Perception of Rural Youth and Utilization of Agricultural Information in Oyo State, Nigeria

Transcription

1 JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURE & SOCIAL SCIENCES ISSN Print: ; ISSN Online: X /AWB/2011/ Full Length Article Perception of Rural Youth and Utilization of Agricultural Information in Oyo State, Nigeria OLUMUYIWA AKIN OLANIYI 1, OYEFUNKE OLAYEMI ADEBAYO AND SAMSON AKINTOLA Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, P.M.B, 4000, Ogbomoso, Oyo State, Nigeria 1 Corresponding author s olaniyi.ao@lautechaee-edu.com; dayomuyiwa@yahoo.com; ABSTRACT The study investigated rural youth s perception of utilisation of agricultural information in Oyo state. Multistage sampling technique was used to select 135 respondents in the study area. Descriptive and inferential statistics (mean, frequency counts, percentages, chi square, Pearson product moment correlation & Analysis of variance) were used to analyse and test hypotheses stated, respectively. The finding revealed that friend/neigbour, parent and extension agent was the most frequently used sources of information by the respondents. Positive and significant relationship existed between perception and utilization of agricultural information and farming experience (r= 0.241; p< 0.05), household size (r=0.189; p< 0.05), frequency of use of information sources (r=0.214; p< 0.05). Meanwhile chi square test showed that significant relationship existed between perception of utilization of agricultural information and marital status (X 2 = ; p<0.05). Generally, the perception of utilization of agricultural information was favourable among the respondents. There was significant difference in the perception and utilization of agricultural information among rural youth in the selected local government areas. It is recommended that the adoption of information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure should be encouraged in rural areas to facilitate information delivery to future farmers in the study area Friends Science Publishers Key Words: Information; Perception; Rural; Utilisation; Youth INTRODUCTION Information plays a pivotal role in our present day society most especially in the development process both in agriculture and rural development. This makes it imperative to provide adequate, relevant and up-to-date information in order to transform agricultural production in many developing countries Nigeria inclusive (Banmeke & Ajayi, 2008). Agricultural information is no doubt central in enhancing accelerated agricultural productivity, facilitating poverty alleviation and rural urban-migration among rural youth. In recognition of the significance of information in technology transfer Ajayi and Nwoko (1995) opined that the emergence of information economy as a global phenomenon that organized production, conscious utilization of information and effective and efficient deployment of information is increasingly becoming the basis for creativity, productivity, and profitability. Hence, access to factors of production (land, labour, capital & management) has probably ceased to be problems but rather ability to generate and intelligently use knowledge and information resources about these factors of production. Furthermore, for any true agricultural progress, farmers must know, understand and act on the available information. Therefore, how far people progress in whatever they are doing depend largely upon the accessibility to accurate and reliable information as well as their perception of utilization of available information. CTA (2009) asserted that in rural Nigeria, as in many other developing countries, good agricultural information can make all difference to a household s revenue and food security. Therefore, if the target segment of population (rural youth) have access to available and readily useable information it s hopefully to better their lots. The term youth has been viewed as a concept and defined as the period in an individual s life, which runs tween the end of childhood and entry into the world of work (Onuekwusi & Effiong, 2002). People in this age bracket definitely constitute a sizeable chunk of a nations population on which the burden of nation building falls. For the purpose of this study, rural youth is being referred to as young people living in the rural areas within the age of 13 and 30 years. There are challenges faced by rural youth in participating in agricultural production. These include: strong beliefs in traditions and customs that are often in conflict with development and change concern; low education level, lack of relevant information, limited job opportunity, limited financial support available for rural youth and low management capabilities of youth leaders in the rural areas (Srithirath, 2005). Therefore, meaningful sustainable agricultural and rural development in Nigeria To cite this paper: Olaniyi, O.A., O.O. Adebayo and S. Akintola, Rural youth s perception and utilization of agricultural information in Oyo State, Nigeria. J. Agric. Soc. Sci., 7: 117 3

