Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/eprovjqr/public_html/dashboard/getdoc.php:5) in /home/eprovjqr/public_html/dashboard/getdoc.php on line 23

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/eprovjqr/public_html/dashboard/getdoc.php:5) in /home/eprovjqr/public_html/dashboard/getdoc.php on line 24

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/eprovjqr/public_html/dashboard/getdoc.php:5) in /home/eprovjqr/public_html/dashboard/getdoc.php on line 26

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/eprovjqr/public_html/dashboard/getdoc.php:5) in /home/eprovjqr/public_html/dashboard/getdoc.php on line 27
ࡱ> OQLMN[ bjbj 7ΐΐz>.}||8S4Ll^C-CCC:::kkkkkkk$nLqbkQ::@:::kCCmlVKVKVK:CCkVK:kVKVK \c]C%bC>\{kl0Ll\r,IBr(]]zr^h ::VK:::::kknJ:::Ll::::r:::::::::| :  THE IMPACT OF FOOD IMPORTATION ON FOOD PRODUCTION: THE CASE OF RICE IMPORTATION AND PRODUCTION ONUAGULUCHI IFESINACHI A. PG/MSC/07/43208 A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA NSUKKA OCTOBER 2014 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study Agricultural sector was the main stay of the Nigerian economy before independence and immediately after it, until the oil boom of the 1970s. In the period before the 1970s, agriculture provided the needed food for the population as well as serving as a major foreign exchange earner for the country (Alabi and Alabi, 2009). Most government policies have been directed towards accelerating economic development with the ultimate aim of transforming the economy into an industrialized one as well as the welfare of the population (Obiechina, 2007), hence cannot be attained without drastic boost in agricultural sector which is expected to act as a catalysts towards the realization of this goal. The traditional role of agriculture in economic development provides the foundation for this position. The role includes product contribution, market contribution, factor contribution and foreign exchange contribution (Johnston and Mellor, 1961).It is the main source of food for most of the population. It provides the means of livelihood for over 70 percent of the population, a major source of raw materials for the agro-allied industries and a potent source of the much-needed foreign exchange (Alabi, Aigbokhan and Ailemen, 2004). Rice is one of the worlds most important food crops that serve as a stable food for a large percentage of the worlds population, especially in India, China, other parts of Asia, and Africa. In Nigeria, rice is a vital food consumption staple but has also become an important cash crop where it provides employment for more than 80% of the population in the major producing areas (Okoruwa and Ogundele, 2006). Ayinde et al.(2009), drawing on WARDA (1996), note that Nigeria is both the largest producer and consumer of rice in the West African sub-region. Moreover, Nigeria consumes considerably more rice than it produces (Business Day, 2009), leading to significant imports in recent years (Table 1 appendix iii). Over the years, several government programs have attempted to stimulate domestic rice production with the goal of addressing the increasing demand-supply gap and making Nigeria more self sufficient in rice amongst which two of the most recent programs are the Presidential Initiative on Rice (PIR), established in 1999 and the National Program for Food Security (NPFS). There have also been trade policies constituting periods of bans and tarrifs aimed at encouraging local rice production. Despite these policies and programs, domestic rice consumption has continued to outpace domestic production leading to an ever-increasing role for rice imports. As can be seen from Table 1, rice imports have been growing steadily in Nigeria and this growth is expected to continue due to increasing demand resulting from growth in incomes, urbanization, and the associated expansion of fast food restaurants (Daramola, 2005). In general, of the estimated 5 million metric tons of annual rice consumption in Nigeria, the annual domestic output of rice still hovers around 3.0 million metric tons, leaving the huge gap of about 2 million metric tons annually, a situation, which has continued to encourage dependence on importation. Some of the reasons for the gap are connected with the improper production methods, scarcity and high cost of inputs, rudimentary post - harvest and processing methods, inefficient milling techniques and poor marketing standards particularly in terms of polishing and packaging. Also poor or low mechanization on rice farms means heavy reliance on manual labor to carry out all farm operations Daramola (2005). Another reason is that imported rice is viewed as of better quality than locally produced rice, and that therefore domestic and imported rice are not perfect substitutes. Yet another explanation is that the long history of consuming imported rice in Nigeria has led to habit persistence and consumption inertia, which makes it more difficult for locally produced rice to compete with imported rice, Akaeze (2010). Achieving sustainable economic development in Africa will confront three central challenges: alleviating wide spread poverty, meeting current and future food needs, and efficiently using the natural resource base to ensure sustainability. Nigerias population is estimated at 160 million with an annual growth rate of about 4%, World Bank (2010). Nigeria must then draw lessons from the Malthusian theory as well as follow the Human Capital led growth formula of the Asian Tigers (Singapore, Taiwan, Malaysia) by drawing on comparative advantages in production and import substitution cum export promotion strategies of trade. This means self sufficiency in food which is currently lacking following that the country currently imports much of her food needs to meet local consumption demand. The implication of Nigerias food import as opposed to export is becoming ever more crucial to growth and development. The thrust of this paper is to ascertain the impact of rice importation on rice production in Nigeria. 1.2 Problem Statement The need for a country to attain self sufficiency in food as a panacea for economic development cannot be over emphasised as it is one of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG). Simply put, Nigeria has been clamoring for growth but much of her policies have been targeted at macroeconomic indices such as inflation, Balance of payments, exchange rates, debt profile and so on while little attention has been given to the agricultural sector. The status of rice in the average Nigerian diet has been transformed from being a luxury food item to that of a staple, taking the place of cassava and yam. Empirical evidence also suggests that the price elasticity of demand for rice is low at the urban market. This last point has been the driver of increasing tariffs in the recent past. The low elasticity means fiscal instrument like tariff can be increased without a corresponding decline in demand because rice is still considered a fast food in many urban centers and government can continue to use high tariff to protect domestic producers without corresponding decline in rice demand. Tariffs for example were high as 100% in 1995 and 2003 and stood at 50% between 1999 and 2002. However despite these high tariffs, domestic production is still not sufficient to meet local demand. Olalokun (1984) noted that prior to 1960 imports were not recorded to have played any significant role in the Nigerian economy as revealed by the fact that agriculture was the largest contributor to the GDP. Alabi et al( 2006) noted that contribution of the petroleum sector to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been rising while that of agricultural sector has been declining as resources and attention of policy makers were being focused more on petroleum sector. While the contribution of the petroleum sector was rising and that of agriculture was declining, the share of imports began to rise. From an initial total value import of N 756 million in 1970, total import value rose to N 1.9 trillion in 2003. The food import initial value of N58.5 million in 1970 rose to N 261 billion in 2003 (Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), 2004). Furthermore, the demand for rice in Nigeria has been increasing at a much faster rate than in any other African country since the mid 1970s (Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2001). For example, during the 1960s, Nigeria had the lowest per capita annual consumption of rice in the sub region at an annual average of 3kg. Since then, Nigerian per capita consumption levels have grown significantly at 7.3% per annum. Consequently, per capita consumption during the 1980s averaged 18kg and then 22kg in 19952000. In an apparent move to respond to the increased per capita consumption of rice in Nigeria, local production boomed, averaging 9.3% per annum. These increases have been traced to vast expansion of rice area at an annual average of 7.9% and to a lesser extent to increases in rice yield of 1.4% per annum (Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2001). In spite of this, the production increase was not sufficient to match the consumption increase. In a bid to address the demand/supply gap, governments have at various times come up with policies and programmes. It is observed that these policies have not been consistent. Thus, the fluctuations in policy and the limited capacity of the Nigerian rice sector to match domestic demand have raised a number of pertinent questions both in policy circles and among economists. For example, what are the factors explaining why domestic rice production lags behind the demand for the commodity in Nigeria? Considering these issues, this study seeks to answer the following questions What is the impact of importation of rice on rice production in Nigeria? What is the impact of government expenditure on rice production in Nigeria? What is the impact of Balance of Payments on rice production in Nigeria? 1.3 Objectives of the Study The broad objective of the study is to evaluate the impact of food importation on food production in Nigeria. The specific objectives of this study are: (1) To ascertain the impact of rice importation on rice production in Nigeria. (2) To ascertain the impact of government expenditure on rice production in Nigeria. (3) To ascertain the impact of Balance of Payments on rice production in Nigeria. 1.4 Research Hypotheses The research hypotheses that will guide this study are stated as follows: Rice importation does not have impact on Rice production in Nigeria. Government expenditure on agriculture does not have impact on rice production in Nigeria. Balance of Payments does not have significant impact on rice production in Nigeria.. 1.5 Significance of the Study The impact of food importation on food production and balance of payment needs to be evaluated for appropriate policy formulation on food import restriction in Nigeria. The Balance of Payment (BOP) equilibrium which measures the extent of transaction between Nigeria and other nations is calculated based on the level of exchange of goods and services in monetary values specifically United States (US) dollar. This study will estimate food importation and production on balance of payment with intention of ascertaining whether they have significant effect on countrys current account balance. The study therefore would be of immense benefit to policy makers, government officials, students, and other stake holders in the economy as it gives direction on how to enhance agricultural policies in Nigeria. The researcher also expects that this study would raise much awareness on our import position, comparative advantage or disadvantage in rice production, and the general state of the agricultural sector in Nigeria. Also the recommendations from the findings of this study would point the direction in which policy makers can hinge policies. It would also serve as a point of reference for other researchers to build upon. 1.6 Scope of Study The study focuses on the impact of food importation on food production in Nigeria as it involves rice importation and production. The study was based on data relating to rice production and importation from 1980 to 2011 in Nigeria. 1.7 Structure of the Study The study is structured into five chapters. The first chapter is introduction, it deals on the background of the study which entails the take off of the study, the problem statement which defines the challenges that prompted the need for the study, after which the objective of study comes, which defines the exact direction the study is taking, the research hypothesis, the significance of the study, scope and structure of the study. The chapter two which is the literature review deals on the theoretical literature, empirical literature and the limitations of the previous studies . the chapter three invoves the model specification, specification of the dummy, estimation technique, pre-estimation test, unit root test, co-integration test, error correction mechanism and data source. The chapter four is presentation and interpretation of results which involves the impact of rice importation on rice production, evaluation of working hypothesis, test of working hypothesis 1, hypothesis 2 and hypothesis 3. The last chapter (chapter five) shows summary, policy implication and conclusion of the study. CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Theoretical Literature Literature on food production abounds and their tenets stem across a wide area of microeconomics on the consumer preferences and efficiency in production. This section is therefore dedicated to examining the various theories that have tried to explain issues in food production and importation and their applicability to the Nigerian context. 2.1.1 Theory of Comparative Advantage Ricardo believes that free international trade is desirable and that nations and their populations benefit from it. He demonstrates this point with his famous England-Portugal example, in which both nations initially produce cloth and wine. To produce the same amount of cloth, England needs 100 labourers and Portugal 90 labourers. England needs 120 labourers to produce the same amount of wine that Portugal produces with 80 labourers (Ricardo 2004b, p. 135). These different labour requirements are due to their dissimilar circumstances that result from a nations situation, climate and other natural or artificial advantages (Ricardo 2004b, p. 132) and are exogenously given. With these four magic numbers (Samuelson 1972, p. 678), Ricardo shows that it would be advantageous for both nations if they specialized according to their respective comparative advantage and started trading with each other. England should specialize in the production of cloth and import wine from Portugal. The opposite applies to Portugal. As a result, they would both benefit. Due to the more efficient employment of labour and capital, the amount and variety of the objects on which revenue may be expended (Ricardo 2004b, p. 133) and the sum of enjoyments (Ricardo 2004b,p. 128) increase. The whole population, as consumers, benefits from international trade because goods become cheaper and available in larger quantities. There are no other economic gains from international trade. Dynamic developments like economic growth are not integrated into the theory of comparative advantage by Ricardo. Ricardo illustrates with his example that no nation needs to fear free international trade because it will be advantageous for both nations, even if one nation has a lower productivity in all goods and the other nation produces both goods more efficiently. This shows that absolute production costs are insignificant internationally, only comparative production costs matter. If the cost ratios are different in both nations, specialization and trade will benefit both. However, the opposite is also true, namely when production cost ratios are equal in both nations no gains can be made by specialization. In this situation trade will not take place at all because there would be no incentive for it. Different comparative production costs are the essential and also the sufficient condition (Cairnes 1874, p. 371) for the existence of international trade. Ricardo shows not only that free trade is advantageous for nations, but also that nations will benefit automatically because free international trade leads inevitably and even unintentionally to a specialization according to comparative advantages. Here, Ricardo draws on the price-specie-flow mechanism, which is a simple version of the quantity theory of money and was developed by David Hume (1903a, 1903b). Ricardo and succeeding classical economists