MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE (MoA)
Final Baseline Survey Report
Participatory Small-Scale Irrigation Development Programme II (PASSIDP II)
RFP NO: RFP-PASIDPII /01/2017
August 2019 Addis Ababa
Final Report
Table of Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... I II. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
2.1 BACKGROUND ...... 1
2.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAM ...... 3 2.2.1 Target Areas ...... 3 2.2.2 Target Groups ...... 3 2.2.3 Development Objective and Components ...... 4
2.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ...... 4
2.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ...... 4
2.5 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ...... 5 2.5.1 General ...... 5 2.5.2 Specific objectives ...... 5 III. METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH OF THE STUDY ...... 12
3.1 APPROACH ...... 12
3.2 METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION ...... 12 3.2.1 Document Review ...... 12 3.2.2 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) ...... 12 3.2.3 Focus Group Discussions ...... 13
3.3 MAJOR CHALLENGES OF THE SURVEY ...... 20 IV. SURVEY FINDINGS ...... 21
4.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS ...... 21
4.2 BASIC DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS ...... 23 4.2.1 Total Population of Respondents and HH Heads by Gender ..... 23 4.2.2 Age Distribution of Respondents’ HH Members by Region and Gender ...... 24 4.2.3 Marital Status ...... 26 4.2.4 Educational Status of Respondents ...... 27 4.2.5 Occupation and Religion of Respondents ...... 28
4.3 HOUSING CONDITIONS AND ASSET OWNERSHIP ...... 30 4.3.1 Housing Conditions ...... 30 4.3.2 Access of Household Heads to Clean Water...... 32
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page i
Final Report
4.3.3 Access and Type of Latrine Use by Households...... 32 4.3 4 Sources of Energy of Households ...... 33
4.4 ASSET OWNERSHIP ...... 34 4.4.1 Land Holding and Use of Households ...... 34 4.4.2 Availability of Communal Land ...... 35 4.4.4 Ownership of Productive Assets ...... 36 4.4.5 Number of Productive Assets Owned by Type and Region ...... 37 4.4.6 Estimated Value of Productive Assets Owned by Type and Region ...... 38 4.4.7 Ownership of HH Durable Assets ...... 38
4.5 LIVESTOCK OWNERSHIP ...... 40 4.5.1 Percent of Respondents Owning Livestock ...... 40 4.5.2 Livestock Sold in the last Year ...... 41
4.6 CROP PRODUCTION ...... 44 4.6.1 Area and Production Under Rain-fed ...... 44 4.6.2 Productivity of Major Crops Produced under Rain-fed ...... 47 4.6.3 Crop Prices ...... 49 4.6.4 Agricultural Inputs Use ...... 49 4.6.5 Crop Production under Traditional Method of Irrigation ...... 52 4.6.6 Production per Household under Traditional Irrigation ...... 53 4.6.7 Crop Yields under Traditional Irrigation ...... 53 4.6.8 Total Value of Crops Produced under Traditional Irrigation ...... 54 4.6.9 Total Value of Crop Production under Different Water Supply .. 55
4.7 GENDER ROLE IN CROP PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES ...... 56
4.8 DISTANCE TRAVELLED TO THE NEAREST MARKET ...... 58
4.9 ACCESS TO SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION SERVICES ...... 58
4.10 MEMBERSHIP IN WATER USERS ASSOCIATIONS ...... 60
4.11 RELATIONSHIP WITH FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ...... 60
4.12 FARMERS’ ACCESS TO ROAD AND COOPERATIVE MARKETING SERVICES ...... 62
4.13 ACCESS TO INFORMATION ...... 64
4.14 SOURCES OF INCOME ...... 66
14.15 POVERTY STATUS OF RESPONDENT HOUSEHOLDS ...... 67
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page ii
Final Report
4.16 HOUSEHOLD FOOD EXPENDITURES AND CONSUMPTIONS...... 68
4.17 ESTIMATED VALUE OF CONSUMED FOOD ...... 77
4.18 HOUSEHOLD NON-FOOD EXPENDITURE ...... 79
2.19 NUTRITIONAL STATUS OF CHILDREN ...... 81
4.20 SHOCKS AND RESILIENCE ...... 83 4.20.1 Shock Events ...... 83 4.20.2 Trends in the Impact of Shock Events among Regional States ...... 90 4.20.3 Extent of Recovery from Shock ...... 94
4.21 FOOD INSECURITY COPING STRATEGIES ...... 99 4.21.1 Coping Strategies Used against Food Insecurity ...... 99 4.21.2 Average Number of Days Strategy Used ...... 100
4.22 ECO SYSTEM HEALTH AND IMPROVED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ...... 101 4.22.1 Tigray Region...... 101 4.22.2 Amhara Region ...... 105 4.22.3 Oromia Region ...... 108 4.22.4 SNNPR ...... 114
V. IDENTIFIED BASELINE INDICATORS FOR LOGFRAME ...... 117
5.1 PROGRAMME GOAL ...... 117
5.2 DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE ...... 118
VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS ...... 121
ANNEX-1 ...... 125
ANNEX-2 ...... 128
ANNEX-3 ...... 131
ANNEX-4 ...... 131
ANNEX-5 ...... 133
