
(5 – 1.91)2
+ (3 – 3.01)2
+ (7 – 8.44)2
+ (2 – 1.21)2
+
1.91 3.01 8.44 1.21
(1 – 2.17)2
+ (4 – 2.17)2
+ (9 – 7.45)2
+ (10 – 20.85)2
+
2.17 2.27 7.45 20.85
(3 – 0.99)2
+ (12 – 1.79)2
+ (8 – 1.79)2
+ (11 – 12.23)2
+

16. Nuhu Bamalli Polytechnic Multidisciplinary Journal 2: (2) 82-97 Dauda et al. (2017)
97
0.99 1.79 1.79 12.23
(49 – 34.26)2
+ (4 - 4.89)2
+ (2 – 8.81)2
+ (1 – 8.81)2
34.26 4.89 8.81 8.81
Χ2
c = 0.16 + 1.60 + 3.40 + 0.62 +
5.00 + 3.32 + 0.25 + 5.16 +
0.63 + 1.54 + 0.32 + 5.65 +
4.08 + 58.24 + 21.54 + 0.12 +
6.34 + 0.16 + 5.26 + 6.92
Χ2
c = 130.31
3. Degree of Freedom (d. f):
d. f = (r – 1)(c – 1)
= (5 – 1)(4 – 1)
= 4 x 3
= 12
4. Comparing the calculated and tabulated values of Chi-square:
The calculated values, Χ2
c = 130.31
The tabulated values at 0.05, Χ2
p = 21.03
5. Decision Rule:
Since Χ2
c = 130.31 ≤ Χ2
p(0.05), reject Ho
6. Conclusion:
Rejecting Ho implies that there was significant relationship by measures of contributions
among professionals of beekeeping practices to poverty alleviation in Zangon-Kataf LGA
of Kaduna State.