present international trade as a form of barter. It is seen as an actual trucking of one commodity against another (Mill 1929, p. 583). Money is seen as neutral and has only one function in international trade, namely as a means of exchange in order to facilitate trade. Ricardo shows not only that free trade is advantageous for nations, but also that nations will benefit automatically because free international trade leads inevitably and even unintentionally to a specialization according to comparative advantages. Here, Ricardo draws on the price-specie-flow mechanism, which is a simple version of the quantity theory of money and was developed by David Hume (1903a, 1903b). Ricardo and succeeding classical economists present international trade as a form of barter. It is seen as an actual trucking of one commodity against another (Mill 1929, p. 583). Money is seen as neutral and has only one function in international trade, namely as a means of exchange in order to facilitate trade. As a corollary, trade must be balanced. This is an important presumption of the price-specie-flow mechanism. According to this mechanism, changes in the quantity of gold (and silver), which was the means of payment at the time, have no real effect, only a price effect. Thus, absolute (gold) prices, wages, etc. depend on the quantity of gold that is available inside a nation. To illustrate how this mechanism underlies the theory is a corollary, trade must be balanced. This is an important presumption of the price-specie-flow mechanism. According to this mechanism, changes in the quantity of gold (and silver), which was the means of payment at the time, have no real effect, only a price effect. Thus, absolute (gold) prices, wages, etc. depend on the quantity of gold that is available inside a nation. To illustrate how this mechanism underlies the theory. The original Ricardian concern with agriculture appears to have been of peripheral interest in the subsequent literature on comparative advantage, which, almost without exception, focuses on industry in the developed world. The recent interest in comparative advantage has tended to renew the emphasis on technological explanations of trade in manufactures. To the extent that developing countries have been included in the analysis, the concern has been with industrial competitiveness and not with developing country agriculture. In his contribution to the 1976 Nobel seminar on international trade, Haberler ref date remarked that "no sophisticated theory is necessary to explain why Kuwait exports oil, Bolivia tin, Brazil coffee and Portugal wine". These he regards as simply "natural resource trade" and much easier to explain than trade in manufacturers. exporter, and so forth. In his examination of the doctrine of comparative advantage as applied to conditions in developing countries, Viner (1931) criticised the Heckscher-Ohlin model for its assumptions of comparable quality in the factors. He emphasised the importance of interpreting comparative advantage in a dynamic setting in which the efficiency of production may change over time, external economies may exist, and the market price. The debate raised much dust but the recent works of Abbott et al (1987) clarifies the case for developing countries, where analysis of comparative advantage needs to include a recognition of the possibility of structural disequilibrium in factor markets; the inclusion of indirect (market and nonmarket) effects of expanding a given type of production; simultaneous determination of levels of consumption, imports and consumption and allowance for variations in the demand for exports. Nigeria with her teeming population should invest heavily in agriculture and reap the gains. 2.1.2 Malthusian Theory of Population The Malthusian model was developed two centuries ago by a man named Thomas Malthus. Malthus's (1798) model is based upon a relationship between both population growth as well as economic development. According to Malthusian theory of population, population increases in a geometrical ratio, whereas food supply increases in an arithmetic ratio. This disharmony would lead to widespread poverty and starvation, of which growth in population would only be checked by natural occurrences such as disease, high infant mortality, famine, war or moral restraint. His main contribution is in the agricultural sector. According to this theory there are therefore two steps to control population: preventative and positive checks. Preventative means control in birth rate, and uses of different methods to control birth; and positive checks means natural calamities war. Etc His theory was wrong because Malthus only considered two factors when he established his basic graph: food supply and population growth. Other factors such as improvements in technology proved him wrong. He was right at his time but development made him wrong in modern days. If it wasn't for outside influences on population growth and food supply, his mathematical reasoning which proved his theory and was right.As stated, the Neo Malthusian (1798) population theory claims that poor nations are stuck in a cycle of poverty which they can't get out of unless some sort of preventative measures of population checks are engaged. Empirical studies now-a-days show that the population theory model is quite flawed because of many factors that render even the two main variables in the theory (population growth and level of per-capita income) not fit to be used within the same conceptual frame work as there is no clear link between them. The theory has not engulfed the Nigerian economy owing to advancement and technology. Traditionally small farm holdings are giving way to mechanized farming spanning wider land cultivation. Nigeria has also been involved heavily in international trade with larger countries and hence imports much food products to meet excess food demand. 2.1.3 Import Demand Theory The import demand theory has a micro foundation. It is based on consumer theory of demand, which states that the aim of the consumer is to maximize satisfaction and so income is allocated among competing goods to obtain maximum satisfaction. This argument is extended to the demand for imports that is, the demand for imports by a consumer is influenced by income, import prices themselves and prices of other commodities. The sum total of individual demand for imports constitutes the aggregate imports for the economy. According to Sodersten and Reed, (1994), part of consumers aggregate demand in an open economy is for imported goods and thus import demand is assumed to be expressed as an increasing function of national income. That is, M = M(Y) with "M/"Y > 0 where M is imports and Y is national income. Since aggregate demand consists of demand for domestically produced goods (Qd) and for imports, it follows that we may write the marginal propensity to consume (MPC) as the sum of the MPC of domestically-produced goods (Cd = "Qd/"Y) and the MPC of imports (Md = "M/"Y). Assuming that imports are a linear function of national income, as income increases, imports also increase. The marginal propensity to import measures how much of an increase in national income is spent on imports. A majority of studies takes the income coefficient to be positive unless imports are inferior in consumption. Although, empirical evidence of negative income elasticity of demand for imports is rare, it does exist in theory. Egwaikhide, (1999) avers that since imports are the excess of domestic consumption over domestic supply, then income elasticity of imports could be negative if domestic supply is more income elastic than domestic consumption. The traditional import demand model relates import demand to real domestic income and relative prices. While real domestic income is expected to show a positive relationship with import demand relative import prices are supposed to show a negative relationship. However, this model has been criticised by many authors in the sense that it assumes that total imports consist of final commodities that are not separable from those other goods that serve as inputs to the consuming sectors. 2.1.4 Human Capital Theory This theory is one of the most influential economic theories of western advancement setting the framework for government policies since the early 1960s with its roots in the works of British economist Sir William Petty (1623-1687) and Adam Smith (1723-1790). The theory explains how knowledge increases productivity and efficiency of workers by increasing the level of cognitive skills. Economists have tested and confirmed the theory of human capital as being a valid theory. Schultz (1961), Mincer (1962), and Becker (1993) have proved that the main proposition of the human capital theory is that human capital is considered the stock of economically productive human capabilities which can be formed by combining innate abilities with investments in human beings Babalola (2000). Schultz (1971) noted that skills and knowledge are a form of capital, an investment in which the proponents of human capital theory consider to be equally and even more worthwhile than in physical capital (Adedeji, et al, 2002) Human capital theorists have established that basic literacy enhances productivity of workers in low-skill occupations like agriculture. They believe that education and trainings, on-the-job training, health and nutrition increase future productive capacity at the expense of current consumption. With a growing number of Universities and colleges of Agriculture, the country is on a good path to raising human capital development for greater gains in agriculture. 2.1.5 Import Substitution (IS)/Export Promotion Theory (EP) This theory has been dubbed the twin -towers in the literature of international trade. The debate has always been between the advocates of free trade against protectionism. The neo-liberals are advocators of free trade, export promotion, or outward looking strategy as an alternative to import-substitution, or inward-looking strategy. They range from scholars such as Krueger (1974), Greenaway et al (1998), Balassa (1980), Bhagwati (1978), main international financial institutions World Bank (1993), Papageorgiou et al. (1990) and the so-called Washington Consensus Williamson (1990). The trust of their argument is that trade provides a channel for the transfer of knowledge and technology, or learning through trade. The theoretical foundation behind the neo-liberal argument is basically the static comparative advantage theory. Accordingly, a country concentrates on exporting what it already produces, not on the development of what it will be able, or wish, to produce and export through developing dynamic comparative advantage. Cline(1983), Amsden (1989). Keesing (1967) adds that under an IS regime, policy makers accept protectionism as a legitimate major instrument to promote industrialisation; every industry is spurred to demonstrate its need to be sheltered from the cruelties of foreign competition, and eventually the country ends up with a system allowing each industry protection according to its inefficiency. In principle an IS strategy preceeds an EP strategy. An economy must produce enough for local demand then export the excess. Keesing (1967) and Bhagwati-Krueger (1973) have argued that under an EP regime, international competition forces domestic entrepreneurs to pay close attention to the possibilities of innovations and speeding up the learning processes. Exporting firms must face price and quality competition in international markets, and consequently the survival and success of each exporter depends on active absorption of up-to-date production techniques and adaptive innovations based on imported technologies. Furthermore, the EP strategy naturally enables an economy to take full advantage of scale economies. Both strategies pose challenges as well as lessons for developing countries like Nigeria in a globalised world. Todaro (2002) asserts that developing countries must look to the instant rapid development of asian tigers who achieved this feat by raising walls of protection and attaining self suffiency then pursued a vigorous export strategy. Developing countries must however follow with caution and approprait government policies. 2.2 Evolution of Agricultural/Food Production and Trade Policies in Nigeria 2.2.1 The Agricultural and Trade Policies in Pre- 1970 era (1950-1969) In the pre-1970 era, the government philosophy of agricultural development was characterized by minimum direct government intervention in agriculture. As such, the governments attitude to agriculture was relaxed, with the private sector and particularly the millions of small-scale traditional farmers bearing the brunt of agricultural development efforts. Government efforts were mainly supportive of activities of these farmers and largely took the form of agricultural research, extension, export crop marketing and pricing activities. Most of these activities were based on regional government with the federal government contribution confined largely to agricultural research. The low visibility of government in agricultural development efforts were borne out of a general philosophy of economic laissez faire. It was however, becoming clear towards the end of the 1960s that the Nigerian agricultural economy might be running into stormy weather. The signs of emerging agricultural problems included declining export crop production and some mild food shortages. Even then most of these problems were ascribed to the civil war and such, were considered to be only transitory in nature. But events soon proved these assumptions wrong as the agricultural sector sank deeper and its problems became much more intractable than anticipated (Manyong et al, 2005). As at 1960, trade and payments controls were relatively moderate. But as from 1966, probably due to the national crisis created by the civil war of that period, foreign exchange controls and import licensing were introduced. These controls were relaxed after the civil war. 2.2.2 The Agricultural and Trade Policies during Pre- SAP era (1970-1985) The turn of the 1970 was characterized by a state of general apprehension about the condition of the Nigeria agricultural sector. This led to fundamental change in the philosophy of government towards agricultural development from one of minimum government intervention to one of almost maximum intervention, particularly by federal government of Nigeria. The feeling was pervasive that the solutions to the increasingly serious problems of agriculture and especially those of food supply required the heavy clout of government in the form of multidimensional agricultural policies, programmes, and projects, some of them requiring the direct involvement of government in agricultural production activities. The sudden discovery of oil fortune reinforced this feeling. Hence, the decade of the 1970 and early 1980s witnessed an unprecedented deluge of agricultural policies, programmes, projects and institutions. Some of these programmes, projects and institutions are: Commodity and Marketing Board, Nigerian Agricultural and Cooperative Bank (NACB), National Accelerated Food Production Programme (NAFP), River Basin Development Authority (RBDA), Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), National Seed Supply Services (NSS), Rural Banking Scheme (RBS), Land Use Decree (LUD) and Green Revolution (GR). The most controversial of them all is Commodity and Marketing Board. Government was heavily involved in the marketing of agricultural commodities, while private traders handled domestic trade in food. The government set official guaranteed minimum prices at which government commodity board would act as buyer of last resort. But the guaranteed prices were too low to encourage production. The commodity and marketing boards were established to stabilize both prices and income of farmers. State trading enterprises were responsible for marketing 15 major crops, for example, the Nigerian Grain Board was in charge of maize, rice, sorghum and millet, while Nigerian Palm Produce was in charge of palm oil, palm kernel oil and palm kernel cake. Stabilization funds were established for protection from short-term world price fluctuations. The boards also funded research into plant breeding, improved husbandry, pest control and supplied inputs such fertilizer, insecticide and credit. They graded produce, offering higher prices for higher grades to induce farmers to improve quality of their produce, conducted campaign against plant diseases, and provided storage facilities, transport and processing services. These functions were perverted overtime; however, stabilization funds became convenient way of taxing the sector. Farmers were paid well below world market prices. In terms of trade policy, the oil boom of 1973-1975 created corresponding increases in imports. The government undertook the importation and sale of cheap foreign grains (particularly rice, wheat flour, vegetable oils, meat product, thereby flooding the local markets with high quality imported foods at prices which are substantially lower than the unit costs of producing their local substitutes. As a result, these domestically produced substitutes were rendered uncompetitive with the cheaper imports, and their production declined drastically. But when the rising import bills could not be sustained, a tight trade policy had to be introduced in the 1977-1978 period. Under that policy, many items were restricted. There was another period of oil boom that followed immediately. During the boom, all manner of imports were dumped on Nigeria. Toward the end of 1981, however, the oil market began to show signs of weakness. By April 1982, government had to resort to import controls once again. The problem of oil glut led to a greater dependence on import licensing as economic policy tool to control imports. In the 1983 budget, about 150 commodities were placed under specific license requirements. 2.2.3 The Agricultural Trade Policies in SAP era (1986-1994) The failure of the state-led approach to development, Nigerias dwindling fortune in the petroleum export market, a burgeoning debt burden and an unhealthy investment climate led to the realization that the countrys economy required some drastic restructuring. This was what gave impetus to the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) launched in July 1986. Reforms during SAP and commitment under the Uruguay Round dominated the policy environment in agriculture since 1986. Under SAP, commodity boards were abolished and prices were liberalized. Farmers remuneration received a further boost from depreciation of the naira. Following these reforms, farmers were receiving close to world market prices and without delays which were common during the commodity board era. Other components of the SAP had indirect effects on the sector. The exchange rate reform addressed the problem of overvalued currency. While the import cost rose, the net effect of exchange rate policy reform was positive because agricultural producers (especially small farmers) were less dependent on foreign inputs than producers in other sectors. In addition government subsidies on fertilizer, improved seeds, herbicide, pesticide and machinery provided significant incentives (Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), 1992). These supports were to be reduced gradually in favour of free market forces. Other measures for increasing agricultural production included monetary and credit policies and public expenditure and investment policies. Banks were directed to grant credit to agricultural sector at preferred interest rates. The food policy instruments during SAP were those involved in trade liberalisation, import substitution, and tariff structure adjustment designed to encourage local production and protect local industries from undue international competition and dumping. 2.2.4 The Agricultural Trade Policies in Post-SAP era (1995- 1999) The agricultural policies during Post- SAP era retained essentially some important aspects of the agricultural policies of SAP period. For example, the abolition of commodity boards, liberalisation of prices and devaluation of Naira continued during the post SAP period. The other components of agricultural policies in the post SAP era are: Review of government fertilizer programme, so that private individuals were allowed to trade in fertilizer; introduction of comprehensive system of sanitary and phyto-sanitary inspection and Introduction of preshipment inspection.The food import policy objectives since 1986 when structural adjustment commenced have not change significantly. The main focus of trade policies is on measures to regulate import trade through such measures as tariffs, import quotas and prohibition (Ogunkola and Bankole, 2000). 2.2.5 The Agricultural Trade Policies in the New era (2000 to Date) The previous agricultural policy documents were finalized in 1988 and were supposed to remain operative until the year 2000. Hence, in 2001, a new policy document was launched (FMARD, 2001). The new policy document bears most of the features of the old one, but has more focused direction and better articulation. The key features of the new policy are as follows: Evolution of strategies that will ensure self-sufficiency and improvement in the level of technical and economic efficiency in food production. This is to be achieved through (i) the introduction and adoption of improved seeds and seed stock, (ii) adoption of improved husbandry and appropriate machinery and equipment, (iii) efficient utilization of resources, (iv) encouragement of ecological specialization, and (v) recognition of the roles and potentials of small-scale farmers as the major producers of food in the country. Reduction of risks and uncertainties in agriculture to be achieved through the introduction of a more comprehensive agricultural insurance scheme to reduce the natural hazard factor militating against agricultural production and security of investment. A nationwide, unified, and all-inclusive extension delivery system under the ADPs. Active promotion of agro-allied industry to strengthen the linkage effect of agriculture on the economy. Provision of such facilities and incentives as rural infrastructure, rural banking, primary health care, cottage industries etc, to encourage agricultural and rural development and attract youths (including school leavers) to go back to the land. The fact that the new agricultural policy is more focused is evident in the specific treatment it gives to each aspect of food sector. The World Trade Organization (WTO) (2005) report noted that Nigerias trade policy is currently relatively liberalized. However, agricultural sector remains highly protected with an average applied MFN tariff rate of 41.4% up from 26.7% in 1998. The most protected food products subject to tariff of 100% include butter, cheese and curd, edible vegetables and certain roots and tubers, edible fruits and nuts, vegetable oil, margarine, prepared or preserved meat products, sugar confectionery, food preparations containing chocolate, pasta, pastry and rice. Tariff on maize is 25%. The average applied MFN tariff on fish imports is 23.7%, crustacean attract a tariff rate of 25%. In addition, import prohibition have been placed on wheat flour ,sorghum, live or dead birds, frozen poultry and poultry products, cassava and cassava products and fruit juice in retail packs, pork and pork products, beef and beef products, mutton, lamb and goat meats. All these show that tariffs and non tariff measures are being used vigorously to control food imports in Nigeria (Ogunkola and Bankole, 2000). 2.3. Empirical Literature Rahji et al. (2008) in a study conducted on the rice supply response in Nigeria using the Nerlovian Adjustment Model noted that rice is an important food crop but the inadequate level of the crops production is evidenced by problems, usually in terms of the ever widening supply and demand for the crop in the country. This in turn has resulted in the use of scarce foreign reserve on importation of the commodity that could be efficiently produced locally. The estimated trend equations showed that time had significant influence on output, area and yield of rice over the period. The short and long run prices are inelastic as they are less than one. The estimated coefficient of adjustment ranged between 0.23 and 0.33, hence the speed of adjustment by the variable is said to be sluggish. Under this situation, achieving significant increase in output will be difficult. Measures that will lead to the productivity increase in rice production are therefore necessary. The study recommended that rice farmers should be encouraged to adopt and use improved technologies like the New Rice for Africa (NERICA) variety. The extension service delivery system must also be improved in order to achieve the desire result. Rahji et al (2008) examined the supply response of rice at the aggregate level over successive policy environments in Nigeria. Rice data for the period 1967-2004 were analyzed in order to meet the objectives of this study. Trend equations, Growth Decomposition and Kinked Growth models were estimated. The estimated trend equations showed that all the parameters on time except that of yield for the period 1961-2004 are significant at the 1% level. The results also indicated that almost all growth in rice output has been due to increases in the area cultivated. In the period 1961-2004 and sub-periods 1961-1985 and 1986-2004, area contributed 96, 66, and 208 per cent to output growth of rice while yield was responsible for 4, 33 and -109 per cent to output growth for the periods respectively. The contribution of yield to output in 1961-1985 was about 8.5 times that of the period 1986-2004 though the first sub-period represented non-intervention era. The second sub-period which typified the era of policy intervention recorded a negative yield growth. The Kinked model confirmed that there was a structural break in 1986 due to the policy intervention by the government. The production and demand projections over ten years from 2005 to 2014 showed that the rice self-sufficiency index ranged between 0.95 (95%) and 0.98 (98%) with a self-insufficiency gap of between 0.02 (2%) and 0.05 (5%). Measures that will increase rice productivity (partial or total) are therefore required to boost production. The adoption and use of high yielding variety e.g. the New Rice for Africa (NERICA) and other productivity enhancing technologies should be encouraged. This should be linked to the provision of an effective and efficient extension service delivery system. Attention must be paid to the growth in the GDP of the country. Nkang et al (2006) estimates the determinants of rice import demand in Nigeria using a dynamic regression model. Specifically, cointegration and errorcorrection model was followed. The results show that short-run changes in domestic rice production, level of external reserves and total import value remarkably shaped rice import behaviour in Nigeria during the period under investigation. More interesting is the fact that the error-correction mechanism (ECM) indicated a feed back of about 125% of the previous years disequilibrium from long-run elasticity of domestic production of rice, external reserves, and import value. It is recommended that efforts geared at reducing rice imports in the short-run should not only rely on increasing domestic rice production and/or reducing total imports but should also look at trade agreements between Nigeria and its trading partners as well as restriction of rice imports, at least to a level that will not lead to food insecurity. Alabi and Chime (2008) analysed the impact of food production on food import in Nigeria. The study used policy regimes as basis of analysis. It applies descriptive statistics, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), Vector Auto-regression Analysis and Log likelihood test on rice, maize, palm oil and chicken meat import; and production data for the period of 1961 2005 was done using Eviews 5.0. The descriptive analyses show that highest per capita domestic food productions were recorded during SAP, correspondingly, the period witnessed lowest per capita food imports, except for chicken meat. This suggests that SAP was able to increase per capita rice, maize and palm oil productions and discouraged their importations. Out of all the food considered, maize and chicken production growth rates were significantly higher than their import growth rates, while rice and palm oil production growth rates were significantly lower than their import growth rates. When production and import growth rates were analyzed on the basis of policy regimes, the highest import growth rates were recorded in Pre-SAP period for all the food products considered in this study. However, lowest import growth rates were witnessed during SAP in importation of rice, maize and chicken meat. It is noted that the yields of these food products have increased between Pre SAP and Post SAP era, but lower than their potential and their yields in other African Countries. Generally, the empirical analyses reveal that food production has potential to have impact on food importation. The impact was highest during Pre-SAP period and has since then been declining. In fact, during Post SAP, food production does not have significant impact on food importation except for chicken meat. The study make some recommendations on how to increase the impact of food production in reducing food importation, so as to meet the policy target of reducing the proportion of food import from current 15% to 5% in nearest future in Nigeria. Akaeze (2010) using annual time series data from 1961 to 2006, investigated consumer preferences for imported rice in Nigeria. Study results indicate that habit persistence and perceived quality differences both play important role in explaining consumer preference for imported rice in Nigeria. An important implication is that policies designed to encourage production of relatively high quality local rice, thereby replacing imported rice in consumption baskets, will face considerable inertia due to the persistence of consumer habits and mindset regarding purchase and consumption of imported rice, even if the locally produced rice is of comparable quality. Companion policies designed to shift consumer-buying habits and alter already established cultural mindset via advertising and promotion programs may be required to overcome this consumption inertia. Shimada (1999) surveys the changes in Nigerian national food production with relation to the governmental policy and anlyses ndings from a eld study about local food production in relation with that of the national level. The author notes that Nigerian food production began to increase in the mid-1980s; however there is no substantial data to support the claim. The study assesses the extent the Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) using the methodology of political ecology. The study attempts to show how and to what extent the change in agricultural production in national level has connected with that of local level. The author notes that introduction of SAP has effect to increase food production, through extensive changes in cultivation, such as diminution of Akpokodje et al. (2003) assess the major supply and demand trends in rice and find that lowland rain-fed rice systems have a higher profitability than upland rice. Erenstein et al. (2003) argue that locally produced rice has the potential to meet food (especially rice) demand of consumers in Nigeria if efficient production practices are employed. Erenstein et al. (2003) also find that the price of imported rice, which is a function of world market price, import duties, transport costs, and a quality premium puts a cap on the price of local produce. Aliyu(2007) assesses the determinants of import and export demand functions to empirically measure the relative strengths and weaknesses of the determinants import and export, and to examine, using the Marshall-Lerner hypothesis, the condition under which balance of payments adjustment works in the Nigerian economy. The study employs analytical framework which encompasses wide a range of tests for stationarity, cointegration and specification of an error correction model. Using data obtained from the Nigerian economy covering the period of 1970 to 2004, the result of over-parameterized error correction model show significant causational relationships in the two models. Awokuse(2006) surveys the economic literature on the impacts of food aid on recipient countries. The study reviews the conceptual and empirical challenges associated with evaluating the impacts of food aid and surveys the main analytical techniques that are used in such evaluations. The author summarizes the available economic evidence on the impacts of food aid on national economic development, domestic agricultural production and markets, commercial trade and the nutritional status of recipients. Lancon et al. (2003) conduct a survey of imported rice consumers preferences and suggest that imported rice cleanliness is the overwhelming technical feature explaining the expansion of imported rice consumption in Nigeria at the cost of local rice market development. Next to cleanliness are swelling capacity (mostly preferred by restaurants and fast food joints), taste, availability and grain shape. Other rice studies in Nigeria include research on rice processing. Rahji and Adewunmi (2008) conducted a study on the market supply response and demand for local rice in Nigeria with implications for self-sufficiency policy. The main objective of the study was to apply a supply response model to rice production in Nigeria. This study examined the supply response and demand for local rice in Nigeria between 1960 and 2004. A system of equations using secondary data was estimated by OLS and 2 Stage Least Square techniques. Area planted with local rice is mainly affected by expected price of output, agriculture wage rate and by the partial adjustment coefficient. The short run response elasticity is 0.077. The implied long run response elasticity is 1.578. The partial adjustment measure is 0.49 thereby indicating some difficulties in the supply response to changing economic conditions. The price elasticity of demand obtained is 0.841. The demand for local rice is thus price inelastic. Rice income inelasticity is 0.3378, that is, it is also inelastic. The ban on rice importation could be said to be a step in the right direction. This policy should be continued and policed. However, price, output and non-price incentives that can exert significant influence on rice supply response and demand are required if the self sufficiency goal is to be achieved. 