ANNEX-6 ...... 138
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page iii
Final Report
List of Tables Table 1: Planned Activities and Inputs, Expected outputs, Outcomes and Impacts ...... 8 Table 2: Summary of FGD by Region ...... 13 Table 3: Sample Size Allocation by Region...... 14 Table 4: Sample size allocation by Scheme – Tigray ...... 15 Table 5: Sample size allocation by Scheme – Amhara ...... 16 Table 6: Sample size allocation by Scheme – Oromia ...... 17 Table 7: Sample Size Allocation by Scheme – SNNPR ...... 18 Table 8: Distribution of Household Heads by Gender ...... 21 Table 9: Number of Respondents by Gender and Region, 2017/18 ...... 22 Table 10: Respondents by Agro-ecological Zone, 2017/18 ...... 22 Table 11: Respondents by Type of Expected Benefits from the Program, 2017/18 .... 23 Table 12: Total Family Members of Respondent HHs by Gender and Region, 2017/18 .. 23 Table 13: Number and Percentage of HH Heads by Gender and Region, 2017/18 ...... 24 Table 14: Distribution of Household Heads by Age and Gender...... 24 Table 15: Age Distribution of Population of Respondent Households by Region and Gender, 2017/18...... 25 Table 16: Distribution of Household Heads by Marital Status ...... 26 Table 17: Marital Status of Respondents’ HH Members, 2017/18 ...... 26 Table 18: Distribution of of Household Heads by Education and Gender ...... 27 Table 19: Education Status of Respondent HHs Members by Region and Gender, 2017/18 ...... 28 Table 20: Distribution of Household Heads by Occupation ...... 29 Table 21: Family members of Respondent Households by Occupation and Region, 2017/18 ...... 29 Table 22: Distribution of Household Heads by Religion ...... 30 Table 23: Population of Respondent HHs by Religion and Region ...... 30 Table 24: Houses by Type of Roof by Region ...... 31 Table 25: Houses by Type of Wall by Region, 2017/18 ...... 31 Table 26: Respondents by Type of Floor by Region, 2017/18 ...... 31 Table 27: Percent Accessible to Clean Water by Region, 2017/18 ...... 32 Table 28: Household Heads Ownership of Latrine by Gender 2017/18 ...... 32 Table 29: Regional Distribution of HHs by Type of Latrine Owned by Gender, 2017/18 . 33 Table 30: Source of Energy for Cooking and Lighting by HH Heads and Region, 2017/18 ...... 33 Table 31: Average Land-holding (ha) of HH heads by Region, 2017/18 ...... 34 Table 32: Average Land-holding (ha) by Use of HH Heads by Region 2017/18 ...... 35
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page iv
Final Report
Table 33: Household Heads Reporting Availability of Communal Land Holdings by Region, 2017/18 ...... 36 Table 34: Size of Communal Land Holding (ha) Reported by Respondents from PASSIDP II Schemes by Region, 2017/18 ...... 36 Table 35: Percent Distribution of Respondents Who Reported Communal land by Purpose from PASSIDP II Schemes by Region, 2017/18 ...... 36 Table 36: Percent of Respondent HH Heads Reporting the Ownership of Productive Assets by Region, 2017/18 ...... 37 Table 37: Number of Productive Assets Currently Owned Per HH by Type and Region, 2017/18 ...... 37 Table 38: Estimated Value (ETB) of Productive Assets Currently Owned per HH by Type and Region, 2017/18 ...... 38 Table 39: Percent of HH Heads by Type of Durable Assets by Region, 2017/18 ...... 39 Table 40: Number of Currently Owned Durable Assets by HH Heads and Region, 2017/18 ...... 39 Table 41: Estimated Value (ETB) of Currently Owned Durable Assets by Respondents by Region, 2017/18 ...... 40 Table 42: Percent of Household, Headss Owing Livestock by Type and Region, 2017/18 ...... 41 Table 43: Average Number of Livestock Owned Per Household, by Region 2017/18 ..... 41 Table 44: Average Number and Type of Livestock Sold During the Past Year by Region, 2017/18 ...... 42 Table 45: Average Amount of Money Earned (ETB) Per HH from Sales of Livestock in the Past One Year, 2017/18 ...... 43 Table 46: Number by Type of Livestock Died during the Past One Year by Regional Schemes, 2017/18 ...... 44 Table 47: Average Area (Ha) Allocated for Rain-fed Crops in 2017/18 by Respondent Households by Region, 2017/18 ...... 45 Table 48: Average Production of Rain-fed Crops in Quintals per HH by Type of Crop by Region in year 2017/18...... 46 Table 49: Yield per Hectare of Major Crops under Rain-fed Production by Respondents by Region, 2017/18 ...... 47 Table 50: Total Value (Birr) of Production per Household under Rain fed production, 2017/18 ...... 48 Table 51 : Average Price (Birr) Per Quintal of Major Crops Reported by HHs by region, 2017/18...... 49 Table 52: Average Area (Ha), Quantity (Qt.) and Estimated Value (ETB) of Organic Fertilizer Used by HHs for crop Production, 2017/18 ...... 50
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page v
Final Report
