Adama Science and Technology University

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

THE EFFECT OF SOIL EROSION ON THE RURAL AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES: A CASE STUDY OF ABAY CHOMEN WEREDA, HORO GUDURU WELLEGA ZONE, ETHIOPIA

BY: TILAHUN ALEMU

SPTEMBERE 2018 ADAMA, ETHIOPIA

THE EFFECT OF SOIL EROSION ON THE RURAL AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES: A CASE STUDY OF ABAY CHOMEN WEREDA, HORO GUDURU WELLEGA ZONE, ETHIOPIA

BY: TILAHUN ALEMU

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTERS OF ART IN GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES MA THESIS SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

ADVISOR TSETADRGACHEW LEGESSE (PhD)

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

SEPTEMBER 2018 ADAMA, ETHIOPIA

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

As thesis advisor, I hereby certify that I have read and evaluated this thesis prepared under my guidance Tilahun Alemu entitled The Effect of soil erosion on the rural agricultural practices: a cause study of Abay Chomen woreda, Horo Guduru wellega zone,Ethiopia. Therefore, I recommend that it is accepted and submitted as fulfilling the MA thesis requirement.

______

Advisor signature Date

We, the undersigned,as member of the board of examiners of the MA thesis final open defense examination, we certify that we have read, evaluated the thesis prepared by Tilahun Alemu entitled The Effect of soil erosion on the rural agricultural practices: a cause study of Abay Chomen woreda, Horo Guduru wellega zone,Ethiopia and examined the candidate. Therefore, this is to certify that the thesis has been accepted as fulfilling the thesis requirement for the degree of masters of Arts in Geography and environmental studies.

______

Internal Examiner Signature Date

______

External Examiner Signature Date

______

Chairperson Signature Date

Declaration

I hereby declare that the dissertation, the Effect of Soil Erosion on the Rural Agricultural Practices, in the cases of Abay Chomen Woreda, Horo Guduru Wellega Zone Oromia Region, Ethiopia. Submitted for the Master‟s Degree in Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, is my own original work and has not previously been submitted to any institution.

Name______

Signature: ______

Date of submission: Spetember, 2018 Adama Science and Technology University Department of Geography and Environmental Management

Acknowledgement

There were individuals and office to which I am indebted. I would like to thank my God for what he helped me and in most honest thank to Professional adviser Tsetadirgachew Lagesse (PhD), my thesis advisor, for his genuine guidance assistance and constructive criticisms throughout my work before and after field work. However, without him this research not able to be fruitful.

In addition I also want to thank my lovely wife Ayantu Fite. She supported me by collected the data and facilitates the situation for worked this research. And also, I would like to give special thanks to Adama Science and Technology University, Arsi University and Agemsa Preparatory school teachers and director those are greatly supported me by provided finance, materials and new idea that helped to work this thesis.

I am also grateful to all enumerators and survey respondents, key informant interviewees and Focus Group Discussants of the three kebeles for their wonderful assistance and cooperation during the process of data collection. Specifically, I am indebted to the three kebeles managers for their assistance in a good manner.

Finally, the people those are supported me in multidirectional but not mention on this are I like to heartily to thank and also blessed by God.

Thank You!

Table Contents Page

Declaration……………………………………………………………………………..i Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………………..ii Table Contents………………………………………………………………………..iii List of figure………………………………………………………………………….vi List of table…………………………………………………………………….…….vii Acronyms/Abbreviation…………………………………………………………….viii Abstract……………………………………………………………………………….ix CHAPTER ONE……………………………………………………………………….1 1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………..1 1.1. Background of Study ...... 1 1.2. Statement of the Problem ...... 2 1.3. Objectives of the Study ...... 3 1.3.1. The specific objective ...... 3 1.4. Research Question ...... 3 1.5. Significance of the Study ...... 3 1.6. Scope of the Study ...... 4 1.7 The Limitation of Study ...... 4 1.8. Organization of the Thesis ...... 4 1.9 Operational Word Definition ...... 5 CHAPTER TWO………………………………………………………………………7 2. REVIEW LITERATURE…………………………………………………………7 2.1. The Effect of Soil Erosion in the World ...... 7 2.2. Empirical Evidences of Researches ...... 9 2.3. Soil Degradation in Africa ...... 11 2.4. The Effect of Soil Erosion in Ethiopia ...... 12 2.5. Theoretical Framework of Soil Erosion ...... 14 2.6. Conceptual Framework ...... 15 CHAPTER THREE…………………………………………………………………..17 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA AND RESEARCH METHODS……..17 3.1. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ...... 17 3.1.1. Location of Abay Chomen Wereda ...... 17

iii

3.1.2. Population ...... 18 3.1.3. Climate ...... 18 3.1.4. Soil ...... 19 3.1.5. Topography and drainage ...... 19 3.2. Research Methodology ...... 20 3.2.1. Research design ...... 20 3.2.2. The source of data ...... 20 3.3. Sample Size and Sampling Technique ...... 20 3.3.1. Methods of data collections ...... 22 3.4. Methods of Data Analyses ...... 24 3.5. Data Validity and Reliability ...... 25 3.6. Ethical Considerations ...... 26 CHAPTER FOUR……………………………………………………………………27 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…………………………………………………..27 4.1. General Background of the Respondents ...... 27 4.1.1. Sex of the household ...... 27 4.2.2. Age of households head ...... 27 4.2.3. Educational status of households ...... 29 4.2.4 The duration of residence lived in the study area ...... 30 4.2.5. Marital status of the household ...... 31 4.2.6. Family size of household ...... 32 4.2.7. Total households yearly income ...... 33 4.2.8. Farm land size ...... 34 4.2.9. Total expense of the respondents‟ per year ...... 35 4.3. Assess the Effect of Soil Erosion on Rural Communities‟ Livelihood ...... 36 4.3.1. The Household livelihood Activities ...... 36 4.3.2. The causes of agricultural production decline ...... 38 4.3.3. Soil degradation and its Economic loss ...... 39 4.3.4. Agricultural Land used ...... 40 4.4. The methods that help to reduce the Effect of Soil Erosion ...... 41 4.5. Government and NGOs supported Farmers to Reduce the Effect of Soil Erosion ...... 43 4.5.1. Agricultural access ...... 43 CHAPTER FIVE……………………………………………………………………..48

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION…………………………………...48 5.1. Conclusion ...... 48 5.2. Recommendation ...... 49 Reference……………………………………………………………………………..50 Appendix: 1…………………………………………………………………………..54 Appendix: 2…………………………………………………………………………..55 Appendix: 3…………………………………………………………………………..61 Appendix- 4…………………………………………………………………………..63

List of figure

Figure page Figure:1.1 Conceptual framework to indicate the effects of soil erosion on livelihoods of rural farmers…………………………………………………………………….....15 Figure 3.1 Map of the study area ………………………………………..…….…….18 Figure:4.1 The duration of residence years lived in the study area…….....……...... 30 Figure 4.2 Marital status of the Household…………………………………...……..31 Figure:4.3 Respondent land holding size in hectare…………………………..…….34 Figure:4.4 The causes of agricultural production decline…………………….……..38 Figure:4.5 Household total yearly income conditions in Agricultures………...……39 Figure:4.6 Agricultural land uses……………………………………………….…...40



List of table

Table page

Table:3.1 Number of sample households of the study area ……………………21 Table:3.2 Key informant interviewers in the study area ……………………….23 Table:3.3 Focus Group discussion members………………………………...….23 Table:4.1 household types of respondents ……………………………………27 Table:4.2 Age structure of households head …………………………….……..27 Table:4.3 Educational status of Household…………………………………….29 Table:4.4 Household family size……………………………………………….32 Table:4.5 Household total yearly incomes……………………………………..33 Table:4.6 the total expense of the respondents‟ per year for Agricultural purposes …………………………………………………………….35 Table:4.7 major livelihoods of Household……………………………………. 36 Table:4.8 Use of chemical fertilizers over the last 15 years……………………37 Table:4.9 Agricultural practices that the methods used to reduce the effect of soil erosion in the study areas……………………………………………41 Table: 4.10 Agricultural accessibility in the study area………………….……..43 Table:4.11 Correlation Matrix……………………………………………….….46 Table:4.12 Correlation Matrix …………………………………………………..47

vii

Acronyms/Abbreviation

CAS Central Statics Agency DA Development Agent E.C Ethiopian Calendar FAO Food and Agricultural Organization FDRE Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia FGD Focus Group Discussion KII Key Informant Interviews GDP Gross Development Product NGO Non- governmental Organization SSA Sub-Saharan Africa UNDP United Nation Development Program WB World Bank WFP World Food Program WMO World Meteorological Organization SLMP Sustainable Land Management Programs SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences UNEP United Nation Environmental Program UNCCD United Nation Convention to Combat Desertification Ha/ha: Hectare

viii

Abstract

Soil erosion is a world-wide challenge for sustainability of agriculture especially in the high land of Ethiopia. The rates of soil erosion that exceed the generation of new topsoil are dynamic process which leads to decline in the soil productivity, low agricultural yield and income. The balance between soil conservation and depleting processes is of utmost importance for attaining long-term sustainability in any production system. Land degradation in the form of soil erosion is a major problem in the Ethiopian high land. This research was conducted in one of the districts in the Oromia region located in the Horo Guduru wellega zone to assess the effect of soil erosion on the livelihood of the farmers. The research is a case study undertaken in an identified the problems by the making use of the questionnaire, interview and FGD method. A household sample 222 was obtained using a simple random sampling technique; Information interviews were conducted with community representatives, district level experts and development agents who work in the community. The research design was cross sectional survey and sampling technique were used probability and non- probability. The results of the study indicated that the effects of soil erosion on land productive accordingly 87% of respondents responded that the soil fertility decline. It led to agriculture production as well as their income decreases. Due to this the farmer to invest on agriculture land for promoting of soil fertility they expense money per year in average 100(45.05%) were 6000birr -10,000; meanwhile the variance between the household total yearly income and the household total annual expenses was 65.77% and have a negative effect on livelihoods of the community members. Recommendations based on the research affirm the necessity to undertake large-scale natural resource management starting with community and reducing the effect of soil erosion on the livelihoods of farmers and ensuring food security and sustainable land management

Keywords: Soil degradation, the effect of soil erosion, loss of production

CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of Study Soil erosion was the major global issue in the 20th century and will remain high on the international agenda even for the 21th century (Bekele, 2003). Various sources suggest that 5 to 10 million hectares worldwide are being lost annually to sever soil degradation.

Soil erosion is one form of land degradation along with soil compaction, low organic matter, and loss of soil structure, poor internal drainage, Stalinizations, and soil acidity problems. These other forms of soil degradation, serious in themselves, usually contribute to accelerated soil erosion. Soil erosion is a naturally occurring process on all land. The agents of soil erosion are water and wind, each contributing a significant amount of soil loss each year. Soil erosion may be a slow process that continues relatively unnoticed, or it may occur at an alarming rate causing serious loss of topsoil. The loss of soil from farmland may be reflected in reduced crop production potential, lower surface water quality and damaged drainage networks (Bezuayehu, 2002). Accelerated soil erosion can also cause a loss of aquatic ecosystem services, associated with the delivery of excessive quantities of particulate matter into aquatic ecosystems (Bilotta, 2008). This is one of the most common causes of water quality impairment globally (Richter, 2005).