2 OLANIYI et al. / J. Agric. Soc. Sci., Vol. 7, No. 4, 2011 depends not only on the mobilization of large number of youth as active participants in the development process but also on how accessible and well utilized the agricultural information made available to them. Based on the above background some questions arise such as (i) what are the sources of agricultural information available for rural youths in the study area, (ii) what is the level of utilization of agricultural information among rural youth in the study area, and (iii) what is the perception of rural youth on the utilization of agricultural information on agricultural production in the study area?. It is hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between personal characteristics of rural youths and perception of rural youth on utilization of agricultural information. There is no significant difference in perception of rural youth on utilization of agricultural information among rural youth across the selected Local Government Areas of Oyo state. In view of this, the objectives of the study were (i) identify the personal characteristics of rural youth in the study area, (ii) identify sources of agricultural information available for rural youths in the study area, (iii) ascertain the level of utilization of agricultural information among rural youth in the study area and (iv) ascertain the perceived effects of utilization of agricultural information on agricultural production among rural youth. MATERIALS AND METHODS This research covers Oyo state as part of southwestern states in Nigeria. The state is predominantly agriculture based with about 70% rural population. The land area covers a vast landmass of 32, km 2 out of which 27, km 2 is cultivable (OYSADEP, 2001). It is bordered on the west by Benin-Republic on the north by Kwara State and on the south and east by Ogun and Osun states. Oyo State has 33 Local Government Areas, all of which have been grouped into four agricultural zones for administrative conveniences. These zones are Ibarapa/Ibadan, Ogbomoso, Oyo, and Saki. The main occupation of majority of the people in the study area is farming as is typical of any rural area in Sub- Saharan Africa (SSA). The major crops grown in the study area include maize, yam, cassava, cocoyam, vegetables (such as okra, melon, tomatoes, pepper), plantain, banana, cocoa, oil palm and rubber. Some of the inhabitants also engage in other income generating activities like trading, processing, marketing of agricultural produce and handicraft. The target population of the study is all rural youth engaging in agricultural activities in Oyo state. A multistage sampling technique was used in selecting a representative proportion of the respondents for the study. First, purposive sampling technique was used to select 10% of the total Local Government Areas of Oyo State. This makes a total of 3 Local Government Areas selected. The selection is based on low availability and access to social amenities as well as similarity in the population density of the areas (OYSADEP, 2001). The Local Government Areas selected were Surulere, Ibarapa East and Irepo Local Government Areas. Second stage involved random selection of five villages from each of the three Local Government Areas, thus making a total of 15 villages. The villages were sampled according to local government areas included Surulere Local Government Area (Biro Okiki, Baba Ode, Temidire, Abewo & Iwofin), Ibarapa East Local Government Area (Araromi, Apata, Balogun, Jagun ode & Iya Koko) and Irepo Local Government Area (Budogeesi, Ojelete, Sooro, welewele & Apatalaje). A total of 135 respondents were randomly selected at the village level based on the population of rural youth in each village (Table I). Structured validated interview schedule was used to elicit relevant information from the respondents. Data were analysed using descriptive statistical such as frequency counts, means, percentages was used while Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), Pearson product moment correlation (PPMC) and Chi-square were used as inferential statistical tools. The independent variables of the study included personal characteristics of the respondents such as age, sex, educational level, farming experience, farm size, religion, marital