




































 AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL STUDIES 9(1) (2024), 17-26  

 

17 

 

 

      AGRICULTURAL STUDIES 

                                                               AIJAS VOL 9 NO 1 (2024) P-ISSN 2641-4155   E-ISSN 2641-418X 
                                                  

                                                                                                                      Available online at www.acseusa.org      

                                                                                                                                Journal homepage: https://www.acseusa.org/journal/index.php/aijas 
                Published by American Center of Science and Education, USA 

 ASSESSMENT OF THE OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE OF 

FARMERS' COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES IN SOUTH EAST 

NIGERIA    

 

 Ogochukwu Gabriella Onah (a)1    Chukwuma Otum Ume (b)     Kelvin Nnaemeka Nwangwu (c)      Emmanuel Ejiofor 

Omeje (d)     Chizoba Obianuju Oranu (e)      

 

(a) Lecturer I, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria; E-mail: ogochi.onah@unn.edu.ng 
(b) Lecturer I, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria; E-mail: chukwuma.ume@unn.edu.ng 
(c) Lecturer II, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria; E-mail: nnaemeka.nwangwu@unn.edu.ng 
(d) Lecturer I, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria; E-mail: ejiofor.omeje@unn.edu.ng  
(e) Lecturer I, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria; E-mail: chizoba.oranu@unn.edu.ng 

 

 
A R T I C L E I N F O 
 

 

Article History: 
 

Received: 14th January 2024 

Reviewed & Revised: 15th January  

to 30th April 2024 

Accepted: 4th May 2024 

Published: 11th May 2024 

 
Keywords: 

 

Farmers, Cooperatives, Operational  

Performance, Southeast Nigeria 

 
JEL Classification Codes: 

 

O13 

       

Peer-Review Model:  
 

External peer-review was done through  

double-blind method.  

 
A B S T R A C T 
 
To uncover the constraints and entry points for improving the operational performance of farmers' 

cooperative societies in southeast Nigeria forms the motivation for this study. Farmers' cooperatives 

have enormous potential to support economic growth at the rural and regional levels, building on the 

spirit of teamwork that is already common among the rural people. A decent number of qualities 

differentiate cooperative associations from other different entities. These comprise open and voluntary 
enrollment. Cooperative social orders are available to all citizenry with common interests. This study 

analyzed responses from two hundred and forty respondents selected through a multi-stage sampling 

procedure. Frequency, mean, Likert scale and ordered logit regression model were used for the analysis. 

The perception of members of farmers' cooperative societies on their operational performance showed 

that the cooperatives in the area performed well in terms of members' access to training, participation 

during decision-making, voting during elections, and leaders' emergence through the democratic 

process. The ordered logit regression result of the socioeconomic factors to the operational performance 
of the farmers' cooperatives showed that membership strength, Age of the cooperatives, access to free 

input, access to training, and access to infrastructural facilities were statistically significant and 

positively related to farmers' cooperatives level of operational performance. Thus, the study 

recommends that Cooperative societies supply their members' goods and services for improved income 

and savings investment, improved productivity, and bargaining power through maximum utilization of 

economies of scale and cost and risk sharing.  
 

© 2024 by the authors. Licensee ACSE, USA. This open-access article is distributed under the terms 

and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license 

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).                           

 

INTRODUCTION 

Group organizations contribute significantly to economic growth and development by empowering poor people and creating 

jobs (Poppe et al., 2021). They facilitate financial inclusion and social protection, critical elements in reducing restiveness 

in society (Yamusa & Adefila, 2014). This is particularly important given the level of restiveness in Nigerian society. 

Farming and farmer organizations are even strategically more critical in this regard, especially in the area of financial 

inclusion, job creation, poverty reduction and social protection (Anigbogu et al., 2016) 

The International Cooperative Alliance (ICA) defines a cooperative as an autonomous association of persons unified 

voluntarily to meet their everyday economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly owned and 

democratically controlled enterprise (ICA, 2009). In this light, cooperative societies function based on the values of self-

help, self-responsibility, democracy, equality, equity and solidarity. In contrast, the cooperative members believe in the 

ethical values of honesty, openness, social responsibility and caring for others (ICA, 2009).  

In particular, Farmers' Cooperative Societies (FCSs) provide a veritable platform to improve the living conditions 

                                                      
1Corresponding author: ORCID ID: 0000-0002-9883-2109 

© 2024 by the authors. Hosting by ACSE. Peer review under the responsibility of the American Center of Science and Education, USA.  

https://doi.org/10.46545/aijas.v9i1.314 
 

To cite this article: Onah, O. G., Ume, C. O., Nwangwu, K. N., Omeje, E. E., & Oranu, C. O. (2024). ASSESSMENT OF THE OPERATIONAL 

PERFORMANCE OF FARMERS’ COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES IN SOUTH EAST NIGERIA. American International Journal of Agricultural Studies, 
9(1), 17–26. https://doi.org/10.46545/aijas.v9i1.314 

https://doi.org/10.46545/aijas.v9i1.314
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
https://www.openaccess.nl/en
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9883-2109
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2033-0560
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0374-5071
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1448-7003
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4293-3816


Onah et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 17-26 

 

18 
 

 

of farmers through increased agricultural production and productivity in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). According to Omotesho 

(2008), cooperative societies are the most effective vehicles for efficiently mobilizing production resources for accelerated 

rural development. They allow for the harnessing and pooling of millions of smallholder farmers' resources to enable them 

to enjoy the advantages of economies of scale (Onugu & Abdulahi, 2012). Farmers can realize scale economies in bulk 

acquisition and hence enter into more stable trade agreements with suppliers or processors by forming cooperatives (Afolami 

et al., 2012). Furthermore, Dimelu et al. (2014) noted that most government and non-governmental organizations, including 

donor agencies, encourage and promote the formation of cooperative societies as a prerequisite for farmers' access to 

agricultural support services.  