Table 53: Average Area (Ha), Quantity (Qt.) and Estimated Value (ETB) of In-organic Fertilizer Used by Respondents for crop Production, 2017/18 ...... 51 Table 54: Average Area (Ha), Quantity (Qt.) and Estimated Value (ETB) of Chemicals Used by Respondents for Crop Production, 2017/18 ...... 51 Table 55: Average Area (Hectares) Cultivated Per HH by Type of Crop Produced Under Traditional Irrigation by Region, 2017/18 ...... 52 Table 56: Average Production Per HH in Quintals by Type of Crop Produced Under Traditional Irrigation Region, 2017/18 ...... 53 Table 57: Average Yield per Hectare of Crops Produced under Traditional Irrigation Methods by Region, 2017/18 ...... 54 Table 58: Estimated Value (Birr) of Total Production per Household under Traditional Irrigation, 2017/18 ...... 55 Table 59: Total Value of Crop Production Per Sampled Household from PASSIDP II Schemes in ETB during 2017/18 ...... 56 Table 60: Percent of Current Male Participation in Crop Production with Irrigation by Region ...... 56 Table 61: Percent of Current Female Participation in Crop Production with Irrigation by Region, 2017/18 ...... 57 Table 62: Percent of Current Youth Participation in Crop Production with Irrigation by Region, 2017/18 ...... 58 Table 63: Mean Distance Travelled (km) to the Nearest Market by Respondents by region, 2017/18 ...... 58 Table 64: Percent of Respondents ‘Access to Irrigation in the Past Four Months by Region, 2017/18 ...... 59 Table 65: Percent of Household Reporting Having Membership in Water Users Association by Region, 2017/18 ...... 60 Table 66: Percent of Respondents Reported as Having Relationship with Financial Institutions by Region, 2017/18 ...... 61 Table 67: Distribution of Respondents Having Relationship by Type of Financial Institution by Region, 2017/18 ...... 61 Table 68: Average Amount of Outstanding Loan per Household with Financial Institution by Region, 2017/18 ...... 61 Table 69: Average Amount of Savings (Birr) Per Household with Financial Institutions by Region, 2017/18 ...... 62 Table 70: Percent of HHs Reporting the Presence of Access Road in their Villages by Region, 2017/18 ...... 63 Table 71: Percent of Respondents by Type of Access Road and Region, 2017/18 ...... 63
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page vi
Final Report
Table 72: Percent of Respondents Having Access to Marketing Cooperatives by Region, 2017/18 ...... 63 Table 73: Percent Marketing Cooperatives Membership by Region, 2017/18 ...... 63 Table 74: Percent of HHs Received Information by Type and Region, 2017/18 ...... 65 Table 75: Percent of Respondents by Source of Information Used by Region, 2017/18 . 65 Table 76: Percent of Respondents Received Income during the Last Crop Season by Source and Region, 2017/18 ...... 66 Table 77: Average Income (ETB) Received during the Last Crop Season by Source and Region, 2017/18 ...... 67 Table 78: Distribution of HHs by Estimated Annual Income (ETB) by Region, May-June 2017/18 ...... 68 Table 79: Percent of Respondents Who Consumed Different Types of Food during the Last Seven Days by Type and Region ...... 69 Table 80: Average Quantity (Kg) Food Consumed per Household during the Last Seven Days by Region, 2017/18 ...... 71 Table 81: Average Quantity (Kg) Purchased per Household during the Last Seven Days, 2017/18 ...... 73 Table 82: Average Quantity (Kg) of Food Consumed Per Household from Own Production by Region, 2017/18 ...... 74 Table 83: Average quantity of food (Kg) Consumed per House per Week from Food Aid, 2017/18 ...... 75 Table 84: Average Food Consumed (Kg) Per Household per Week from Own Production and Food Aid, 2017/18 ...... 76 Table 85: Estimated Total Food Value (Birr) Consumed Per Week per Household, 2017/18 ...... 78 Table 86: Percent of Respondents Purchased Services/Household Items during the Last 30 Days by Region, 2017/18 ...... 80 Table 87: Average Amount Paid (ETB) Per Household by Type of Purchased Services/Items by region, 2017/18 ...... 81 Table 88: Nutritional Status of Children Under 5 by Region, 2016...... 83 Table 89: Percent of Respondents Experienced Shock Events during the Past Crop Year by Type of Event and Region ...... 84 Table 90: Average Number of Shock Events Reported by Respondents during the Last Crop Season, 2017/18 ...... 85 Table 91: Percent of Respondents by Severity of Shock Events in Tigray, 2017/18 ...... 86 Table 92: Percent of Respondents by Severity of Shock Events in Amhara, 2017/18 .... 87 Table 93: Percent of Respondents by Severity of Shock Events in Oromia, 2017/18..... 88 Table 94: Percent of Respondents by Severity of Shock Events in SNNPR, 2017/18 ..... 88
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page vii
Final Report