status and membership of social organization. Level of utilisation of agricultural information was measured on a four-point rating scale of level of use of agricultural information: Frequently =3, Often = 2, Rarely = 1 and Never =0 and frequency of use of sources of information was measured on 6 point scale of Daily = 6, more than once in a week = 5, fortnightly = 4, once in every 3 weeks = 3, once in a month = 2, rarely = 1. The dependent variable of the study was the perceived effects of utilization of agricultural information. This is measured on a five-point Likert rating scale of Strongly Agreed (SA) = 5, Agreed (A) = 4, Undecided (U) = 3, Disagreed (DA) = 2 and Strongly Disagreed (SD) = 1, against 10 perception statements. The maximum score for a respondent was calculated as 50 while minimum was 10. This was later categorized into favorable and unfavorable perception of utilization of agricultural information using mean perception score. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Personal Characteristics of Respondents Age: Table II shows that majority (60.7%) of the sampled rural youth were within the ages of 25 to 30 years, about one-quarter (25.2%) within the age category of 19 to 24 years and 14.1% of them fell within the age range of 13 to 18 years. Mean age of the respondents was 24.3 years. The result showed that older rural youth are more involved in agricultural activities in the study area. Durston (1996) had earlier reported that this category of older youth is considered to be matured and more productive in economic enterprises. Gender: It was discovered that majority (83.7%) of the respondents were males and rest (16.3%) females. A higher percentage of male involved in agricultural activities in the 118

3 RURAL YOUTH S UTILIZATION OF AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION IN NIGERIA / J. Agric. Soc. Sci., Vol. 7, No. 4, 2011 study area showed that male folks dominated agricultural activity in the study area. The finding is consistent with the findings of Torimiro and Oluborode (2006) that farming occupation in rural areas is dominated by male gender as a mean of livelihood. This could be as a result of the energy demand required of the occupation. Marital status: The result showed that more than half (57.8%) of the respondents were married, 40.7% of them were single and only very few (1.5%) of the sampled respondents were divorced. This result indicated that majority of the respondents were married early enough. This corroborates with the findings of Perez-Morales (1996) that young people in rural areas get married earlier and become involved in adult responsibilities. Years of education: The mean year of formal education of the respondents was 8.7 years. The result showed that majority (92.6%) of the respondents was literate who were between 1 and 18 years of formal education and the remaining (7.4%) had no formal education. The implication of this finding is that majority of the respondents were literate, this level of literacy is expected to influence their perception of information received and utilized among rural youth in the study area and would probably contribute to their innovativeness and adoption of various farm technologies. Religion: The result of the analysis further revealed that majority (51.9%) of the respondents claimed to be Christians, while others (48.1%) were Muslims. Farming experience: About 27% of the sampled rural youth had between 13 and 16 years of farming experience, 23.7% had 5 to 8 years, 23.7% had 9 to years, 13.3% had 1 and 4 years and.6% had 17 years or more farming experience. This implies that the respondents have acquired much experience in farming. Farm size: Majority (63.7%) of the respondents cultivated land areas of a size between less than 1 and 2 hectares (ha), 18.5% had farm size between 3 and 4 ha, while 14.1% claimed to own farm size between 5 and 6 ha and very few (3.7%) had a cultivable farm size of 7 ha and above. The average cultivated land was 2.8 ha. This implied that majority of the respondents were small scale farmers; characteristics of an African farmer. This finding is consistent with the finding of Olagunju and Ogunniyi (2006) that majority of the farmers in Southwestern Nigeria have relatively small cultivated land areas. The small farm size among the respondents may be attributed to their access to land for farming. Household size: More than half (53.3%) of the rural youth surveyed had between 1 and 2 members. About 30% had between 3 and 4 members, while.5% had between 5 and 6 members and 3.7% between 7 and above members. There was relatively small household size among the respondents in the study area. This has implication on level of dependants and hence the level of poverty in the household since larger the household size the higher the mouth to be feed and vice versa. On the other hand it has implication on family labor availability for farming enterprises. Table I: Distribution of sampling frame for rural youth in the study area Local Government Surulere Local Government Area Irepo Local Government Area Ibarapa East Local Government Area Villages sampled Total number of youth Number of youth sampled (50%) Biro Okiki 14 7 Baba Ode 6 Temidire 6 3 Abewo 16 8 Iwofin 24 Total Apatalaje Budogeesi Ojelete 18 9 Sooro 16 8 welewele 14 7 Iya koko 18 9 Total Araromi, Apata, 16 8 Balogun 18 9 Jagun ode Iya Koko 16 8 Total Total number of sampled respondents = = 135 Membership of social organization: The result of revealed that majority (56.3%) of the rural youth surveyed claimed not to belong to any social organization within their community while 43.7% were members of social organization. This implied that majority of the respondents had no social affiliation within their communities. This may have implication for both governmental and non-governmental agencies in reaching out to rural youth in terms of aids and financial assistance for increase agricultural production. Sources of agricultural information: As shown in Table III, that majority (97%) of the respondents claimed their source of agricultural information as friend/neighbor, closely followed by parent (90.4%), extension agents (84.4%), Radio (78.5%), commercial input dealers (40.7%), newspapers (25.9%), agricultural shows (18.5%), television (13.3%), drama (2.2%), town crying (2.2%), internet (1.5%) and folk music (0.7%). This implied that various sources of agricultural information are available for rural youth ranging from interpersonal sources and electronic media, which are considered conventional and traditional sources. This result agree with that of Anyanwu et al. (2002) who had earlier reported that farmers use more of non-professional interpersonal sources of information such as friend/nneighbor and other farmers than professional interpersonal sources of information. Frequency of use of Information sources: Table IV shows source of information for rural youth mainly agricultural information frequently from friends/neighbor (.21) followed closely by parent (11.59), radio (9.77) and extension agent (9.32). Other occasional sources of information 119

4 OLANIYI et al. / J. Agric. Soc. Sci., Vol. 7, No. 4, 2011 Table II: Distribution of respondents according to personal characteristics Variable Frequency Percentage Age (in years) (Young) (Middle) (Older) Gender Male Female Marital Status Single Divorced Widowed Married Years of Education Religion Christianity Islam Traditional Farming Experience (years) Frequency Percentage and above 17.6 Farm Size (ha) < and above Household Size and above Social Organization Yes No Table III: Distribution of Respondents by Sources of Information Source(s) Frequency Percentage Extension agent 114* 84.4 Radio Television Friends/neighbor Newspapers Parent Town crying Folk Music Internet Commercial input dealers Drama Agricultural show Source: Field survey, 200 included newspapers (6.41), commercial input dealers (6.71), television (5.57), agricultural shows (5.50), town crying (4.83), drama (4.81), internet (4.78) and folk music (4.76). The result conforms that of Tologbonse et al. (2005) Table IV: Distribution of Respondents by frequency of usage of information sources Sources of Information Mean score Standard Deviation Rank Order Friends/Neighbour Parent Radio Extension agent Commercial Input dealer Newspaper Television Agricultural show Town Crying Drama Internet Folk Music Source: Field Study, 2007 who had earlier reported that friends/neighbor, parents, radio, extension agents and were some of the important sources of information from which farmers frequently seek information. The fact that internet ranked among the least used sources of information points to the fact that information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure have not been adopted in most of our rural areas by the respondents hence they depend on the conventional sources of information. Furthermore, some indigenous communication media were ranked at the bottom. This implied that use of indigenous communication media were eroded away to the background in the rural areas. Azeez and Jimoh (2003) asserted that indigenous media have a great role in complimenting the conventional media. Although, the kind of information sought by an individual often determines the kinds of sources the individual seeks, such information is based on the easy