However, managing cooperatives remains crucial for sustaining income generation and social security in 

communities (Masuku et al., 2016; Breitenbach & Brandao, 2021). Poor performance of cooperatives could be attributed to 

poor governance structure, membership cohesion and satisfaction,  limited advocacy and communication skills, and financial 

constraints that make it impossible for cooperatives to function effectively and optimally to better their members' living 

conditions. Thus, there is an urgent need to assess the existing farmers' cooperative groups to provide the required tools and 

evidence for its improvement and policy in Nigeria. When fully sustained, the farmers' cooperative groups in Nigeria will 

provide a veritable platform for reducing poverty (Ige & Ojo, 2023), especially among rural poor farmers who are generally 

described as the poorest and most vulnerable segment of society. There is little empirical evidence on the operational 

performance of farmers' cooperative societies to make way for easy policy formulation. Most studies in this area have tended 

to ignore the organization's structure and state of governance, which will enhance such issues as a cohesive and optimal 

performance of the societies (Liu et al., 2023). This is particularly important to enhance the longevity and sustainability of 

cooperatives in Nigeria and reduce proliferation for political and state aid reasons. The study, therefore, evaluated the 

operational performance of the farmers' cooperative societies from the view and perspective of the members, as well as 

determine the socioeconomic factors affecting the operational performance of the farmers' cooperatives.  

 

LITERATURE REVIEW 

Contextualization of Operational Performance 
The performance of FCS can be evaluated by different standards and with different perspectives. The choice of criteria for 

evaluating the performance of any organization, including farmers' cooperatives, is a contextual issue that depends mainly 

on the nature of the organization in question (Onwuchekwam, 1985); different authors have their claims on cooperative 

performance; Holmén (1994) describes how donors’ expectations on cooperatives are unrealistic and how cooperatives often 

fail to address the development problems that donors want them to target. Consequently, Holmén argued that an evaluation 

of cooperative performance should start with discussing what cooperatives can and cannot do. It is argued that the members' 

expectations are vital to understanding the cooperative goals and that the criteria for evaluation should be formulated as "the 

extent to which a cooperative satisfies the basic interests that motivated the members to join the cooperative" 

(Onwuchekwam, 1985). Therefore, operational performance is contextualized in this study based on the activities of the 

FCSs geared towards realizing the goals and aspirations of the members (Jamro et al., 2021; Jabessa et al., 2023; Kebede et 

al., 2024). 

Figure 1 presents a conceptual framework that suggests three essential vintage points for understanding a 

cooperative's operational performance.  

 First is the level to which members are involved in cooperative meetings and gatherings  

 Second is the level of participation of the members in decision-making as well as voting during elections  

 Finally, the level at which the members contribute financially and use the cooperative as the avenue for transacting 

in terms of a collective purchase of inputs and sales of produce.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Criteria for accessing the operational performance of a cooperative society 

Members of a Farmers' 

Cooperative Society (FCS) 

F
in

a
n

cia
l co

m
m

itm
en

t  

P
a
rticip

a
tio

n
 in

 D
ecisio

n
-

m
a
k

in
g

 

Meeting attendance 

Operational 

Performance  



Onah et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 17-26 

 

19 
 

 

The assumption is that cooperatives that fulfil these three criteria reflect the extent to which a cooperative satisfies 

the primary interests that motivate the members to join the cooperative. Kassali and Adeyemo (2007) found that cooperative 

societies operated in a competitive environment and engaged in development and poverty alleviation projects, while 

membership and the number of services provided to members were some of the determinants of cooperative performance. 

This study evaluated the performance of farmers' cooperatives through their operational performance ability as a yardstick 

to assess their contributions to members' welfare and the development of local communities as required by cooperative law. 

A cooperative society promotes autonomy and a democratic process in its operations, where members are key 

players in setting policies and decision-making. This is a unique feature of cooperative society that determines the 

involvement or participation of members in cooperative operations, which is a significant factor in cooperative performance. 

The participation of members is essential for the success of any cooperative society, irrespective of type, as it helps achieve 

cooperative objectives. Therefore, farmers' cooperatives must achieve their objectives to be viewed as performing optimally; 

however, achieving these objectives depends on several factors. 

The International Cooperative Alliance (ICA, 2009) states three core principles associated with cooperative 

operations: openness, democratic control and management of capital. Openness means cooperative members must ensure 

transparency in all establishments and operational practices. Subsequently, democratic control dismisses sole proprietorship 

in cooperative planning and decision-making processes and management of capital encourages proper cooperative budgeting 

and discourages wastefulness in cooperative funds during operational periods. The ICA also maintains that the 

implementation of these principles helps in ensuring that the cooperatives' pre-set objectives have a holistic benefit to all 

members of the cooperative, extinguishing one member's service and also considering meeting the needs of all members 

while maximizing cooperative profits (Department of Trade and Industry, 2012). 

Based on the preceding, we portray operational performance as a reflection of the state of governance in cooperative 

operations. In that regard, cooperative societies are democratic institutions with all members having an equal vote; they 

meet and decide on all issues. Empirically, we determine operational performance based on the level of member participation 

in decision-making and voting during elections, the average member commitment in payment of dues, selling produce 

through cooperatives and buying products from cooperative society, and more broadly based on the perception of farmers' 

cooperative societies towards their operational performance. 

