TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION, PRODUCTIVITY AND COMMERCIALISATION OF CASSAVA IN THE  SOUTH-SOUTH STATES OF NIGERIA

ATTENTION

BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!

INFORMATION:

YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420

WHATSAPP US ON  08137701720

TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION, PRODUCTIVITY AND COMMERCIALISATION OF CASSAVA IN THE  SOUTH-SOUTH STATES OF NIGERIA

ABSTRACT

The study analyzed technology adoption, productivity and commercialization of cassava in the south- south states of Nigeria. The specific objectives of the study were to describe the socioeconomic characteristics and cropping systems of cassava farmers, assess the level of adoption of improved cassava production technologies and the factors influencing level of adoption,  determine  cassava farmers’ output and  productivity and assess  the determinants of  productivity of cassava farmers, determine the technical efficiency of cassava farmers, assess  the determinants  of technical efficiency of cassava farmers, and assess the extent of cassava product commercialization and the factors influencing commercialization of cassava products in the study area. Data were obtained using structured and validated questionnaire from 300 randomly selected cassava farmers, but 290 farmers were used for data analysis due to unusable form of 10 of the questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (mean, frequency distribution and percentage), level of adoption model, productivity model, Household commercialization index, multiple regression model, and stochastic production frontier. Results showed that majority (67%) of the farmers were males, and mean age, household size and farming experience were 41years, 7 persons and 9 years respectively. Greater percentage (85.5%, 81.7% and 70%) of the cassava farmers cultivated TM 30572, TME 419 and NR8052 improved cassava varieties respectively. The mean level of adoption of the improved cassava varieties was 0.35, but for the identified cassava production technologies the mean adoption score was 4.2. The factors influencing level of adoption were level of education, farm income, farming experiences, farm size, credit availability, age, membership of cooperatives and extension contact. The mean output of cassava farmers was 10.96 MT/Ha while the mean total factor productivity (TFP) was 1.12 MT/Ha. Productivity of cassava farmers were influenced by level of adoption, extent of commercialization and capital. The farmers were technically inefficient in resources use with mean technical efficiency of 0.736. The commercialization index of cassava product was 60.9% and the determinants of extent of cassava commercialization were level of adoption, external inputs use, farm size, household size, and distance to market. The study concludes that there are great potentials and opportunities to increase cassava varieties adoption, and productivity, and hence commercialize its products in the study area. The study recommends that the government should encourage more people to embark on cassava production as it is profitable and to harness market outlets that could take up the output surpluses of the farmers due to increased production.

Keywords:Adoption, Cassava, Commercialization, Productivity, Technology.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Content                                                                                                                   Page

Title page

Copy right page                                                                                                          i

Certification                                                                                                                ii

Dedication                                                                                                                   iii

Acknowledgement                                                                                                      iv

Abstract                                                                                                                       v

Table of contents                                                                                                        vi

List of tables                                                                                                               ix

List of figures/charts                                                                                                   xi

Acronyms                                                                                                                   xii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1.      Background of the study                                                                                 1

1.2.      Statement of the problem                                                                               4

1.3       Objectives of the study                                                                                   8

1.4       Hypotheses of the study                                                                                  9

1.5       Justification of the study                                                                                 9

1.6 Scope of the study        11 1.7 Plan of study         11

CHAPTER TWO:  LITERATURE REVIEW                                                      12

2.1       Conceptual Literature                                                                                     12

2.1.1   Concept of Technology and Technology Adoption                                        12

2.1.2     Productivity                                                                                                   14

2.1.3    Resource use efficiency and productivity                                                      15

2.1.3.1 Technical Efficiency                                                                                       16

2.1.3.2 Price or Allocative Efficiency                                                                        16

2.1.3.3 Economic Efficiency                                                                                      16

2.1.4  Commercialization                                                                                           17

2.2.      Theoretical Literature                                                                                     19

2.2.1  Theory of utility maximization                                                                         19

2.2.2  Innovation diffusion theory                                                                              21

2.3       Analytical Framework                                                                                    25

2.3.1    Total Factor Productivity (TFP)                                                                     26

2.3.2     Determinants of Agricultural Productivity                                                    27

2.3.3 Measurement of efficiency                                                                                29

2.3.4    Household Commercialization Index (HCI)                                                   32

2.3.5. Regression Analysis                                                                                         33

2.4       Empirical Literature                                                                                       35

2.4.1  Efficiency of resource use and productivity.                                                    35

2.4.2  Status of cassava production and development in Nigeria.                              37

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY                                                             41