Soil erosion is a disastrous environmental problem throughout the world. So that the major causes of these are manmade activities. Human induced soil erosion and associated to all agricultural land over many years have resulted in the loss of valuable agricultural land due to abandonment and reduced productivity of the remaining land which is partly made up for by the addition of nitrogen and phosphate fertilizer (Dejene, 2008). In addition, soil erosion reduces the valuable diversity of plants, animals and soil micro organisms. Due to this future food security is threaded were crop land degradation is allowed to occur because of significantly reduced crop productivity. Shortages of cropland are already having negative impacts on world food production (Pimentel, 2009). 1

Ethiopia soil erosion has been a major problem for many years as it led to decreased soil productivity (Berry, 2003) and severely affected the country‟s agriculture sector. For instance, the soil erosion problem is more severe in the northern highlands of Ethiopia due to overgrazing, further exacerbated by high rainfall intensity and steep topography (Nyssen,2005).

In Ethiopia soil erosion by water that contributes significantly in food insecurity in rural households, constitutes a real threat to the sustainability of the existing subsistence agriculture (Yirga; 2007). Ethiopia has about 12 percent arable land, 1percent permanent crops, 40 percent permanent pastures, 25 percent forest and wood land, and 22 percent others (World Food Program, 2005). The current environment crises are result of deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion and desertification (New Africa Year Book 1999/2000).

Moreover the researcher study area is also one of the parts of Ethiopia high land region/ in western part of in Horo Guduru wellega Zone. In Abay Chomen Wereda the researcher have interest for study on this topic. Many researchers had studied on these topics. But also this paper attempt to fill the gap and find solutions to the problem.

1.2. Statement of the Problem Ethiopian agriculture and the livelihoods of rural community have been affected by land degradation the major drivers of which are soil erosion (Kassu, 2011). Soil erosion can affect the land and its inhabitants in both on- sit and off- site effects. On- site effect is directly created through the loss of soil nutrients. This effect is particularly crucial on agricultural land because it involves the loss of soil quality, structure and soil stability. While in off-site effect, movement of sediments and agricultural pollutants into watercourses are the major problem, leading to sedimentation in rivers and disruption of ecosystem.

In Ethiopia also land degradation, caused by soil erosion and deforestation, presents an obstacle on agriculture hence threatening the rural livelihood in the country. Ethiopia is the area most detrimentally affected by soil erosion in the world (Bekele, 2003).

The study area is located in highland of wellega where the soil erosion are severs. The continuous cultivation with little protection measures exacerbated the level of soil erosion and hence land productivity has declined significantly (World Bank, 2013). The consequences of these are their agricultural production continuously decreases, reduces the farm level income of households and decrease in soil fertility leads to increase in farm level investment. Those problems have been affecting the livelihoods of the study area. Hence, it is believed that there is a gap to explain and clarify the effects of soil erosion on the rural agricultural practices community. This study is therefore hoped to fill this gap.

1.3. Objectives of the Study The general objective of the study was to assess the effects of soil erosion on the rural agricultural practices in Abay chomen wereda.

1.3.1. The specific objective  Identify the effect of soil erosion on the rural Agricultural practices.  Evaluate the effect of soil erosion on rural Agricultural practices.  Investigate the mechanisms by which the effect of soil erosion on rural Agricultural practices livelihoods are reduced in study area.  Examine the level of external supports provided for rural farming communities in their practices of reducing the effect soil erosion on crop production.

1.4. Research Question The study aims to answer the following questions  What are the methods to identify the effects of soil erosion on the rural Agricultural practices?  What are the major effects of soil erosion on the rural Agricultural practices community?  What are the mechanisms by which the effect of soil erosion on rural Agricultural practices are reduced in study area?  To what extent is the level of external supports provided for rural farming communities in their practices of reducing the effect soil erosion on crop production?

1.5. Significance of the Study The study was vital because it focused on the problems of crop production relating to soil erosion on the livelihood of agricultural practices community. Soil erosion reduces drastically the productive potential, income and life of community through impoverishment of the soil. Therefore, investigations of research conduct on the effect 3

of soil erosion on the livelihood of agricultural practices were contributed some important points. Firstly, the study will contribute as a feedback to the administration units as what they do in the agricultural practices area. Secondly, it may also use as a reference materials. Therefore, this study will be expected to play important role in filling the knowledge gap and on this area and motivate future researcher as well as input for sustainable agricultural development of the area.

Furthermore, the study of the effect of soil erosion can give examine the current life condition of the agricultural practices community at household level will provide genuine and constructive information (input) for policy maker, agricultural experts and future researchers‟ contribution to knowledge.

1.6. Scope of the Study This study was limited at Abay chomen wereda. It has twenty two kebele, from these kebeles researcher only selected three kebeles namely, Genji qere , Achane and kolobo . Because of time availability, population size, financial and geographical location. That means if the researcher needs to research the whole kebele of Abay chomen wereda it require much time and financial resources. Some kebeles land features are not good for transport and others are very wide and the like. So that the researcher was selected the study site based on different altitude/topographic/ features by purposive sampling technique only in three kebeles.

1.7 The Limitation of Study The research was conducted based on the information that obtained from study area respondents. Those study areas are three kebele such as Achane , Genji qere and kolobo are selected randomly methods. When the researcher contact to the respondent so many things were appeared. Some of them are the limitation of study. For instance, the respondents were not open to respond exactly to all questions, Political instability, poor communication system in the given area, and the lack of the accessibility of transportation in the areas, economical and time constraints were among the limitation the researcher faced in the study area.

1.8. Organization of the Thesis This thesis is organized in five chapters. The first chapter deals with the introductory part that contains background, statement of the problems, the object of the study, significance of the study, scope of the study, data validity and reliability, ethical 4

consideration and organization of the thesis. Second chapter focuses on the review of related literature. The third chapter is the description and interpretation of study area, the method in which the researcher used to gather information from the targeted Study area (Kebele), the type of model employed to analyses the data and the procedures of their presentation. The fourth chapter focused and present results and discussions. The last chapters contain conclusion and recommendations. References and appendixes are also attached to this page at the end of the page.

1.9 Operational Word Definition Soil erosion refers to a loss in soil productivity due to: “physical loss of topsoil, reduction in rooting depth, removal of plant nutrients, and loss of water. Soil erosion is a quick process. Soil depletion means loss or decline of soil fertility due to crop removal or removal of nutrients by... water passing through the soil profile. The soil depletion process is less severe and can be easily remedied through cultural practices and by adding appropriate soil amendments.” Soil degradation is a broader term for a decline in soil quality encompassing the deterioration in physical, chemical and biological attributes of the soil. Soil degradation is a long term process which may be enhanced by, among other things, accelerated soil erosion. Land degradation is defined as the long-term loss of ecosystem function and productivity caused by disturbances from which the land cannot recover unaided (Bai and others 2008). Land degradation occurs slowly and cumulatively and has long lasting impacts on rural people who become increasing vulnerable (Muchena 2008).. Land degradation has a wider scope than both soil erosion and soil degradation in that it covers all negative changes in the capacity of the ecosystem to provide goods and services. Soil erodibility is an estimate of the ability of soils to resist erosion, based on the physical characteristics of each soil. Texture is the principal characteristic affecting erodibility, but structure, organic matter and permeability also contribute. On-site effect is the process of soil erosion that eroded fertile soil or removal of productive topsoil from farmland. On-site effects are those that happen at the site where erosion occurs.

Off-site effects is the process by which soil erosion inducing damage to water reservoirs, and pollution of water bodies and air, attracted the more attention than the on-site effects from researchers and policy-makers in the developed world.

CHAPTER TWO

2. REVIEW LITERATURE

2.1. The Effect of Soil Erosion in the World According to Stringer, et al., (2012), soil is considered one of the world‟s limited, non- renewable resources. The continued maintenance of fertile soil is essential in order to meet basic human needs and provide ecosystem services such as food production, and provides the basis of livelihoods for millions of people across the world. Achieving the goal of soil sustainability requires an interdisciplinary approach, and provides an enormous challenge to policy makers, scientists and land users.

While soil resources are generally owned and managed at a local level, their condition is determined by the cumulative interactions of biophysical, social, economic and political structures and processes, operating across a range of spatial and temporal scales (Stringer, et al., 2007). Some of these variables move slowly and operate over long time frames, while others are more rapid. The experience of soil degradation becomes apparent at the local scale (Warren, 2002), where it is experienced as a creeping phenomenon with the populations most acutely dependent on the natural resource base for their survival (often the poor and marginalized) being the most vulnerable to its effects.

The degradation of soil resource being degraded relates to national sovereignty concerns, while the indirect impacts of degradation transcend village, district and national boundaries and affect food prices, food security and ecosystem service provision in downstream locations, far away from the site of degradation. However, these complex multi- scale linkages present a clear need to frame land and soil degradation as global issues that require international recognition particularly in driving investment in funding, technology transfer and capacity building to tackle the soil challenges (Lambin, 2002).

In the absence of the sustainable use and management of soil resources, global sustainable development and environmental sustainability are at risk (Bai, 2008). Globally soil degradation is most rapid during the conversion of land use towards continuous cropping. As the agricultural sector becomes more profitable and other

conditions more favorable, farmers invest more in land use planning and management.

Policies and programs may have a large impact during this transition period, when returns to investment in the soil may be met in the short to medium term. The situation is most critical in the marginal areas where vulnerability of human and environmental systems overlaps. This is where the mixed crop and livestock system is expanding, placing even more people at risk of productivity declines and highly variable rainfall. As we seek solutions for these problems, it is important to note a number of trends some of which are influenced by global changes. Diversification, towards a mixture of crops and livestock, cash and food crops, and farm and non-farm income, will continue to be a critical means for households to reduce their risk in face of these changes (Ellis, 2000).

Erosion is a major problem affecting soils all over the world. The rapid growth of the world‟s population has resulted in increased cultivation of land. This puts more pressure on land and leads to soil losing its structure and cohesion, which means that it can be eroded more easily. Heavy farming machinery can also „compact‟ soil, which causes water to run straight off the surface after rain, taking soil particles with it, instead of infiltrating into the soil. The total land area subjected to human-induced soil degradation is estimated at about 2 billion ha. Of this, the land area affected by soil degradation due to erosion is estimated at 1100 Million ha by water erosion and 550 Million ha by wind erosion (Balasubramanian, 2017).

Soil erosion has been identified as a serious environment problem with a multiplicity of social and economic consequences. Soil erosion is a disastrous form of environment degradation whose effects is multi- dimensional. Accord to Michael Pidiwirmy (2010), past erosion has an effect on soil erodibility` for a number of reasons; many exposed subsurface soils on eroded site tend to be more erodible than the original soil, because of their poorer structure and lower organic matter. The lower nutrient levels often associated with subsoil contribute to lower crop yield and generally poorer crop cover which in turn provides less crop protection for the soil. He further expatiate by saying that the implications of soil erosion extend beyond the removal of valuable topsoil, crop emergence, growth and yield are directly affected

through the loss of natural nutrient and applied fertilizers with the soil. Sediment can be deposited on down slope properties and can contribute to road damage (Michael Pidwirmy, 2010).

2.2. Empirical Evidences of Researches As the researcher researched on the soil degradation in Amhara Region; this region is particularly threatened by soil degradation processes due to high dependence of agriculture, population growth, over crop production pressure and traditional methods of farming in the areas. More over in Amhara region as about 90% of the regularly cropped land is found there. As results of these soil fertility losses and sequentially reductions in crop yield; this has been more pronounced in the Amhara region (Dessalew Meseret, 2016) and (Lakew, 2001).

The studies on effect of land degradation on income generating activities of farmers in Imo state, Nigeria. That soil degradation poses a threat to food security and sustainability of agricultural production. The mean score of respondents engaging in crop planting always before the soil degradation was 31.8 while the mean score of respondents engaging in crop production after soil degradation was 25.4. This is an indication that land degradation actually affects crop Production and the income of agricultural practices (Oladeji,J.O ,2001) . Researcher studies indicated; soil erosion is a disastrous environmental problem throughout the world. Erosion is a slow dangerous problem that is continuous. Indeed, 1 mm of soil, easily lost in one rain or wind storm, is so minute that its loss goes unnoticed by the farmer and others. Yet this loss of soil over a hectare of cropland amounts to about 15 t/ha. Replenishing this amount of soil under agricultural conditions requires approximately 20 years; meanwhile the lost soil is not available to support crops (Pimentel et al., 2009). Worldwide cropland studies indicated, about 80% of the world‟s agricultural land suffers moderate to severe erosion, while 10% experiences slight erosion. Worldwide, erosion on cropland averages about 30 t/ha/year and ranges from 0.5 to 400 t/ha/year. As a result of soil erosion, during the last 40 years about 30% of the world‟s cropland has become unproductive and much of that has been abandoned for growing crops (D. Pimentel, 2013).

The nearly 1.5 billion ha of world cropland now under cultivation for crop production are almost equal in area to the amount of cropland (2 billion ha) that has been abandoned by humans since farming. Such abandoned land, once biologically and economically productive, now only produces little biomass but also has lost considerable diversity of the plants and animals; it once supported. Each year an estimated 10 million ha of cropland worldwide are abandoned due to lack of productivity caused by soil erosion. Worldwide, soil erosion losses are highest in agro-ecosystems of Asia, Africa, and South America, averaging 30 to 40 tons/ha/year (Pimentel, 2013). In developing countries, soil erosion is particularly severe on small farms that are often located on marginal lands where the soil quality is poor and the topography is frequently steep. In addition, poor farmers tend to raise row crops such as corn and beans; row crops are highly susceptible to erosion because the crop vegetation does not cover the entire tilled soil surface. For example, in the Sierra Region of Ecuador, about 60% of the cropland was abandoned because erosion and inappropriate agricultural practices left the land devastated by water and wind erosion. Similar problems are evident in the Amazonian region of South America, especially where vast forested areas have been cleared to provide land for sugarcane and other crops, plus livestock production. Past soil erosion for the African continent as a whole has caused an average annual crop yield decline of 8.2% and 6.2% for sub-Saharan Africa and that if higher soil erosion rates continue unabated, average annual crop yield declines of 16.5% and 14.5% for sub-Saharan Africa may be possible. World Meteorological Organization (2005) studied on sub- Saharan Africa; this region has the highest rate of soil degradation in the world. It is estimated that losses in productivity of cropping land in sub-Sahara Africa are in the order of 0.5- 1 percent annually. Suggesting that productivity losses at least 20 percent over the last 40 years.

2.3. Soil Degradation in Africa Soil fertility depletion has been described as the major biophysical root cause of the declining per-capita food availability in smallholder farms in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), with a decline from 150 to 130 kg per person over the past 35 years in production (Jaetzold, et al., (2006).

Adequate and better solutions to combat nutrients depletion where known, are often limited in application because of the dynamics and heterogeneity of the African agro- ecosystems in terms of biophysical and socio-economic gradients. This calls for system-specific or flexible recommendations, rather than monolithic technical solutions such as blanket fertilizer recommendations. Despite diversity of approaches and solutions and the investment of time and resources by a wide range of institutions, soil fertility degradation continues to prove to be a substantially intransigent problem, and as the single most important constraint to food security in the continent. Return to investment in soil fertility has not been commensurate to research outputs. Farmers are only likely to adopt sound soil management if they are assured of return on their investment Jaetzold (2006).

According to Aziegbe (2004) one of the major effects of soil erosion in our environment is the development of poverty. Beside the influence of human activities, soil erosion processes are also caused by different height of the land surface, the erosive force of rainfall and the erodible of soil and soil surface. Runoff is considered as the most important direct driver of soil erosion (Jone Set al. 2004). The rate of rill erosion depends on the amount of runoff and is related to rainfall intensity, soil in alteration, and slope length. Vegetation cover plays a very important role as a factor mitigating soil erosion by water.

Soil erosion is a physical process of soil degradation and the most widespread form of land degradation as quoted by Argaw (2005). It is the detachment and transportation of soil particles from one place to another with a degree ranging from splash erosion to the alarming stage of gully formation. The process as a loss of nutrient rich clay and organic matter in rain-drop splashes, impoverishing the upper top soil and while subsequent erosion peels-off the upper soil layers. Tripathi (2001) state that soil erosion that can be called the creeping death is a worldwide problem.

Kenya is facing one of the highest annual population growth rates in the world, estimated in 2000 to 2.3 % per year (World Bank, 2000). The growing population combined with limited land availability in the agriculturally productive highlands has led to increasing land use. The effect of land degradation on income generating activities of farmers are sex, education level, age and household size influence farmers involvement in income generation activities (Oladeje,J.O,2001). On the other hand constant water shortages and environmental deterioration restrict productive agriculture and livestock keeping, i.e. the local people‟s primary livelihood (Sanyu, 2001).

2.4. The Effect of Soil Erosion in Ethiopia The areas of rain feed agriculture most under pressure from ecological degradation in the Horn of Africa lie in the northern and central highlands of Ethiopia. As to the magnitude of the severity of erosion, 50% of the highlands are significantly eroded, while 25% is seriously eroded (Alemneh, 2003). In general, the extent of soil resources degradation in Ethiopia, especially the degree of soil erosion, nutrient depletion and deforestation in highland areas of the country is very high. A significant amount of arable land in the highlands of the country is lost due to soil degradation, which has different causes behind it (Lakew, 2000). Due to high degree of degradation, important renewable natural resources such as soil, water, forest and of biodiversity are highly deteriorating in the Ethiopian highlands. This problem is further aggravated by the expansion of agriculture to marginal areas (Gete, 2002).

Soil erosion has significant negative impact on productivity of land. That is, where soil erosion is taking place at a higher rate, the productivity is low and vice versa, other things remain the same. It is manifested by a reduction in the actual or potential productivity of soils. This productivity of soil is significantly affected in Ethiopia due to the serious soil erosion in the country (Desta 2009). It is indicated that the soil in cropping land of Ethiopia is not sufficiently fertile to support the required level of food production.

In Oromia region a large part of land receives a high amount of rainfall concentrated in a limited period during the year, which also contributes to erosion as rainfall intensity is a more important factor than rainfall amount is the cause of erosion (Paulos, 2002). In this region also loss of forest and other vegetation cover over time 12

due to population pressure and expansion of farmland has contributed greatly to enhance erosion rates over a large part of the region.

Studies have reported wide scale knowledge of land users employing these indicators for instance in estimating the extent and effect of soil erosion on soil productivity potential (Okoba, 2006). The erosion Indicators not only reflect the changes in the soil properties but also determine the current status of severity of soil erosion and crop production potential (Gameda, 2004). According to Barrera-Bassols, (2009), information needs in land use management practices. Soil classification, soil fertility assessment, Soil and water conservation measures, spatial distribution of soil in the farm field, soil erosion recognition and soil quality assessment. The information is useful for large and smallholder agricultural development projects, enabling farmers ability to have high production in a given land use.

In Ethiopia, agriculture is the backbone of Economy and agricultural production is the source of livelihood for millions of Ethiopians, especially for those in rural areas. According to Namara (2010), the persistent fluctuation in the amount and distribution of rainfall is considered as a major factor in rural poverty. Agricultural water ministry (2000) Ethiopian is divided into different agro ecological zones delineated by biophysical conditions. The distributions of rainfall in various part of the country are in amount and duration unequaled. These are highly influenced on the production of crops and livestock as well as violated the incomes of the farmers.

As of Asmamaw (2004) vulnerability to rural poverty are mainly caused by degraded natural resources, poor access to essential services, poor infrastructure, weak local institution, rain-fed agriculture system and low saving. Tesfahun (2005) revealed that poverty was found to rise with household size. Land degradation is one of the major causes of low and in many places declining agricultural productivity and continuing food security and rural poverty in Ethiopia.

A number of factors contribute to unsuitable land management in Ethiopia with steady growth in population, clearing of woodland for agriculture has been a continuous process with an increasing rate in each year; methods of cereal production are conducive to soil loss and dung and crop residues are needed for fuel, reducing their use as fertilizers (Berry, 2003). 13

2.5. Theoretical Framework of Soil Erosion Montgomery (2007) is of the opinion that the recognition of the detrimental influences of accelerated soil erosion on agrarian societies dates back to Plato and Aristotle. Several classic studies have attributed the bare rocky slopes of the classic world to soil erosion in current times. Furthermore, soil erosion is a major environmental and agricultural problem worldwide. Although erosion has occurred throughout the period of agricultural activity, it has intensified in recent years. Soil erosion is a complex process that involves soil properties, ground slope, vegetation and rainfall intensity (Montgomery, 2007).

Soil erosion occurs when soil is exposed to water or wind energy. Rain drops hit exposed soil with great energy and launch soil particles along with the water in to the air. Rain drop splash and resulting sheet erosion remove the thin film of soil from the land surface (Pimentet, 1998). Soil erosion therefore impacts agricultural production negatively by depleting nutrients needed for plant growth. Hartemink (2006) reports that in tropical regions where many soils have inherent low fertility that is concentrated in the top soil, loss of top soil by soil erosion results in a serious reduction in soil chemical fertility.

Erosion can decrease rooting depth, soil fertility, organic matter in the soil and plant- available water reserves. The rates of soil erosion that exceed the generation of new topsoil are a dynamic process which may lead to a decline of soil productivity, and result in lower agricultural yield and income, at least in the long run. The balance between soil-forming and depleting processes is of the most importance for attaining long-term sustainability in any production system. Soil being a non-renewable resource and the basis for 97 per cent of all food production (FAO, 2004), strategies to prevent soil depletion are critical for sustainable development.

2.6. Conceptual Framework A conceptual framework (Figure 1.1) indicating the effect of soil erosion of the livelihoods of farmers follows-

Livelihoods of farmers altered

Traditional land Fewer livelihoods cultivation(natural diversity(less income capital

Severe soil Decline in land erosion(altering natural productivity(land ecosystem degradation)

Figure: 2.1. Conceptual framework to indicate the effects of soil erosion on livelihoods of rural farmers: Source ( Kassu Kebede, 2011)

The traditional system of land cultivation entails over-utilization of the natural resource base leading to soil erosion which in turn affects the livelihoods of the farmers. This can be attributed to the fact that soil erosion diminishes soil fertility resulting in decline in land productivity.

Land cultivation is the main livelihood of the farming community members that constitute 85% of the Ethiopian population (WFP, 2005). Soil erosion is serious problems that affect land productivity and threaten the livelihoods of majority of the country‟s population. The recurrent drought that has prevailed since the 1980s and its negative impact on rural livelihoods have been aggravated by soil erosion.

As indicated on the conceptual framework, the primary resource of livelihoods of rural communities is agriculture, and agriculture in Ethiopia is predominantly traditional. Appropriate natural resource management interventions have not been undertaken on any significant scale. Severe soil erosion affects the livelihoods of farmers directly. Soil erosion depletes the productive potential of land leading to a decline in agricultural production. Soil erosion by water and its associated effects are recognized as severe threats to the national economy of Ethiopia and, since 85% of the country‟s population depend on agriculture for their livelihoods, physical soil and nutrient losses inevitably lead to food insecurity ( Brehane ,2009).

CHAPTER THREE

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA AND RESEARCH METHODS

3.1. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

3.1.1. Location of Abay Chomen Wereda

3.1.1.1 Absolute location

Astronomically Abay Chomen district is situated at 90 33‟54‟‟N--100 3‟25‟ ‟N latitude and 37013‟0‟‟E--- 370 26‟0‟‟E longitudes. Inseparably to topography of the town is dominated by plain surface with gentle slope where the altitude gradually increases towards the northern direction. It is surrounded by wide plainly surface land in all directions.

3.1.1.2. Relative location

Abay Chomen is one of the woredas in the Oromia Region of Ethiopia. That was the part of the Horo Gudru Welega Zone, Abay Chomen is bordered on the south by Lake Finicha'a (created when Finicha'a Dam flooded the Chomen swamp), on the southwest by Jimma Horo, on the northwest by Amuru Jarte, on the north by the Abay River which separates it from the Amhara Region, and on the east and south by Guduru wereda .

Figure 3.1. The study area of Abay Chomen woreda (source: Ethiopia map, 2007)

3.1.2. Population The 2007 national census reported a total population for this woreda of 48,316, of whom 24,972 were men and 23,344 were women; 9,440 or 19.54% of its population were urban dwellers and 38,876(80.46%) of its population also were lived in rural area Census (2007).

3.1.3. Climate The Abay Chomen district experiences heavy rain fall during summer /Kermit in Ethiopia/ and dry conditions during winter /Bega in Ethiopia/. The annual rain fall ranges between 1500mm in the months of June, July, and August and 1100mm in the months of September and October. The average annual rain fall of it is about 1350mm. It also an area experience high temperatures in the months of January, February and March and lower temperatures in the months of July and September due to extensive cloud during these months . So, the town experiences 260c in the hottest month and 180c in the middle of summer.

3.1.4. Soil Soils of varied properties and development potentials are the results of the variations in the parent materials. Physiographic, climate and vegetation cover of the sub-region are basically derived from volcanic and sedimentary rocks. Among the six (6) major soil types of West Oromia high lands, pellicle, verity sols are the major soil type widely covers the Abay Chomen district. These soils are usually dark occupying areas that are water logged during the rainy season. Textually pellicle vitriol‟s are fine that occupy areas of 0-2 percent of slope angel Central statistical Agency of Ethiopia (2013).

3.1.5. Topography and drainage The altitude of this wereda ranges from 880 to 2,400 meters above sea level. Rivers within the wereda include the Nedi, Finchawa, Agemsa, Korke, Gogoldas, Boyi and Bedessa Rivers. A survey of the land in this wereda shows that 11.4% is arable or cultivable, 2.2% pasture, 1.4% forest, and the remaining 83.8% is considered mountainous, unusable, or part of the Finicha'a Sugar Project. Niger seed is an important local cash crop. Industry in the wereda includes 17 grain mills, 10 oil mills, one bakery, and a sugar factory in Finicha'a. There were 4 Farmers Associations with 3119 members and 4 Farmers Service Cooperatives with 2287 members. Abay Chomen has and 69.5 kilometers of all-weather road, for an average road density of 87.8 kilometers per 1000 square kilometers. About 70% of the urban and 12% of the rural population has access to potable water (CSA, 2013).

The local cash crops are Niger seed, rape seed and linseed. These oil seeds are supplied to the central market in large quantities. About 1,542 hides and 22,681 skins were sent to the central market from the district.

Soil erosion, lack of health institutions and personnel, insufficient veterinary services, lack of communication services and transportation are some of the problems. Regarding the potentialities, Abay chomen has untouched farmland in the Fincha valley which is suitable for crop production. This wereda also has Fincha Lake and Nashe Lake. Those lakes have generating hydro electric power for our country.

3.2. Research Methodology

3.2.1. Research design

The method of research for this study was used cross sectional survey research design. The reason for this researcher chooses this design is that it enabled to describe the intended study to the effect of soil erosion on the livelihoods of community. In order to address the stated objectives the researcher was used both qualitative and quantitative types. This is because the proposed study needs the collection of statistical (numerical) data for the quantitative approach. Qualitative method applied to describe the existing conditions of soil erosion and by using qualitative data, options that are hold and processes that are going on regarding to the effect of soil erosion on the livelihood of the rural community.

3.2.2. The source of data The research written was involved the combination of the primary and secondary source of data.

3.2.2.1 The Primary source of data These sources of data were collected from the primary sources of data, which includes source of data collection; for quantitative research design was used household questionnaire. And also the source of data for qualitative research designs was using key informant interview, focus group discussion and field observation.

3.2.2.2. The Secondary source of data The source of secondary data was collected from different secondary data sources such as Kebele report documents, various registers and publications (like books, journals, research reports and papers, magazines), documents available on different profiles on world wide web and others like, and land use regulations and government policy document.

3.3. Sample Size and Sampling Technique In this study both probability and non-probability sampling methods were used in this study. Firstly, from the non-probability sampling methods, purposive sampling is used to select the Kebeles. The researcher was selected those three kebeles from different height of land (altitude). So that Purposely three Kebeles drawn from the 22 Kebeles 20

in the Woreda. These Kebeles are Achane , Genji qere and kolobo. This technique is used in order to involve proportional household heads from both public works and direct support from the selected Kebeles. Sample size at indicate below and presented in Table: 3.1 the sample size was drawn by Yamane (1967) formula:

n= N___ 1+ N(e2)

Where: n- is desired sample size N- is target population of the study e- is margin of error n = 502__ 1+ 502(0.05)2 = 222 is the sample size

After selected the sample size by using Yamane formula the researcher those samples share for each study area/kebele/ by using non probability technique that means quotas. But the researcher was taken the samples from each kebele by means of simple random techniques (see table3.1).

Table 3.1: Number of household samples in the study area Total Household Sample size No. Name of Kebele number Sampling techniques

M F T HHs Techniques 1 Achane 181 41 222 90 Simple random 2 Genje qere 93 30 123 60 Simple random 3 Kolobo 131 26 157 72 Simple random Total 405 97 502 222 Simple random Source: The researcher manipulation from Population and Housing Census of Ethiopia (2007)

3.3.1. Methods of data collections The most important methods were employed to generate relevant information are questionnaires, key informants interview, field observation and focused group discussion the data enumerator visit each randomly selected respondents on pre agreed mutually convenient time.

3.3.1. 1.Questionnaire Questionnaires which have semi-structured (closed and open ended) questions were prepared and administered to collect a wide range of data from a large number of household heads. The questionnaires were design by the researcher and administer by the same and enumerators by training them. The number of the respondents participates in questionnaires activities are totally two hundred twenty two. That means the respondents those participated in key informant interview and Focus group discussions are not including under this questionnaires. The questions were translated in to local language and administer by train enumerators under direct supervision of the researcher. The administration of the instruments (such as questionnaire, interview and focus group discussion) were seriously supervised and more than half of it undertaken by the researcher in order to minimize errors.

3.3.1. 2. Key informant Interview Key informants were interview at Wereda and Kebeles where the fieldwork undertaken. Key informant interviews used because of the researcher„s interest in understanding the perceptions of different stakeholders who are directly or indirectly affected by it. In order to collect primary data, it used semi structure questions because it allows the researcher to go beyond systematically prepared questions. Moreover, the way respondents act and answer may lead the researcher to ask in different ways, so these types of questions are more appropriate. Therefore, individuals who were expected to have background information on the effect of soil erosion on the rural agricultural practices were conducted and interview. The potential respondents are natural resource development coordination departments, wereda agricultural office, Kebele leaders, wereda administrator, elders and any other knowledgeable individuals. Therefore, the researcher for key informant interview purposes three key informants, two from the community and one from the kebele administration altogether 6 key 22

informants were interview in each kebele (see table:3.2 Key informant interviewers in study areas ). The important aspect of this participatory inquiry was that it helps us explore past problems, assess present situation and anticipate future directions of livelihood strategies of the agricultural practices in study areas. Table: 3. 2. Key informant interviewers in study areas

Name of study Key informant interviewers respondent in No. area/kebele/ each kebele Total Key Community Kebele respondents informant members administration 1 Genje qere 3 2 1 6 2 Kolobo 3 2 1 6 3 Achane 3 2 1 6 Total 9 6 3 18 Source: Sample households survey, 2018

3.3.1. 3. Focus Group Discussion In addition to the above two instruments, focus group discussions with selected households was went to be done. Through this method basic descriptive information collects at the community level in each survey site or Kebele. These discussions were carried out to cross check the information obtained from the household head survey and key informant interviews. Table: 3. 3. Focus Group Discussion members Focus group discussion No. Name of Kebele household members in each Sampling kebele techniques M F T Techniques 1 Achane 5 4 9 Purposive 2 Genje qere 3 2 5 Purposive 3 Kolobo 4 3 7 Purposive Total 12 9 21 Source: Sample households survey, 2018

As table:3.3. Shows the focus group arranges were made to have twenty one members and deliberately for each kebele give quota based on their population number. But each kebele respondents would be select by using purposive sampling techniques. Even so after reading the available literature on issues related to the effect of soil erosion on the livelihood of agricultural practices community in Ethiopia, Africa and Global level: in the case of Abay Chomen Woreda. The investigator established the basic questions of the study on which questionnaires were designed. After the pilot test, the questionnaires and interview questions were checked and corrected. After Modification was made, questionnaires were distributed to respondents and interviews were done face to face through short not taking form.

3.3.1.3 Field observation Observation can be used as a supplementary technique to collect data and crosscheck the collected data (Robson, 1995). Similarly, it gives an opportunity to observe realities directly in the research area. Therefore, in this study direct field observation was held by the researcher to observe the socio-economic and demographic as well as livelihood conditions of the agricultural practices in the study area.

3.4. Methods of Data Analyses The methods were employed for analyze data both quantitative and qualitative. The data which was collected set in frequencies. Then the relevant data collected was processed and analyzed with tables and percentages, pie chart, bar graphs and the data analysis method used was descriptive statistics because of its simplicity and clarity. The data from field interviews with households and key informants was analyzed used SPSS 20.0 software and Microsoft excel. The information was gather include the understanding of the respondents of the existence of soil erosion and to determine what the effects of soil erosion on land productivity through depleting soil fertility with reduced farm income.

The analysis was also based on age categories and gender to see whether there are different attitudes towards the problem of the different age groups and the problem of soil erosion on the livelihoods of the farmers and the size of land ownership now.

Data obtained from the focus group discussion, which was qualitative, are analyze through discussions and what the focus group have to say about their understanding of the problem of soil erosion on the livelihoods of farmers within the study area was documented. The views of all the members of the focus groups (experts, and development) agents are classify and analyze after which the information was combined with the results from the interviews with households and key informants.