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS 

The study area was the East region of Nigeria, made up of five states: Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu and Imo, with latitudes 

4°30'and 7°00'N and longitudes 5°30' and 9°30'E (National Population Commission, 2006). The study population comprised 

registered farmers' cooperative societies in the region. A multistage sampling technique was adopted for the selection of 

respondents. In the first stage, three states, Anambra, Ebonyi, and Enugu, were randomly selected from the five states in the 

region. In the second stage, two agricultural zones were purposively selected from each state because of the high 

concentration of farmers' cooperative societies. This gave a total of six agricultural zones. These agricultural zones were 

Anambra and Onitsha (Anambra state), Ebonyi Central and Ebonyi South (Ebonyi state), and Awgu and Nsukka (Enugu 

state). In the Third stage, two Local Government Areas (LGAs) were randomly selected from each of the selected 

agricultural zones, making twelve LGAs. These local government areas were Anambra East and Ayamelum from Anambra; 

Ihiala and Ogbaru from Onisha; Ishielu and Ikwo from Ebonyi Central; Afikpo South and Ohaozara from Ebonyi South; 

Awgu and Aninri from Awgu and Igbo-entity and Uzo-want from Nsukka agricultural zones. A random sampling was used 

to select twenty farmers' cooperative societies from a list of Farmers' Cooperative Societies (FCSs) in each LGA supplied 

by the LGA cooperative officer. This study used two hundred and forty farmers' cooperative societies.   Using a set of using-

tested and validated questions, names collected data. Descriptive statistics and ordered logit models were used to analyze 

the data. 

The instrument elicited information on the operational activities and performance of the cooperative society, such 

as cooperative meetings, training organized for members and committees, services rendered to members, members' 

participation/patronage, members' participation during decision-making,  members' commitment in payment of dues, 

members' participation in voting during the election and how cooperative leaders emerged, was accessed on 4 point – Likert 

– type scale of Very High (VH) = 4, High (H) = 3, Low (L) = 2, Very Low (VL) = 1. Variables with mean scores < 2.5 were 

ranked "Not Performing, and mean scores of≥ 2.5 were considered performing. 

The ordered Logit model determined the factors affecting the farmers' cooperatives' operational performance. This 

is because the dependent variable (level of operational performance) is structured of an ordinal nature, derived through a 

Likert rating scale, which required the respondents to indicate the extent of the cooperative' operational performance under 

three categories: High = 3, medium and Low=1. For each of these Cooperative Societies, the number of indicators that 

passed the scale was counted as indicating performance level in such area (these formed the dependent variables of the 

ordered logit). The ordered logit model is given as 

y* = ß’x + Ɛi, where y* is the underlying latent variable that indexes the level of the cooperative's operational 

performance; ß is a vector of parameters to be estimated while x is a vector of explanatory variables and Ɛ is the stochastic 

error term. The latent variable exhibits itself in ordinal categories coded as 1, 2, 3,….j. The response of category j is thus 

observed when the underlying continuous response falls in the jth interval as:   

y = 1 if 0 > y* ≤ ∂1 

y = 2 if ∂1 > y* ≤ ∂2 

y = 3 if ∂2 > y* ≤ ∂3 



Onah et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 17-26 

 

20 
 

 

. 

. 

. 

=     j if   ∂j-1     ≤ y* 

This is a form of censoring, with the ∂'s unknown parameters to be estimated with ß 

  

The hypothesized factors affecting the operational performance of the farmers' cooperatives include; 

X1 = the Amount of money saved by the cooperatives (N), X2 = the Membership strength of the cooperative (the number 

of people in a cooperative), X3 = the Age of the cooperative society ( in years), X4 = the Total Shareholdings of the 

cooperative (Naira), X5 = Access to free input by the cooperative (access=1; no access = 0), X6 = Access to training by the 

cooperative (access=1; no access = 0), and X7 = Access to infrastructural facilities (access=1; no access = 0).  

 

RESULTS 

Operational performance of farmers’ cooperative societies 

We assessed the operational performance of the surveyed cooperative societies based on the following criteria: i) Percentage 

of the group members' attendance at meetings, ii) member participation in decision-making and voting. iii) average member 

commitment in payment of dues, selling produce through and buying products from society, iv) perception of farmers' 

cooperative societies towards their operational performance in the study area. This section presents the results based on the 

240 surveyed cooperative societies.  

 

Attendance of meetings by members 

Meeting attendance reflects the level of integration and commitment by the members themselves. Table 1 shows the 

percentage attendance per meeting by members. It was shown that farmers' cooperatives with membership sizes ten and 

below had, on average, a 48.75% level of attendance. Cooperatives between the 11- 20, 21- 30, and 31 and above 

memberships had, on average, 26.67%, 19.17%, and 5.42% persons, respectively, attending meetings each time. This result 

does not indicate high participation of members in attendance to meetings. 

 

Table 1. Average attendance at meetings 

 
 Cooperative size(membership) Frequency % meeting attendance 

10 117   48.75 

11-20 64 26.67 

21-30 46 19.17 

31 and above 13 5.42 

 

Member participation in Decision making  

Cooperative societies are democratic institutions. All members have an equal vote. They meet and make decisions together 

on all issues. Figure 2 shows the level of members' participation in the decision-making process and voting during the 

election of their executives.  

 

 
Figure 2. Member participation in decision-making and voting during elections 

 

It showed that 95% and 84.58% of cooperatives indicated that their members participated in decision-making and 

voted during the election of their leaders, respectively. This indicates the depth of the democratic process, membership 

control, and ownership of cooperative affairs as required by cooperative law. Democracy is known to improve members' 

trust and commitment to cooperative operations. 

 

Commitment to financial matters 

The third criterion investigated was the level of commitment of cooperative membership to regular payment of dues in the 

cooperatives. Table 2 showed that those whose membership size was 10, 11-20, 21-30, and 31 and above had 7, 12, 20, and 

33 persons, respectively, committed to payment of dues. The result in Table 2 suggests that members are not committed to 

0

20

40

60

80

100

Participated in decision making participated in voting during
election

Yes

No



Onah et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 17-26 

 

21 
 

 

payment of dues as required. Table 2 further reveals members' commitment to buying and selling their products through 

cooperation (patronage). 

 
Table 2. Member commitments in payment of dues, selling, and buying through FCS 

 
Variable  Frequency        Mean   Percentage  

Average members committed to paying 

dues/contributions by cooperative size. 