3.1       Study Area                                                                                                     41

3.2       Sample selection                                                                                            43

3.3.      Data collection                                                                                              45

3.3.1    Tests for Validity and Reliability of Research Instrument                            46

3.4.      Data analysis                                                                                                 47

3.4.1    Model Specification                                                                                       48

CHAPTER FOUR:    RESULTS AND DISCUSSION                                          56

4.1       Socio-economic characteristics of cassava farmers in the study area            56

4.1.1    Gender and Age of Cassava Farmers in the Study Area                                56

4.1.2    Household Size and Source of Labour of Cassava Farmers in the                 58

4.1.3    Farming Experience of Cassava Farmers in the Study Area                          58

4.1.4    Education Level of Cassava Farmers in the Study Area                                59

4.1.5    Source of Farmland Acquisition                                                                     59

4.1.6    Membership of Association by Cassava Farmers in the Study Area             60

4.1.7    Access to Credit by Farmers in the Study Area                                             61

4.1.8   Contact with Extension Agents by Farmers in the Study Area                       61

4.2    Cropping Systems of Cassava Farmers and Inputs use in the Study Area        61

4.2.1 Cropping mix of Cassava Farms in the Study Area                                          61

4.2.2 The Use of Improved Inputs in Cassava Farms in the Study Area                   63

4.2.3 Labour use by Task and Gender in cassava farms in the Study Area               63

4.2.4 Labour use, Labour Cost, and Wage Rate by Farm Activities and Gender

In Cassava Farms in the Study Area                                                                  64

4.3   Assessment of the level of Adoption of improved cassava Production

Technologies in the study area                                                                           65

4.3.1   Types of improved cassava varieties cultivated by farmers in the

Study Area                                                                                                       65

4.3.2    Reasons for Cultivating improved Cassava Varieties                                     67

4.3.3    Level of Adoption of Improved Cassava Production Technologies              68

4.3.4    Adopter Categories of Cassava Farmers                                                        69

4.3.5   Factors that influence level of adoption of improved cassava

Production Technologies                                                                                  72

4.4      Assessment of cassava farmers’ output and productivity in the study area     76

4.4.1    Cassava farmers output per hectare in the Study Area                                    76

4.4.2    Cost and Returns of Cassava output per hectare                                             77

4.4.3    Total Factor Productivity of Cassava Farmers                                                78

4.4.4    Determinants of Productivity of Cassava Farmers                                          79

4.5      Estimation of Technical Efficiency of Cassava Farmers in Resource used       82

4.5.1    Maximum likelihood Estimate of Stochastic Production and Cost

             Frontier for Cassava Production in the Study Area    82

4.6       Determinants of Technical Efficiency of Cassava Producers       85

4.7       Extent and Determinants of Commercialization of Cassava Product 

                in the Study Area       86

4.7.1    Extent of Commercialization of Cassava Farmers     86

4.7.2    Household Commercialization of Cassava and the Major Intercrops      87

4.7.3    Determinants of Commercialization of Cassava by Farmers

 88

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 91

5.1       Summary                                                                                                         91

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                       92

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                           93

5.4       Contribution to Knowledge                                                                             94

REFERENCES                                                                                                95

APPENDIX I                                                                                                  109

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

                                1.1.      BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Cassava (manihot esculenta crantz) originated from South America. It was introduced into Africa in the 16th century and subsequently spread throughout the SubSaharan African countries where the crop has become one of the most dominant starchy staples in the diet of the people. Today, cassava is grown in over ninety countries including Nigeria, Brazil, Indonesia, India, Ghana, Thailand, Zaire, Tanzania, and

Uganda, (Dixon and Nukenine, 2000; IITA, 2005; Bamidele, Babatunde and Rasheed, 2008; FAO, 2012; Amos, 2013).

