Socioeconomic Determinants of Fruits Consumption Among Students of the Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria

ABSTRACT

Fruits are important components of a healthy diet. They are a good source of vitamins, minerals, proteins, and dietary fibers. The study was carried out in the Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria with the major objective to analyze the determinants of fruit consumption among students. A multistage sampling procedure was used to select 100 students and data were collected with the aid of a well-structured questionnaire. The mean age was 27 years and 52% of the sampled students were male with a mean stipend of ₦14,511.77 of which about ₦307 is spent on fruit consumption. Apple was most preferred by the respondents due to taste. The regression analysis indicated that marital status, amount of stipend received, parental education level, availability of fruits, and nature of study were variables that significantly determine consumption of fruits among the students. Provision of physical access by giving space to either the growers or sellers of fruits in the University campus and financial access with more stipends to raise what students spent on the average per months will significantly change their fruits consumption pattern.

KEYWORDS:

• Fruit expenditure
• vegetables
• ordinary least square
• Nigeria
• socioeconomic

Introduction

Nutritional problems in Nigeria are mostly due to inadequate food supply, poor income, and lack of proper education on fruits intake. These problems lead to malnutrition as a consequence of an unbalanced diet (Bvenura and Sivakumar, 2017). Fruits production in Nigeria throughout the year is necessary due to unavailability of storage and processing facilities. Fruits are important components of a healthy human diet. They are a good source of vitamins, minerals, proteins, micronutrients, and dietary fibers (Balasubramanian, 2012) and are recommended for protection against almost all major non-communicable diseases (Liu, 2013; Slavin and Lloyd, 2012). They are foods with low energy density with few calories in relation to volume consumed, favoring maintenance of healthy body weight. Regular consumption of adequate amount of fruit could prevent diseases (Pomerleau et al., 2004). A diet including mainly fruits can boost memory (Vishal, 2014). In spite the benefits of fruits, the consumption in Africa is low compared to the recommended daily intake (Hall et al., 2009) with most people not meeting the daily fruit intake requirement (Landais, 2012).

Fruits add variety, enjoyment and a sense of satisfaction to the diet because of their appealing colors, flavors, and texture (Adebamiji and Omotola, 2009). Despite the relevance of fruits in the diet, per capita consumption of fruits in the developing world is only 100 g compared with 220 g in more advanced countries (Messiaen, 1992). Developing countries account for about 98% of total fruit production while the developed countries account for 80% of world import fruit (FAO, 2004). There is little information on determinants of fruit consumption in Nigeria among students studying in higher institution of learning. This study seeks to analyze students’ preference on fruits, and factors that influence their consumption.

Theoretical underpinning

The economic theory underpinning the article is the theory of consumer’s behavior, which has to do with what people eat and why do they eat such and not the others. This uses the concept of demand and supply. While demand examines behavior of consumers, that of supply look into the behavior of the sellers/producers. The theory of consumers’ behavior is based on the assumption of consumer utility functions; consumer preference that is faced with alternatives commodities each of which has its own utility content. Households or individuals plan to spend their income on commodities with the higher utility content because they are assumed to be rational, (wants to maximize utility). The theory of consumer behavior has two approaches. The ordinal approach (indifference curve) and the cardinal approach both concepts are based on the assumption that consumers are rational. The ordinal approach believes that the utility of each commodity is accurately measurable in terms of unity or monetarily, the cardinal measure ranks commodities in order of preferences.

Engel’s law states that, as income rises, the proportion of income spent on food falls, even if absolute expenditure on food rises (i.e., food absorbs a decreasing part of the budget as affluence rises). As income increases, the quantity consumed increases by a small amount; the income elasticity of demand is low. Expenditure for luxuries increases more in response to increased income than to expenditure for food and income elasticity is greater.