    

10 64         7 26.6  

11-20 117        12 48.74  

21-30 46        20 19.16  

31 and above 13        33 5.41  

Average members that sell their products through 

cooperatives by cooperative size 

    

10 64         4 26.6  

11-20 117         4 48.74  

21-30 46         8 19.16  

31 and above 13        11 5.41  

Average members that buy produce from cooperatives by 

cooperative size 

    

10 64       5 26.6  

11-20 117       6 48.74  

21-30 46      12 19.16  

31 and above 13      25 5.41  

 
Table 2 shows that cooperatives with a membership size of 10, 11-20, 21-30, and 31 and above have, on average, 

4, 4, 8, and 11 persons, respectively, committed to selling their agricultural produce through their cooperative society. Also, 

cooperative membership sizes of 10, 11-20, 21-30, and 31 and above had, on average, 5, 6, 12, and 25 persons buying their 

products from their cooperatives. The result in Table 2 showed very poor patronage by members. However, interestingly, 

the result showed that the level of commitment to dues payment, as well as the level of sales and purchases through the 

cooperative societies, increases with an increase in the membership size of the cooperative societies.  

 

Perception of cooperative societies towards their operational performance  

The perception of farmers' cooperative societies regarding their operational performance was investigated using a 4-point 

Likert scale. The majority of the respondents indicated that their cooperatives did not perform their operational functions 

with average scores: members do not attend meetings (2.39), members are satisfied with the benefits they get from the 

cooperative (2.06), members are committed to payment of dues as required (2.13), members buy produce from the 

cooperative (2.37), and members sell their produce through the cooperative (2.14).   

The result in Table 4 showed that members do not participate nor are committed to the critical operational activities 

of cooperatives, which are stated by cooperative principles to be among the factors determining good governance in 

cooperative operations. It showed that members needed to be more committed to meeting attendance. This result 

corroborates the findings by Garandi (2018), who reported a strong relationship between cooperative members' attendance 

at meetings and performance. His report showed that most respondents (72%) rated poor meeting attendance as the most 

challenging habit of members of cooperatives affecting their performance in the study area. 

Dues payment by members could have been more encouraging. Most farmers' cooperative members join and remain in the 

societies to gain benefits from government agricultural assistance (Franks & Mc Gloin, 2007). This was also evident in the 

result of this study, as shown in Table 2, where the attitude of members' dues payment was deplorable. Members are not 

interested in committing their resources to the cooperative movement, which is against the cooperative principle of economic 

participation of members, perhaps due to a lack of trust in the leadership, lack of honesty, transparency and poor orientation 

of the cooperative group. These findings agree with Garandi's (2018) report. 

Buying from and selling through cooperatives by members is evidence of the participation of members, which is 

crucial to the performance of the cooperative society and is pertinent to their goal attainment. Agrawal et al. (2002) noted 

that members' participation in cooperative activities, both in quantity and quality, can improve the perception and control 

members exert on the cooperative performance. They further stated that members' investment through their share capital, 

patronage, and other social activities could be at various levels, and it is expected that each of these will have differing 

effects on cooperative performance and control. In a related study, Olabisi and Petronilla (2011) reported that members' 

patronizing cooperative businesses positively correlates with cooperative performance realization.  

The cooperatives that indicated to have performed their operational functions include members and committees having 

access to training (2.59), members participating during decision-making (2.70), members voting during meetings (3.27), 

and leaders emerging through election (2.62). 

 

Table 3. Perception of Farmers’ Cooperative Societies towards their Operational Performance in the Study Area (n=240) 

 
S/N Perception VH x4 H x3 L x2 VL x1 Total Mean Remark 

1 Members are committed 

to attending meetings 

42(168) 58(174) 91(182) 49(49) 573 2.39 NP 



Onah et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 17-26 

 

22 
 

 

2 Members are satisfied 

with the benefits they get 

from cooperative 

34(136) 41(123) 73(144) 92(92) 495 2.06 NP 

3 Members and committees 

have access to training 

33(132) 90(270) 102(204) 15(15) 621 2.59 P 

4 Members participate in 

decision-making 

89(356) 40(120) 62(124) 49(49) 649 2.70 P 

5 Members are committed 

to paying dues as 
required  

29(116) 42(126) 102(204) 67(67) 513 2.13 NP 

6 Members vote during 

elections 

120(480) 81(243) 25(50) 14(14) 787 3.27 P 

7 Members buy produce 
from a cooperative 

24(96) 57(171) 142(284) 17(17) 568 2.37 NP 

8 Members sell their 

produce through 
cooperative 

20(80) 41(123) 132(264) 47(47) 514 2.14 NP 

9 Leaders emerge through 

the democratic 

process(election) 

59(224) 61(183) 101(202) 19(19) 628 2.62 P 

Total number of cooperatives = 240; Total mean =22.27; Grand Mean = 2.47. Figures in parenthesis are nominal Likert values multiplied by their 

Frequencies/ Weight P = Performing; NP = Not Performing 

 

Factors affecting the operational performance  

The ordered logit regression result is presented in Table 4. The table shows the estimates of the parameters of ordered logit 

regression on the factors affecting the operational performance of farmers' cooperative societies. The explanatory power of 

the factors, as reflected by Pseudo R2, was (57%). This shows that about 57% of the variation in the levels of operational 

performance is explained by the explanatory variables included in the model. The “/cut” parameters are the estimated 

thresholds µ1, µ2, and µ3.   These reflect the ancillary parameters used to estimate probabilities for the independent variable 

values (1, 2, and 3) with the following values: -1.360, 0.961, and 3.260. The model proves robust through a chi-square of 

98.88 with 7 degrees of freedom. Prob> Chi2 (0.0000) indicates that the variables included in the model are jointly 

statistically significant. The model seems to have behaved well in terms of consistency with prior expectations regarding 

the relationship between the dependent and explanatory variables.   

The results showed that the cooperative societies' membership strength, the cooperative's Age, access to free input, 

access to training, and access to infrastructural facilities were statistically significant determinants of operational 

performance. Other significant variables include the Educational Status of the top manager (the top manager is usually 

referred to as the chairperson), whether the cooperative is government-established or non-government-established, the 

experience of the top manager, ownership of a corporate bank account, and support from NGOs.  