3.5. Data Validity and Reliability Reliability and Validity are the two most important and fundamental techniques of any measurement procedure (Messay, 2012). One of the conceptualization concern in validity and reliability given by American psychological Association (1985: 19) as it was note on Mahlet (2013: 05-06), state validity and reliability as‟ … reliability refers the degree to which observed scores are free from errors of measurements that can be gauge by consistency of score while validity refers to the appropriateness, meaningfulness and usefulness of the specific inferences made from a given measurement.‟ In this regard, the most common used method for testing the internal consistency of a scale for the reliability is the Cronbach Coefficent Alpha which ranges from 0 to 1 with a minimum of 0.6(Hair, 2006). Accordingly, in this study, internal consistency (homogeneity) of the reliability of instruments was measured by means of the split- half reliability index, Cronbach coefficient Alpha. Hence, the Cronbach Coefficient Alpha result was 0.782 ( see Appendix 1)

Validity is the usefulness of our instruments in addressing our research objectives and research questions (Knapp and Mueller,2010, sited in Mahlet, 2013) has argued that research is valid to the extent that its findings offer access to an objective reality. Often the quality of a research design can be expressed in terms of how well it counters threats to validity (Gomm, 2009).

However, to make this study valid and to generalize the finding result on all agricultural practices in the study area, this researcher employed a triangulation method such as pilot study observation, questioner and KII interview. Therefore, the researcher argues that the assessment of reliability and validity of this research tools and methods confirm the reliability and trustworthiness of the research output.

3.6. Ethical Considerations For this study, ethical consideration was seriously taken into account. So that, on this research all the concern, integrity, secrecy, consent and other human elements of the respondents, discussants and interviewees are protected. First, the researcher kindly requested all of the survey participants, FGD discussants, and key informant interviewees participants for their voluntariness by informing them the objects and outcomes of the researches before starting the real data collection process. Therefore, as stated in the beginning of this paragraph, the researcher guaranteed for all of them about all information concerning of this them would not be passed to other unauthorized persons or institutes without their agreement. Moreover, the names of the respondents was not be specified in any part of this study. In the same way, the data that was be collected from Abay chomen wereda different offices was not ever be disclosed and distributed to other persons and organizations without the consent and prior permission of these wereda offices.

CHAPTER FOUR

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. General Background of the Respondents

4.1.1. Sex of the household Table: 4.1. Household type of respondent

Household head types Frequency Percent Male headed household 165 74.3 Female headed household 57 25.7 Total 222 100 Source: Sample households survey, 2018

Based on the table 4.1 reveals the sex distribution of respondents, out of the total 222 samples of households 165(74.3%) were male-headed households and the rest 57(25.7%) were females- headed households. Thus, the majority of respondents were male headed of household types in the study area. To support this Oladej.J.O (2001) describe as the household sex on the income generating activities of farmers are highly influenced on it. The key formants and FGD were responded that the female household head having problems of dealing with any kind of work that require physical fitness.

4.2.2. Age of households head Table 4.2 Age structure of household‟s heads

Age of respondents Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent Valid age 16-35 50 22.5 22.5 22.5 age 36-60 137 61.7 61.7 84.2 age 61& more 35 15.8 15.8 100.0 than 61 Total 222 100.0 100.0 Source: Sample households survey, 2018

As we can see from the table 4.2 the sample households 137(61.7%) were between 36 to 60 years age and 35(15.8%) indicated above 61 years age. Therefore, the majority respondents of the sample households of the age groups were between 36 to 60 years old in the study area. From this data we can understand that the majority of populations were economically active. These groups of the population were hardly worked for increased their production due to this expand farmland and accelerate deforestation in the study area. The key formants were responded that those activities which mean expanded farmland and deforestations are directly led to severe soil erosion happened in the area as well as agricultural productions are decline.

The key formant interviewer and FGD have common idea on these issues. This means that their land fertility is declining and their livelihood is in problem. Generally the effect of soil erosion in the study area were high between 36-60 years age; due to expanding of their farmland year to year widely removed the grassland and forest in the area. As a result of this agricultural production and their income become decreases.

To support this Lakew (2002) emphasize that the considerable amount of arable land in the highlands of the Ethiopia is lost due to soil erosion, which has different causes behind it. Because of the natural resources time to time rapidly degradation, important renewable natural resources such as soil, forest and of biodiversity are highly deteriorating in the Ethiopian highlands. This problem is further aggravated by the expansion of agriculture to marginal areas.

4.2.3. Educational status of households Table 4.3 Educational statuses of respondents

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent illetracy 54 24.3 24.3 24.3 edu.level 1-4 65 29.3 29.3 53.6 educ.level 5-8 68 30.6 30.6 84.2 Valid edu.level 9-10 30 13.5 13.5 97.7 edu.level 11-12 5 2.3 2.3 100.0 Total 222 100.0 100.0 Source: Sample households survey, 2018

As far as the educational background as concerned, the respondents figure 4.3 reveals above, 68 (30.6%) indicate that between grade 5 to 8 education level and 5 (2.3%) were above grade twelve. As it is observed from the figure the majority of the respondents had less educated. These imply those less educated peoples had less to do on conserving and preventing soil from erosion. Key formants responded that those less educational qualification populations whose land uses had been poor and their livelihoods were affected by soil erosion.

To support of this Barrera (2009) emphasize that education status was one of the determinate factors for land use management. Education level also important for large and small landholder agricultural development projects, enabling farmers ability to have high production in a given land use. Generally, as the data indicated 68 (29.3%) the respondent have no more educational qualifications. As a result of this the method to which used for protecting natural resources from destruction and soil erosion; the way of cultivation of different types of crops are poor. So this was directly led to severe soil erosion and the productions of the area also not growth up.

4.2.4 The duration of residence lived in the study area

30 Frequency 20

0 13-18 19-24 25-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-75 Duration of residence (year)

Figure: 4.1. The duration of residence lived in study area Source: Sample households survey, 2018 As indicated in figure 4.1 above, the number of years lived in the study area by the respondents ranged from 13 and 75 years; with differing numbers of years lived in the area. All of the respondents indicated that they had experienced environmental changes such as soil erosion and deforestation in the area, irrespective of the number of years they had resided there. Even respondents with the least number of years (13) living in the area recognized that there had been environmental changes, gaining an indication of serious soil erosion in the area.

To support this Warren (2002) emphasized that the population who lived in the study area for a long period of time they had more information about their environment changed. Those populations also give detail information of the past and present features of their environment changes. One elder in the study area his age around sixty seven and lived in this area for a long period of time. So when he told us about this area before twenty years the number of population who lived in this area were very small and the nature of soil and the forest coverage area also higher than today. The crop production was at that time obtained very high. But, today the number of

population year to year increases and the soil fertility become decline similarly our income also detorarieated.

4.2.5. Marital status of the household

160 140 120 100 80

Frequency 60 40 20 0 single married Divorced windowed Marital status of the respondents

Figure 4.2. Marital statuses of the respondents

Source: Sample households survey, 2018

As to the marital status of the respondents figure 4.2 indicated above, 152 (68.47%) reveals that married while 18 (8.11%) remain divorced. The majority respondents of the sample households were married in the area. According to key formant and FGD responded that the married one has strong power than single, divorced and windowed. The married were built from two sexes such as male and females. So those two sexes have different potential in conserving soil. That means they support psychological, economical and social to each other. Meanwhile, for promoting their economy (income) and production as well as for properly land use and land management become strong. But, what the researcher mention above single, divorced and windowed were not strong as like married. The consequences of these are highly influenced on land use and land management.

For example the FGD responded that the single, divorced and windowed were because of the work of farmers needed power they employed laborers. Those employed labors highly focused on crop production or only focused on his benefits

and not properly maintain soil fertility. As a result of this these family farmland highly influenced by severe soil erosion and it led to their crop production and incomes become decreases.

To support this Bai (2008) emphasized that the agricultural practices improperly use of the natural resource such as soil, forest, water and other biodiversity earnings continuously their quantity and qualities are decline. So the effects of these are highly influenced on national sustainable development, environmental sustainability and on the livelihood of farmers.

4.2.6. Family size of household Table: 4.4. Household family size

Households family size Frequency Percent 1-3 12 5.68 4-6 35 16.59 7-9 94 44.55 10-12 51 24.17 13-15 and above 19 9.01 Total 211 100 Source: Sample households survey, 2018

As the table: 4.4, reveals as the sample household respondents 94 (44.55%) indicated 7 to 9 family size and 12 (5.68%) were 1 to3 of family sizes of the respondent had in study area. Therefore, the majority of the respondents were 7 to 9 family sizes in the area. From this, we understand those respondents had large family size. And also they had great burden for their family under the agricultural income sources. The Key formant and FGD responded that the number of population in study area from year to year growth up. Due to this farmland size from year to year expanded, the grassland changed in to farmland, forests were deforested and the over utilization of crop land in the area were done. Those activities were leads to severe soil erosion as well as their income continuously deteriorated.

To support this Balasubramanian (2018) emphasized that the rapid growth of the world‟s population has led to the demand of food from time to time continuously

growth up and increased cultivation of land. This puts more pressure on land and leads to soil losing its fertility, which means that it can be eroded more easily. As a result of this the outputs of the agricultural practices from their farmland become deteriorated. And also those population livelihood incomes disturbed.

4.2.7. Total households yearly income Table4. 5. Households total yearly income total yearly income of Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative respondent Percent Percent

Valid less than 10,000 68 30.6 30.6 30.6 11,000-20,000 80 36.0 36.0 66.7 21,000-50,000 58 26.1 26.1 92.8 more than 51 16 7.2 7.2 100.0 Total 222 100.0 100.0 Source: Sample households survey, 2018

Along the lines of the table 4.5 reveals the respondents 80 (36.0%) shows that 11,000 to 20,000 income levels and 16 (7.21%) remain that 51,000 and more than 51,000 incomes levels in the study area. Moreover, the majority income levels of study area 80 (36.0%) were 11,000 to 20,000 income levels in the study area. Therefore, from this implication we understand the major population 80(36%) the total yearly incomes that they obtained from their lands are very low .The key formant interview and FGD responded that the major populations income in the study area were very low. This was grate impacted on the farmers‟ livelihoods. The agricultural practices income low means the capacity of the household head to protect soil erosion effect also very low. Those implications were low purchase of inputs, not employing workers and embankment, terracing and a forestation conservation techniques not used. Due to this soil fertility depletes in their farmlands as well as their production/income/ can be decline.

Moreover, as the respondents data in table 4.5 above reveals that the cumulative percentage of income of households that means 1000- 20,000 were 148(66.7%) so when we compare with the family size in table 4.4 the major household size 7-9 were 94(44.55%) . In general the incomes of those farmers are not sufficient for their family. This is why? Because of the study areas the major population that mean in 33

table 4.6 indicated 205(92.34%) were depends on agriculture (and live stocks) and also those populations were they obtained income only per year.

The consequences of this the life of agricultural practices livelihood in the study area were too difficult. According to Desta (2009) supported that the productivity of soil is significantly affected in Ethiopia due to the serious soil erosion in the country. It is indicated that the soil in cropping land of Ethiopia is not sufficiently fertile to support the required level of food production. These are directly influenced the farmers economy. This is due to the main source of the households head income came from agriculture.