Types and frequency of food consumption is associated with several socioeconomic, demographic, personal, and environmental factors, such as gender, age, economic status, place of residence, nutritional knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, perceived barriers, and family size and structure (Rasmussen et al., 2006). According to Schlosser (2001) and Young (2005), unhealthy eating habits and sedentary lifestyles are closely related to various socioeconomic indicators including parent education levels, financial resources, professional status, and living in economically deprived areas. Consumption of fruit and vegetables is related to the availability, accessibility, cost, and quality of the food (Johnson et al., 2012; Niclasen et al., 2011). Fruit consumption increases with family’s material wealth and higher parental occupational status, but this depends on socioeconomic position of the population among several other factors (Vereecken, 2005). Fruits, vegetables, and fish consumption are associated with populations of lower socioeconomic status unlike consumption of fats and soft drinks, which is greater in population with higher socioeconomic status (Young, 2005). Consumption of fruits will continue to grow with population growth change in lifestyle and improvement in the standard of living along with emergence of the middle class and the youthful population (Kearney, 2010).

Studies (such as Ruel et al., 2004) have shown a decreasing trend in fruit and vegetables consumption in Nigeria while intake of sweet and soft drinks is on the increase and age and gender were considered as vital factors influencing the eating. In 2001, fruit and vegetable consumption decreased between ages of 11 and 15 and intake of sweet and soft drinks increased. Boys eat less fruits than girls and consume more soft drinks (Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2004).

Beard (2000) stated that females require increased amounts of iron after puberty. Insufficient supplies of iron in adolescent girls cause a need for a diet rich in iron with fruits as a major source. Girls aged 14 years and older, and boys 18 years and older had the highest proportion of adequate consumption of fruit (≥ 3 portions/day) and children and young people living in large cities showed the highest proportions of inadequate fruit intake (Perez- Rodrigo et al., 2005). Bjelland et al. (2011) stated that the determinants fruits and vegetable consumption among children and adolescent are based on age, gender, socioeconomic position, preference, parental intake, and home availability/accessibility. Adebamiji and Omotola (2009) stated that the consumption of fruits is relatively low and may be due to high prices of fruit, season, income, and taste. The result from their study revealed that consumption of fruits was dependent on the student’s monthly allowances.

Materials and methods

The study was carried out in the Federal University of Agriculture Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria. It is a public university located in Abeokuta, Ogun State Nigeria, in Western Nigeria. The university was established in 1988 by the Federal Government as one of the three federal universities of agriculture in Nigeria (the other being in Makurdi in Benue State and Umudike in Abia State). The academic structure comprises 10 fully functional colleges besides institutes, centers, and academic establishments (See Table 1 for details). The university has 179 academic programs made up of 44 undergraduate programs, 135 graduate programs, which include 22 postgraduate diploma programs, 57 masters degree programs, and 56 doctorate degree programs. The students in the University comprise the undergraduates with population size of about 15,919 and 1,600 postgraduates in 2017 when this study was carried out.

Table 1. List of colleges, departments, academic programs, centers, and institutes in FUNAAB.

Colleges	Departments, Programmes, Centers, and Institutes
College of Management Sciences (COLMAS)	• Dept. of Accounting
	• Dept. of Banking and Finance
	• Dept. of Economics
	• Dept. of Entrepreneurial Studies
	• Dept. of Business Administration
College of Physical Sciences (COLPHYS)	• Dept. of Chemistry
	• Dept. of Computer Science
	• Dept. of Mathematics
	• Dept. of Physics
College of Biological Sciences (COLBIOS)	• Dept. of Botany
	• Dept. of Biochemistry
	• Dept. of Microbiology
	• Department of Applied Zoology
College of Engineering (COLENG)	• Dept. of Mechatronics
	• Dept. of Agricultural Engineering
	• Dept. of Civil Engineering
	• Dept. of Electrical and Electronics Engineering
	• Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
College of Food Sciences and Human Ecology (COLFHEC)	• Dept. of Food Science and Technology
	• Dept. of Home Science and Management
	• Dept. of Nutrition and Dietetics
	• Dept. of Food service and Tourism
College of Veterinary Medicine (COLVET)	• Dept. of Veterinary Anatomy
	• Dept. of Veterinary Physiology & Pharmacology
	• Dept. of Veterinary Pathology
	• Dept. of Veterinary Microbiology & Parasitology
	• Dept. of Veterinary Medicine & Surgery
	• Dept. of Veterinary Public Health & Reproduction
College of Plant Science and Crop Production (COLPLANT)	• Dept. of Crop Protection
	• Dept. of Horticulture
	• Dept. of Plant Breeding and Seed Technology
	• Dept. of Plant Physiology and Crop Production
	• Dept. of Soil Science and Land Management
College of Animal Science and Livestock Production (COLANIM)	• Dept. of Pasture and Range Management • Dept. of Business Administration
	• Dept. of Animal Breeding and Genetics
	• Dept. of Animal Physiology
	• Dept. of Animal Production and Health
College of Environmental Resources Management (COLERM)	• Dept. of Aquaculture and Fisheries Management
	• Dept. of Environmental Management and Toxicology
	• Dept. of Forestry And Wildlife Management
	• Dept. of Water Resources Management And Agrometeorology
College of Agricultural Management and Rural Development (COLAMRUD)	• Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Farm Management
	• Dept. of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development
	• Dept. of Agricultural Administration
	• Dept. of Communication and General Studies
Institutes, centers, and academic establishments	• Centre of Excellence in Agriculture and Sustainable Environment (CEADESE). • Centre for Entrepreneurial Studies (CENT)
	• School of Postgraduate Studies
	• Distance Learning Institute
	• Institute for Continuing Education
	• Biotechnology Centre
	• Institute of Food Security, Environmental Resources and Agricultural Research (IFSERAR) • Agricultural Media Resources and Extension Centre (AMREC)

Primary data were collected through the use of a well- structured questionnaire. A multi-stage sampling procedure was employed. The first stage was selection of Federal University of Agriculture because it is a specialized university and it is expected that students would consume varieties of fruits grown on campus. The second stage involved random selection of five colleges. The third stage involved random selection of two departments from the selected five colleges. The last stage involved random selection of 10 students from each department with a total of 100 respondents.

Data on the age of the student, sex, nature of study, types of program of study, marital status, residence, types of fruits available, amount of stipend receive, and expenditure on fruits were analyzed using descriptive statistics and ordinary least square regression analysis to analyze factors affecting fruits consumption of students in the study area.

Implicitly

(1) $\mathrm{C}=\mathrm{F}\left({\mathrm{X}}_1,{\mathrm{X}}_{2,}{\mathrm{X}}_3\dots \dots \dots \dots \dots \dots \dots \dots \dots {\mathrm{X}}_8,\mathrm{U}\right)$(1)

Where C = Amount spent on Fruit (Naira/month) as a proxy for food consumption

X₁ = Age (years)

X₂ = Sex (if male 1 otherwise = 0)

X₃ = Marital status (if single = 1, otherwise = 0)

X₄ = Nature of study (if full time = 1, otherwise = 0)

X₅ = Place of residence (If campus = 1, otherwise = 0)

X₆ = parents education (if educated = 1, otherwise = 0)

X₇ = Amount of stipend received (Naira)

X₈ = Student employment (if yes = 1, otherwise = 0)

X₉ = Availability of fruit (if available = 1, otherwise = 0)

U = Error term

Explicitly, linear functional was used and expressed as

(2) $\mathrm{C}={\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{o}}+{\mathrm{b}}_1{\mathrm{X}}_1+{\mathrm{b}}_2{\mathrm{X}}_2\dots \dots \dots \dots \dots \dots \dots \dots ..{\mathrm{b}}_8{\mathrm{X}}_8+\mathrm{U})$(2)

Results and discussion

The findings show variations in the socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents (students) (Table 2). Only a few of these students live on campus. Typical student was male, single in the late twenties and received a mean monthly stipend of ₦ 4,511.45.

Table 2. Socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents.