The membership strength of the farmers' cooperative societies refers to the number of farmers in the cooperative 

society. This was an ordinal variable where cooperative societies with less than ten members were assigned the value 1, 

memberships between 11 to 20 were assigned 2, and memberships of 21-30 were assigned 3. In contrast, cooperatives with 

a membership of 31 and above were assigned 4. The result of the logit model showed that membership strength was 

positively and significantly related to their level of operational performance at a 10% probability level. In other words, 

population size was correlated to the operational performance of farmers' cooperatives. This implies that cooperative 

societies with many members perform better than those with fewer members. A positive relationship between membership 

strength and cooperative performance was also reported by Adefila (2012). 

 

Table 4. Ordered logit Regression  

 
 Coef. Std. Err. Z – Value  

Amount of Savings 5.51e-07    4.29e-07     1.28     

Membership strength .0346 .017630     1.96 *  

Age of the cooperative .0503 .0302367      1.67*  

Total Shareholding 2.67e-07    4.59e-07       0.58     

Access to free input 2.086 .293102     7.12***  

Access to training .7254 .282490 2.57**  

Access to infrastructural facilities .6262 .198855      3.15***  

Gender of the top manager 5.241 1.52415 1.24  

Educational Status of the Top Manager  2.332 0.01101 1.95*  

Age of the top manager  0.057 1.55214 1.001  

Government established  .0054 0.54125 5.14***  

Experience of the top manager 1.524 0.00024 3.59***  

Ownership of Corporate bank account  0.071 0.10852 2.054**  

Location (Urban = 1; Rural = 0) 2.521 2.21012 0.251  

Supported by NGOs  0.217 0.52186 3.529***  

Cut1 ∂1                                                             

Cut2 ∂2 

Cut3 ∂3  

Statistics:  

No. of observations = 

-1.3609 

.961723.2609 

 
240   

98.88 

.666112 

.670212 

.686093                                                           

  



Onah et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 17-26 

 

23 
 

 

LR chi2(7)        =                      

Prob> chi2       =                                                                            

  Pseudo R2      =                                                 

0.0000 

0.57                          

Note: *, **, and *** indicate significant at 10%, 5%, and 1% respectively 

 

The Age of the cooperative was captured as a continuous variable representing the number of years from the 

formation of the cooperative society. The result of the logistic regression shows that the Age of the cooperative society had 

a positive relationship with the level of operational performance of farmers' cooperative societies and was significant at the 

10% level of probability, implying that the level of operational performance of cooperatives was dependent on the 

cooperative year of existence.  

Access to training and free input had a positive and significant relationship with the level of operational 

performance of farmers' cooperative societies. While access to free input was significant at a 1% probability level, access 

to training by the farmers' cooperative societies was significant at a 5% probability level. This implies that cooperatives' 

operational performance level depended on cooperatives having access to free input and training from government or non-

governmental organizations. Similarly, access to infrastructural facilities had a positive relationship with the level of 

operational performance of farmers' cooperative societies. It was significant at a 1% level of probability, implying that the 

level of operational performance of cooperatives was dependent on cooperatives having access to infrastructural facilities. 

Infrastructural facilities include road networks to meeting places and meeting venues' availability. However, the result from 

Table 4 suggests that the cooperative societies' location does have minimal performance. This means that the operational 

performance of the cooperative societies is independent of whether the cooperative is located in an urban or rural setting. 

The result also suggests corporate bank account ownership significantly affects cooperative societies' operational 

performance. This means that cooperatives that are more included in the community financial system appear to have better 

operational performance.  

The socioeconomic characteristics of the top manager showed that the top manager's educational status and 

experience were the two factors that determined the cooperative's operational performance. The top manager here represents 

the elected president of the cooperative society. However, the top managers' age and gender do not significantly affect 

operational performance.  

 

DISCUSSIONS 

In rural and agrarian economies, group belongingness and cooperative formation are crucial as essential services, such as 

electric power, irrigation facilities, extension knowledge, and even insurance services, can be secured through cooperatives 

(Ndifon et al., 2012). Belonging to a cooperative society can directly benefit farmers, including low-cost credit, supplies 

and equipment for farm and household needs, and marketing products (Ndifon et al., 2012). Therefore, in everyday life, 

cooperatives can benefit farmers in many ways. However, the operational performance of a cooperative is critical if the 

benefits and goals of a cooperative are to be harnessed. This study focused on three criteria for judging the operational 

performance of a farmer cooperative society. These three factors are the level of participation of its members in meetings 

and other gatherings, their level of participation in voting and day-to-day decision-making activities, including elections, 

and the member commitment in financial matters such as contribution in payment of dues and transacting through the 

cooperative societies.  

Our findings showed a low level of performance in meeting attendance among members of the regional cooperative 

societies surveyed. However, interestingly, when the membership is smaller, the attendance rate at meetings is higher 

compared to cooperative societies with larger memberships. This shows that small cooperative groups might be a more 

effective way of engaging farmers. It may be easy to reach out and know when a member is not present, which is why the 

level of engagement appears to be higher among cooperatives with smaller membership sizes. However, beyond attendance 

of meetings, a more important criterion is the level of engagement of the membership in making decisions within the 

cooperatives. According to Fici (2013), one of the fundamentals of a cooperative society is opening and inclusiveness. In 

other words, one way to measure the operational performance of any cooperative will be to determine how the members of 

the cooperative society are involved in making day-to-day decisions. Based on this criterion, one can submit that the 

cooperative society in the study area has a high operational performance. Over 80% of the members make regular decisions 

in the cooperatives and vote for the leaders. This is a good performance when contrasted with reports on the operational 

performance of cooperatives in other developing economies, such as the Northern Province of Sri Lanka, where membership 

involved was perceived to be low (Mangaleswaran & Alfred, 2014).  