The importance of cassava as a food crop began towards the end of the 19th century when several cassava-processing techniques were introduced by perhaps the emancipated slaves from South America. The crop later received concerted research attention from the international and national institutes, which propelled world cassava production to about 160.5 million tonnes in 1995 (El-Sharkawy, Tafur, and Lopez,

2012). Cassava has become an important staple food and cash crop in several tropical African countries, especially Nigeria where it plays a principal role in the food economy.

Available statistics showed that although, cassava is grown in many tropical countries of

Africa, Asia and Latin America, the production from African countries accounts for over 50% of world’s total production, whereas Asia, and Latin America share less than 50% with the rest of the world ((FAO, 2001).

Currently, Nigeria is the world largest producer of cassava with an annual estimated output of 54 million tonnes (FAOSTAT, (2016); Onubuogu, Chidebelu, and

Eboh, 2014) while other top producers include Indonesia, Thailand, the Democratic

Republic of Congo and Angola (FAO, 2012 and FMARD, 2012). Nigeria’s production accounts for 21% of world’s output and 38.8% of Africa’s output and the country has consistently been ranked as the world’s largest producer of cassava since 2005 (Okoro,

Lemchi, Ezedinma, Dixon, Akoroda, Sanni, Okechukwu, Marco, Nkumbira, Ogbe, Illona, and Tarawali, 2005; Girei, Dire, Yuguda, and Salihu, 2014).

Comparing the output of various crops in Nigeria, cassava production ranks first, followed by yam production at 27 million tonnes in 2002, sorghum at 7 million tonnes, millet at 6 million tonnes and rice at 5 million tonnes (Amos, 2013). This large harvest in Nigeria can be attributed to rapid population growth, internal market demand, availability of high yielding improved varieties of cassava provided by International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA) as well as other root crop research institutes, and increased hectare of farm land allocated to cassava in the country. Broadly, the major cassava growing belts fall within the agro-ecological zones of Nigeria which includes; SouthSouth, South-West, South-East, North-Central and North-West regions. As a staple food, cassava has certain inherent characteristics which make it attractive especially to smallholder farmers in the country. First, the crop is capable of thriving on marginal soils where other crops, most especially grains, failed (Nweke, 2004; IITA, 2005; Ogundari and Brümmer, 2010; FAO, 2012). Secondly, cassava is regarded as a famine reserve crop which requires relatively low amounts of inputs (Enete and Igbokwe, 2009).

Thirdly, the crop can withstand stress such as drought as it can stay in the ground for several months. Fourthly, cassava is available all year round, thus providing household food security. Lastly, although cassava is cheap to cultivate, it can generate good income for farmers (Ohen, Ene and Umeze 2014 and Girei et al., 2014). However, it is widely acknowledged that the scope for agricultural production can be expanded and sustained by farmers within the limits of existing resource base and available technology if farm productivity is raised by efficient use of resources (Udoh, 2005; Onubuogu, Chidebelu, and Eboh, 2014; and Girei and Dire, 2013).This exposition therefore, forms the fundamental point why the concept of farm efficiency has remained an important economic study especially in developing agricultural economies like Nigeria, where resources are meager and opportunities for developing and adopting better technologies are dwindling.

Efficiency analysis in agricultural production is generally associated with the possibility of farms producing a certain level of output from a given bundle of resources or certain level of output at least cost (Girei et al., 2014). Also technical efficiency implies the ability of a firm to obtain maximum output from the given inputs. It is the ratio of output to input and the greater the ratio, the more the magnitude of technical efficiency (Simonyan, Olukosi, Omolehin and Atala, 2012).

The relative position of cassava in the food basket of Nigerians cannot be over emphasized. Its consumption in Nigeria and the rest of the world has been on the increase since the mid-1980s (Nweke, 2004). Currently, about 46% of the population of Nigerians live in urban centers, increasing the demand for convenient foods. Moreover, the diversified use of cassava roots in contemporary times has contributed enormously to the increase in demand and production. For instance, due to the high caloric content of cassava roots and peels, it has been found to be an excellent energy source for livestock feeds.

Nweke et al., (2002) classified cassava development in Africa into five stages; (i) rural famine crop (where it is considered as a famine crop during period of scarcity); (ii) rural food crop (main source of calories in diets of rural consumers); (iii) food and cash crop (based on traditional low yield varieties); (iv) food and cash crop (based on improved technology); and (v) as an industrial raw material (such as starch, ethanol, and flour) and livestock feeds. A significant part of cassava growers in Nigeria have transited to the fourth stage showing a wide scale of adoption of high yielding cassava Tropical Manihot species (TMS) varieties and the resulting increase in yields has shifted the problem of cassava subsector from  supply (production) to demand issues (Ezedinma et al., 2005).

