Determinants of Livelihood Diversification and its Impact on Household Income and Food Security among Rural Farmers in Kano State, Nigeria
F. S. Abdulwahab *
Faculty of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology, Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Aliko Dangote University of Science and Technology, Wudil, Kano, Nigeria.
S. Abdullahi
Faculty of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology, Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, Nigeria.
M. Garba
Faculty of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology, Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, Nigeria.
B. Hamidu
Faculty of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology, Department of Agricultural Economics, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, Nigeria.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Rural farming households in northern Nigeria increasingly use livelihood diversification to manage climate variability, market instability, rising production costs and declining agricultural productivity. However, empirical evidence on the determinants of diversification and its welfare implications remains limited for Kano State. This study examined the determinants of livelihood diversification and its effects on household income and food security among rural farmers in Kano State, Nigeria. Guided by the Sustainable Livelihood Framework, primary data were collected from 450 smallholder farmers selected through a multistage sampling procedure across seven Local Government Areas. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, the Livelihood Security Index, the Simpson Index of Diversification, Ordinary Least Squares regression, binary logistic regression and social network analysis. The findings showed a moderate level of livelihood diversification, concentrated mainly in farm-based activities, with a mean Livelihood Security Index of 0.47. The OLS model indicated that livelihood diversification had a positive and significant effect on household income and food security (unstandardised β = 0.421, standardised β = 0.125, p < 0.001; R² = 0.754). Livelihood security (β = 0.315, p < 0.001), education, monthly income and remittances positively influenced diversification, whereas vocational training and extension contact had significant negative effects. Binary logistic regression identified livelihood security as the strongest predictor of diversification, while social capital variables, including cooperative participation and remittances, positively influenced livelihood strategies. Major constraints were limited access to credit (73.1%), high start-up costs, rising input prices, pest and disease incidence, and market instability. The study concludes that livelihood diversification is associated with improved household welfare and food security, while livelihood security remains a central driver of diversification. Policies should strengthen rural finance, asset accumulation and diversification-oriented extension services to support resilient rural livelihoods.
Keywords: Livelihood diversification, livelihood security, food security, household income, rural farmers, sustainable livelihood framework, simpson index of diversification, social capital, smallholder agriculture