In terms of financial involvement, it was surprising to observe that only about 30% of the members either contribute 

financially to the success of the society or are involved in transacting through the cooperative. This is a low performance as 

one of the essential goals of a cooperative society is to assist their group purchase and sales of their products to maximize 

profit (Mahazril‘Aini et al., 2012). This result, however, does not corroborate the findings of Dimelu et al. (2014), who 

reported that 100% of Rice farmers' cooperative members in Enugu state are committed to payment of dues. The contrary 

findings from this study might be explained by the fact that most farmers are smallholders engaged in self-provisioning and 

the excess they directly dispose of at the market. Unlike rice farming, a primary commercial production in the area, it will 

readily benefit from group purchases of inputs and sales of products. 

Furthermore, this could also be attributed to a lack of trust by members in their cooperatives, perhaps due to poor 

leadership or poor orientation regarding cooperative movement. Membership participation in cooperative economic 

activities is compulsory and one of the unique attributes of any true cooperative. A cooperative can only be autonomous if 



Onah et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 17-26 

 

24 
 

 

its members contribute to financing the cooperative businesses rather than depend wholly on external financing. There was 

also the challenge of very poor patronage by members of their cooperatives. This could be due to a lack of trust/ fear of not 

getting patronage refunds from cooperatives or a lack of members' knowledge of the importance of patronage to cooperative 

sustainability. Patronage by members is essential to a cooperative movement as a democratic organization that should be 

owned, used, and controlled by members. In a related study, Olabisi and Petronilla (2011) reported a positive relationship 

between membership patronage and performance realization. 

In general, the perception of the cooperatives based on the Likert scale rating confirms that the operational 

performance of the farmers' cooperative societies is only high when assessed based on members participating during 

decision-making and members voting during elections. This suggests that efforts to enhance the operational efficiency of 

the cooperatives should be directed at encouraging membership attendance at meetings and making financial contributions. 

The result of the logit model provides two broad perspectives on understanding the factors that determine the operational 

efficiency of the farmers' cooperatives societies. The first is the characteristics of cooperative societies. Here, we showed 

that factors such as membership strength, the Age of the cooperative, and the level of access to training, inputs, and 

infrastructure are important when analyzing the operational efficiency of a cooperative society. A cooperative's year of 

existence improves experience, enhancing skill acquisition and use of input to expand production for higher output. Okoli 

(2018) reported a positive and significant relationship between farming experience and the extent of organic waste use for 

urban farming. Adefila (2012) also reported a positive relationship between cooperative performance and cooperative years 

of existence. This study also observed that cooperatives with more members performed better than those with lower 

membership. This correlates with the findings of this study, which showed that cooperatives with large memberships have 

a higher involvement of members in decision-making and financial contributions. Access mechanisms of cooperative 

societies are essential for their continuous operation (Wanyama et al., 2008). Based on the available data employed in this 

study, access to free input had a positive relationship with the level of operational performance of farmers' cooperative 

societies. It was significant at a 1% probability level, implying that cooperatives' operational performance level depended 

on cooperatives having access to free input from government or non-governmental organizations. This is plausible because 

the farmers will be more incentivized to engage with a cooperative society where they perceive that it can be a vehicle for 

accessing palliatives from the government of NGOs. The importance of farmers' cooperatives' access to production inputs 

cannot be overemphasized, as it has been one of the most important motives for some of them joining different types of 

cooperatives. External assistance in the form of inputs is a factor that can improve the performance of cooperative societies 

as it encourages them to perform many of their functions for their members. Similarly, Cooperative education/ training is 

important in enhancing strong and better-performing cooperative societies. It is essential to train and educate cooperative 

members to improve their capacity to bring optimum results and promote the sustainability of their business organizations 

(Anania & Rwekaza, 2016; Hussain, 2014). Paulo and Gratian (2018) noted that providing education and training enables 

the implementation of daily activities to enhance the operational performance of cooperatives. By forming cooperatives, the 

farmers can be easily reached by extension agents and field officers responsible for teaching them how to improve their 

performance. Finally, regarding access to infrastructural facilities, the study observed a positive relationship with the level 

of operational performance of farmers' cooperative societies. This implies that the level of operational performance of 

cooperatives was dependent on cooperatives having access to infrastructural facilities. The results are consistent with the 

research by Muthyalu (2013), who reported that infrastructural factors significantly influence farmers' Cooperatives. In a 

related study, Tewodros (2017) also reported a positive relationship between access to infrastructural facilities and 

cooperative performance. Most members might be unable to access the meeting place due to a bad road network or simply 

because the meeting venues are in bad shape. Sometimes, it was observed that many of these cooperatives meet under the 

trees, making it difficult to have a good number turned up, especially during the rainy seasons. Turning now to the personal 

attributes of the leadership, we found that the top leader's experience and the top leader's educational status positively 

determine operational performance. A leader with experience in cooperative organization must actively engage the members 

and give them a sense of belonging. This finding suggests the need to ensure that at least the top managers of these 

cooperatives are trained to pilot the affairs of the cooperatives effectively. Experience and education go hand in glove. Our 

finding shows that, just like the experience of the top manager, the educational status of the top manager also improves the 

operational efficiency of the farmers' cooperative societies. This means that even though the cooperatives are democratic, 

there is a need for the members to appoint those who have the experience and training to pilot the affairs of the society.  

Apart from the personal attributes of the top leaders and the cooperatives themselves, the influence of external 

bodies such as government ownership and NGO support will also play a significant role in determining the operational 

efficiency of the cooperative societies. Our finding suggests that cooperatives established by the government or with 

government influence had better operational efficiency. This is also the case with cooperatives that receive financial or 

knowledge support from non-governmental organizations. This shows that external influences are necessary to compel 

farmers' cooperatives to engage their members and carry everyone along actively.  