Cassava is the dietary mainstay of over 200 million people in tropical Africa. It is produced under various agro-ecological conditions, some of which are quite unsuitable for many other crops. This makes cassava a reliable food security crop, which has the potential to bridge the existing food gap (Ogunbameru, and Okeowo, 2013). Although cassava is a very important crop to Nigeria, its comparative production advantage over other staples serves to encourage its cultivation even by the resource poor farmers. The crop’s production is generally thought to require less labour per unit of output than other staples and the crop is able to give reasonable yields in relatively low fertile soils.

Given population growth and the limits of area expansion as a means to increase crop production, productivity growth will increasingly entail the intensification and commercialization of smallholder agriculture, involving more intensive use of productivity enhancing inputs and more market oriented patterns of crop production such as cassava. The International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (ITTA) and other related agricultural research institutions have over the years introduced new cassava varieties which are either high yielding or resistant to cassava mosaic diseases. The adoption of these new technologies by cassava farmers was expected to increase the average productivity of cassava enterprises and the level of commercialization with respect to the proportion of cassava product sold relative to what is consumed especially in the study area.

                                1.2       STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Cassava is the most grown crop among smallholder farmers in the southern part of Nigeria. It plays a vital role in the food security of the rural economy because of its capacity to yield under marginal soil conditions and its tolerance to drought. The crop is consumed in both rural and urban communities as food in processed forms (IITA, 2004).

Data from the Collaborative Study of Cassava in Africa (COSCA) showed that 80% of

Nigerians in the rural areas eat cassava meal at least once week (Nweke, Spencer, and Lynan, 2002). Empirical evidence still suggested that the volume of output and supply is yet to meet the demand in Nigeria, and the unit market price of the product is on a steady increase.

The existing gap between food production and population expansion, cultivable land and labour has significantly increased. The government in an attempt to forestall this scenario in 1972, through the National Acceleration Food Production Programme (NAFPP) instituted the need for agricultural technology development in Nigeria (Ajani, and Onwubaya, 2013). The purpose was to enhance technology transfer with respect to priority crops like maize, wheat, sorghum, cowpea and cassava to the rural farmers. Consequently, the government established agricultural technology research centers or institutions with the major aim of breeding improved planting materials that are early maturing, high yielding, resistant to pest and diseases and are adaptable to the local environment.

Sequel to the above scenario and in 1973 when cassava bacteria blight (CBB) became a scourge for cassava in the country, the International Institute for Tropical

Agriculture (IITA) later produced improved cassava clones (TMS 30211 and TMS 30395, TMS 30572, TMS 30001, TMS 30017, TMS 30337, TMS 30555, TMS 4(2)142) and which were distributed to farmers (IITA, 2004 and FMARD, 2012). These improved cassava varieties differed in their resistance to cassava diseases and pests and also produced tubers with varying quality of roots at differing maturity duration and storage in the ground as well as high yield (Kolawole, Farinde and Alao, 2003). A wide variety of such cassava cultivars can be observed in farmers’ field in the study area, though one or two cultivars may occur more frequently in a given agricultural zone. Some studies of Ezedimma (2005) and Agwu, and Anyaeche, (2007) had reported that technology adoption is on the decline, hence food production is consistently very low.

FAO (2009) reported that cassava contributed 14% of average daily dietary intake per person in Nigeria. The fourth largest contributor after sorghum 22%, millet 19% and yam 15%, and yet the full exploitation of the potentials of the crop which depends on research and detailed information obtained about cassava growing conditions, adoption of improved varieties by farmers, production practices, consumption patterns, and extent of product commercialization is yet to be done.

However, the introduction by government and the agricultural research institutions of yield enhancing technologies such as improved cassava varieties, fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides seem not to have significantly improved productivity in the area. The average productivity of cassava farmers in Nigeria is as low as 11 tonnes per hectare while that of Brazil, Thailand and Indonesia was 13.7, 19.3 and 14.69 tonnes per hectare respectively (Nweke, and kormawa, 2005).