Characteristics	Frequency	Percent
Age (Years)
< 20	18	18.0
21–30	61	61.0
31–40	14	14.0
41–50	6	6.0
> 50	1	1.0
Total	100	100.0
Mean	27
Sex
Female	48	48.0
Male	52	52.0
Total	100	100.0
Marital status
Married	18	18.0
Single	82	82.0
Total	100	100.0
Religion
Christianity	75	75.0
Muslim	24	24.0
Traditional	1	1
Total	100	100
Residence
Campus	6	6
Off campus	94	94
Total	100	100
Types of Programs
Post-graduate	19	19
Under graduate	81	81
Total	100	100
Nature of Study
Full time	70	70
Part-time	30	30
Total	100	100
Stipend
Daily	3	3.0
Monthly	61	61.0
None	14	14.0
Per semester	7	7.0
Weekly	15	15.0
Total	100	100.0
Paid Employment
No	64	64.0
Yes	36	36.0
Total	100	100.0
Stipend amount(₦)
≤ 5000	42	42.0
5001–10,000	31	31.0
10,001–15,000	12	12.0
15,001–20,000	5	5.0
> 20,000	10	10.0
Total	100	100.0
Mean	14,511.45
Amount spent on fruits(₦)
≤ 200	56	56.0
201–400	14	14.0
> 400	30	30.0
Total	100	100.0
Mean	312.77

The mean amount spent on fruits monthly was ₦312.77. Most are not working, are undergraduates and a smaller minority are studying part-time.

Preferences for fruit type varied (Table 3). The majority of students preferred apple to other fruits because of it taste and accessibility compare to other fruits. This is followed by banana and watermelon. Walnut, mango, and cucumber are not preferred by respondents due to unavailability at all seasons.

Table 3. Distribution of respondents based on preference for different fruits.

Fruits	Most liked	Better liked	Acceptable	Less liked	Not at all liked
Mango	18	22	31	12	17
Orange	36	27	24	11	2
Pawpaw	23	21	35	14	7
Banana	45	25	16	11	3
Apple	59	18	16	3	4
Walnut	11	19	26	24	20
Watermelon	41	23	20	7	9
Cucumber	23	30	20	10	17
Pineapple	29	30	22	13	6
Egg plant	10	22	27	25	16

The coefficient of determination in Table 4 indicated that independent variables accounted for 50.5% of the total variation in dependent variable (amount spent on fruit consumed). The F-value was 10.20 implying that the model was significant (at p < 0.01) and the independent variables fit the model.

Table 4. Determinants of fruits consumption.

	Coefficient	Std. Error	T-value
(Constant)	0.528	0.508	1.039
Age	0.070	0.119	0.587
Sex	−0.164	0.142	−1.151
Marital Status	0.444*	0.255	1.738
Full time	−0.384*	0.207	−1.857
Residence	−0.108	0.291	−0.370
Parent education	0.261*	0.136	1.920
Amount of stipend	0.053	0.055	0.946
Paid employment	0.239	0.198	1.210
Availability	1.165***	0.145	8.032
F-Value	10.20***
R^2	0.505
Adjusted R^2	0.455

Note: *significant at p < 0.1, **significant at p < 0.05, ***significant at p < 0.01

Marital status, nature of the study, parents’ education and availability of fruits significantly affected the consumption of fruit. Nature of study significantly and negatively affects the amount spent on fruit implying that students that study on part time spend more on consumption of fruits, which may be due to students having close access to markets where fruits are more available. Availability and access to most fruit depends on season and this determines the quantity and variety of fruit available. Many of these fruit are not available. This agrees with the importance of availability and seasonality of fruits to their consumption (Layade et al., 2014; Mette et al., 2006; Othman et al., 2012). This variable has a positive effect on the amount spent on fruits and this implies that respondents that have access to fruits tends to consume more and spend more on fruit consumption. Single students tend to spend more on fruit which may be due to them that not having extra responsibility freeing up funds to purchase fruit.

Education of parents had a positive (β = 0.261) and significant (p < 0.1) influence on amount spent on fruit, implying that parents that have higher education understand the importance of fruit in the diet and tend to give their children sufficient stipends which can be spent on fruits.

Conclusion and recommendations

Given the results presented, it is concluded that the preference of students for certain type of food over others in the study area are mainly determine by taste and accessibility, while the determinants of fruits consumption in general are significantly determined by factors such as marital status of the student, amount of stipend received, level of parental education, availability of fruits, and nature of study (full time or part-time). Provision of space within the University campus for sale of fruits and increase in students’ stipend per month will increase consumption of fruits among students.