 

CONCLUSIONS 

Farmers' cooperative societies perceived that members wanted more from their cooperatives. Also, members lacked the 

required commitment and participation in their membership obligations for the optimum realization of operational 

performance, such as members' commitment to attendance meetings, members' commitment to payment of dues as required, 

members buying produce from cooperatives, and members selling their produce through cooperatives. The socioeconomic 

factors, membership strength, Age of the cooperatives, access to free input, access to training, and access to infrastructural 



Onah et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 17-26 

 

25 
 

 

facilities were statistically significant and positively related to farmers' cooperatives' level of operational performance. It is 

evident that farmers' cooperatives are still a viable means of poverty alleviation among poor farmers; hence, the need to 

encourage good governance, members' commitment/participation, and government support to enhance their operational 

performance and achieve their objectives.  

Therefore, the study recommends that cooperative promotion offices, Non-Governmental organizations (NGOs), 

secondary cooperatives (unions), and primary cooperatives themselves prioritize upgrading the conceptual, technical, and 

managerial skills of management committees and members through short-term and long-term training programs. This will 

ensure transparency, accountability, commitment, and willingness of members. 

The result suggests that several socioeconomic factors are essential in achieving farmers' cooperative's optimum 

performance. There should be increased equity capital by the cooperative through the formulation of mechanisms that 

promote members' savings and buying of additional shares. Moreover, governments and other financial institutions should 

arrange for long-term financial credit, working capital management, record keeping and documentation systems. 

 

 
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, O.G.O., C.O.U., K.N.N., E.E.O. and C.O.O.; Methodology, O.G.O.; Software, O.G.O.; Validation, O.G.O., 

C.O.U., K.N.N., E.E.O. and C.O.O.; Investigation, O.G.O., C.O.U., K.N.N., E.E.O. and C.O.O.; Resources, O.G.O.; Data Curation, O.G.O.; Writing – 

Original Draft Preparation, O.G.O., C.O.U., K.N.N., E.E.O. and C.O.O.; Writing – Review & Editing, O.G.O., C.O.U., K.N.N., E.E.O. and C.O.O.; 
Visualization, O.G.O.; Supervision, O.G.O.; Project Administration, O.G.O.; Funding Acquisition, O.G.O., C.O.U., K.N.N., E.E.O. and C.O.O. Authors 

have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  

Institutional Review Board Statement: Ethical review and approval were waived for this study because the research does not deal with vulnerable groups 
or sensitive issues. 

Funding: The authors received no direct funding for this research. 

Acknowledgements: Not Applicable  
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. 

Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available upon request from the corresponding author. Due to restrictions, they are not 
publicly available. 

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

REFERENCES 

Adefila, J. O. (2012). Spatial assessment of Farmers’ cooperative organizations in agricultural development in Gurara Area 

of Niger State, Nigeria. Journal of Ecology and the Natural Environment, 4(2), 51-57.  

Afolami, C. A., Obayelu, A. E., Agbonlahor, M. U., & Lawal-Adebowale, O. A. (2012). Socioeconomic analysis of rice 

Farmers and effects of group formation on rice production in Ekiti and Ogun States of South-West 

Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Science, 4(4), 233-244. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jas.v4n4p233  

Agrawal, R., Raju, K. V., Reddy, K. P., Srinivasan, R. & Sriram, M. S. (2002). Member-funds and Cooperative 

Performance? Journal of Rural Development. 22(1), 1–17. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5113465_Member-funds_and_Cooperative_Performance 

Anania, P. & Rwekaza, G. C. (2016). The determinants of success in agricultural marketing cooperatives in Tanzania: The 

experience from MwekaSungu, Mruwia and Uru North Njari Agricultural Marketing Cooperatives in Moshi 

District. European Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 4(3), 62-75.  

Anigbogu, T. U., Taiwo, A. O. & Nwachukwu, O. F. (2016). Performance assessment of farmers multipurpose cooperative 

societies (FMCS) in marketing of members farm produce in Benue State of Nigeria. Cogent Social Sciences, 2, 1-

8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2016.1219211 

Breitenbach, R., & Brandão, J. B. (2021). Factors that contribute to satisfaction in cooperator-cooperative relationships. 

Land Use Policy, 105, 105432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105432 

Department of Trade and Industry (2012). The DTI Integrated Strategy on the Development and Promotion of 

Cooperatives.  

Dimelu, M. U., Enwelu, I. A., Attah, C. P., & Emodi, A. I. (2014). Enhancing the performance of farmers' cooperatives in 

the rice innovation system in Enugu State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 18(2), 206-219. 

https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v18i2.21 

Fici, A. (2013). Cooperative identity and the law. European Business Law Review, 24(1), 37 – 64. 

https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2013002 

Franks, J. R., & Mc Gloin, A. (2007). Environmental cooperatives as instruments for delivering across-farm environmental 

and rural policy objectives: lessons for the UK. Journal of Rural Studies, 23(4), 472–489. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.03.002 

Garandi, I. D. (2018). Assessing the factors hindering the effectives performance of cooperatives Societies in Mubi 

Metropolis, Adamawa State, Nigeria. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 8(8), 183-

193. https://doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.8.8.2018.p8024  

Holmén, H. (1994). "Cooperatives and the environmental challenge – what can local organizations do?” In Holmén & 

Jirström (ed.) Ground level development: NGOs, cooperatives and local organizations in the Third World, Lund: 

Lund University. 

Hussain, M. S. (2014). The role of cooperative organizations in rural community development in Nigeria.Prospects and 

Challenges, Academic Research International, 5(3), 189-974. 