More so, the government of Nigeria in a bid to expand the market horizon of cassava products, recently began the exportation of cassava chips and promulgated an edict enforcing all bread and confessionary industries to use cassava as part (20%) of their production raw material (Nigeria cassava Master Plan, 2006, and Agwu, Anyanwu, and Mendie, 2012). This was to develop and induce investment, increase output and productivity as well as enhance the level of cassava product commercialization. The impressive results of high level adoption of new cassava production technologies, productivity and commercialization of cassava products are yet to be achieved in the study area and according to Nweke, (2009), only less than 40% of farmers output were sold. The question is, what level of commercialization do cassava farmers in the area need to achieve in order to clear up more than 40% of their outstanding or surplus production output? Issues of this nature are posing serious challenges to commercialization policy as it relates to cassava production in Nigeria. According to Nweke et al., (2002), adoption of improved cassava production technologies by farmers had been low because the farmers are not aware of the existence of some of the improved technologies. The questions therefore that this study intended to address were that, If the improved technologies were made available and accessible to farmers, why was the adoption of the improved technologies reported to be low in the area? And why is the application of these technologies for commercial production not predominant in the study area?

            Although     some    studies    (Abdoulaye,     Abass,    Maziya-Dixon,     Tarawali,

Okechukwu, Rusike,  Alene, Manyong, and Ayedun. 2014;  Ayoade, 2013; Eze, Ibekwe,

Onoh, & Nwajiuba, 2006; and Oladele, 2005) that have assessed the adoption of Agricultural technologies have utilized either probit, logit or tobit model. In order to analyze the level of adoption, measured by the average farm land devoted to improved cassava varieties relative to the traditional or local varieties and the extent of commercialization by the respondents in the study area, this study adopted the probit model. The probit model is a statistical model that describes the relationship between a non-negative dependent variable and an independent variable via a parameter vector.

Other related studies on productivity (Atala, 2012; Bamidele, Babatunde, and Ajan,

2008), considered productivity and technical efficiency among cassava farmers in Kaduna and Kwara states respectively. They measured productivity based on the partial productivity of the inputs (labour, capital and land) where the average productivity statistics of the inputs do not represent the true changes in the underlying productivity of such inputs, (Dixon and Nukenine, 2000). This study therefore envisioned to adopt Total Factor Productivity (TFP) as a measure of productivity of cassava farmers in the area which can be measured by dividing total output by total inputs, (Fakayode, 2008).   Although the collaborative study of cassava in Africa (COSCA) had conducted a survey on the status of cassava production in Nigeria between 1988 and 1993, (over 20 years ago), it is expected that some changes must have occurred with respect to the level of adoption improved of cassava production technologies, yield per hectare and extend of commercialization of cassava products. This study therefore, was poised to evaluate the adoption of improved cassava production technologies, farmer’s productivity and the extent of cassava product commercialization in the study area.

1.3   OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

 The general objective of the study was to evaluate the adoption of cassava production technologies, farmers’ productivity and the extent of cassava product commercialization in the study area.

The specific objectives were to;

describe the socioeconomic characteristics and cropping systems of cassava farmers in the study area, ii. assess the level of adoption of improved cassava production technologies and the factors influencing level of adoption in the study area, iii. determine cassava farmers’ output and productivity and assess the determinants of productivity of cassava farmers in the study area,

determine the technical efficiency of cassava farmers in the use of resources in the area,

assess the determinants of technical efficiency of cassava farmers in the use of resources in the area, and vi. assess the extent of cassava product commercialization and the factors influencing commercialization of cassava products in the study area.

                                1.4       HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

The following hypotheses were tested;

The productivity of cassava farmers is not significantly influenced by the level of adoption of improved Cassava production technologies, farm size, access to credit, quantity of inputs used and the extent of cassava product commercialization.

Cassava farmers in the study area are not technically efficient in resources

utilization.

The socio-economic characteristics of cassava farmers have no significant influence on the extent of cassava product commercialization in the study area.