4.2.8. Farm land size

30 Frequency 20

0 0.5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Land size in hectare

Figure 4.3: Respondents land holding size in hectares

Source: Sample households survey, 2018

Figure 4.3: Indicates above the respondent land holding size in hectares. These ranges are from 0.5 hectare minimum to 16 hectares maximum land holding size in hectares. Owning land by the households enables generation of information in relation with the effect of soil erosion on the livelihood of agricultural practices. This is because respondents can clearly see the effect of soil erosion on their farm plots and the associated problem in their incomes. The key formants interview and FGD responded

that the sample household head who have small land size and large land size on the protecting of soil erosions are quite differences. That means, the household who have small land sizes the opportunity to practices the methods of protect soil erosion such as fallow, crop rotation and diversification of crops are very low. But, the household head that have large land sizes can protect soil erosion on their land mass. Therefore, the small land size household head due to continuously over exploitation of crop production on their lands the fertility of soil becomes rapidly decline; and also the agricultural production will be decreases. To support this D. Pimentel (2013) emphasize that soil erosion is particularly severe on small farm land due to over utilization of crop lands. The consequence of this the quality of the farm land soil becomes poor.

4.2.9. Total expense of the respondents’ per year Table 4.6: Total expense of the respondents‟ per year for Agricultural purposes

Total yearly expenses of Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative respondents Percent Percent

Valid 1000-5000 102 47.1 47.1 47.1 6000-10,000 86 39.6 39.6 39.6 11,000-15,000 17 7.8 7.8 86.7 more than 16,000 12 5.5 5.4 100.0 Total 217 100.0 100.0

Source: Sample households survey, 2018

In line with of Table 4.6 reveals the sample household‟s respondents total expense on agricultural, 107 (48.2%) were 1,000 to 5,000 and 12 (5.4%) shows that total expense were more than 16,000 of the study area. Therefore, the majority of the respondents were 1,000 to 5,000 total expenses in the area. From this, we can learn that those farmers in study areas and whose land had been affected by soil erosion have high expenses when we compare with their income what the researcher mention under table 4.4; The KII and FGD responded that those household heads were for crop production and maintain of soil fertility invest their time, money and materials on farmland. Therefore, the effects of these were made economic crises on their

livelihood such as on food security and on their incomes. So that those agricultural practices family members were face great challenged in their life.

To support this Jaetzold and Lambin (2006) focused that soil degradation area the farmers for promote the fertility of soil they were take a lot of measurements such as use fertilizers, terracing, and forestation and so on. Meanwhile, those are required much of money, human power and time. The effect of this led to the expense of agricultural practices invest more money on farmlands are day to day increases and it become disturb the livelihood of farmers.

4.3. Assess the Effect of Soil Erosion on Rural Communities’ Livelihood

4.3.1. The Household livelihood Activities Table 4.7: Major livelihoods types

Livelihood type Frequency Percentage

Farming alone 12 5.41

Farming and livestock rearing 205 92.34 Others (small trading in addition to farming and animal 5 2.25 husbandry.) Total 222 100

Sources: Sample households survey, 2018

As table 4.7 above revealed the major livelihood of household head in the study area 205(92.34%) were farming and livestock rearing while 5(2.25) were others activities. This implies the major household head livelihood types were farming and livestock rearing. From this we understand those household livelihood types requires the sustainability of soil. That means soil degradation directly influenced crop production and animal products. The key formant interview responded that the household livelihood types of farming and livestock rearing are profitable if properly use it. These two economic activities are to support to each other or vice versa. That means the animals manure we can use on farmland like fertilizers and the crops trash help for livestock food.

Table 4.8: Use of chemical fertilizers over the last 15 years

Fertilizer use Frequency Percentage

Yes 217 97.8 No 5 2.2

Time of use Frequency Percentage Over the last five years 24 10.8 Over the last eight years 47 32.4 Over the last ten years 62 27.5 More than fifteen years 84 38.71

Sources: Sample households survey, 2018

Specific to the area, as indicated in table: 4.8 that 97.8% of the respondents were use chemical fertilizers for agricultural production and 2.2% were not use chemical fertilizers. Significantly, 84(38.71%) of the respondents have been using the chemical fertilizers for more than 15 years. This is an indication that the level of soil erosion is high in the area and the actions that have been taken to combat soil erosion and restore soil fertility are ineffectual.

The respondents, key formant interviews and FGD responded that the population who lived in this area was chemical fertilizers use more than fifteen years. The use of chemical fertilizers from one farmer to others are quite difference. This means, some household head those who have higher income can buy fertilizers and use on their land farm fertilizers were match with its size. But, the others household those who had got low income can buy the fertilizers but the amount of fertilizer that bought are not much with their farm land sizes; due to economical problems. As a result of these are those households out puts or crop productions decline and also highly influenced on their income. In addition sometimes the fertilizers that we use chemical fertilizers are not matched with our area soil types. So that the effects of these are the agricultural production become losses.

According to All Right Reserved (2018) supported that a wave of plant available, soluble nutrients from a typical fertilizer application can reduce the intensity of biological activity and the level of functions it performs, plants respond and that is all we humans look at and care about over time; the plant growing system often shows symptoms of problems that are related to this reduction in biological activity. The KII supported that one of the important issues in rural areas where land cultivation dominates livelihood activities were loss of soil fertility or loss of organic matter, with the resultant additional investment in agricultural production, one of which is in the chemical fertilizers. Beyond posing a challenge to farmers who need to cover the costs of chemical fertilizers each year, change in chemical properties of soil is another negative effect of applying chemical fertilizers.

4.3.2. The causes of agricultural production decline 10.40% 2.60% Climate change 15.50% 11.90% Poor crop performance Change of soil fertility 59.60% Land size Others

Figure:4.4 The causes of agricultural production decline

Source: Sample households survey, 2018

The causes of agricultural production decline in study area as the figure 4.4 data indicated 115(59.6%) were change of soil fertility while the 5(2.6%) remain were others. The major respondent 115(59.6%) responses were the main causes of agricultural production decline in the study areas were because of the changes of soil fertility.

The Key formants and focus group discussion responded that the farmers for increasing the fertility of soil they bought fertilizer (dap and Urea). These were created another expense for them. And also, the methods that helped to minimizing soil erosion the farmers are constructed terracing. For constructing terracing it requires long time and money. So that the farmers had been employee their time and money on unwanted place. Generally what the researcher mention above the farmer 38

food security faced great challenged or under question. Finally the new generation those who lived in rural area observed the ineffective agricultural activities. And also those were changed their work and migrate in to urban area.

To support this Bekele(2001 ) focused that the land provides a means of livelihoods for the majority of the population in Ethiopia, soil resources are facing increasing degradation mainly due to water erosion in the form of sheet and rill erosion that has made it difficult to attain food self sufficiency at a national level. The key formant Interview and the focus group discussions responded that the effects of soil erosion on the livelihood of farmers are as it is. For instance, the crop production deteriorated, the plants which grow in the surrounding area of farmers are damaged and the climate of the area also changed. Although the product that obtained from honey Bees and milk product minimized. In addition, the soil moisture that helped for plant growth become dry. As a result of this the sustainable agricultural activities passed to generation to generation will be disturbed.

4.3.3. Soil degradation and its Economic loss Increases income 13%

Decrease income 87%

Figure 4.5 Household total yearly income conditions in agriculture

Source: Sample households survey, 2018

As the figure 4.5 shows 193(87%) were respondents their income time to time deteriorated, 29(13%) were respondent production become increases. From this we learned in the study area the major respondents were their incomes was face great challenge. The key formant and focus group discussion responded that the quality of soil resources continuously due to soil erosion decreases. The declining of soil fertility directly interrelated to crop and livestock production. This means the losses of 39

soil fertility in the study area highly influenced on the production of crops and livestock. So that the farmers for rebuild the fertility of soil they took different traditional and scientific measurements. But those measurements are they need money, time and human power. Because of these the incomes of the agricultural practices were from day to day declining.

To support this L. Berry (2003) emphasized that the major costs that the country, Ethiopia, pays because of soil degradation includes costs of nutrients lost with top soil erosion, lost production due to nutrient and soil loss, costs of forest removal, and loss of livestock carrying capacity, declining of agricultural productivity and continuing food insecurity.

4.3.4. Agricultural Land used

Agro- forestry Bee keeping 1% Livestock keeping 2% 5%

Crop farming 92%

Figure 4.6 Agricultural land uses

Source: own construction based on the data (2018)

As the figure 4.6 above revealed agricultural land uses in the study area 204(91.89%) were crop farming and 2(1%) were used for agro forestry. From this we learned the major people in study area were their land used for crop farming. The key formant and FGD responded that the major reason the household head their land use for crop production are they hadn‟t option for doing others. That means the main source of our incomes came from crop production. But for a long period of time the crops land over exploited and the fertility of soil becomes decline. So that the crop productions that we obtained from these farmlands were not sufficient for maintain food security. To support to this Bekele (2003) emphasized that as a national level in Ethiopia the major 40

people were lived in rural area. Those people were depending on agricultural economic activity. That means agriculture is the single most important source of food for the nation. These agricultural activities were highly depending on rainfall. Subsistence farming is a typical feature of agriculture in Ethiopia. Therefore, the results of that was due to over utilization crop land the fertility of soil loss. The effect of these are agricultural production continuously detorarieated in the area.

4.4. The methods that help to reduce the Effect of Soil Erosion Table: 4.9. Agricultural practices that the methods used to reduce the effect of soil erosion in study area

No. The Methods used Frequency Percents (%) Cumulative 1 Add fertilizers/Urea& 140 63.06 63.06 Dap) 2 Crop rotation 45 20.27 20.27 3 Intercropping 19 8.56 8.56 4 Changing enterprises 5 2.25 2.25 5 Planting of higher bred 13 5.86 5.56 crop varieties

Total 222 100 100 Source: own construction based on the data (2018)

As table 4.9 revealed above the agricultural practices for surviving the effect of soil erosion they used in the table which shows. Among the respondents 140(63.06) were used add fertilizers while the lower one 5(2.25%) were they changing enterprises. From this we have to learn for surviving the effect of soil erosion in the study area the major households they took measurements are use chemical fertilizers.

The key formant and FGD responded that the uses of fertilizers are not the only measurement for surviving the effects of soil erosion in the area. Sometimes the natures of fertilizers are not much with the soils at that time the crop production declines. The major one for sustainable agricultural developments we must used crop rotation, agro forestry, intercropping, terracing, use composts and add cattle manual, fallow methods, control deforestation, avoid ploughed on the high slope of land and 41

cultivation/planting crops and fruits that go with the climatic condition. To support this Ellis (2000) described as the effect of soil erosion on livelihood of agricultural practices were reduced by making their work diversified. That means if those people diversified their work toward a mixture of crops and livestock, cash and agro-forestry, and non farm income; the household will continuously growth up their capacity and they can able to reduce the challenge that faces them.

The KII responded that the soil degradation can be prevented through different mechanisms depending up on the nature and form of degradation. Most types of soil degradation can be prevented or reversed by adding nutrients to nutrient depleted soil, rebuilding topsoil through soil amendments and reestablishing vegetation.