accessibility, reliability and credibility. Level of utilization of agricultural information: Table V shows that more than 50% of the sampled rural youth most often use information on improved maize varieties (62.2%) followed by use of sprayer for chemical in controlling pests and diseases of crops, selection and rate of chemical application for weed control (54.1%) and fertilizer application (51.1%). Over 50% indicated that they never used information on combine harvester, mechanized method of harvesting cassava, mechanized method of shelling and threshing of grains, storage of maize in modern cribs, storage of grains in silo, modern processing of produce, soil fertility testing and use of bulldozer for clearing and stumping. The pattern of agricultural information utilization in this study showed that the respondents were adequately informed in term of practical skills involved in the use of those technical information. This may be attributed to the various sources of information especially the extension agents in disseminating agricultural information to the farmers. Perceived effect of agricultural utilization information: The result (Table VI) indicated that over 90% of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that utilization of agricultural information has improved their knowledge of farming, 89.6% strongly agreed or agreed with the statement that utilization of agricultural 0

5 RURAL YOUTH S UTILIZATION OF AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION IN NIGERIA / J. Agric. Soc. Sci., Vol. 7, No. 4, 2011 Table V: Distribution of Respondents by utilisation of Agricultural information Technical Information Level of Utilization Agricultural information Never Rarely Often Very often Weather information on crop production 43 (31.9) 04(3.0) 41 (30.4) 47 (34.8) Soil management practices 17 (.6) 23 (17.0) 48 (35.6) 47 (34.8) Soil fertility testing 86 (63.7) 01(0.7) 07 (5.2) 41 (30.4) Use of bulldozers for clearing/stumping 108 (80.0) 13 (9.6) 05 (3.7) 9 (6.7) Tractor for ploughing/harrowing 64 (47.4) 47 (34.8) Tractor for Ridging and seed bed making 51 (37.8) 28(20.7) 35 (25.9) 21 (15.6) Improved varieties of cassava cuttings 14 (10.4) 25(18.5) 48 (35.6) 48 (35.6) Yam minisett 56 (41.5) 01(0.7) 48 (35.6) 30 (22.2) Improved Varieties of maize 18 (13.3) 08(5.9) 25 (18.5) 847 (62.2) Improved varieties of Rice 56 (41.5) 06(4.4) 13 (9.6) 60 (44.4) Improved seeds/seedlings 31 (23.0) 05(3.7) 48 (35.6) 51 (37.8) Selection and rate of chemical application for weeding 17 (.6) 14(10.4) 31 (23.0) 73 (54.1) Use of sprayer for chemical in controlling pests and diseases 11 (8.1) 18(13.3) 26 (19.3) 80 (59.3) Methods of fertilizer application (e.g. folia, Ring, broadcasting and side) 26 (19.3) 11 (8.1) 29 (21.5) 69 (51.1) Use of combine harvesters 7 (94.1) 04(3.0) 01 (0.7) 03 (2.2) Mechanized method of harvesting Cassava 3 (91.1) 08(5.9) 03 (2.2) 01 (0.7) Modern processing of agricultural produce 104 (77.0) 04(3.0) 19 (14.1) 08 (5.9) Mechanized method of shelling and threshing of grains 3 (91.1) 08(5.9) 3 (2.2) 01 (0.7) Storage of grains e.g. Rice and maize in silo 69 (51.1) 11 (8.1) 20 (14.8) 35 (25.9) Storage of maize in modern maize crib 105 (77.8) 13(9.6) 07 (5.2) 10 (7.4) Table VI: Distribution of Respondents by Perceived effect of agricultural Information on agricultural practices and production Perceived effect of utilization of Agricultural Information SA A U D SD Mean Score Utilization of Agricultural Information has improved my knowledge of farming 90 (66.7) * 35 (25.9) 09 (6.7) 01 (0.7) 0 (0.0) 4.59 (0.65) ** Utilization of agricultural Information enhances the accountability of farm enterprises 54 (40.0) 67 (49.6) 08 (5.9) 05 (3.7) 01 (0.7) 4.24 (0.79) Utilization of agricultural information increase the awareness and adoption of innovation 67 (49.6) 53 (39.3) 08 (5.9) 6 (4.4) 01 (0.7) 4.33 (0.84) Utilization of agricultural information has increased my income due to better marketing outlets. 73 (54.0) 49 (36.3) 06 (4.4) 04 (3.0) 03 (2.2) 4.38 (0.89) Utilization of agricultural information has improved my skill in operating farm equipments and machineries 54 (40.0) 62 (45.9) 06 (4.4) 10 (7.4) 3 (2.2) 4.15 (0.97) Agricultural information disseminated brings confusion into already known practices 21 (15.6) 03 (2.2) 05 (3.7) 27 (20.0) 79 (58.5) 4.04 (1.47) Utilization of agricultural information have no effect on my income and savings 09 (6.7) 05 (3.7) 42 (31.1) 67 (49.6) 4.06 (1.27) Available agricultural information is all encompassing hence I don t know those ones to make use. 11 (8.1) 60 (44.4) 40 (29.6) 3.77 (1.22) Utilization of agricultural information is difficult because, information is not practicable. 