                                1.5       JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

Over the past two decades, many developing countries have experienced

considerable difficulties in providing sufficient food to satisfy the ever-increasing demand. This is evident by the mounting food deficits, hunger and widespread rural poverty. Cassava is currently gaining more attention as a reliable crop especially, because it serves as a staple food for over 200 million people in tropical Africa, and second to only maize in caloric contribution (Onabolu, Oluwole, Bokanga and Rosling, 2001). Traditionally, cassava farms just like other crop farms in Nigeria are the smallscale types, which are characterized by low productivity, and the production surpluses are generally marketed and sold domestically throughout Nigeria (Gray, 2004 and Bamidele, Babatunde and Ajan, 2008). It is therefore pertinent to stimulate cassava production among subsistence farmers as well as concentrate on the development of improved cassava production technologies. It was in response to this in Nigeria, as well as the devastating attacks by cassava diseases and pests over the past decades, that the International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA) in collaboration with other national agricultural research services had launched successful cassava programmes.

The result of this study is therefore necessary to cassava research institutes as it will evaluate the uptake of these research output, otherwise called adoption by cassava farmers, to stimulate investment, and the use of improved inputs or technologies and low level of commercialization of cassava products. Farmers require a better understanding of decision-making when faced with production choices and identifying factors that limit the use of such improved technologies based on the farmers’ perspectives. It is therefore empirically relevant to access how commercialization influences farmers’ decision on input use and adoption of technologies, and their effects on productivity of farm households. Therefore, this current study will be important to both researchers and policy makers in understanding the level of inputs use (intensification) by cassava farmers, thereby guiding policy initiatives for sustainable productivity. It would further strengthen research efforts and extension services to enhance the adoption and diffusion of innovations and increased crops’ productivity of smallholder farmers in the South-South states of Nigeria.

In 2002, cassava suddenly gained prominence in Nigeria following the pronouncement of a presidential initiative on the crop (Ezedinma, 2005). The initiative was aimed at using cassava production as the engine of growth in Nigeria. In recent times, government has encouraged the use of the crop to produce a wide range of industrial product such as ethanol, glue, Glucose syrup and bread. The result of this study is of immense importance to government and the Industries, to justify whether the current level of cassava production expansion can be relied upon to meet the increasing demand for the crop in Nigeria. Although the collaborative study of cassava in Africa

(COSCA) had conducted a survey on the status of cassava production in Nigeria between 1988 and 1993, (over 20 years ago), it is expected that some changes must have occurred with respect to the level of adoption improved of cassava production technologies, yield per hectare and extend of commercialization of cassava products. The results of this study will justify this as it will elucidate the current status of cassava production in the study area and the extent of cassava commercialization.

                                1.6       SCOPE OF THE STUDY

 The study was limited to the South-South states within the agriculture rainforest zone of Nigeria. The agricultural zone is one of the highest cassava producing region in the country. The study focused on farmers who cultivated cassava sole or in mixed cropping system.

                                1.7       PLAN OF THE STUDY

This study is organized in five chapters. Chapter one is the introduction which highlights the background of the study, problem statement, research objectives, hypothesis and justification. In chapter two, the literature review is sub-divided into four sections; the conceptual, theoretical, analytical and empirical frameworks.  Chapter three presents the methodology of research. The results of analysis are presented and discussed in chapter four. Finally, chapter five gives the summary, conclusion and recommendations.

HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)

After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to

08068231953 or 08168759420

(1)    Your project topics

(2)     Email Address

(3)     Payment Name

(4)    Teller Number

We will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert

BANK ACCOUNTS

Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI

Account Number: 0046579864

Bank: GTBank.

OR

Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI

Account Number: 3139283609

Bank: FIRST BANK

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:

08068231953 or 08168759420

AFFILIATE LINKS:

myeasyproject.com.ng

easyprojectmaterials.com

easyprojectmaterials.net.ng

easyprojectsmaterials.net.ng

easyprojectsmaterial.net.ng

easyprojectmaterial.net.ng

projectmaterials.com.ng

googleprojectsng.blogspot.com

myprojectsng.blogspot.com.ng

https://projectmaterialsng.blogspot.com.ng/
https://foreasyprojectmaterials.blogspot.com.ng/
https://mypostumes.blogspot.com.ng/
https://myeasymaterials.blogspot.com.ng/
https://eazyprojectsmaterial.blogspot.com.ng/
https://easzprojectmaterial.blogspot.com.ng/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *