Climate risks constitute an enormous challenge to poultry production and have affected the livelihoods of the people who depend on them. Thus, farmers have adopted various strategies that can help them cope with the adverse effects of climate change. The aim of this study is to examine the factors influencing small scale poultry farmers’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate change. Data used for this study were obtained from 121 representative farmers selected through a two-stage random sampling procedure. Descriptive Statistics, Likert Scale and the Multinomial Logit Model were the tools used for analysis. Results showed that the mean age and household size of the respondents were 45 years and 5 persons respectively, while the average number of birds per farmer stood at 583 birds. Majority of the respondents had a moderate perception of the impacts of climate change on poultry farming and chose management adaptation strategies in their fight against climate change. Econometric analysis showed that the age, gender and educational status of farmers, number of birds, household size, poultry experience, access to cooperative societies, poultry housing system, access to credit, access to extension services and farm size were the factors influencing farmers’ choice of climate change adaptation strategies in the study area. Therefore, policy should focus on awareness creation on management adaptation strategies through enhancing education and extension services as well as access of poultry farmers to credit facilities to indirectly insure farmers against climate change impacts.

In the article “Professor Tinbergen’s Method” (Keynes J. M. Professor Tinbergen’s Method. − The Economic Journal. 1939. Vol. 49. No. 195) John Maynard Keynes expressed critical notes concerning insufficient scientific level of the Jan Tinbergen’s results obtained with the help of econometric methods. The conclusion of present research is that the critical appraisal of econometric applying given by John Maynard Keynes in 1939 can be completely assigned to many published in Latvia research in economics and business done by inductive statistics because scientists carelessly apply the linear regression model in absence of the knowledge a priori required by proper theorems and algorithms. Moreover, many times there is no sense even to speak about stochastic experiment because the most important condition − ceteris paribus does not fulfil, namely, economic environment is not homogeneous enough. As the result, the causal inferences derived from Regression Report are not scientifically justified. The second conclusion is that the objective criticism in econometrics applications area in order to keep the satisfactory level of scientific correctness and scientific ethics in Latvia has to be established. We also assert that the applications of inductive econometrics in agriculture are much more justified due to possibility to repeat the stochastic experiments many times in constant circumstances like in physics and mechanics. The meta-target of present article is to remind the protests of John Maynard Keynes to the careless utilization of econometric theorems and to raise a wide discussion about the problems of correctness in applying inductive statistics in economics and agriculture in Latvia.

Rural households are displaced from their lands without any plan in place to resettle or compensate them, for a promise of improvement in their living standards. This has not only resulted in a decline in the living standard of the rural populace, in terms of loss of land and livelihoods, the poor are also further marginalized and impoverished. This study examines the welfare implication of domestic land grabs among rural households in Delta State, Nigeria, employing primary data obtained from one hundred and seventy-three representative farming households. Descriptive analysis revealed that majority were low-income earners and engaged in farming as their major occupation. Econometric analysis revealed land size, secondary education, community leaders’ influence, compensation and the use to which the grabbed land was put into as some of the significant factors influencing domestic land grabs in the study area. Further, the size of land grabbed, no compensation for the use of land and low farm output were found to have negative effects on the welfare of the farmers. Thus, the need to intensify efforts to ensure that the rural populace is not being unreasonably dispossessed of its lands, becomes imperative. The need for commensurate compensation of rural households whose lands were grabbed and periodical checks on community leaders who positively influence domestic land acquisitions arbitrarily also becomes pertinent for improvement in the welfare of the farmers. This is especially so, if these small-scale farmers are to be significant drivers of global food security.