13 (9.6) 02 (1.5) 46 (34.1) 62 (45.9) 3.99 (1.30) Utilization of information has no effect on my agricultural output hence I am not interest in the usage again. 02 (1.5) 08 (5.9) 38 (28.1) 75 (55.5) 4.21 (1.21) Source: Field survey, 2007 SA - Strongly Agreed A - Agreed ** Standard Deviation U - Undecided * Parentheses indicates percentages D - Disagreed Grand Mean = 4.18 SD - Strongly Disagreed information enhances accountability of farming enterprises. About 89% strongly agreed or agreed with the statement that there was an increase in awareness and adoption of innovation as a result of utilization of agricultural information in 86.3% strongly agreed or agreed with the statement that utilization of agricultural information increases income as a result of better marketing outlets, also 85.9% strongly agreed or agreed with the statement that utilization of agricultural information has improved skills in operating farm equipments and machinery. A total of 83.6% strongly disagreed or disagreed with the statement utilization of agricultural information has no effect on their output, 80.7% followed the same pattern by strongly disagreed or agreed with the statement that utilization of agricultural information has no effect on their income and savings, 80.0% strongly disagreed or agreed with the statement utilization of agricultural information is difficult, because information are not practicable enough, while 78.5% strongly disagreed or disagreed with the statement that agricultural information disseminated bring confusion into 1

6 OLANIYI et al. / J. Agric. Soc. Sci., Vol. 7, No. 4, 2011 Table VII: Distribution of Respondents by Perceived Effect of utilization Scores Perception score Frequency Percentage Favorable ( ) Unfavorable (< 41.78) Total Source: Field survey, 2007 Mean Score = Standard Deviation = 6.85 Table VIII: Result of correlation coefficient between selected variables and level of utilization of agricultural information Variables r P-value Remark Age NS Education NS Farming Experience 0.241** S Household Size 0.189* S Farm Size NS Frequency of use of sources of Information 0.214** S Source: Field Survey, 2007 ** S 1% NS- Not significant Table IX: Result of Chi-square Test analysis showing relationship between some personal characteristics variables and level of utilization of agricultural information Variables X 2 cal df P-value Remark Marital Status S Gender NS Religion NS Social participation NS Source: Field Study, 2007 S Significant at p<0.05 NS - Not significant df- Degree of freedom Table X: Summary of Analysis of variance result showing significant differences in Perception of utilization of agricultural information across the study area Perception of utilization Sum of df of Information Squares Between Groups Within Groups Total Mean Square already known practices and 74.0% strongly disagreed or disagreed with the statement that available agricultural information is all encompassing hence they don t know, which one to make use. These finding portrayed a generally positive disposition of rural youth to utilization of agricultural information. Disposition to the effects of utilization of agricultural information: Evidence from the data reported in Table VII shows that more than half (65.2%) of the respondents fell into favourable disposition to the effects of utilisation of agricultural information, while 34.8% of them expressed unfavourable disposition to utilisation of agricultural information. This implied that utilization of agricultural information is beneficial as claimed by the respondents. F Remark S Test of Hypotheses Hypothesis 1: There is no significant relationship between selected rural youth personal characteristics variables and level of utilization of agricultural information. The result of correlation analysis in Table VIII for parametric variables revealed that farming experience (r =0.241), household size (r = 0.189), frequency of use of information sources (r = 0.214) had positive and significant relationship with perception of utilization of agricultural information. Also age (r = ), had negative but non-significant relationship with perception of utilization of agricultural information (Table VIII). This finding is similar to that of Ugwokwe et al. (2005), who reported that significant relationship exists between some rural youth personal characteristics such as farming experience, household size and perception of participation in farming activities. The result of Chi square test revealed that marital status (X 2 = ) is statistically significant with perception of utilization of agricultural information, while religion (X 2 = 1.603), gender (X 2 =1.082), social participation (X 2 = 4.572) shows no significant relationship with perception of utilization of agricultural information (Table IX). Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in rural youth s perception of utilization of agricultural information across the selected local government areas. The analysis of variance result reported in Table X reveals that there is significant difference in rural youth s perception of utilization of agricultural information across the study area with computed F value=6.46, p<0.05. The hypothesis is therefore rejected. CONCLUSION The study therefore concluded that in solving the menace of food insecurity in Nigeria the utilization of agricultural information among rural youth is of paramount importance as they are the future farmers and the onus of agricultural development depend on them. Although their perception of utilization of agricultural information was favorable, these have a lot to do with encouraging them to remain in agricultural sector. The major sources of information identified shows that interpersonal interaction in the rural areas are still of relevance to the dissemination of agricultural information and they were not exposed to modern information and communication technology (ICT). Based on the findings of this study it is recommended that: 1 The eroded indigenous media communication in our rural communities should be revisited by the extension personnel in disseminating information package to the rural population. 2 The use of information and communication technology (ICT) which has not been adopted in the rural areas is a challenge as the whole world is becoming a global village, therefore, local information service center (LISC) should be established by the government in our rural areas where rural 2

7 RURAL YOUTH S UTILIZATION OF AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION IN NIGERIA / J. Agric. Soc. Sci., Vol. 7, No. 4, 2011 youth could retrieve information that are relevant to their need. 3 Extension institution should make their messages more practicable through various multimedia approaches to information dissemination in order to enhance utilization of agricultural information. REFERENCES Ajayi, W.O. and S.G. Nwoko, Information Support for a Cocoa Revolution in Nigeria. In: Adegeye, A. and W.O. Ajayi, (eds.), Cocoa Revolution in Nigeria, pp: Ibadan ARG Anyanwu, A.C., A.E. Agwu and C.A. Umeweni, Sources of Agricultural Information Used by Women Farmers in Orumba North Local Government Area of Anambra State, Nigeria. Int. J. Agric. Sci. Environ. Technol. (ASSET) Servi., A 2: Azeez, I.O. and S.O. Jimoh, Traditional Media Use in Forest Conservation Support Communication (FCSC) in Protected Areas in Southwestern Nigeria. J. Environ. Ext., 4: Banmeke, T.O.A. and M.T. Ajayi, Farmer s Perception of the Agricultural Information and Rural Development 1: CTA, Brief Report: Top Scheme for Women and ICT, p: 4. Spore Magazine, No 139 Durson, J., Comparative International Analysis of Rural Youth Policy in Developing Countries: Coping with Diversity of Change, pp: In: Expert Consultation in Extension and Rural Programmes and Sustainable Development. FAO, Rome Olagunju, F.I. and L.T. Ogunniyi, Implication of Agricultural Credits Corporations Facilities to Small holder Farmers for Food Security in Southwestern Nigeria. Int. J. Agric. Apicult. Res., 2: Onuekwusi, G.C. and E.O. Effiong, Youth Empowerment in Rural Areas through Participation in Rabbit Production; A Case of Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. Nigerian J. Rural Sociol., 4: Oyo State Agricultural Development Programme (OYSADEP), A Report of Village Listing Survey in Oyo State, pp: Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Department, Oyo State Agricultural Development Programme, Nigeria Perez-Morales, R Issues Papers: Youth Policy and Resources Related to Rural Youth Programme. In: Cook, J.F. (ed.), Expert Consultation on Extension Rural Youth, pp: FAO Rome, Italy Srithirath, V., Drug and Other Impact on LAO Rural Youth, p: 23. In: Report on National Rural Youth, Food security and Sustainable Rural Development in the LAO people s Democratic Republic. RAP publication 2005/15 Tologbonse, E.B., M.O. Alabi and A. Tergama, Adoption of Recommended Crop protection Practices by Sesame Farmers in Benue State. J. Agric. Ext., 8: Torimiro, D.O. and A.A. Oluborode, Exploring Socio-economic Correlates of Production Needs for Southwest Nigeria. J. Appl. Sci. Res., 5: Ugwoke, F.O., O.M. Adesope and F.C. Ibe, Youth participation in Farming Activities in Rural Areas of Imo State Nigeria: implications for Extension. J. Agric. Ext., 8: (Received 07 April 2009; Accepted 04 May 2009) 3