ICA (2009). International Cooperative Alliance. Retrieved from http://www.ica.coop 

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2016.1219211
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105432
https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v18i2.21
https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2013002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.03.002


Onah et al., American International Journal of Agricultural Studies 9(1) (2024), 17-26 

 

26 
 

 

Ige, A. O., & Ojo, T. O. (2023). Does agricultural cooperative membership impact poverty level of cocoa farmers in 

southwestern Nigeria?. African Geographical Review, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376812.2023.2218344 

Jamro, M. M.-U.-R., Abbasi, Z. A., & Chandio, A. S. (2021). DETERMINATION OF FRUIT DEVELOPMENT STAGES 

AND PRODUCTION OF DATES IN KHAIRPUR SINDH PAKISTAN. Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary 

Scientific Research, 3(2), 21-27. https://doi.org/10.46281/bjmsr.v3i2.1190 

Jabessa, T., Tesfaye, G., & Bekele, K. (2023). EVALUATION OF GENOTYPES WITH ENVIRONMENTAL 

INTERACTIONS OF LABLAB (PURPUREUS L.) AND IT’S DRY MATTER YIELDS STABILITY IN THE 

MIDLAND OF GUJI ZONE, SOUTHERN OROMIA, ETHIOPIA. Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary 

Scientific Research, 8(1), 34-43. https://doi.org/10.46281/bjmsr.v8i1.2169 

Kebede, B., Bobo, T., & Korji, D. (2024). PRE-EXTENSION DEMONSTRATION OF SHIRO TYPE FIELD PEA 

TECHNOLOGIES IN THE HIGHLANDS OF GUJI ZONE, OROMIA REGIONAL STATE, ETHIOPIA. 

Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research, 9(1), 1-6.https://doi.org/10.46281/bjmsr.v9i1.2185 

Kassali, R. , & Adeyemo, R. (2007). Structure-Conduct-Performance of rural cooperatives in Osun State, Nigeria. Bowen 

Journal of Agriculture, 4(1),10-21. https://doi.org/10.4314/bja.v4i1.41926 

Liu, Z., Qu, J., Wu, X., Niu, X. & Feng, S. (2023). Improving member satisfaction with cooperatives: The role of 

participation in governance. Annals of public and cooperative Economics/ Early View. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12456 

Mahazril‘Aini, Y., Hafizah, H. A. K., & Zuraini, Y. (2012). Factors affecting cooperatives’ performance in relation to 

strategic planning and members’ participation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65, 100-105. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.098 

Mangaleswaran, T., & Alfred, M. (2014). Financial and Operational Performance of Cooperatives in Northern Province. 

Jaffna University International Research Conference. http://repo.lib.jfn.ac.lk/ujrr/handle/123456789/838 

Masuku, T. A., Masuku, M. B., & Mutangira, J. P. B. (2016). Performance of multi-purpose cooperatives in the Shiselweni 

Region of Swaziland. International Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Research, 3(4), 58-71. 

https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.70/2016.3.4/70.4.58.71 

Muthyalu, M. (2013). Analyze the Performance of Multipurpose Cooperatives in Input and Out Agricultural Marketing in 

Adwa Woreda, Tigray Region, Ethiopia. IFSMRC AIJRM, 2, 14–15. 

National Population Commission (2006). Nigerian Population: Facts and figures. Federal Republic of Nigeria, Abuja.  

Ndifon, H. M., Agube, E. I., & Odok, G. N. (2012). Sustainability of agricultural cooperative societies in Nigeria: The case 

of South-South Zone, Nigeria. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 3(2), 19-19.  

Okoli, E. (2018). Assessment of the Contribution of Cooperative Societies in the Development of the Youth: A Case Study 

of Selected Cooperative Societies in Dunukofia Local Government Area, Anambra State, Nigeria. PhD thesis 

submitted to the Dept. of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. 

Omotesho, O. A. (2008). “Global Food Crises and National Food Security: Strategic options for Nigeria". Paper presented 

at the 2008 Annual Conference of the Development Finance Department of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), held 

at Orchid Hotel, Asaba, Delta State,  5th-8th October.   

Onugu, C. U. & Abdulahi, T. O. (2012). The Performance of Agricultural Cooperative Societies under the National 

Programme on Food Security in Enugu State, Nigeria. eview of Public Administration and Management, 1(2), 61- 

88.  ttps://doi.org/10.4172/2315-7844.1000105  

Onwuchekwa, C. I. (1985). Agricultural cooperatives and problems of transition: a study of organizational development 

problems in rural development, Stockholm. University of Stockholm Department of Business Administration.  

Paulo, A., & Gratian, C.  R. (2018).  Cooperative education and training as a means to improve performance in Cooperative 

Societies. umerianz Journal of Social Science, 1(2), 39-50. 

Poppe, K., Vrolijk, H. & Dijk, R. V. (2021). Design of a System for Information Transfer to Reduce Administrative Burdens 

in the Agrifood Sector. nt. J. Food System Dynamics, 12(4), 301-313. ttp://dx.doi.org/10.18461/ijfsd.v12i4.92 

Olabisi, A., & Petronilla, O. I. (2011). Effect of members’ participation on cooperativeperformance: a study of selected 

multipurposecooperative societies (mcs) in Awka South Lga of Anambrastate, Nigeria. International Journal of 

Multi-disciplinary research, 4, 117-126. 

Tewodros, B. A. (2017). Assessment of factors affecting performance of agricultural cooperatives in wheat market: The 

case of GedebHasasa District, Ethiopia. African Journal of Business Management. 1(16), 393-414. 

ttp://dx.doi.org/10.5897/AJBM2017.8293  

Wanyama, F. O., Develtere, P., & Pollet, I. (2008). Encountering the evidence: cooperatives and poverty reduction in 

Africa. Working Papers on Social and Cooperative Entrepreneurship WP-SCE, 08-02. 

Yamusa, I., & Adefila, J. O. (2014). Farmers’ Cooperatives and Agricultural Development in Kwali Area Council, Federal 

Capital Territory Abuja, Nigeria. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4(1), 161-169. 

 
Publisher’s Note: ACSE stays neutral about jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 

 
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee ACSE, USA. his open-access article is distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 

(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0). 

American International Journal of Agricultural Studies (P-ISSN 2641-4155 E-ISSN 2641-418X) by ACSE is licensed under a Creative Commons 

Attribution 4.0 International License. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/19376812.2023.2218344
https://doi.org/10.4314/bja.v4i1.41926
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.098
http://repo.lib.jfn.ac.lk/ujrr/handle/123456789/838
http://dx.doi.org/10.18461/ijfsd.v12i4.92
http://ssbfnet.com/ojs/index.php/ijrbs
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