2.4 Limitations of Previous Studies The importance of rice to the Nigeria has led many researchers to delve into issues affecting the commodity in Nigeria. Considerable previous research has focused on identifying the constraints to increasing domestic rice production in Nigeria such as Imolehin and Wada (2000); Ekeleme et al.(2009), IRRI(2008). Other researchers have also done some interesting work on rice production in Nigeria. For example, Ogundele and Okoruwa worked on technical efficiencies of rice production technologies, Daramola (2005) looked at government policies and competitiveness of rice, Akaeze (2010) and many others looked at agricultural output and production patterns in general notably Rahji and Adewumi (2008), Nkang et al (2006), Alabi and Chime (2008). However none of these works focused on the impact of rice importation on rice production in Nigeria. This study would rely on this gap as our point of departure by using a simple econometric model to first of all capture the relationship between rice production and rice importation and then proceed to get the specific impact of rice importation on rice production in Nigeria. CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Model Specification Models according to Gujarati (2008) should be developed from economic theory and mathematical representation. On this premise, this study draws variables from relevant theoretical literature reviewed. First and foremost, the study focuses on rice production hence it adopts rice production (RPROD) as the dependent variable. From comparative advantage theory we understand that technical efficiencies in production leads to reduction in prices of goods hence prices of rice imports (ARIP) entered the model. The human capital theory advocates for a knowledge rich population and the Malthusian theory points the need for self sufficiency in feeding the local population. The study therefore adopts population proxy by population growth rate (PGR). The IS-EP theories incorporate workings of interest rates (IR) for domestic demand and exchange rate (ER) for foreign demand. The study includes price of other substitutes (PSUB) and government expenditure on Agriculture (GEA) as explanatory variables. Therefore, in keeping with theoretical postulations and in order to capture the specific objectives of the study, the research employs the model thus; RPROD=  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 (GEA, BOP, ARIP, RIMP, PSUB, EXR, IR, PGR)1 Where; RPROD = Rice Production GEA = Government Expenditure on Agriculture BOP = Balance Of Payments ARIP = Average Rice Import Price RIMP = Rice Import Price (which takes the value 1 for active import years and 0 for ban years). PGR = Population Growth Rate EXR = Exchange Rate IR = Interest Rate PSUB=price of substitutes  EMBED Equation.DSMT4  is the functional relationship. Transforming equation 1 above into an econometric equation we have RPROD= EMBED Equation.DSMT4 0+ EMBED Equation.DSMT4 1GEA+ EMBED Equation.DSMT4 2BOP+ EMBED Equation.DSMT4 3ARIP+ EMBED Equation.DSMT4 4RIMP+ EMBED Equation.DSMT4 4PSUB+ EMBED Equation.DSMT4 6EXR+ EMBED Equation.DSMT4 7IR+ EMBED Equation.DSMT4 8PGR+ EMBED Equation.DSMT4 2 where,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 0 is the intercept,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 s are the coefficients,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4  is the error term and is white noise. Apriori expectations:  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 1,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 2,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 3,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 4,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 5,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 6,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 8 > 0.  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 6,  EMBED Equation.DSMT4 7 < 0. Equation 2 above is the model designed to capture the objectives of this study. 3.2 Specification of the dummy. Rice importation has experienced many policy summersaults over the years constituting years of high tariffs and some periods of outright ban on the importation of the product. The introduction of SAP also ushered a new dimension for rice importation. Nkang et al (2006) in a study on rice production, imports and food production in Nigeria adopted dummy variables taking values of 1 for pre-SAP years and 0 for SAP years. This study employed dummy to represent 0 for years of ban and 1 for years of active imports irrespective of the nature of tarrifs. The table below shows the import structure of rice during the period of this study. Dummy variables are binary numbers taking the values of 1 and 0 for observations that are qualitative in nature ( Gujarati, 2004). Table 3.1 Nigerias Trade Policy on Rice 1974-2003 PeriodPolicy Measures1974-197820% tariff1979-1983Ban1984Imports licensed1985Ban1986Imports1986-1995100% Tariff1996-200250% Tariff2003-date100% TariffSource; Adapted from Akaeze (2010) 3.3 Estimation Technique The ordinary least square technique was employed to estimate the model specified for the study. The Best Linear Unbiased Estimator (BLUE) property of OLS makes it suitable for this model. The results from the model were interpreted based on statistical, econometric and economic insight. Variables were selected from theoretical literature reviewed. This work used STATA 11.0 for analysis. 3.4 Pre-Estimation Tests 3.4.1 Unit Root Test It has been resolved that the outcome of an estimated model of non-stationary series may result in spurious regression. To reduce the effect of a non-stationary series, this research employed unit root tests analysis. Most time series have proven to be non-stationary in nature, especially at level form (Dickey and Fuller, 1981). The study therefore employed the Augmented Dickey and Fuller (ADF) to test for stationarity. 3.4.2 Co-integration test The unit root test enabled the researcher to test if the variables are stationary. Co-integration test is meant to test if the explanatory variables are of the same stationarity with the dependent variable and are related in the long run. If the variables are not stationary then co-integration test can be used to investigate their long run relationship between them. The study therefore employed the co-integration test for all regressions to test the long-run relationship. 3.4.3 Error Correction Mechanism The ECM is a test to adjust the error committed by the presence of co-integration. The existence of unit root and co-integration tests is the necessary and sufficient conditions for using the error correction mechanism to bring the non-stationary trend to equilibrium. Vector Error Correction (VEC) model is multivariate generalization of ECM model known from the previous classes. You can see it also as VAR model designed for use with nonstationary time series that are known to be cointegrated Granger et al (1981).The specification of VEC models contains the cointegration relations, so it assumes that the economy converges to the long-run relationships. On the other hand, it allows also for the short-run adjustment dynamics. 3.5 Data Source The study used time series data from 1980-2011. The data used was sourced from the CBN Statistical Bulletin, National Bureau of statistics (NBS), Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations and the World Bank Indicators. CHAPTER FOUR PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTSRESULTS 4.1 Impact of rice importation on rice production To ascertain the impact of rice importation on rice production, the study first tests for unit root and co-integration to verify if the necessary and sufficient conditions of the ECM model are met. The table below shows unit root test results. Table 4.1 Unit root test results VARIABLES  TEST OF STATISTICS TREND STATIONARITY LAG LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE RPROD  -4.068TrendI(1)Lag(0)5% ARIP  -4.991TrendI(1)Lag(0)1% GEA -6.029TrendI(1)Lag(0)1% PSUB -5.826TrendI(1)Lag(0)1% IR -3.191No trendI(1)Lag(0)5% EXR -5.140TrendI(0)Lag(0)1% BOP -3.831TrendI(0)Lag(0)5% PGR -4.906No trendI(1)Lag(0)1% RESIDUAL -3.409TrendI(1)10%Taking a cursory look at Table 4.1 above, the unit root test presents very interesting results. All variables including RPROD became stationary after differencing once except for prime lending rate and exchange rates which were I(0) process meaning they were stationary at levels form. The residual was not stationary at both 1% and 5% meaning no co-integration exists therefore prompting no need for the ECM test. Figure 1: Scatter Diagram of RPROD on its Residual  SHAPE \* MERGEFORMAT  The above graph illustrates a scatter diagram of RPROD against its residual. The dotted lines lie on a 45% line pattern across the graph that shows a highly sensitive linear relationship between the dependent variables and the independent variable. This set of dependent and independent variables therefore validates the linearity assumption thereby making it suitable for a classical linear model. Also the Durbin Watson value of 2.96 which when checked with the degree of freedom leads us to the conclusion that there is no positive or negative autocorrelation as the value falls in the zone of indecision. Table 4.2 Regression Results for Rice Production (RPROD) and its Determinants VariableRprod DeterminantsARIP-6.99(-1.77)RIMP-291581.3(-0.33)PSUB36.803(2.42)GEA-43.59(-2.38)POPGRRATE-4268801(-0.96)EXCHANGERATE10208.16(0.72)PRIMELENDRATE184124.9(2.55)BOP0.351(0.74)No of observations31R-square0.529Prob>F0.0220Durbin Watson2.96t statistics in parentheses The table above shows the specific impact of the determinants of rice production. This shows that about 53% of the changes in RPROD are explained jointly by variation of the explanatory variables in the model, However, the F- statistic significant probability is 0.022 and is significant at 5% level, indicating that the model is adequate, from the regression results obtained the coefficients of the variables show the impact of a unit change of the independent variables on the dependent variable. The coefficients of average rice import price (ARIP), government expenditure on agriculture (GEA), rice imports (RIMP) and population growth rate (POPGRRATE), all have negative relationship with rice production according to the results obtained. Prime lending rate, exchange rate, balance of payments (BOP) and price of substitutes have positive relationship with rice production. All these have implications for our economy. However in line with the objectives of this study. BOP, PSUB, GEA and prime lending rates are all significant variables in explaining rice production since their t-values are greater than 1.96 (using the 2-t rule of thumb). All other variables are not significant in explaining rice production according to the findings of this study. 4.2 Evaluation of working hypotheses The hypotheses for this study as stated in section 1.4 are evaluated thus: 4.2.1 Test of Working Hypothesis 1 H0: Rice importation does not have impact on Rice Production in Nigeria. H1: Rice importation has significant impact on Rice Production in Nigeria. DECISION: The p-value of the slope of rice imports is 0.03 which is less than 0.05 at 95% confidence interval. We reject the null hypothesis that Rice importation does not have impact on Rice Production in Nigeria. Hence we conclude that rice importation has significant impact on rice production in Nigeria. 4.2.2 Test of working Hypothesis 2 Ho: The impact of government expenditure on rice production in Nigeria is not significant. H1: The impact of government expenditure on rice production in Nigeria is significant. DECISION: The p-value of the slope of government expenditure on agriculture is 0.53 which is greater than 0.05 at 95% confidence interval. We do not reject the null hypothesis that the impact of government expenditure on rice production is not significant. We therefore conclude that agricultural production had no significant impact on rice production in Nigeria. 4.2.3 Test of working hypothesis 3 Ho: The impact of Balance of Payments on rice production is not significant. H1: The impact of Balance of payments on rice production is significant. DECISION: The p-value of balance of payment is 0.307 which is less than 0,05 at 95% confidence interval. We reject the null hypothesis that the impact of balance of payments on rice production in Nigeria is not significant. We conclude that the impact of balance of payments on rice production in Nigeria is significant. CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION 5.1 Summary of Findings The saying that agriculture is the mainstay of the Nigerian economy may have become a clich. It nevertheless underscores the emphasis placed on agriculture as the engine of growth in the Nigerian economy. Because rice has become a strategic commodity in the Nigerian economy, the Nigeria government has actively interfered in the Nigerian rice production over the last thirty years. However, policy has not been consistent. It has included oscillating import tariffs and import restrictions. Expenditure on rice imports have been rising year in year out. The country currently imports more rice than it produces to feed her growing population the study was able to discover that there is huge growth in rice imports and these huge rice budgets have macroeconomic implication including the countrys Balance of Payments position. From the results it was also confirmed in line with other similar studies that the demand elasticity for rice is low hence high tariffs would hamper demand for the product and increasing demand would higher imports. Policy recommendations favoured protectionism approach of bans on the product to encourage domestic production and only after self sufficiency in rice production has been attained can the country now proceed to export the commodity which would better her Balance of payments position. 5.2 Policy Implications This study has brought forth a number of policy implications that shall advance policy simulation and promote further research. The study has first of all highlighted the importance of rice, the nature of domestic demand and the size of the expenditure on the product in Nigeria. This implies that the government must look into better ways of making the product available to locals and reduce expenditure on imports which could be channeled to other productive uses. Agricultural production proxy with government expenditure on agriculture is negatively related to rice production however the t value of GEA -2.38 shows that it is a significant determinant of rice production in Nigeria. A good explanation is that government expenditure on agriculture may have not been duely channeled to rice production; an attribute of corruption that is rampant in Nigeria. Most importantly is the fact that rice importation significantly affects rice production in Nigeria which is expected. Major reasons for this could be that consumer preferences are tilted towards foreign imported rice which is superior in quality to locally produced rice. Consumers are rational agents who sek to maximize utility hence preferences are easily influenced when need be hence the government should look for ways to improve the quality of locally produced rice by giving farmers incentives to improve on cultivating, milling, packaging and marketing. Balance of payments is positively related to rice production which is expected since BOP is one of the key macroeconomic goals of all economies hence when there is favourable BOP, the production of commodities is positively affected. Exchange rate and prime lending rates have positive impacts on rice production hence policies on rice should incoporatate the workings of interest rates and exchange rates. Exchange rate dynamics have real implications for a special crop like rice, high exchange rates and low interest rates could be used to discourage excess imports and encourage domestic production and exports. The need to have a healthy population is also key for economic growth and development. If the country must get the best out of her vast human resources, she has to keep them healthy this means that the government should ensure that food production and indeed rice production statistics is properly done and it should keep pace and even outstrip population growth rate. This would be a big task but it is achoievable considering that agriculture currently employs majority of Nigerian workforce. Hence with the right incentives given to farmers, self sufficiency in food production would be achieved. 5.3 Recommendations The impact of food importation on food production in Nigeria as it involves rice importation and production in Nigeria is a study that shows how importation of food affects food production in Nigeria. Rice is a vital food which has relative stable consumption but has also become an important cash crop where it provides employment for more than 80% of the population in the major producing areas (Okoruwa and Ogundele, 2006). The observation made in the working hypotheses agreed that rice importation has significant impact on rice production in Nigeria. Therefore Nigeria should discourage importation and encourage drastic rice production; this process would impact human capital development. Nigeria could employ human capital theory which is the most influential economic theories of western advancement setting the framework for government policies since the early 1960s with its roots in the works of British economist Sir William Petty (1623-1687) and Adam Smith (1723-1790). The theory explains how knowledge increases productivity and efficiency of workers by increasing the level of cognitive skills as tested and confirmed by Schultz (1961). In order to promote drastic increase in rice production, government would have to increase expenditure on Agricultural production giving rice production preferential attention, providing sophisticated machines and skill training to produce products that can compete in the international market, raise customers taste to take advantage of the teeming population. 5.4 Limitations of the Study All research works generally record a number of limitations as the hindrances in the course of the research and this research was not an exception. The availability of data was a constraint to the analysis given that, it took a lot of time to assemble the data from the various data banks. It is however fortunate that the explanatory variables were able to determine the dependent variable as proved by the goodness of fit (R2) test for all the regressions. Also finance was another constraint that is more general to research in the developing countries which stems from the high cost of IT application, transportation, data sourcing, maintenance and nutritional upkeep amongst others. 5.5 Suggestions for Further Research This study has been able to lay some key foundations on which other researchers can further build upon. The study has been able to ascertain that food importation and indeed rice importation has a significant impact on food production. The study has also been able to point other determinants of rice production such as population, government expenditure on agriculture, production of other substitutes, price of rice. Further research could be conducted to ascertain other possible determinants of rice production in Nigeria. 5.6 Conclusion This study examined food production and food importation in Nigeria with particular focus on rice from 1980-2011. The model specification was based on the OLS multiple regression. Akaeze (2010) using annual time series data from 1961 to 2006, investigated consumer preferences for imported rice in Nigeria. Study results indicate that habit persistence and perceived quality differences both play important role in explaining consumer preference for imported rice in Nigeria. An important implication is that policies designed to encourage production of relatively high quality local rice, thereby replacing imported rice in consumption baskets, will face considerable inertia due to the persistence of consumer habits and mindset regarding purchase and consumption of imported rice, even if the locally produced rice is of comparable quality. Companion policies designed to shift consumer-buying habits and alter already established cultural mindset via advertising and promotion programs may be required to overcome this consumption inertia. This probably explains the growth of rice imports in Nigeria. Notwithstanding, there is the need for government to raise domestic production as well as improve the quality of milled rice in Nigeria in a bid to increase its preference among rice consumers in Nigeria vis--vis imported rice. Policy actions to significantly reduce rice imports in the long-run should not only rely on reducing total imports, but should explore alternative measures such as trade agreements and perhaps restriction of rice imports to increase production for local population and exports for foreign exchange earnings as well. REFERENCES Abbott P. and Thompson, R. (1987) Changing Agricultural Comparative Advantage, Agricultural Economics, 1, 1987, 97-112. Adedeji A. (2002) from the Lagos Plan of Action to the New Partnership for Africas Development and from the Final Act of Lagos to the constitutive Act: Wither Africa?,. Keynote address prepared for presentation at the African Forum for Envisioning Africa to be held in Nairobi, Kenya, 26-29 April, 2002. Adeyeye, V.A (1989) Health and nutrition factors in labour productivity amongst Tobacco and non- Tobacco farmers in Oyo State, NISER Monograph Series Number 7: 1- 46 Aigbokhan, B.E. (2001) Resuscitating agricultural production for exports, Paper presented at the 10th annual conference of zonal research units of the Central bank of Nigeria, 4 8 June, Akaeze, H.O. (2010) Consumer preference for imported rice in Nigeria-Perceived quality differences or habit persistence. Michigan State University. Akande, S.O . (2002) An Overview of the Nigerian Rice Economy, NISER, Ibadan Akinbile, L .A.( 2007) Determinants of productivity level among rice farmers in Ogun State , Nigeria. In African Crop Science Conference proceedings, 8:1339-1344. Akpokodje, G., Loncon, F. and Erenstein, O. (2001) Nigerias rice economy: state of the art. Paper presented at the NISER/WARDA Nigeria Rice Economy Stakeholders Workshop, Ibadan, 8 9 November, 2001. Boake WARDA. Akinbulumo, M.O. (2011) Agricultural Research for Development in Nigeria. Proceedings of the 2nd Annual conference of Federal University of Technology, Akure. Pp 215-218. Akpokodje, G. and Erenstein, O. (2003). Nigerias Rice Policy And Development: A Review. Abidjan: WARDA. Alabi, O.F. and Alabi, R.A.(2009) Effect of Economic Liberalisation on Chicken Meat Production in Nigeria, European Journal of Social Sciences Volume 7, Number 4 Alabi, R.A and C.C Chime (2008) Impact of food production on food importation in Nigeria, Final Report Presented to African Economic Research Consortuim(AERC), Nairobi, Kenya Alabi, R.A., Aigbokhan, B. and Ailemen, M.I. (2004) Improving technical efficiency of Nigerian cocoa farmers through institutionalized farm credits, in: M.N Omare, M.O Makokha and W. Oluoch-Kosura(eds). Shaping the future of African Agriculture for Development: The role of Social Scientists. Proceedings of Inaugural Symposium of Association of African Agricultural Economists. Pp93-99, Nairobi, Kenya Alabi, R. A, Adegboye-Ayegbe, A. and J. Egbedion (2006) The determinants of food importation in Nigeria, in: G. E Onibi, S.O Agele, V.A J Adekunle and M.O. Akinbulumo: Agricultural Research for Development in Nigeria. Proceedings of the 2nd Annual conference of Federal University of Technology, Akure. Pp 215-218. Aliyu,S.U.R. (2007) Imports-Exports Demand Functions and Balance of Payments Stability in Nigeria: A Co-integration and Error Correction Modeling, Awokuse, T.O,(2006) Assessing the Impact of Food Aid on Recipient Countries: A Survey,ESA Working Paper No. 06-11,ESA.Working Paper  HYPERLINK "http://www.fao.org/es/esa" www.fao.org/es/esa Ayinde, O. E., Adewumi, M. O. and Ojehomon, V. E. T. (2009). Determinants of Technical Efficiency and Varietal Gap of Rice Production in Nigeria: A meta- Frontier Model Approach.A paper presented at the International Association of Agricultural Economics conference, Beijing, China, August 16-22. Cairnes, J.E. (1874). Some Leading Principles of political economy newly expounded,London:McMillan. Dickey, D.A. and Fuller, W.A. (1979). Distribution of estimators for autoregressive times series with a unit root. Journal of American Statistical Association, 74 (366): 427-431 CBN (2004) Central Bank of Nigeria Statistical Bulletin, Vol. 15 (1): 1- 420. Central Bank of Nigeria (1992) Impact of Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) on Nigerian Agriculture and Rural Life, vol. I: The National Report, CBN/NISER, Lagos. Daramola, B. (2005) Workshop on rice production and food security in sub Saharan Africa WARDA, Cotonou, Republic of Benin.. Working Paper. Egwaikhide, F. O. (1999). Determinants of imports in Nigeria: A dynamic specification. African Economic Research Consortium (AERC),Research Paper 91:1-33. Engle, R. F. and Granger, C.W.J. Cointegration and Error-Correction Representation, Estimation, and Testing. Economem~a (March 1987): 25l-76. Esobhawan, A.O, Alabi R. A. and Chime C.C. (2006) Economic analysis of factors that influence Nigerian Agriculture(1970-2002), in G. E Onibi, S.O Agele, V.A. J Adekunle and M.O Akinbulumo. Agricultural Research for Development in Nigeria. Proceedings of the 2nd annual conference of Federal University of Technology, Akure. Pp219-222. Farzin,Y.H. (1988) Food Import Dependence in Somalia Magnitude, Causes, and Policy Options, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.World Bank Discussion Papers FAO (1996) Technical Background Document for the World Food Summit, Rome, Italy FAO, (1996): Irrigation in Africa in figures. Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. FMARD (2001) Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, New Agricultural Policy, Abuja, Nigeria. Haberler, G. (1976) The world economy, money and the Great Depression, : American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. 1919-1939. Washington, D.C. Helleiner, G.K. (1966) Peasant Agriculture, Government, and Economic Growth in Nigeria,Richard D. Irwin, Homewood. Imahe, O.J and Alabi, R.A (2005)Determinants of Agricultural productivity in Nigeria, Journal for Food, Agriculture and Environment 3 (2):269 274. Krueger, A. O. (1974), The Political Economy of the Rent-Seeking Society, American Economy Review, 64, 3, 291303. Livsmedelsekonomiska institutet (SLI)(2004) EU and US Food Aid - Effects on Local Production and Imports,  HYPERLINK "http://www.sli.lu.se/eng/abstracts/kortom20042.asp" http://www.sli.lu.se/eng/abstracts/kortom20042.asp Makokha, M.O and W. Oluoch-Kosura (eds). Shaping the future of African Agriculture for Development: The role of Social Scientists. Proceedings of Inaugural Symposium of Association of African Agricultural Economists. Pp93-99, Nairobi, Kenya Mincer, J. (1962). On-the-Job Training: Costs, Returns, and Some Implications. Journalof Political Economy 70 (5) part 2: 5079. Muroi, Y. (1989) Economic crisis and development policies in African states in 1980s, Institute of Developing Economies (I.D.E.), Tokyo. Nkang, N.M (2006) Rice production imports and food security in Nigeria Journal of food agriculture and Environment. WFC publishers, Calabar. Obiechimina M.E. (2007). Improving the Agricultural Sector towards Economic Development and Poverty Reduction in Nigeria. CBN Bullion, 31(4): 66-86. Ogunkola, E.O (2003) Agriculture and WTO: Economic interest and options for Nigeria, In M.D Ingco, J.D. Nash and Dominique Njinkeu (eds).Liberalising Agriculture Trade: Issues And Options For Sustainable Africa in the WTO. The World Bank. Okojie, C. (1991) Achieving Selfreliance in Food Production in Nigeria: Maximising theContribution of Rural Women, Journal of Social Development in Africa , 6,2,33-52 Ojo, M.O. (1984) Redesigning Public Sector Strategies for Food Selfsufficiency in Nigeria, Proceedings of the NES conference on Selfreliant Strategies for Development, May, Benin City. Ojo, M.O. (1994) Non oil exports in Nigerias changing policy dispensation, Bullion 18(2): 12 23 Okuneye, P. A. (1995): Nigerian agriculture on the run. Refuses to move. University of Agriculture Abeokuta (UNAAB) Inaugural Lecture. Lecture Series, No. 2. 3 Olalokun F.A. (1979). Structures Of The Nigerian Economy. Ibadan Macmillan Pulication. Oriola, E.O. (2009) A Framework for Food Security and Poverty Reduction in Nigeria, European Journal of Social Sciences Volume 8, Number ) 132 Ricardo, D. (1981) The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 1981. First publication: 1817: Ricardo, D. (2004). The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo. (P. Sraffa, Ed.) Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, Inc. Schultz, T.P. (1971) Soil water changes under fallow crop treatments in relation to soil type, rainfall and yield of wheat. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 11: 216-242. Shimada, S. (1999) A study of increased food production in nigeria: the effect of the structural adjustment program on the local level|, African Study Monographs,20(4): 175-227 Shimada, S. (1977) Intensification Process of Land Use in Southern Nigeria, ace   & 8 öÙÍs_K_7&h}hb5CJOJQJ\^JaJ&h}hv5CJOJQJ\^JaJ&h}hj1P5CJOJQJ\^JaJ h)5CJOJQJ\^JaJh)5CJaJhEh)5CJaJh)5CJ$OJQJaJ$hEh)5CJOJQJaJh)5CJOJQJaJhEh)5CJ$OJQJaJ$hEh)5CJ OJQJaJ hEh)CJaJ"jh)CJUaJmHnHu)abcde $a$gd)gd)$a$gd)$a$gd)  & B xy@%A% $da$gd}$d7$8$H$a$gd}$d7$8$H$`a$gd}$d7$8$H$`a$gd}$d7$8$H$a$gd}$d7$8$H$a$gd}$d7$8$H$a$gd}8 < A B k c k *ij~m~~\K: h}hlCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hO>CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hFnCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hvCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hdCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hvCJOJQJ\^JaJ#h}h CJOJQJ\^JaJ h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ&h}h 5CJOJQJ\^JaJ&h}hb5CJOJQJ\^JaJ&h}h!5CJOJQJ\^JaJ*KLQ[ ()+~<=QSͼޫޚމxgޫVggEgV h}htqCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h#x9CJOJQJ^JaJ h}htnCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hKCJOJQJ^JaJ h}htCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h,CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hAyBCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h9CJOJQJ^JaJ?%@%A%a%l%%%%%e&f&w((_*u**++ +M+N+U+r+w+νάάΛΊyyhyyWF h}hNCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hYCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hc@CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hWC5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h%)CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h*X CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h)*CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h?oCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hwCJOJQJ^JaJh}CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}htn5CJOJQJ^JaJA%N++++A,B,_,,J-----.Y...$ & Fd`a$gd} $da$gd}$d`a$gd}$d7$8$H$^a$gd}$ & Fd7$8$H$`a$gd}$d7$8$H$a$gd}w++++++++++++++++ ,!,),*,4,5,A,B,F,^,_,пЮ￝ᅨygU#h}hl5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hjJ5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hM5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h,5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hqCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h]CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hWC5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hNCJOJQJ^JaJh}CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h0CJOJQJ^JaJ_,h,,,,,,-----)-*-=-@-A-I-J-Q-޻ޘveTeFe5 h}h+hCJOJQJ^JaJh}CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hU]CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hICJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hnCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h95CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hjJ5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h^lmCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hjJCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h+ CJOJQJ^JaJQ-^-e-f-i-------------------ͼ{jYHYY h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hEBCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hjJCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJh}CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hU]CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h]CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hqCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hnCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ------ ..