Table 95: Distribution of HHs by Status of the Impact of the Shock Regions, 2017/18 89 Table 96: Distribution of Respondents by Status of the Impact of the Shock 2017/18 .. 91 Table 97: Distribution of Respondents by Status of the Impact of the Shock Amhara, .. 92 Table 98: Distribution of respondents by status of the impact of the shock on Oromia . 92 Table 99: Distribution of Respondents by Status of the Impact of the Shock ...... 93 Table 100: Distribution of Respondents by Trend in the Impact of the Shock, 2017/18 93 Table 101: Percent of Respondents by Extent of Recovery in Tigray, 2017/18 ...... 94 Table 102: Percent of Respondents by Extent of Recovery in Amhara: 2017/18 ...... 95 Table 103: Percent of respondents by extent of recovery in Oromia, 2017/18 ...... 97 Table 104: Percent of Respondents by Extent of Recovery in SNNPR ...... 98 Table 105: Percent of Respondents by Extent of Recovery in all Regions ...... 99 Table 106: Percent of Households Used Strategies over the Past Seven Days 2017/18 100 Table 107: Average Number of Days of the Strategy Used by ‘Type and Region, ...... 101 Table 108: Current Status of Executed Interventions in Watershed Management ...... 101 Table 109: Selected Scheme Watershed Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR) Analysis ...... 103 Table 110: Surface and Groundwater Potential of Scheme Watersheds ...... 104 Table 111: Amhara Region Improved Watershed Management Activities ...... 106 Table 112: Land under Improved Watershed Management Practices ...... 108 Table 113: Water resource potential of the scheme watershed in Oromia ...... 109 Table 114: Oromia Region Improved Watershed Management Activities ...... 110 Table 115: Gullies of the scheme watersheds in Oromia ...... 112 Table 116: Oromia Region Improved Watershed Activities before Project Scenario .....113 Table 117: Gullies and sediment delivery Ratio (SDR) in SNNPR ...... 115 Table 118: Existing practices (Ha) in each scheme watershed in SSNP ...... 117 Table 119 : Yield/Ha in Quintals of Common Crops under Raifed and Tradional Irrigationat during 2017/18 Crop Year ...... 120
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page viii
Final Report
ACRONYMS/ ABBREVIATIONS
SNNPR : Southern Nationals nationalities and Peoples Region SSI : Small Scale Irrigation CSA : Central Statistical Agency EDHS : Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey FDRE : Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia FGD : Focus group Discussions FHHs : Female Headed Households FPCMU : Federal Program Coordination and Management Unit; IFAD : International Center for Agricultural development IRR : Internal Rate of Return KII : Key Informant Interview MHHs : Male Headed Households FHH : Female Headed Household MoANR : Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources NPV : Net Present Value PASSIDP : Participatory Small Scale Irrigation Development Program PDO : Program development Objective PIM : Program Implementation manual SECAP : Social, Environmental and Climate Change Assessment Procedures SDR : Sediment Delivery Ratio
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page ix
Final Report
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
ITAB CONSULT PLC would like to thank and acknowledge all Organizational units of the Ministry of Agriculture and IFAD involved providing useful support during the preparation for fieldwork and actual implementation of the survey and comments on the documents prepared at stage starting from inception to final report. In particular, the firm thanks all staffs of
PASSIDP II Programme Coordination and Monitoring Unit for their endless support and useful comments.
ITAB CONSULT PLC also thanks all professionals engaged in the assignment at field level and took the courage to collect the data required at those most difficult times. In particular, those taken by flood, imprisoned and contracted disease and had the patience to stay the course are highly appreciated by the firm.
Finally, ITAB CONSULT PLC also thanks and acknowledges regional staff down to the level of Kebele, who also assisted in providing information and guiding field data collectors. Had your support been absent, the assignment could have not been accomplished at all.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page x
Final Report
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This executive summary highlights the major findings of the baseline survey of the Participatory Small-Scale Irrigation Development Program II (PASDIP II) undertaken in May to June 2018. It recaps; the objectives, methodology used in data collection and analysis and findings of the survey. The baseline survey covered 74 Schemes of which 11, 23, 30 and 10 are in Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNPR, respectively.
PASIDP II targets farmers operating on a land holding of less than 0.5 ha in the lowlands with a potential for irrigation of 1ha and development of 4ha of watershed. The targets are primarily poor and food insecure rural households involved in rain-fed agriculture or traditional irrigation schemes and are commonly vulnerable to shocks and climate changes. These are mixed crop-livestock farming systems, predominantly living on a per capita income of less than US$ 0.3 per day.
Even though program performance indicators have been set, the baseline/benchmark against which the progress in program implementation as output/outcome and impact that could be measured are not known. Hence, the actual values or benchmarks of the selected indicators in the logical framework need to be determined before the actual implementation of the program begins through a scientifically designed baseline survey. Thus, the main objective of the study was to undertake a baseline survey that would provide a benchmark for tracking, monitoring and assessing the progress and impacts of the program at a later stage. In short, the purpose of the survey was to assesss the economic and environmental conditions of beneficiary households including the institutional set-up of the community.
The approach used in the study was both qualitative and quantitative methods using FGDS, KIIS, Household Survey and observations. In the household survey, a total of 3000 sample households were selected using random walk in the schemes to select beneficiary households of the irrigation schemes and micro watersheds planned for improvement. Tablets were used in data collection and entry including registration of
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page I
Final Report scheme and interviewed Households, while data analysis was made using SPSS software, whose final results are presented in the body of this report.
Using poverty head count method the finding indicated that only 2.27% (68) of smaple households of of 3000 and extrapolated 1412 HHs of the 62,797 target households (SSI schemes and watersheds) were above poverty line at the time of the survey. The Average Value of Durable Assets per Household, as estimated by the sample households during the survey, was found to be ETB 1274.6, while that of the Productive Assets per household excluding livestock was ETB 851.14. The survey revealed that the average landholding is about 1.04 ha per household allocated variably to the production of different crops based on the priority of each household.
The use of inputs for production of crops under rainfed and traditionally irrigated systems are minimial resulting in an overall low yield levels of 10.5 quintals for cereals, 7.2 quintal for pulses, 5.3 quintal for oilseeds, 50.3 quintal for vegetables, 56.5 quintal for fruits and 59.1 quintal for root crops under rainfed and 10.0 quintals for cereals, 8.2 quintal for pulse and 34.7 quintls for vegetables per hectare per household under traditional irrigation systems, respectively.
With respect to finance, of the 13% reporting as having relationship with financial institutions, only 36, 31 and 23 % of the sampled HHs have access to micro-financial, commercial bank and saving and credit institutions, respectively to support their farm operations. About 71% of the HHs have no access to market services and on average travel 12 km to the nearest market places
Households experienced climate-related shock events like too little rains, crop diseases outbreaks, and late onset and/or early finish in the year preceding this survey work in the SSI scheme areas. About 47 % (1408 HHs) and around 41 % (1.237 HHs) faced drought and crop disease shock events, resectiveyl. In the events of food shortage due to such shocks; HHs employ primarily strategies such as eating more of less preferred and cheaper foods and secondly borrowing food from friends or relatives to cope up with the problem.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page II
Final Report
Eco-system health has been assessed in the perspective of SSI scheme operation areas on the environment. Indicators employed for this purpose were; water resource potential for water supply, soil erosion/degradation status and its impacts on downstream irrigation schemes and diversity in vegetation cover. The finding of this study indicated that current condition of the selected watershed intervention execution stands at 15 % good, 35 % moderate and 4 % poor showing the need for strengthening intervention implementation efforts for enhanced impacts.
The oveall results of the baseline survey; viewed in terms of the economic, environmental and institutional set up of the target community, highly justify the interventions planned under PASSIDP II. However, the interventions seem to require a more coordinated apparoach and strategies in their implementation and periodic monitoring.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page III
Final Report
II. INTRODUCTION This study has been conducted by ITAB CONSULT PLC pursuant to an agreement signed with the Ministry of Agriculture (Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia), dated March 1, 2018 to undertake a baseline survey of the Participatory Small Scale Irrigation Development Program II (PASDIP II). The study identified benchmark indicators at the start of PASID II, against which progress in achievements of the expected periodic and end results of the interventions under the program implementation could be measured.
2.1 Background
Ethiopia has a diverse agro-ecology with varying farming systems that are fragile and often vulnerable to various climatic changes such as drought, winds and heavy rains/floods culminating in great losses of lives and biodiversity. Agriculture in the country, by and large, is rain-fed which increases its vulnerability to the frequent climatic changes.
In Ethiopia drought, among climatic changes, has been a serious menace to the country’s agricultural farming systems. Evidence indicates that about 80% of farmers in the lowlands and 22% in the highlands had at least one crop failure due to inadequate precipitation to support full crop growth and development over the last five years (PIM, 20171).
There are indications that annual mean temperature continues to increase in Ethiopia over the next half of a century threatening a sustainable agribusiness based on rain- fed farming and increasing the need for the development and use of irrigation. Crop failure as a result of drought makes farm households unable to produce enough for meeting the family needs and increases chances of depending on food assistance.
To avert this problem through ensuring the provision of water supply for crop production in the drought prone locations of the country, the Government of Ethiopia
1Program Implementation Manual. 2017. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Participatory Small- Scale Irrigation Development Program(PASIDP- II)
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 1
Final Report
(GOE) and IFAD have entered into a collaborative effort focusing on the development of a participatory small-scale irrigation. The first phase of this program implemented 2008-2015 (PASIDP) has not only contributed to the reduction of the country’s vulnerability to adverse climatic risks but also assisted in bringing down problems of rural poverty and food insecurity.
The positive results achieved in the first phase of the program encouraged the two parties to suggest the development of a second phase as a PASIDP II project.
This phase takes the assumption that farmers with access to secured irrigation, markets and associated necessary services will produce and market higher volumes of products than those without these provisions. Investments on watersheds with irrigation schemes will further enhance food security and nutrition of the farmers and improve their resilience against external shocks caused by adverse weather and climatic changes. Such intervention is expected to improve the production and productivity of the target farmers in the food insecure areas of the program. PASIDP II innovates on; mainstreaming of participatory planning and selection of schemes, developing agri-business linkages and market access to mitigate marketing risks particularly for perishable high-value crops, integration of climate change adaptation strategies, promotion of improved crop husbandry and access through improved inputs and financial services, enhanced focus on gender and youth as priority target group, mainstreaming nutrition-sensitive agriculture and aligning to IFAD’s new Social, Environmental and Climate Change Assessment Procedures (SECAP) and its international engagements with respect to climate change resilience.
In this survey, description of the program, statement of the problem, significance of the study, objectives (General and specific) and scope of the study have been highlighted. Literature review has also been done on; the concept of poverty and poverty measurement, malnutrition, household assets and income, water efficiency, contribution of irrigation to crop yield increase and yield stability, access to financial services and climate resilience.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 2
Final Report
2.2 Description of the Program
2.2.1 Target Areas Focus areas of this study were four regions of; Amhara, Oromia, Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Region (SNNPR) and Tigray. The Government desired to capitalize on the already built delivery capacity under the PASIDP I program when considering these four regional states for PASIDP II program.
2.2.2 Target Groups PASIDP II program targets farmers operating on a land holding of less than 0.5 ha in the lowlands with a potential for irrigation of 1 ha of a command area where 4 ha of land will be rehabilitated following a watershed-based rehabilitation in the adjacent watersheds.
These are primarily poor and food insecure rural households involved in rain-fed agriculture or traditional irrigation schemes and commonly are vulnerable to shocks and climate changes. They rely predominantly on mixed crop-livestock farming system, living on a per capita income of less than US$0.3 per day.
PASSIDP II program aimed at developing 18,400 ha of small-scale irrigation schemes and an estimated 60,000 ha of adjacent watersheds that will be developed using a micro-watershed approach. The beneficiaries of this program are expected to be 108,750 households (HHs), of which: i) 46,250 HHs in small-scale irrigation schemes with fields in the adjacent watersheds; ii) 37,500 households in the adjacent watersheds, without land in the irrigation schemes; iii) 15,000 youth and landless people who benefit from rural employment creation due to the growing labor need requirements in irrigation and related downstream and upstream agribusiness development; (iv) 10,000 households that benefitted from irrigation support under PASIDP and that would benefit from the agronomic support and agribusiness linkages and market access support under PASIDP II.
Within the core target group, women and women-headed households (WHHs) representing the very vulnerable group and the youth (Refers to those who are between 18 and 35 years of age), largely unemployed, underemployed, and underpaid being among the working poor.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 3
Final Report
2.2.3 Development Objective and Components The goal of PASIDP II program has been to contribute to “Increased prosperity and resilience to shocks in food insecure areas of Ethiopia”, while its development objective (PDO) is to “Provide improved income and food security for rural households on a sustainable basis”.
The program has three components: a) Investment in Small-scale Irrigation Infrastructure b) Investment in Capacity for Sustainable Agriculture and c) Program Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Knowledge Management
2.3 Statement of the Problem
For successful implementation of, ongoing monitoring, periodical and final evaluation of the program, a logical framework has been developed during the design of this study with performance indicators and means of verification. Sources, frequency, responsible bodies and risk assumptions have been indicated by hierarchy of results. While targets are set for the program under each hierarchy, as performance indicators, the baseline/benchmark against which the progress in program implementation as output/outcome and impact could be measured are not known. Hence, the actual values or benchmarks of the selected indicators in the logical framework need to be determined before the actual implementation of the program begins through a scientifically designed baseline survey. Thus, this study is meant to bridge the current information gap at the beginning of the study, on the socio- economic and production parameters of the program focus area through undertaking this baseline survey.
2.4 Significance of the Study
In order to monitor the changes that are expected from the interventions to be made by this program, result monitoring paramours have been developed with indicators. The selected monitoring parameters were: I) Water quality in rivers ii) Agrochemical releases into irrigation drains/rivers iii) Agrochemical concentrations in aquatic fauna iv) soil fertility situation, vi) Economic activity in project area, vii) Socio-economic status and viii) Food security. This study is, therefore, significant in the sense that
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 4
Final Report
it will determine the current level of each situation focusing on socio-economic status and food security and using the selected parameters in the log frame to monitor the level of changes achieved periodically during the course of the implementation of the project and after its completion.
2.5 Objective of the Study
2.5.1 General The main objective of this study is to undertake a baseline survey of the PASIDP II program, which is expected to provide a benchmark for tracking, monitoring and assessing the progress and impacts of the project at a later stage.
This survey has furnished information on output, outcome and impact indicators of the program (including both Results, and Impact Management (RIMS) indicators and other relevant indicators according to TOC collected both at the micro and project levels. It will, hence, allow a rigorous impact assessment to be conducted and accommodate to help and inform project implementation and M & E system of PASSIDP II.
2.5.2 Specific objectives The specific objectives of the baseline survey are to assess and determine current: i) Socio-economic characteristics of the prospective beneficiaries; ii) Access to modern agricultural service institutions; III). Shock occurrences and coping strategies.
2.6. Theory of Change (TOC) and logical framework
The TOC illustrates the project's causal chain, which links inputs to outputs, outcomes, and impacts. It derives testable hypotheses to be tested by the research questions2. The concept is shown as follows.
INPUTS AND ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS OUTCOMES IMPACTS
2 Garbero, A., Songsermsawas, T., 2017. Impact Assessment Plan: Participatory Small-scale Irrigation Development Programme – Phase II, Ethiopia. Rome: IFAD.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 5
Final Report
As presented in the logical framework of PASIDP II, the project focuses on improving economic growth and alleviating rural poverty through investments in irrigation systems and building beneficiaries' capacity for practicing sustainable agriculture via market access, agricultural extension, watershed management, PHL (Poverty at House Level) reduction, and adopting practices with Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) potential.
It is believed that access to irrigation for agricultural product helps farmers to improve their productivity outcomes. Improved water supply for irrigation also increases crop yields, as farmers have access to overall greater volume of water for cultivation, more consistent water supply and at the time when irrigation water is most needed. Moreover, irrigation also allows farmers to expand their cultivated area and increase their crop rotations in an agricultural season. Furthermore, it allows a more efficient use of complementary inputs including improved seeds, fertilizer, or pesticides. Other channels through which irrigation may help farmers improve productivity include allowing the diversification of income sources, mitigating the impacts of drought by supplying water when needed, increasing access to output markets, increasing demand for hired agricultural labor, reducing seasonal variation of output prices, and increasing resilience. Measuring household-level resilience is difficult without collecting explicit data on income or consumption indicators. A number of previous studies have used household consumption (instead of using household income) to analyze how households can maintain their welfare levels over time in the presence of exogenous shocks or other adverse weather events (Songsermsawas, 2017).
While the construction or the development of irrigation systems may generate impacts on several indicators, the magnitude of impacts can be heterogeneous based on the scale of the irrigation systems. As for other PASIDP II interventions apart from irrigation development, agricultural interventions aimed at improving market access through roads and strengthening of linkages among; research and extension, watershed management, PHL reduction, and adoption of CSA practices have been
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 6
Final Report shown to improve agricultural productivity, which has a direct effect on household income, consumption, nutrition, and welfare outcome.
The interventions rolled out as part of PASIDP II are expected to help the project beneficiaries in the following ways. First, irrigation water user associations (IWUAs) are formed within each community under the project area. Second, IWUA leaders and members are provided with the necessary knowledge by the project’s extension agents to build the irrigation schemes, manage, and operate the schemes to distribute or allocate water efficiently. Third, the watershed surrounding the irrigation command areas are rehabilitated, and developed to ensure that sustainable agricultural practices can be implemented. Fourth, training and capacity building activities related to improved agricultural practices and technology adoption such as drip irrigation, labor saving techniques, and improved farm implements and inputs are delivered to the beneficiaries to help increase productive capacity of beneficiary farmers. Fifth, beneficiaries would obtain (1) a constant supply of water, appropriate to farmers' needs, (2) higher overall volume of water, (3) better water delivery in terms of quantity and timing in a cultivation season.
