Understanding Soil Conservation Decision of Farmers in the Gedeb Watershed, Ethiopia

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the main factors that influence smallholders' adoption decision of soil conservation measures in the Gedeb watershed. Data from 498 household heads who live in the three districts of the watershed were analysed using the binary logistic regression model. We find that farmers need adequate cash to invest in soil conservation measures. Moreover, farmers would be more encouraged to implement soil conservation measures when they have larger areas of cropland. We explore the possibility that when farmers presume that they have fertile land, they exploit their land more. This hints at the need for extension advice about the benefit of sustainable use of farmers' cropland so that they can maintain their land and pass it on to the future generation. Farmers' awareness about the benefit of land management practices and recognition of the problem erosion is causing on their crop land are central to their decision to adopt soil conservation measures. Furthermore, to adopt these measures, farmers have to be convinced about the effectiveness of these measures. Thus, awareness creation and demonstration of the effectiveness of these measures is essential. Because of the transboundary nature of the problem, policy makers in downstream countries that are suffering from the off-site impact (e.g. Sudan) would benefit from the information provided and support efforts in the implementation of soil conservation measures.

Understanding patterns of tree adoption on farms in semi-arid and sub-humid Ethiopia

“…The relations amongst contextual factors and FMNR confirm our assumption that traditional agroforestry practices are driven by locational flexibility along with multiple utilities, as Biggelaar and Gold (1996) argued from their Rwandan case study. In contrast, the relations amongst contextual variables and HVAF could be explained by the fact that it would be easy for farmers to manage and supervise the growing of commercially valuable tree species in home compounds and fences, whereas scattered trees on farm would be susceptible to low survival rates because of livestock grazing (Gebremedhin et al 2004;Kassahun et al 2009;Mekuria and Aynekulu 2013;Tesfaye et al 2014). This is consistent with the logic behind the homegardens widely observed in southern as well as northwestern regions of Ethiopia, which are known for their rich diversity of economically useful tree species that shade enset (Ensete ventricosum, also known as false banana) and/or coffee (Negash 2007;Hylander and Nemomissa 2008;Linger 2014).…”

“…During the last century, the expansion of agriculture to support the growing population was in general achieved by massive deforestation that has been followed by soil degradation (Bewket 2002;Gelaw et al 2014). Over much of the country this has transformed forests and woodlands into agricultural land with scattered trees (Tesfaye et al 2014).…”

“…Communal grazing which is widely practiced in the country can also affect patterns of tree cover on farm. Communal grazing causes soil degradation but also affects the survival of tree seeds and seedlings on farms, which can affect incentives to intensify or extensify tree management on farms (Gebremedhin et al 2004;Kassahun et al 2009;Mekuria and Aynekulu 2013;Tesfaye et al 2014). Under given tenure conditions, access to more land may provide locational flexibility for trees to be managed without competing with crops and livestock, if the availability of labour and other inputs is not constraining.…”

Cropping systems diversification, improved seed, manure and inorganic fertilizer adoption by maize producers of eastern Ethiopia

“…However, the vast majorities of the studies (including Gebremedhin and Swinton 2003;Feleke and Zegeye 2006;Abebe et al 2013;Tesfaye et al 2014) have focused on technologies in isolation though farmers adopt multiple technologies as complements, substitutes, or supplements to tackle their multiple problems, such as weeds, pest and disease infestations, and low farm productivity (Khanna 2001;Moyo and Veeman 2004;Kassie et al 2013). For instance, Ethiopian farmers face a wide set of problems including low farm productivity (Haji 2007;Ahmed et al 2002), top soil erosion (Gessesse et al 2015), soil acidity (Abdenna et al 2007) and salinity (Tolessa and Beshir 2009).…”

Analysis of farmers perception on the impact of land degradation hazard on agricultural land productivity in Jeldu district in West Shewa Zone, Oromia, Ethiopia

“…The larger the farm holding size, the higher is the likelihood of witnessing rills, surface runoff, sediment deposition and redeposition by farmers (Bewket and Sterk, 2003). Larger parcel size may create a positive incentive for small-scale farmers to invest in SWC technologies (Tesfaye et al, 2014b;Teshome et al, 2016). This is presumably true in subsistence agriculture because farmers assume that SWC technologies compete for space on small plots, which reduces productivity in the short run, thereby increasing farmer reluctance to apply countermeasures (Tesfaye et al, 2014).…”