$.D.Y.Z.[.μudSB1 h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hjJCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hrCJOJQJ^JaJ h}htCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hjJ5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h)5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}he5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h}5CJOJQJ^JaJh?H5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY]CJOJQJ^JaJ [._.k.p.y.................../6/7/F/G/R/ͼޮޝ{jY{H{jY{Y{Y{{{ h}h}CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hP)fCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h $CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hjJCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJh}CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hU]CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hpa CJOJQJ^JaJR/S/T/V/Z/t/0080 112222@4A4B4C4ͻveWF4#h}h,o5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h?HCJOJQJ^JaJh}CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h@=CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h[_dCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hlwCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h`CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h`5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hjJCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hpa CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hP)fCJOJQJ^JaJ.T/V/t/22A4C4V4?5@5A5\599999:Y;Z;; $da$gdNd $da$gd $da$gd}$d`a$gd}$ & Fd`a$gd}C4G4U4V4h445%5>5?5@5A5[5\5F799ɸyjXI;-hTBSCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJhTBS5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hTBS5CJOJQJ^JaJhYI5CJOJQJ^JaJh}5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hlwCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h0CJOJQJ^JaJh9CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h@cCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hlw5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h'E5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h_5CJOJQJ^JaJ99999999:X:Y:[:}:::::;˹raPrar?a. h}hwqACJOJQJ^JaJ h}hjCJOJQJ^JaJ h}heg\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h)CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hNj35CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}he5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h05CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h`5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h@c5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hH5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ;X;Y;Z;`;;;EE*NPPPQQQQR̻xgRxAx0x h}h+cCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h:JCJOJQJ^JaJ)h}hG*B* CJOJQJ^JaJphP h}hG*CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hFCJOJQJ^JaJhNdCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hFN5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h@J5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h@JCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hFDR5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h)CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY CJOJQJ^JaJ;?EEGJL*NUUUYY^^-^fiiimm$d`a$gd}$d7$8$H$`a$gd} $da$gd} $da$gd}$d7$8$H$a$gd}RR+RHRzRRRR@SASwSxS|SSSSSTZTzTTTTU'UUUUUU VVVVGWͼ޼޼޼޼޼޼ުududu h}h+pCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hY 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}ha 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h\qd5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hFDRCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h:JCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hFCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ"GWdW1X;XPXXXXXY Y Y Y YYYYYYYYZZ#ZSZsZZZZ޼ޫޚxg޼޼V޼޼ h}h!CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h)XCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h7BCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h^VCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hFCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hrCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h ACJOJQJ^JaJZZ[![U[u[[[\#\[\{\\^ ^^^^^^-^?^I^W`ͼޫu`K`)h}h%@!B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}h&"B*CJOJQJ^JaJph#h}h&"5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hD*i5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h`g5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h`CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h!CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hFCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY CJOJQJ^JaJ h}ho-rCJOJQJ^JaJW`X`Y`]`^```bbcc6dtdvdf^f_fffffggg{dOOO:)h}hHB*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}h'hB*CJOJQJ^JaJph-h}hT-B*CJOJPJQJ^JaJph-h}h3B*CJOJPJQJ^JaJph-h}h *B*CJOJPJQJ^JaJph-h}h&"B*CJOJPJQJ^JaJph)h}h&"B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}hX>B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}h!B*CJOJQJ^JaJphgg*g+ggghgggggiiiiikk>k9mmҽҽҽҽҫudSdSB h}h8JCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hECJOJQJ^JaJ h}h7CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hFDR5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}ht[5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h)X5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h`g5CJOJQJ^JaJ)h}h'hB*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}h&"B*CJOJQJ^JaJph0h}h&"B*CJEHH*OJQJ^JaJphmmmmmIoooooooooooppppͿޮygygyUD3 h}hV`CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h[CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hk 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h]o 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hO5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY*vCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJhNdCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hFDRCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h8JCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hgCJOJQJ^JaJmooov z z zzz[zz} Whɋʋjk$d7$8$H$a$gd}$d7$8$H$a$gdNd$d`a$gd} $da$gd}ppp;q=qgqkqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqr%r&r2rjrkr}r~rrr's?susssssttttpuquuͼͫͫͼͫͫͼͼͫͫͫͼͼͼͼͼͼͼͼͼ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hLCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hY*vCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h[CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hV`CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h'9CJOJQJ^JaJ1uvvvvy z z zzZz[z`zazz ﻩsaO>-> h}hECJOJQJ^JaJ h}h`CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h`5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hd5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hE 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hV5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h 65CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h8J5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h8JCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h5> CJOJQJ^JaJ W ?@ɋʋjk˹udVEV4 h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hvCJOJQJ^JaJhNdCJOJQJ^JaJ h}huKCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h #CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h@aCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hbCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h`CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h`5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hG)5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h~(5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hsx CJOJQJ^JaJ12Õĕ˹rdSBB h}hvCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hmCJOJQJ^JaJhNdCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hfw CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hQZ5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hv5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h`5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h<5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h~(5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}he5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h`CJOJQJ^JaJ12AڛGXUئ٦ڦۦ$d^`a$gd}$ & Fd`a$gd}$d`a$gd} $da$gd}AڛXTU˹sbTbTbTC h}h7uCJOJQJ^JaJhNdCJOJQJ^JaJ hNdh`CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hj5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}he5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hpCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h`CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h`5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h=5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h~(5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h=CJOJQJ^JaJצئ٦ڦۦ fͿ|j|YH7Y h}hjCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h|CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h~(CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hl5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h`5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hNdCJOJQJ^JaJhNdCJOJQJ^JaJhR%CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hECJOJQJ^JaJ h}h`CJOJQJ^JaJ h}ht!CJOJQJ^JaJfiȫҫݲ޲߲r/0ƺlWBlBl1 h}h`CJOJQJ^JaJ)h}h=6YB*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}hGtB*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}h>B*CJOJQJ^JaJph h}h>CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hGZCJOJQJ^JaJh}haCJaJh}hNCJ]aJh}haCJ]aJh}hgp%CJ]aJh}hFn|CJ]aJ h}h~(CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h]CJOJQJ^JaJ߲$d7$8$H$`a$gdNd$d`a$gdNd $da$gdNd$d7$8$H$`a$gd} $da$gdNd$d7$8$H$a$gd} $da$gd}$d`a$gd} $da$gd}-¾ I[fLlIiخؙؙ؈wffUffffffff h}h(CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h _CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h=CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hV;CJOJQJ^JaJ)h}hsu*B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}hZ>B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}hGtB*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}hV;B*CJOJQJ^JaJph#hNdB*CJOJQJ^JaJph!>Qv_}56:;UVabnͼͼ͚͚ͫ͌{{{{{{{{{{{{j h}hc*CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hjCJOJQJ^JaJhNdCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hpCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h|CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h:&fCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h:&fCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h 6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hV;CJOJQJ^JaJ(OPQ_twgnM $da$gdNd $da$gdNd$d7$8$H$a$gd} $da$gd} $da$gd}$d`a$gd}$d7$8$H$a$gdNd8?@A<deziXzGX6i6 h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hJCJOJQJ^JaJ h}ht)CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h{CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h`CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h/3CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h/35CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h45CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h5CJOJQJ^JaJh}haCJaJ#h}h:&f5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hqI'CJOJQJ^JaJeQ01NOPQ_stvw޻weSAeA/#h}hc_5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h!*5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h-5c5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h\5CJOJQJ^JaJhNd5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hk5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hJCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hs5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h9z5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hsCJOJQJ^JaJ h}haCJOJQJ^JaJ*STUmtQVpwuv.ͼ͚ͫͫͫ)w`N#hOh:6CJOJQJ^JaJ,jhOh:6CJOJQJU^JaJ#hOh"7]6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h:CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h~CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h)!CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hDCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hwCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hTCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hICJOJQJ^JaJ./01[aefgmnstͶq`O=+#h}h\6CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h"7]6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hDCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h57oCJOJQJ^JaJ hOhDCJOJQJ^JaJ hOhYCJOJQJ^JaJ hOhOCJOJQJ^JaJ#hOh"7]6CJOJQJ^JaJ,jhOh:6CJOJQJU^JaJ0jhOh:6CJEHOJQJU^JaJ2j/4U hOh:6CJOJQJUV^JaJ tu|JKLMPQRfijmnoz}~ͻvvͻ h}h"CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hDCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h\6CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h"7]6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hmGpCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hOCJOJQJ^JaJ.Mj~*pqxI$dh$If`a$gdNd $da$gdNd$d`a$gd} $da$gd}*/ͻͦ}fUD2#hOh! 6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h+ICJOJQJ^JaJ h}hDCJOJQJ^JaJ-jh}ho8?CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j4/4U h}ho8?CJOJQJUV^JaJ h}ho8?CJOJQJ^JaJ)jh}ho8?CJOJQJU^JaJ#h}h"7]6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hmGpCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hOCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ/01HIJKLMNefghilmnƬ؁gN؁<#hOh! 6CJOJQJ^JaJ0jhOh"7]CJEHH*OJQJU^JaJ2j74U hOh"7]CJH*OJQJUV^JaJ#hOh.kCJH*OJQJ^JaJ0j@hOh"7]CJEHH*OJQJU^JaJ2jg74U hOh"7]CJH*OJQJUV^JaJ#hOh"7]CJH*OJQJ^JaJ,jhOh"7]CJH*OJQJU^JaJ hOh.kCJOJQJ^JaJͶoU<0j hOh"7]CJEHH*OJQJU^JaJ2j74U hOh"7]CJH*OJQJUV^JaJ#hOh"7]CJH*OJQJ^JaJ hOh.kCJOJQJ^JaJ#hOh! 6CJOJQJ^JaJ#hOhk[cCJH*OJQJ^JaJ,jhOh"7]CJH*OJQJU^JaJ0jz hOh"7]CJEHH*OJQJU^JaJ2j74U hOh"7]CJH*OJQJUV^JaJꘆu^L22j84U hOh"7]CJH*OJQJUV^JaJ#hOh"7]CJH*OJQJ^JaJ,jhOh"7]CJH*OJQJU^JaJ hOh.kCJOJQJ^JaJ#hOh! 6CJOJQJ^JaJ#hOh! CJH*OJQJ^JaJ-jhOh"7]CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j74U hOh"7]CJOJQJUV^JaJ hOh"7]CJOJQJ^JaJ)jhOh"7]CJOJQJU^JaJ  (ооhV?-#hOh\CJH*OJQJ^JaJ,jhOh\CJH*OJQJU^JaJ#hOhk[cCJH*OJQJ^JaJ0jhOh"7]CJEHH*OJQJU^JaJ2j84U hOh"7]CJH*OJQJUV^JaJ hOh.kCJOJQJ^JaJ#hOh! 6CJOJQJ^JaJ#hOh"7]CJH*OJQJ^JaJ,jhOh"7]CJH*OJQJU^JaJ0jOhOh"7]CJEHH*OJQJU^JaJ()*+,./0GHIJͶl[C,l-j#hOh\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/jF84U hOh\CJOJQJUV^JaJ hOh\CJOJQJ^JaJ)jhOh\CJOJQJU^JaJ hOhk[cCJOJQJ^JaJ#hOh! 6CJOJQJ^JaJ#hOhk[cCJH*OJQJ^JaJ,jhOh\CJH*OJQJU^JaJ0jhOh\CJEHH*OJQJU^JaJ2j'84U hOh\CJH*OJQJUV^JaJ JKNOPghijknopqʵudVE4&hOCJOJQJ^JaJ hOhOCJOJQJ^JaJ hOh+ICJOJQJ^JaJhOCJOJQJ^JaJ hOhYCJOJQJ^JaJ-jhOhTCJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j94U hOhTCJOJQJUV^JaJ hOhTCJOJQJ^JaJ)jhOhTCJOJQJU^JaJ hOhf>CJOJQJ^JaJ#hOh@6CJOJQJ^JaJ#hOh! CJH*OJQJ^JaJ qvxyǵǵm\D-m-j!h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/jj84U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ)jh}h\CJOJQJU^JaJ0j]h}hTCJEHH*OJQJU^JaJ2j94U h}hTCJH*OJQJUV^JaJ#h}hTCJH*OJQJ^JaJ,jh}hTCJH*OJQJU^JaJ h}hf>CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ$23JKٙwbQ9/jz84U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ)jh}h\CJOJQJU^JaJ h}hf>CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h0CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ-j$h}hTCJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j94U h}hTCJOJQJUV^JaJ h}hTCJOJQJ^JaJ)jh}hTCJOJQJU^JaJ KLMNOPQhijklmnoӎv_M<ӎ h}h=eCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h=eCJH*OJQJ^JaJ-j)h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j84U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hf>CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h}4CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h0CJH*OJQJ^JaJ)jh}h\CJOJQJU^JaJ-j7'h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJлu]F5u h}h}4CJOJQJ^JaJ-j/h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j84U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hf>CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hdCJH*OJQJ^JaJ#h}h=eCJH*OJQJ^JaJ)jh}h\CJOJQJU^JaJ-jt,h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j84U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJлv^Gv//j84U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJ-jN4h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j84U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hf>CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h}4CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h}4CJH*OJQJ^JaJ)jh}h\CJOJQJU^JaJ-j1h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j84U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJ !"#$%&'>|dM<| h}hf>CJOJQJ^JaJ-j9h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j 94U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h! CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h}4CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h! CJH*OJQJ^JaJ#h}h}4CJH*OJQJ^JaJ)jh}h\CJOJQJU^JaJ-j6h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ>?@ABCDEGISлudSdB1 h}h `CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hmGpCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h+ICJOJQJ^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h! CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h}4CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h! CJH*OJQJ^JaJ#h}h}4CJH*OJQJ^JaJ)jh}h\CJOJQJU^JaJ-j$<h}h\CJEHOJQJU^JaJ/j84U h}h\CJOJQJUV^JaJ i̺udVE4 h)r5CJOJQJ\^JaJ h}hOCJOJQJ^JaJhmGpCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hNCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h1^CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hC$CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h4CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hmGp5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h&5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h45CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h `5CJOJQJ^JaJh_(5CJOJQJ^JaJ &'*,01ACGHKMQRY[depr{|۸۸۸۸۸ۧۧۧۧۧۧۧۧۧۧۇxh_(5CJOJQJ^JaJhNd5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hNvHCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hYCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h>S5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h>SCJOJQJ^JaJ&h}h>S5CJOJQJ\^JaJ(qZ$dh$If]`a$gdNd$dh$If`a$gdNd{kd>$$Ifl0!L t0,"644 layt ve'+qq$dh$If`a$gdNd{kdS?$$Ifl0!L t0,"644 layt ve+,1Bqq$dh$If`a$gdNd{kd?$$Ifl0!L t0,"644 layt veBCHLqq$dh$If`a$gdNd{kdy@$$Ifl0!L t0,"644 layt veLMRZqq$dh$If`a$gdNd{kd A$$Ifl0!L t0,"644 layt veZ[eqqq$dh$If`a$gdNd{kdA$$Ifl0!L t0,"644 layt veqr|qY$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gdNd$dh$If`a$gdNd{kd2B$$Ifl0!L t0,"644 layt veqY$dh$7$8$H$If`a$gdNd$dh$If`a$gdNd{kdB$$Ifl0!L t0,"644 layt vebcde~ujjjjjjj $da$gd}$d`a$gd}{kdXC$$Ifl0!L t0,"644 layt ve f{abdeh}ʹʨxjYJ8#h}hZ5CJOJQJ^JaJh_(5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hOCJOJQJ^JaJhOCJOJQJ^JaJh\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hjaCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hG(CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hy>;CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hNCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hN5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h)5CJOJQJ^JaJ}~?@ACȴyfSf@f,٠'h}ho5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ$h}h4c2CJOJPJQJ^JaJ$h}h2*OCJOJPJQJ^JaJ$h}hG(CJOJPJQJ^JaJ$h}h7BCJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}hG(5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}hxt`5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}hK75CJOJPJQJ^JaJ!h_(5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}h7B5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ#h}hG(5CJOJQJ^JaJ~?@\:;\:K<=>?uuu$pd^p`a$gd}$ d7$8$H$a$gdNd$ d7$8$H$`a$gd}$ dd7$8$H$\$`a$gd}$ dx7$8$H$`a$gd}$ dx7$8$H$`a$gd} CDFGH[\]:;=>@[\]ijMڲxdƞxQ@ h}hUCCJOJQJ^JaJ$h}hUCCJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}h5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ$h}hG(CJOJPJQJ^JaJ$h}h7BCJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}hG(5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}h&5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}ho5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}hxt`5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ!h_(5CJOJPJQJ^JaJMU[b89:;=>JKLOYZfz͹lYF3F3F3$h}hG(CJOJPJQJ^JaJ$h}hxt`CJOJPJQJ^JaJ$h}h7BCJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}hG(5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}ho5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ!h_(5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}hxt`5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ'h}h7B5CJOJPJQJ^JaJ h}hUCCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h~OCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ<?M~quڵm[J9J(J h}hKCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hy#=CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hQ5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hEH&5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hy#=5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hGH8&&& H$d8$IfgdNdkdJ$$Iflֈi^ 7,"<<<<<< t0644 layt]HOUZ[_$$ H$d8$If`a$gdNd H$d8$IfgdNd_`58-! $$da$gd} $dha$gdNdkdJ$$Iflֈi^ 7,"<<<<<< t0644 layt]xyz~ ͼ﫚ͫxcNc)h}hj#B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}h B*CJOJQJ^JaJph h}hj#CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hv{CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hYCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h*gCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h2CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hiCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h CCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h!CJOJQJ^JaJ 456MNOPQRSTzҽ~iWF5 h}h;qCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h6 CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h 5CJOJQJ^JaJ)jKh}h6CJOJQJU^JaJ1jh}h CJOJQJU^JaJmH sH  h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ)jh}h CJOJQJU^JaJ)h}hj#B*CJOJQJ^JaJph,h}h 5B*CJOJQJ^JaJph,h}hm+85B*CJOJQJ^JaJph 5RST  G{kdL$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt] $$Ifa$gdNd $da$gd}$d`a$gd}$$dx7$8$H$`a$gd}z}7K޼ޫޫޚވveTCTCTCT h}h~nCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hofVCJOJQJ^JaJ h}haCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hofV5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h}5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h+9LCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hkCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hT~]CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hBCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h;qCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ $%*,6:;DFPTU[]fijpr|ʹʹʹʹʹʹʹʆuu h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hiCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h JUCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h#KCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h ICJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h<5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h#K5CJOJQJ^JaJ- %+,-5x{kdL$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt] $$Ifa$gdNd56;Exx $$Ifa$gdNd{kd#M$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]EFGOxx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdM$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]OPU\xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kd-N$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]\]^exx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdN$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]efjqxx $$Ifa$gdNd{kd7O$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]qrs{xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdO$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]{|xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdAP$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdP$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdKQ$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdQ$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdUR$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdR$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kd_S$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdS$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdiT$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]"#37TUVW.d3MN޼ޫxgggVgEx h}h#^CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h.CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h<CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hiCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hkCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hofVCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h@QCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h3CJOJQJ^JaJxx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdT$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]$xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdsU$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]$%38xx $$Ifa$gdNd{kdU$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt]89VWFGl$uuju_____ $da$gdNd $da$gd}$d`a$gd}{kd}V$$Ifl0,"LL t0644 layt] Nbijnouv|<IUd{~#./358OKͫK͚ͼ)ͼx͉x h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hhCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hEcCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hiCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h#^CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hvWCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hMSCJOJQJ^JaJ/OoEFGHln#(JOnopzͼޫvdRd#h}h 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h\Q5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h,CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hb 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h#^5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hb CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h7CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZdCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h#^CJOJQJ^JaJ$opz%}~_* $da$gd}$d^a$gd} $da$gd}$ da$gdNd$Zd^Z`a$gdNd $da$gdNdEUr/N}~ͼޚޫމweTTB#h}h\Q5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h[CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hfQ5CJOJQJ^JaJ#hNdh\Q5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hb CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h5zCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hYCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hpCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h}CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hfQCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hcCJOJQJ^JaJ~ 5X~KʹʹʨʗudR@#h}hmy5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hTF5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h\QCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h)FCJOJQJ^JaJ h}horCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hTFCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h[CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hYCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hSCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hP)f5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hS5CJOJQJ^JaJK^_)*+̺縉tbPb>P#h}h 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h\5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hU5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h"5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h@Q5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hsCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hmyCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h+5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hqpX5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hTFCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h@QCJOJQJ^JaJ*+Cx y    $d<a$gd}$d`a$gd}$d^`a$gd}$d7$8$H$a$gd} $da$gd} d`gd}+/6BCo z  v w x ɷssbsTsbsC h}h {CJOJQJ^JaJhmzCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h>CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hiCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hsMCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hneCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hQ CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hp}5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hy25CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h05CJOJQJ^JaJx y | }   s c       "utʸʖtʖccRAR h}hUCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h%CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h]<CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hdCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h?CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hU5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h {CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h {5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hF5CJOJQJ^JaJt&̺̗tctQ?-#h}h{f 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hQ05CJOJQJ^JaJ#hmzhmz5CJOJQJ^JaJ hmzhmzCJ OJQJ^JaJ h}hneCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hne5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h4d\5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h%CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h%5CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hK|CJOJQJ^JaJ  ,8ʹʨʖʇucQ@/@ h}hJoCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h{f CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h]o5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h{f 5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hQ05CJOJQJ^JaJhmz5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ]+CJH*OJQJ^JaJ h}hICJOJQJ^JaJ h}hYLCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZ]+CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hx5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h5CJOJQJ^JaJ x&y&z&{&|&}&~&&''6(7((())4** *^*`gdmz$*^*`a$gdmz $da$gd}$d`a$gd} $da$gd}   $G$c$$$$$%:%J%K%Y%x%%%%%& &&t&u&v&w&˹˧˒llllllllll[ h}h{f CJOJQJ^JaJ)h}h,EB*CJOJQJ^JaJph h}husCJOJQJ^JaJ)h}hC.B*CJOJQJ^JaJph#h}h]o5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hX:5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hC.5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hQ05CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hC.CJOJQJ^JaJ w&x&z&~&&&&&&&'''"(7(((,)))Ʒq`qO=O=O#h}hq)6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hq)CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hW/CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hk6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hb)CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hkCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ5CJOJQJ^JaJhmz5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h'5CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h 5CJOJQJ^JaJ)h}h{f B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)))))*4*I*q**++++,, ,,F,,,޻ުveTB#h}hn6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hKWCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h~pCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hmwCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hnCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hIC6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hICCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h!X16CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hb)CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h!X1CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hHCJOJQJ^JaJ*$++,,----k.l.00?1@1112233.4/444$*7$8$H$^*`a$gdmz$*^*`a$gdmz *^*`gdmz,,------...Z.n....///00000+1>1̺̩̺̺̘̘̇udSAS#h}hF^6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hF^CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hMCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hj06CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hj0CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h)>CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hzCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hBN6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hBNCJOJQJ^JaJ>1?111111%2A2\2]2^222222223ﻪrZrGr6 h}hkCJOJQJ^JaJ$h}h10JCJOJQJ^JaJ/jWh}h1CJOJQJU^JaJ)jh}h1CJOJQJU^JaJ h}h1CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hn6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hnCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hKo)CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hMCJOJQJ^JaJ34+4/4444455555j6k6l66677̸̧s^I^2^,h}heB*CJOJQJ\^JaJph)h}h*[0B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}heB*CJOJQJ^JaJph h}hq)CJOJQJ^JaJ h}heCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJ&h}h6CJOJQJ]^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hG6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hGCJOJQJ^JaJ4253555k6l67777889999Q:R:::_;`;;;m<n<$*^*`a$gdmz777777777778898b888888J9M9N9999޼xfRff@ff#h}ht6CJOJQJ^JaJ&h}hZ6CJH*OJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hKo)CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hDCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hx\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h*[0CJOJQJ^JaJ h}heCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hq)CJOJQJ^JaJ999 :C:W:X::::: ;A;B;^;`;x;;;;;;.