However, to support this Coxhead (2008) emphasized that the main environmental principles for reducing soil degradation are to maximize vegetation cover to reduce or prevent the speed and volumes of water flow over the soil. From this perspective, tree crops, perennial crops, intercropping and reduced-tillage systems are preferred. Similarly, UNCCD (2004) support that forests and tree cover combat soil degradation and desertification by stabilizing soils, reducing water erosion and maintaining nutrient cycling in soils. Therefore, sustainable use of goods and services from forest ecosystems and the development of agro forestry systems can contribute to increase the income of farmers, making the rural population to `reduce the impact of soil degradation. Broadly speaking, soil degradation can be controlled and reduced, if the land is used wisely.

4.5. Government and NGOs supported Farmers to Reduce the Effect of Soil Erosion

4.5.1. Agricultural access The effects of soil erosion on the livelihood of farmers are too great. Those are some respondent said silent killer and too much disturbed the agricultural practices communities‟ income and life. The key formant responded that soil erosion affected directly the farmers but, it disturbed the economy of the whole people of nation and government. So that for solving these problems the whole nation, non- governmental and governmental organizations should have been actively participate on this issue. These are one of the responsibilities of citizens.

On the survey questionnaire, household head were asked to specify their main problems in agricultural practices. Hence, agricultures‟ main problems in crop production activities were lack of the agricultural techniques supports, access of equipments, extensions, access of agricultural inputs and introduction to new modern farming technology.

Table 4.10 Agricultural accessibility in the study area

The methods of support farmers Frequency Percents Cumulative (%) Agricultural Techniques Yes 81 36.49 36.49 No 141 63.51 63.51 The access of equipments Yes 95 42.79 42.79

No 127 57.21 57.21 Extension(training) Yes 51 22.98 22.98 No 171 77.02 77.02 The access of the agricultural inputs Yes 101 45.50 45.50 No 121 54.50 54.50

Introduction to new modern farming Yes 70 31.53 31.53 technology No 152 68.47 68.47 Source: own construction based on the data (2018)

As table 4.10 above revealed that agricultural accessibility in the study area; 77.02% were the respondents responded that their main problems for solve the effect of soil erosion in crop production lack of the access of extension. 68% of the sample household heads replied that lack of the introduction to new modern farming technology. 63.51% of the sample household head responded that not obtained the access of inputs. And also lack 63.51% support in agricultural techniques and 57.21% the access of equipments were among the problems for solve the effect of soil erosion in crop production of household heads in the study area. These livelihood problems were raised by FGD discussant and key formants. Hence, this result has confirmed the findings through and from FGD and key formant interview.

Moreover, the respondents were asked to order their main livelihood problems for solved soil erosion effect on their agricultural practices. Thus, 77.02% of the sample household heads replied that not obtained the access of extension was the first problems in their agricultural practices. The second and third livelihood problems were lack of the access of agricultural inputs 54.50% and introduction to new modern farming technology.

As a result of these key formant, Focus group discussion and respondents replied that their needs to the way of Government and NGOs organizations helped them as by facilitate continuous training in terms of reduce soil erosion and the methods of promoting their production, introduce scientific methods and technology, and encourage the farmers to planting tree seedling at spare time by giving incentives. For example in our local area the non- governmental organization that means Sustainable Land Management Programs (SLMP) encourage the farmers for constructing terracing and planting tree seedling by gave incentive for them. So that other non- governmental organization if done in such like manner we can control soil erosion and its effect.

However, a key formant his age around forty years old and his work experiences also around eighteen years told us the people, governmental and non- governmental organization have great responsibility for maintaining the continuous soil resource sustainability. This is why? Soil degradation is directly or indirectly affected them. So those groups can play great role for

keeping the sustainable of soil fertility by making policy, create great awareness in the society, provides the access of information and technology. Non- Governmental Organization can support the farmers by provide continuous training and introduce new technology, and also by giving incentive the farmers planting agro-forestry and new tree seedling in their area. The people must have actively participate on maintains of natural resources such as soil, water and forests. If those three big organization such as people, government and non- governmental organization work together on the control of soil fertility sustainability more fruitful than goes alone. The quality of soil maintains means in other word maintain the production of agriculture and the income of farmers. If they did not work together you should haven’t achieving the goal of the security of food and also the major population who depends only on agricultural economy or livelihood of farmers is no changed forever. Finally the government also can mobilize the whole people by using media and others to solve the effect of soil erosion.

To support of this Stringer (2012) emphasized that the continued maintenance of fertile soil is essential in order to meet basic human needs and provides ecosystem services such as food production and provides the basis of livelihoods of millions of people across the world. Achieving the goal of soil sustainability require an interdisciplinary approach and provides an enormous challenge to policy makers, scientists and land user.

Table 4. 11 Correlations Matrix total yearly Total yearly land size income of expenses of of respondent respondents responde nt Total yearly income Pearson 1 .811** .655** of respondent Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000

Total yearly expenses Pearson .811** 1 .611** of respondents Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 land size of Pearson .655** .611** 1 respondent Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). b. List wise N=222 Sources: Sample households survey, 2018 In order to observe the relationships between sample households‟ total yearly income with their total annual expenses and land holding size of respondents, a bivariate correlation technique with correlation coefficient Pearson was employed. Therefore, the correlation between the household total yearly income and the household total annual expenses responded is a ┼0.811 and with accepted significant level. This correlation value indicates that strong level positive correlations between total yearly income and household total annual expenses. Moreover, there is also strong level of positive correlation between total yearly income and households‟ land holding size of respondents in the same year is a ┼ 0.655 and with accepted significant level. So that those correlation results according to Cohen that shows there is a strong degree positive correlation between households‟ total yearly income, total annual expenses and households‟ land holding size responded.

However, the Pearson correlation of the household head total annual expenses 0.811 and the land size of the sample respondent 0.655. Those Pearson correlation results 46

when squared indicates respectively are 65.77% and 42.90% shared variance. That means 65.77% of the household head total annual expenses variance in respondents‟ score on the perceived total yearly income of the household. 42.90% the household head land size variance with the perceived total yearly income of the household.

Table 4.12 Correlations Matrix

total yearly Educational Family income of status of size of respondent respondents respondent total yearly income Pearson 1 .148* .283** of respondent Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .028 .000 Educational status of Pearson .148* 1 .023 respondents Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .028 .728 Family size of Pearson .283** .023 1 respondent Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .728 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). c. List wise N=222 Sources: Sample households survey, 2018

The above correlation table 4.12 portrays that the relationship between total yearly income of the households‟ with their households of educational and family size of the households. So that, the correlation between the total yearly incomes and educational status of the respondents 0.148 (positive values). This means the relations between them are low. And also the correlation value 0.283 indicates there is a moderate degree of relationships between the total yearly income and family size household head. Therefore, from this we understand the relationship between total yearly income of household head and family size of the respondents have moderate correlate than the household of education.

CHAPTER FIVE

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1. Conclusion An essential condition for sustainable development is that a community‟s and nation‟s stock of natural resources such as soil, forests, water and biodiversity should not decrease overtime through overuse, needed not only to meet the needs of the present generation, but also to ensure a minimum degree of fairness and equity with future generation.

Soil degradation is huge problems that need to be taken seriously all over Ethiopia. Many of the traditional agricultural systems particularly long fallowing system that was ecologically stable is breaking down today due to increasing population pressure, deforestation and expansion of farmland the production nation sustainable food lagging behind and failed keep up pace with growth of the population. Similarly, a large proportion of the nation and study area lack one of the basic needs households was unable to produce enough food to meet their needs.

The majority of households are marginal farmers‟ i.e. their land holding as the cumulative percent data indicated 152(68.5%) in the study area was categorized under 1 hectare to 4 hectare, that was insufficient to meet the life needs. When human population increases and the existing resources are improperly utilized, soil degradation problems become more serious. Their degradation intensity such as the use of land out of its actual capacity has brought declining of the land productivity and expansion towards forest lands. Therefore forest resources and grazing land degradation led to soil erosion. The effects of these are the crop production and live stocks animals products as well as their income slowly detorarieated. And also take a chance to threatening the ecosystem of the study area.

5.2. Recommendation In order to address the problems identified in this paper, the following measures are recommended.

 The rural households should diversify their income sources. That means agricultural practices should not only depended on rain fed agriculture, they must be make their work diversified toward a mixture of crops and livestock, cash crops, non- farm and use agro-forest that go with the climatic condition of the areas. Those the researcher mention above greatly contributed for farmers‟ income developed and life changed.  The households of the study area must be effectively involved in family planning.  Government and non- Governmental organization should be support the household toward protecting of soil erosion by means of introduce new technology to develop their production, provide training in terms of their work and family planning, encourage the household at spare time actively Participate on maintaining forest, reforestation and build terracing by giving incentive.  Better soil conservation measures must be used to reduce the levels and rate of soil erosion and soil fertility reductions. This likely to increase food production, food security and increase household incomes.  Encourage use of organic and composite manure from cattle shed and farmer residues as a way of improving soil fertility and subsequently increasing food production as well as household income capacity.  The farmer should be increasing their level of awareness, understanding, and adoption of current agronomic practices that make the best use of soil resources.

Reference African, Y. b. (1999/2000). Ethiopia. United Kingdom, (pp. 175-185).

Alemneh, D. (2003). Integrated Natural Resource management to Enhance Food Security; The case of community based approaches in Ethiopai,Environment and Natural Resources Working. No.

All, R. R. (2018). Natural Vs Chemical fertilizers. North Country Organics.

American Association, P. (1985)., (p. 19).

ARGAW.M. (2005). Forest conservation, soil degradation- Farmer's perspective nexus; implications for sustainable land use in south west Ethiopia.

Asmamaw, E. (2004). Understanding Poverty: The Ethiopian Context;. Paper presented at the Gambia AAPAM roundtable Conference. Banjul: Gambia.

Bai. (2008). Proxy global assessment of land degradation, soil use and managements 24:., (pp. 223-234).

Balasubramanian. (2018). Global politics of reproduction. India.

Barrera-bassols. (2009). participatory soil survey: Experince in working with a masoamerica indigenous community. soil use and management 25, (pp. 43-56).

Bekele. (2001). Forestry outlook studies in Africa, case study. Addis Ababa.

Bekele.W. and Drake L. (2003). Soil and water conservation discussion behavior of subsistence farmers in the eastern highland of Ethiopia. Addis Ababa.

Berry, L. (2003). Land degradation in Ethiopia: its extent and impact. The world Bank, washington DC Google Scholar .

Bezayehu. (2002). Nature and causes of land degradation in the oromia Region:Socio- economic and policy research working. (p. 36). International livestock Research institution.

Bhan.c. (1988). Spatial analysises of potential soil erosion risk in welo region,Ethiopia. A geomorphologic evaluation Mountain Research and Development , 139- 144.

Brehane, G. (2009). Estimating soil loss using universal soil loss equation(USLE) for soil conservation planning at Medego watershed;. Northen Ethiopia. Journal of American science.

CAS. (2005). National Statistics , Table B.3 and B.4 Lakaw Desta, Minalle Kassie, Benins,s, and Pender,J(2002), and Degradation. Benins. censes, E. P. (2007). Results for Oromia Region. Vol.1 Table 2.1, 2.5,3.4.

Census. (2007). oromia Region. Tables 2.1,2.4,2.5,3.1,3.2 and 3.4 .

Central, S. A. (2013). Agricultral Statistics Report Inter- sampling Census of Ethiopian population. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Cohen, J and Cohen.P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edition. New York Erlbaum.

Coxhead. (2008). Land degradation:Submitted for Copenhagen Consensus comments. University of Wisconsin.

Desta, D. (2009). Determinats of Farmer's land Management Practice:. The case of Tole District, South West Shewa Zone Oromia National Regional state, A thesis submitted to school of Graduate Studies, Institute of Regional and Local Development Studies .

Ehrlich and Holdren. (1977). Population, Resources,. San Francisco: Freeman.

Ellis. (2000). Rural livelihoods and diversity in developing countries oxford university press,. Oxford.

FAO. (2008). Land degradation assessment,. case study. Rome, Italy.

Gameda, S. (2004). Soil Crops. An expert system for soil conservation- crop productivity relationships.

Gete, Z. (2002). Resource Use and poverty in the Ethiopia Highlands: Tilahun Amede(ed) proceeding of a conference on batural resource Degradation and enviromental Concerns in the Amhara national regional State:. (pp. 109-125). Bahir Dar Girma: Impact on Food Security.

Gok. (2002). National Action Programme. A framework for combating desertification in kenya in the cotext of the united nations convention to combat desrtification. Government Kenya.

Gomm. (2009). Key concepts in social research methods. Macmillan. Palgrave.

Hair. (2006). Multivariate data analysis, 6th edition,printice Hall. New Jursey.

Hartemink. (2006). Soil erosion: perennial crop plantation taylor and Francis, wageningen,Research paper. Netherlands.

Jaetzold.R. and Shisanya. (2006). farm management handbook of Kenya Vol.2/Cl. Nairobi: Minister Agriculture.

Kounang.N., T. a. (2001). Soil Erosion and Conservation. New age International Publishers New Delhi .

Lakaw Desta ,minalle kassie and Pender. (2002). Land Degradation and Strategies for sustainable Development in the Ethiopia High lands. amahara region Social 51

Economic and Policy Research Working Paper,international Livestock Research InstitutionILRI) , Paper no.32.

Lakaw Desta,Minalle Kassie and Pender. (2005). CSA National StatisticsTables B.3 and B.4. land degradation .

Lambin.E. (2002). Dynamics of land use and cover change in tropical regions. Annual Review of Environment and Resources , p. 205-241.

Mahlet, T. (2013). The relationship between climatic patterns and its impact on crop production in kuyu wereda. Central Ethiopia unpublished MA thesis. AAU.

Messy. (2012). Proposal Development Guidelines for master's program students, unpublished teaching materials, ASTU Adama.

Montgomery.D. (2007). soil erosion and agricultural sustainability. Natural Acadamic of sciences , p. 104.

Muchena, F. (2008). "Indicators for sustainable land management in Kenya's context". GEF land degradation focal area indicators. ETC-East Africa.

Namara and Hagos,F. (2010). Rural poverty and inequality in Ethiopia. Ethiopia.

Nyssen J. Vandenreyken H and Deckers J et. (2005). Rainfall erosiveity and varibility in the northen Ethiopia Highlands J Hydrol 311(1):172-187.

Okoba, B. (2006). Farmers' identification of erosion indicators and related erosion damage in central highlands of Kenya. CATENA.

Oladeji, J. (2001). Effect of land degradation on income generating activities of farmers in IMO state. Nigeria.

Paulos, D. (2001). Soil and water resources and degradation factors affecting their productivity in the Ethiopian highland agr-ecosystems. Michigan stae university press, (pp. 1-18).

Pimental, D. (1993). Overview. in World soil erosion and conservation,edited by D.pimental.Canbrige. Cambridge University press.

Pimental, D. (2013). World wide cropland studies.

Pimentel.D and Kounang. (1998). Ecology of soil erosion in ecosystems,. Cornell University New York .

Robson, C. (1995). Real World Research Resources for social scientist and practitioner research. Cambridge. Massachusetts, USA.

Sanyu. (2001). The study on the integrated Rural Development Project in the bariingo Semi Arid Land Area, master Plan,Japan International Cooperation Agency. Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Development.

Stringer LC and Thomas. (2007). From global politics to local and user. swzil: Applying the united Nation Convention to combat desertification.

Stringer LC. and Thomas AD. (2012). Challenges and opportunities in linking carbon sequestration, livelihoods and ecosystem service provision in drylands environmental sciences and policy., (pp. 121-135).

Tesfahun. (2005). Rural Poverty Situation and Determinants:the case of Kersa kondaltity woreda,. South west Shewa.

Tripathi.D and Kounang.N. (2001). Soil erosion and Conservation. New Delhi: New age International publishers.

UNCCD. (2004). conventionsForest, Climate change, Biodiversity and land degradation. Joint group of Rio ., (pp. 3-6). Germany.

UNEP, U. N. Lake Baringo Community Based integrated land and Water management project-project Descriptive., (p. 2000). Kenya.

Warren. (2002). land Degradation in contextual. .Land degradation and Development, (pp. 449-459).

World, B. (2013). Ethiopia: The world Fact Book. Retrieved from http:/www.cia.gov/publications/the world fact book/fields/2116.html accessed.

World, f. p. (2005). Ethiopia country program. Addis ababa, Ethiopia.

Yirga, C. (2007). The dynamics of soil degradation and incentive for optimal management in the central highland of Ethiopia. South Africa.

Appendix: 1

RELIABILITY /VARIABLES=income expense edu.level Fsize Hectar & Q2 income Q3 expense Q4 edu.level Q5 Fsize Q6 Hectar /SCALE('ALL VARIABLES') ALL /MODEL=ALPHA.

Reliability

[DataSet1] C:\Users\i3\Desktop\NEW spss - Copy.sav

Scale: ALL VARIABLES

Case Processing Summary N % Valid 15 6.8 Cases Excludeda 207 93.2 Total 222 100.0 a. List wise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha .782 10

Appendix: 2 Date______

Questionnaires

Effects of Soil erosion on the livelihood of agricultural practices: The case of Horo Guduru Wellega zone Abbay chomen wareda.

The Information Collected from this Survey is strictly Confidential and is to be used for Academic Purposes Only.

Informed Consent Form

A research is being undertaken to assess the effects of soil erosion on the livelihood of agricultural practices by a student from ASTU University. You have been identified as a key stakeholder in this research and therefore a respondent to a few questions. The information you provide will be treated with confidentiality and will be used for academic purposes only.

SECTION A: Household Identification:

A1. Village name …………………………

A2. Questionnaire serial no………………

A3. Date of interview ______

A4. Gender of household head

Male Female

A5. Age of the households

No. Age of the households Mark(√) 1 13—15 2 16-35 3 36-60 4 More than 61

A6. Marital status of the respondent

No. marital status of the respondents Single married

divorced widowed

SECTION B: Household general information

B1. Level of education of household head

No. Level of education Mark(√) 1 Illiteracy 2 Grade 1-4 3 Grade 5-8 4 Grade 9-10 5 Grade 11-12 and above B2. Occupation of Household head

i. Agriculture…………………………… ii. Non agriculture……………………… iii. Self Employed……………………… iv. Others……………………………………

B4. Household size______

B5. Land size______

B7. Total income from Agriculture Per/year (mention the amount of money) ______

i. Is it agricultural income year to year increase or decrease? If you say either increase or decrease; tell us what is your 56

reason?______If your answer on question (i) is decreases. Why? a. Climate change b. Poor crop performance c. Land production d. Change of soil fertility e. Land size f. Other( specify)

B8. Have you use fertilizes / urea and Dap/ on your farmland?

Yes No

B9. Have you use fertilizer on your farmland? If your answer yes, write for how many years fertilizer use on your farmland?

Over the last five years over the last ten years

Over the last eight years More than fifteen years

B10. How long have you been living in this community/―Kebele? ______B11. Have you used the following alternative for reducing soil erosion on your farmlands?

Method used Mark(√) Yes No Add fertilizers/Urea& Dap) Crop rotation Intercropping

Changing enterprises

Planting of higher bred crop varieties

SECTION: C Agricultural land use

C1. Which agricultural practices do you carry out on your farmer?

1 Livestock keeping…………………………………. 2 Crop farming………………………………………. 3 Farm forestry………………………………………. 4 Poultry……………………………………………… 5 Bee keeping………………………...... 6 Others (specify) ……………………………………

If you select one of them; write your reasons______

C2= Rank the agricultural practices stated in C1 in order of their contribution to house hold income with 1 being the highest ranked practices.

No. house hold activities Mark (√) 1 Livestock keeping 2 Crop farming 3 Farm forestry 4 Farm forestry 5 Bee keeping 6 Others

C3. How many birr you get from agriculture per yearly in birr?

-Blow 10,000 -21,000—50,000

- 11,000—20,000 - More than 51,000

C4. How many birr you invest for agricultural purposes in a year?

- 1000birr-- 5000birr -11,000birr—15,000birr - 6000birr—10,000birr -Above 16,000 birr

SECTION: D: Local knowledge of soil erosion, evaluation and classification.

D 1. Is there the effect of soil erosions are observed in your agricultural production Yes No

D2. What is the effect of soil erosion on the agricultural practices livelihood?

No Soil erosion indicator (in Abbay The effect of soil erosion on the chomen) agricultural practices livelihood

Section E . The Agricultural access related to Government and NGOs

E1. Have you supported the agricultural access by Government and NGOs? Let as tike / use this √/ your answer the researcher mention below?

a. Agricultural techniques Yes No b. The access of equipment Yes No

c. Extension/training/ Yes No d. Agricultural inputs Yes No

e. Introduction new modern farming technology Yes No

E2. What are the possible solutions to the challenges faced?

1. ______2. ______3. ______4. ______5. ______

Thank you!

Appendix: 3

Semi-Structured Interview Guide for Research participants

Respondents‟ Demographic and Research Related Information

Study area: Location: Region ______Zone ______

Wereda ______Kebele ______

Gender:______

Age: ______

Marital status:______

Family size:______

Source of Income/Livelihood:______

Educational Level: ______

Research activities involved in:

Grand tour questions (general and specific):

1. How long have you been living in this community/―Kebele?

2. What are the main causes for the decline of your agricultural production?

3. Which types of agricultural activities are carrying out on your farmland?

4. Explain the methods that use for reduce the effect of soil erosion on your farmland?

5. Describe the total yearly income of you from agriculture in birr.

6. Explain the total expense for agricultural purposes in terms of develop the fertility of soil and others in a year (in birr).

7. Is there the effect of soil erosions are observed in your agricultural production?

8. Have you supported by Government and NGOs for reducing the effect of soil erosion in your area? Explain it.

9. How do you describe the effect of soil erosion on food security issues? 10. Have you use fertilizer on your farmland? If your answer yes, for how many years you use fertilizers?

11. What are the possible solutions to reduce the effect of soil erosion in your area?

Appendix- 4

Focus Group Discussion Questionnaires 1. What are the effects of soil erosion on the rural Agricultural practices livelihood? 2. What are your perceptions regarding to the effect of soil erosion on rural Agricultural practices livelihood? 3. What are the mechanisms of Government and NGOs used to support farmers for reducing the effect of soil in your area? 4. What are the major effects of soil erosion observed on your area? 5. What are the possible solutions to reduce the effect of soil erosion on farmland?