<[<n<<<<=N=O=P=滛vvbQ h}h 3 CJOJQJ^JaJ&h}h\6CJOJQJ]^JaJ h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h\6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h] WCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hdp~CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJn<<<==>>=?>???Z@@@AABBICJCCCRDSDDD$*^*`a$gdmz$*7$8$H$^*`a$gdmzP=Q==============,>>>> ?ٵq_N= h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hO6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h,?CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hLCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hWCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hOCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hMCJOJQJ^JaJ$h}h 3 0JCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h 3 CJOJQJ^JaJ)jh}h 3 CJOJQJU^JaJ ?'?>????????@@@Z@@@@@AAAAWBYBBʸʧʖsbNbʸʸ= h}h$z<CJOJQJ^JaJ&h}h:LT6CJOJQJ]^JaJ h}h:LTCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h86CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hP3]CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h!X1CJOJQJ^JaJ h}h8CJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJ h}h\CJOJQJ^JaJ&h}h\6CJOJQJ]^JaJBB7CCC&DHDRDSD`DDDDDDDE$E9E:E?EEEEFPFQFFFFFFFFzGGG̺rr̕raa h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}h:LT6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hCJOJQJ^JaJ&h}h:LT6CJOJQJ]^JaJ#h}h:LTCJOJQJ]^JaJ h}h:LTCJOJQJ^JaJ#h}hZ6CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJ$D>E?EEEBFCFDFFFGGM|N|||||R}S}}}_~`~a~b~ $`a$gdmz$*^*`a$gdmzGGG||N|||||||||S}|}}'~Q~a~b~c~e~޵|kWkWkF>:h/jh/U h}h DCCJOJQJ^JaJ&h}h:LT6CJOJQJ]^JaJ h}h:LTCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hdp~CJOJQJ^JaJ h}hlCJOJQJ^JaJ,h}hl6B*CJOJQJ^JaJph)h}hlB*CJOJQJ^JaJph#h}hZ6CJOJQJ^JaJU h}hZCJOJQJ^JaJ h}hTCJOJQJ^JaJScience Reports, Tohoku Univ., 7th Series. (Geography), 27 (2), pp. 201-217. Sodersten, B. O. and Reed, G. (1994). International Economics London.Macmillan Press Ltd. United Nations, World population prospects: The 2010 revision, May 2011. Viner, J. (1931), Cost Curves and Supply Curves, Zeitschrift fr Nationalkonomie , 3, 23-46 WTO (2005) Trade Policy Review Nigeria, Bernand Associates/WTO publications, Geneva, Switzerland. Yusuf, S.A. and A.O. Falusi (2000) Trend analysis of the performance of agriculture in Nigeria.(1970- 1998), Nigerian Agricultural Development Studies, 1(2) : 1-19.      PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 0 0 5.0e+06 1.0e+07 1.5e+07 2.0e+07 2.5e+07 rprod 0 5000000 1.00e+07 1.50e+07 2.00e+07 2.50e+07 Fitted values b~d~e~g~h~j~k~m~n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~gd $a$$a$gd@e~f~h~i~k~l~n~o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    h}h DCCJOJQJ^JaJh]h)h #h B*CJOJQJ^JaJphh}yh h)mHnHuhka`jhka`Uh/jh/U.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~      $`a$gdmzgd 501h:p)/ =!"#$% Dd @0  # A2Iɻ=$7&+AD`!Iɻ=$7&+AD@ x-Q=OA}g!ل"(%)"J8`aK狳!'gqe4#T4(4H])ffuۛ7owfgcMҖfm)W4WQ ͜"j[sW@]eأWg˖%?ZAYqsѻB+lܕa]nFŷtv~0//ǵ]C慠ÓnCՆ7U{`8Ng'öQ6î5z BH ,eA|RִA@̯nySO,W //yLw|B鲙zɺL5S!;٣#gݯ^Ÿc($-G I|1)WËnS?? Kzq \ǻ PE-fZ *j#b/v{+ÖjQ6Žjhv;AX̺PLa{?]& X_"`:Hm2 Yf%N2LxU{ YԢHA#3'Deƿ yiy=i\ϓG@u֓#7qx''#C?2}~Dd 0  # A2YuEa%i`!YuEa%iD`R!x-QnA}g1 (#QH%| GDy>%d-ʩR1=ERGIpޮnyfgv@  1^E)H$b0h[<ȹI`BocFh=*j9D,ʣ*jRU 5? W݉`sNk8arV(_{~˜/:),=/77/pENJmuctՖ.n(TWqz{QwjFG*E؎*u}?G V`b5AT GY~;^3s췡}Cdϲ^Hؾ6 avig ya= 2="8\GP(>e( ,,̾[| r1,ޚc:5Lί.N#ÈeoSz؝Dd @0  # A2(r "q;F!`!(r "q;FDR x-QAkAf6MMEt-(nV!LfǺlB6%)={zE*x A0~30y`m @b4)H$j2hWʹ I`<٨MwcP`п$Y*jR+CWQw"؜Ӟ{f?_958>._fO*~x1/su.\ x6gr*ݏUW;Znvo 4b'}f0JPEt2DQ-4;np:Dd^ly̱^ě,fÐȱ}},l;<ʖ\1m0BrQA,,N8z&5vpx?Yh=Ojh=uS|0 k856#~LDd @0  # A2/mwT?sI[ `!/mwT?sI[DR x-Q1o@ƍd' *P1 A8Z,%N YHg[`e΀7$w'{NXXB2M  ^ :7 nK*!/hų7Dm v\DW_[]Mjt]Dʋ<>Ns;QVa+4x.OfzNUpD!P}` l,-?Z}z ]\3g,Yd35Sg>{Sc~3b|$Dd @0  # A2]N qZ `!]N qDR x-QnA}g1I #($RȗA(,l|6p}|WNMDM* .uH[h߼ٙy+PmH,W& \V9! Wb54|j9D7:[%]Mj)D?\t'97`R>8zݟ58ͮ?fݓoe΃ΥK+NN[CiJj}PX+5!p}xQ}ASZCo}7F V`& f Χ?}9kyxٳly9e0ucޞ]QH.#(E2I_| r1W,ݞS5:%.MmMf2x}iDd @0  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCEFGHIJKPSvTUVWYXZ[\]^_`bacdefghikjlmnopqrtsuwxyz{|~}Root Entry} F`F%bR6Data DWWordDocument|7ObjectPool'F%b`F%b_1429483278FF%bF%bOle CompObjiObjInfo "%&'*-./2567:=>?BEFGJMNORUVWZ]^_befgjmnoruvwz}~ FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT, DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  Equation Native _1429483316 FF%bF%bOle CompObj i FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT, DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  ObjInfo Equation Native  _1429485415FF%bF%bOle  FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49q,T  DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  aCompObjiObjInfoEquation Native _1429485490 FF%bF%bOle CompObjiObjInfoEquation Native  FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  b_1429485506FF%bF%bOle  CompObj!iObjInfo# FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bEquation Native $_1429485522"FF%bF%bOle (CompObj )i FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bObjInfo!+Equation Native ,_1429485552$FF%bF%bOle 0 FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bCompObj#%1iObjInfo&3Equation Native 4_1429485575E)FF%bF%bOle 8CompObj(*9iObjInfo+;Equation Native < FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  b_1429485588.FF%bF%bOle @CompObj-/AiObjInfo0C FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bEquation Native D_1429485607,63FF%bF%bOle HCompObj24Ii FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bObjInfo5KEquation Native L_14294856388FF%bF%bOle P FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bCompObj79QiObjInfo:SEquation Native T_1429486029J=FF%bF%bOle XCompObj<>YiObjInfo?[Equation Native \ FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  e_1429485966h;BFF%bF%bOle `CompObjACaiObjInfoDc FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  aEquation Native d_14294856741^GFF%bF%bOle hCompObjFHii FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bObjInfoIkEquation Native l_1429486068LFF%bF%bOle p FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49q$T DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  eCompObjKMqiObjInfoNsEquation Native t_1429485690QFF%bF%bOle xCompObjPRyiObjInfoS{Equation Native | FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  b_1429485703OYVFF%bF%bOle CompObjUWiObjInfoX FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bEquation Native _1429485716[FF%bF%bOle CompObjZ\i FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bObjInfo]Equation Native _1429485750T@`FF%bF%bOle  FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bCompObj_aiObjInfobEquation Native _1429485769eFF%bF%bOle CompObjdfiObjInfogEquation Native  FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  b_1429485783cwjFF%bF%bOle CompObjikiObjInfol FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bEquation Native _1429485796oFF%bF%bOle CompObjnpi FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bObjInfoqEquation Native _1429485835tFF%bF%bOle  FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  bCompObjsuiObjInfovEquation Native _1429485814mryFF%bF%bOle CompObjxziObjInfo{Equation Native  FMathType 6.0 Equation MathType EFEquation.DSMT49qT DSMT6WinAllBasicCodePagesTimes New RomanSymbolCourier NewMT Extra!/ED/APG_APAPAE%B_AC_AE*_HA@AHA*_D_E_E_A  b  # A2*vmi@)Y`!*vmi@)YDR x-Q1o@&d'TPVꀘP\DbtpKA!S::u`E1"!;tO{w%ziR0Hzmоs[p y"=ܰQA+.& h kAtI%MUդFeOq<ǃTw"؜Y!DOeYGypXֹt_s2xIzik4>N V@/>F} lo8&jZ]/_u]Gt}Dd @0   # A 2Or8= K|Pwl.`!Or8= K|PwlDR x-Q=@}N/NP;"("(''B\M~A"rDxjG[ ` @b 4)H$f1@(I`<;n9vQ/؛` _],AoUt5U &+;l,Feӟ^|6e^Gyֹt_srIz_ik,9M Q@{/[f}\ypxg v|2d2讀{ƣ8E*i:ZiLA]y߽C||uNUE0 c޾SQH.#(E2$KsO65AKlv;lFSg>Sc~1b.|Dd @0   # A  2^Jt\]`!^Jt\]DR x-Q1o@Ɖd'B`*`J+1N(c(CPD"1:N8ĉ⠐)YoS%Z!oHN>}{޽@v ^e$ r/n\U&!OEރ-5r{\gD&˟[]MjtME<>Ns`2«_?eo~ys`Ӭ4RYrzaҡ}*n*I(Βa0y:P/ʼj὜uh^&f v g1پ{[~'wgs6uGQD:>ak4ywVzNMpD!P}` l,>Yz ]\1,]fs5: > ]G*}5Dd @0   # A  2'tV|_'}g`!'tV|_'}DR x-Q=oA}g'tg #($R ȗA(,l|6p}|Fƕ!ј"U-=BW !aޮn}fgv@  ^E$ rt(n\E*!/Eޣ-Uٛb69{WD״_[%]Mj+{;D?\u'9Ũ?bV?8Vu:_Ǽyp\ֹt_s2xIz_ik4H V@ϓ![f}x'pxVBH 5w_GQ7X+XMuBfӈ? V#9kw! 4$rl_ ϲae( ,,V^>}' uL<Sc~1bI.~mDd 0   # A  228Y $hTȚ`!28Y $hTȚD@`!x-QnA}{g1A (A(,l|89>[>qe4F| EZ$:HH7+v5oμQ(,!c))k\ p54l{M0pmӂOy䯒d]_?Rbqnk6x>cbuW|~p,tg//?eAΒ^굺Nz{vPTX+[ҳ$8KD7P-μ'z=U{U` _=KT c ~s?\f:"u+y2VkM=%LL&ɩ?ycAeyDd 0   # A  2FREy0b+n`!FREy0b+nD`R!x-QkAf6MԃRt[jR[QݬV!@5u!لl$)=ywѫ@Jٛhfa{7%zy aҠ]q'*pUgBokFh3)19{D[,GUդF$ֈȳ4\u'9ͰJ&v~:~[Gys s2xQ|Pi|^q_&]VJvy'^qUD;@k5u(Aq:Zq8 {2~zo {-B"Yvx- O;?daU>BY)CY`da~aE&5vpx_F{Nzgdvuqjl#XzeDd @0  # A 2kTycl*[yG>"`!kTycl*[yGDR x-Q1o@ƍd'TPVb@]:2E$ㄣXJ(J33K-2t`7$w'{NX;XB2M  ^  nK*!hųwDm 6Xa /.i *<>Ns;Q<ȶ?UynUGyֹt_srIzik,9M Q@y/>f}\pxg QTeHeK5^GqU4X+DMuRgiLA6]yܽC||uNUF'0 ݨ޾SQH.#(E2$KOV^1mAkBc׌' tL|&A`g]f26S~Dd 0  # A2&`"F>qF $`!&`"F>qF D@`!x-Q=oA}{g@BpDEQHJr9–(χل32 * DGDD?tʫ]͛;3oJ s*XAZ.+bjuՁ\sPE3FfX.3MZ0k$,A--\%kz+(gg>*nb{ӳ |}% %G Yrz^Ӟ]Jvs4I~0Β^0|[P+vμz=5{U` _=K ͎c ~c/\4V:#5Ky2F{M=%>ޘ`g]Sc ~6I1z1Dd @0  # A27w$;yu"O{'`!7w$;yu"ODR x-Q1o@ƍd'TPVb`DqC" 19NKũL13t`EbcfAồOt޽w}'PH,W& \% Wb Uٛb6{\D_[]MjtUD7BY)-Id&(4vqxNgzxk~uqjloF,s~\Dd @0  # A2p \^l Vx*`!p \^l VxDR x-QnA}g۱tgE#($BBadaK$'ggd\95)RA"@B¼]jG[2`m @b 4)H$z6hOlܦ$0\UBMz7lTъf'DmsXa 8i ʺxpNs:Qϯz_KG~˜O+: Xz._o2I[/}_ 9mMlj*]u2CQ`촺π4b7}(JPkEaVhulQ҃`ڙc o {B" 0[syȐ6 ۳# E}S@dayaW?hMk.vgzd~uqjl/F,}Dd @0  # A2<4&6 ^I,`!<4&6 ^IDR x-Q=oA}g'cqgEEȗA(,l |6$lWNMh)RA"]yՎ͛ٙ%ziR0HjeОsp y.6=ZQA3vcP`п$Y*jR+CWu;liχo>=_foۻys7ePi|~q_&=Jv&N0J?zZщJQ-vJWj U+oZG' f Φl}9kw! 0$rl_ a<G ya# 2="8\GP(>e( l,,>Z=zeZ;X7g,՞S5:>_5]G:}[Dd @0  # A2R{eB1oW2{5V/`!R{eB1oW2{5DR x-Q1Af69nrZ(yb%۬E$fǸlB6KmOkm;l'v|{޼@ ^e$ rt$ܮ$0\MB]zwЎo{:h p_]Қ,IoUu5UM$+;l&=u.7[>x/s6a~4yOVzNMpD!P}` TH֟bz.O﮲ZOMφ.N#͈em!|{Dd @0  # A2偕 #( 1`!偕 #( DR x-QnA}gرtg GQH$ȗA(,l|6p}|WNEAc""U t?@ $$խvoμ(ֶ$ЫHABV+VmHU$ؠhFh3+Z+54VIWݔ]Q| 0T)_|58?>Ϯ_gJ 9u.\ x6r*OݏUWZnvq QՊNTjUT3h%Zyբ?:j78N" ~?X6VC][,fÐȱ}},l'<ʖ\1턍0BrQA,,Nz&5vpxv{Nz̧xovtqjl/F,$~Dd @0  # A2uk-4a 'W4`!uk-4a 'WDR x-Q@}NN$ Ds GHKA!U A -UלErDxjG[*` @b 4)H$v5@(]I`<8/W3t(؛`-?'XߪjRkr ZEWQw"؜[M1%=44\/?'o?e΃GΥ KßͲγ FN[[eiFJGHG( T۽N1puQ%`FuS^'y/{5)V`L5AK_c R{nڇ~7ws6uGQD:>6aôxvzNMpD!P}` TH֟!bz.O뭲ZOL.N#͈eV|zDd @0  # A2+R-l{¤.7`!+R-l{¤DR x-Q1o@&Me'B`*`J+u`DqmC" 19N8ĉTitFBO#fN]Hl!;tO{wziR0HzmоQp[p5 y.=ذQC+.& hQ7 kAtIk%MUդFdO4q<ǃD9C_mWOE%~˜UK,=/7d'/@eIvJj}QبVpezQ%Z^&#}1)V`O V fӘl=WiܹM||u9UF0Mc(\oϮ ($ʢO$KV^1}O,ZOLޯ.N#͈e}JDd @0  # A2YtYݧhN9`!YtYݧhNDR x-Q@}Nd'@B`N@q:.B9.(',ĉ⠐*Wӄ_-;$ەW;7ovfg TkOkUIA !ۭAzJ$إw⠆Nx_E`oKb ~Iʁh&_y݉`sno5NXǟGϯeJ2C[pKϥfYi|#4zD#u=OG( T^2I(ΒQ0}P/ʼjL'qU4X/ӷDuRiv,n"^9\'&|c1C~Ԏ\oߩ ($ʢOl'kH65AKbzl&Sg>{p𫡋Sc~3bR{fDd @0  # A2,y`wOΟ'ith<`!,y`wOΟ'itDR x-Q=oA}gC E.ȗPYl6$l+1%5E4Z$]yՎ۝ٙ7% ziR0HfcЁsI`<zlTъ˩ڨ0p_]LEt6юxp}ҕtdO|!}[ٰOiYA KMiTiG'ػ|_L|$$If!vh5L5#vL#v:V l t0,"65L5yt ve$$If!vh5L5#vL#v:V l t0,"65L5yt ve$$If!vh5L5#vL#v:V l t0,"65L5yt ve$$If!vh5L5#vL#v:V l t0,"65L5yt ve$$If!vh5L5#vL#v:V l t0,"65L5yt ve$$If!vh5L5#vL#v:V l t0,"65L5yt ve$$If!vh5L5#vL#v:V l t0,"65L5yt ve$$If!vh5L5#vL#v:V l t0,"65L5yt ve$$If!vh5L5#vL#v:V l t0,"65L5yt ve$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]$$If!vh555555#v#v#v#v#v#v:V l t065<yt]Dd!D  3 @@"?$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]$$If!vh5L5L#vL:V l t065Lyt]DyK www.fao.org/es/esayK 4http://www.fao.org/es/esa1TablerSummaryInformation(~(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjyOh+'0,8HTh |    Agricultural sector was the main stay of the Nigerian economy before independence and immediately after it, until the oil boom of the 1970sUser 1 Normal.dotm Onyeson.com3Microsoft Office Word@^в@Lo6@u`@d #bG/՜.+,D՜.+, hp  `B= Agricultural sector was the main stay of the Nigerian economy before independence and immediately after it, until the oil boom of the 1970s TitleP 8@ _PID_HLINKSA y3N3http://www.sli.lu.se/eng/abstracts/kortom20042.aspTKhttp://www.fao.org/es/esa  F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q^ 00>H02 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH @`@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA`D Default Paragraph FontRi@R  Table Normal4 l4a (k (No List 4@4 @0Header  H$66 @0 Header CharCJaJ4 @4 @0Footer  H$6!6 @0 Footer CharCJaJ4U@14 Hyperlink >*phjCj ~I Table Grid7:V0.XQ. /A(@Emphasis6]B^@bB Y 0 Normal (Web)dd[$\$borb ~(Default 7$8$H$-B*CJOJQJ^J_HaJmH phsH tH N"@N  0Caption5B*CJ\aJmH phOsH X`X ) No Spacing(CJOJPJQJ^J_HaJmH sH tH PK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w toc'vuر-MniP@I}úama[إ4:lЯGRX^6؊>$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3ڗP 1Pm \\9Mؓ2aD];Yt\[x]}Wr|]g- eW )6-rCSj id DЇAΜIqbJ#x꺃 6k#ASh&ʌt(Q%p%m&]caSl=X\P1Mh9MVdDAaVB[݈fJíP|8 քAV^f Hn- "d>znNJ ة>b&2vKyϼD:,AGm\nziÙ.uχYC6OMf3or$5NHT[XF64T,ќM0E)`#5XY`פ;%1U٥m;R>QD DcpU'&LE/pm%]8firS4d 7y\`JnίI R3U~7+׸#m qBiDi*L69mY&iHE=(K&N!V.KeLDĕ{D vEꦚdeNƟe(MN9ߜR6&3(a/DUz<{ˊYȳV)9Z[4^n5!J?Q3eBoCM m<.vpIYfZY_p[=al-Y}Nc͙ŋ4vfavl'SA8|*u{-ߟ0%M07%<ҍPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK]  '07:CMWakz|&?.024689<>@BDFGH '07:CMWakz| &? **---08 *-^?%w+_,Q--[.R/C49;RGWZW`gmpu fe.t/(JqK>}CMx zNO~K+x tw&),>1379P= ?BGe~   "#%&')*+,./0234679:;=A A%.;mM+BLZq~?"?Gdk<H_5 5EO\eq{$8$**4n<Db~~   !$(-158<@B=UWWoqt/17OQVnpvYqsw %'/GIMeg\tw&&&w111&?::::::::::::::::::::::::_XX $&0!8HI@$HH(   ! 3  "<?T  C X?!H  # H?C!N  3  MH>!H  #    >HB  # Cg DHB  # g HB   # T g U HB   # g HB   # `g aHB   # g N2   3 GoGoAdN2  3 GoGoAdN2  3 GoGoAdN2  3 GoGoAdN2  3 GoGo F`N2  3 GoGo F`N2  3 GoGoQ[N2  3 GoGo[VN2  3 GoGo eCN2  3 GoGou9N2  3 GoGo-0N2  3 GoGooN2  3 GoGoN2  3 GoGooFN2  3 GoGoj N2  3 GoGo(oN2  3 GoGo;kN2  3 GoGo#zN2  3 GoGoN2   3 GoGod$N2 ! 3 GoGo  N2 " 3 GoGo &T }N2 # 3 GoGoI X N2 $ 3 GoGo MP N2 % 3 GoGo1 N2 & 3 GoGo[mN2 ' 3 GoGo0N2 ( 3 GoGosN2 ) 3 GoGordN2 * 3 GoGonN2 + 3 GoGoi BB ,   BB -B   7CD . B.'v BB /B   7 0 B0Hb!H BB 1B   7T U  2 B2H !  BB 3B   7 4 B4J0  BB 5B   7`a 6 B6 BB 7B   7 8 B8Jp#V  9 <9J!   BB :   g BB ;    < <<8K BB =   d e  > < >8   BB ?    @ < @ 85  BB A    B < B88  BB C   FG D < D8  BB E    F < F8    G <G h H # C"? B S  ?u&?H!!!kt!t nsx}S\ f n 4<cmq!{!//444444+545^5d577<<7F@FHHJJJ%J*J3J}JJDXMXYY;Z=ZAZCZ`ZbZ%\/\+^5^`` bbbbffff gg0i6i?iFiiijjjj*k1k=kEkmmOnTnnnoo uuxxyyz(zzz$-#)iw-ގ_d!vޠ QZܫU[lu;@̽ؽڽ .4CJWc)59Fht    *1[aKTZ`ir  # -     """"""2#7#=#D#L#Y#Z#]#)$.$$$$$$$$$S%X%&&&&&&o'y'''9(R(P+]+++++++J,O,U,Z,c,k,../0 001122222223;333445!5z888888;:A:;; ==>=I=J=M=N=^=z>z>|>|>}>}>>>>>>>>>>>>"?$?'?e~GQ Q'S'.///41A1r8t8IIWW^XeXZ Z6\>\a&a#i)iOnTnؓƭʭ;AkvJn`aP # ?@ZchprJ} m     !!S!U!q"|"S#Z#`###$l%r% & &&'B(R(V({(Z))****++.++++),5,,,,-------1.w.y..,///j/////111222q2r22223g4h4444555 6666o78!88888X9`9y9|9:6:;;f<<N=`=k==/>1>z>z>|>|>}>}>>>>>>>>>>>'?33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 h,,?-@-[-111jkdedey>z>z>|>|>}>}>>>>>>>>>'? h,,?-@-[-111jkdede'?+b%<R 5N F"K#GL zNИp0GQ{;OzLl*^*`o(.>^`>o(.0^`0o(..^`o(... ^`o( .... b`^b``o( ..... b`^b``o( ...... ^`o(....... 2 ^2 `o(........0^`0o(() V^V`hH. &L^&`LhH.  ^ `hH.  ^ `hH. L^`LhH. f^f`hH. 6^6`hH. L^`LhH.80^8`0o(() ^`hH. pL^p`LhH. @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PL^P`LhH.h^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohP^P`OJQJo(hHw^w`o(^`o(.$ 0^$ `0o(.. ^ `o(... ^`o( .... r`^r``o( ..... `^``o( ...... .^.`o(....... !^!`o(........^`OJPJQJ^Jo(" ^`OJQJ^Jo(hHop^p`OJQJo(hH@ ^@ `OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoP^P`OJQJo(hH^`o(() ^`hH. pL^p`LhH. @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PL^P`LhH.OzR 5N F+b% zN#GGQ         W        j:hN                 ұ\                >:NL.H;NL.HNL.H>$fNL.Hlj[ZlNL.H:uNL.HxNL.HTS_:d,G*0Oa"J;Vs &G(KVk"pVz}T-l)'EO t"m`tHi fw 1  6 *X  g : O pa  3 E Q b *l q Y {f (t $Ot)A K{&)=0_Eb"\]Nfw_~p:={U\ {9qc*[0EB!AU+Ijart&0Ro  V<QZph!\Q+ 5> X Y k ]o sx !)!%@!&","c"j"{" #G#j#E $$C$r$R%Z%gp%&! &EH&k&qI'Bs'$x'/A(_(~(%)G)zV)b)Ko)q)* *M*su*Z]+,5H,Y-w6-C.W/0*[0d0 y0!X1% 24c23/3Nj3X4}4C$5=5WC56)6)E6r6K7eb7c7m+89'9#x9n:y>;V;U<X<$z<c=y#=O>X>Z>f>{g>,?o8?O@ AyQAwqAn=BYBkBAyB C1C DCHCICUCDDlD,E mEsE)FTFv^FJFHNvH II2gIuI~IWJ8J:J@J#K7KuK+9LMMN28Nb>NFNBN2*O-Pj1P=PopPQfQ6R7R9RFDR|bRZ~R( SSSTBSYS(=T:LTOTF\TV!U#U JUmU V/VUV^VofV*tV] WWWX)X@XbNXqpX=6YQZZZZZGZaZ@[a[Ld[Rp[\\\HD\4d\eg\P3]5]"7]U]Y]E~]T~]1^k^+s^py^~^_c_d_d_@u_ ``3`V`ka`xt``Aabb)bIbEc#c+c-5cxLck[cNdZd[_dod\qdwdeeue=e5@eomene ve:&fP)fCftfjg*g`g hh+h`hiD*i],iWijhJj^j kk.k)/lQlTg:my$Y8MST a 99BLGtv9|C #)*QY"ny aC  Gks)g2q j02]<h=t[ZCL=s _)\?Bf'7BDd!*23\aNeW=u )5EY)X:3/x~G+7[G ,A PYrf'u}/XYmty{qEvW[`Wl~fFO+@QVdl7[+ZrS[jz{!KW@a0IOL\1Q0Ha] 7s6Jh $)X06 ;II1`di:')^qs<wCHQ#K`# ZQZ]KYjJ5KOOjt:<%CZ_tnA'(sMlQky'.Qd@ #08Liv{ Kjn"z^~R@c?]on (.Y1+=oCj%Fs(k+.O&8AH$I!JY^D4%W2n:s 'h435)>>sqYIbHrw!|! !3NfEN#^np ITltvl 1#6I8c@?H}!8JN\&{0@=S$L=q;qt~OS}\cr @PFJ(`pPO]a&.XVeut&y2)Ce{*95@Yt! 67uF^!JO(nO\EGx\ >!YL]Bw/DCDhF,JY}B!,?Pc}us-hrsz>|>@hL'Y'[''<&?@b@@@Unknown G* Times New Roman5Symbol3. * Arialo CNILO H+ T T 115 B 8 O 00MS GothicA. Arial Narrow7.{ @Calibri?= * Courier New;WingdingsA BCambria Math"1hCGCG.*/GB/GB!x4d== 2qHP ? 2!xxAgricultural sector was the main stay of the Nigerian economy before independence and immediately after it, until the oil boom of the 1970sUser 1 Onyeson.com(