It is expected that project intervention leads to increase in agricultural outputs, improved market and service linkages through allowing the facilitation of contractual arrangements with agricultural traders, and providing information related to agricultural markets to ensure that beneficiaries have sufficient marketing channels to sell their produce after harvest. The above argument relating project inputs/activities, outputs and outcomes is summarized in table 1.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 7
Final Report
Table 1: Planned Activities and Inputs, Expected outputs, Outcomes and Impacts
INPUTS AND ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS OUTCOMES IMPACTS
Development of irrigation systems • Irrigated area Household level Household level • Investment in irrigation increased based on infrastructures (e.g. canals the scale of the • Increased • Increased built and diversion systems irrigation systems input use household constructed) • Improved and • Expanded income increased water cultivation • Increased • Establishment and supply for plots inside area household strengthening of IWUAs the command area • Increased consumption based on the scale of crop • Higher ability • Training of IWUA leaders and the irrigation systems productivity to smooth members • IWUAs established • Increased consumption and functioning with sales of crop • Increased clearly defined (both food security operating rules quantity and and dietary • Farmers trained on value) diversity water use, watershed • Reduced • Increased management, vulnerability resilience improved practices to production against shocks and climatic and adverse • Farmers adopted shocks climatic technology, used events provided inputs, Agricultural capacity building implemented CSA Community level Community level recommendations • Formation of FRGs and • Increased • Improved extension support • Female farmers membership ability to take trained on activities and greater immediate • Development of surrounding designed specifically functionality actions when watershed for them of IWUAs necessary • Improved • Improved • Promoting CSA approach • Market access for productivity ability to farmers improved via of land in accumulate • Provision of inputs development of roads command additional and market sheds area and IWUA • Delivery of activities surrounding resources designed for women (e.g. • Financial services watershed when needed home gardening made available to • Sustainable • Improved farmers agricultural ability to
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 8
Final Report
practices expand maintained activities to • Greater meet new resources for demands of IWUA IWUA activities members from user fees and labor contributions
ASSUMPTIONS • Geographical conditions • Contractors can build Household level allow for irrigation irrigation systems and systems to be developed service facilities • Markets for inputs, credit, and outputs exist and • IWUAs can effectively function well with sufficient supply of inputs and • Suitable conditions to manage water use and credit and demand for agricultural products develop service facilities allocation • There are no other barriers to improving agricultural such as roads and market • Training is suitable outcomes such as land access, soil quality, weather sheds and context-specific conditions, or civil conflicts • Inputs and credit are • There is sufficient support available to increase Community level for the establishment and farm investments to strengthening of IWUAs take advantage of • Sufficient IWUA capacity to accumulate financial and water availability labor resources to carry out IWUA activities • There is sufficient • Watershed demand for training management and CSA • Sufficient and continuous support to IWUAs by related to water and practices are federal and local institutions watershed management appropriate for the command area and the surrounding watershed
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 9
Final Report
2.7 Definition of Terms and Concepts Used in the Survey
Region: refers to PASSIDP Irrigation Schemes located in Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNPR and data presented are only for the schemes in each region.
Household: constitutes of a person or group of persons irrespective of wealth related or not who normally live together in the housing unit or group of housing units and who have common cooking arrangements.
Head of Household: A head of a household is a person who economically supports or manages the household or for reasons of age or respect, is considered as head by members of the household or declares himself as head of a household. Head of a household could be a male or a female.
Beneficiary Households: Are those households who are targeted to benefit from PASSIDP II small scale irrigation schemes or micro watershed or both in the program area.
Outcome. : is something that follows as a result or consequence of an activity or an input. The differebce between output and outcome is that the former tells the story of what is produced or the organization's activities. On the other hand, an outcome is the level of performance or achievement that occurred because of the activity or services the organization provided.
Household Assets: In this survey, household assets are categorized as durable and productive assets. Durable assets are consumer goods that have long economic life and value, while productive assets are those assets that are used as inputs in production and creation of wealth. Household items such as television, furniture, bed, etc are considered as durable assets, while farm tools, equipment and machinery are productive assets. Land and livestock are also productive assets, but the former is not included in this category as farmers do not own it but only have use right.
Traditional Irrigation
These are schemes generally based on diversion of small streams, with diversion structures, constructed by the farmers from mud, rocks twigs or mixtures of these. The structures are generally, washed away during each rainy season by floods, consequently requiring maintenance or full reconstruction by the beneficiaries at the end of each rainy season. As these structures are not water-tight, less water is diverted due to the seepage losses. Thus, less volume of water is diverted for irrigation despite the presence of sufficient water in rivers. Water Efficiency: is reducing water wastage by measuring the amount of water required for a particular purpose and the amount of water used or delivered. Water efficiency differs from water conservation in that it focuses on reducing waste, not restricting use.
Efficient Technology
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 10
Final Report
This is a relative term that refers to techniques that allow more control of water and reduce water losses. Different technologies have different efficiencies, e.g. pipe distribution system being more efficient in comparison with unlined canal and drip irrigation being more efficient in relation with surface irrigation methods.
Income: refers to the value of crops produced, sales of Livestock/livestock product and firewood/charcoal, trading, sales of other goods or assets and tree crops, grain milling, food processing business and local drinks, repair business, agricultural wage labor (on-farm), non-agricultural wage labor (off-farm), pension, interest/dividend earned on other investment, remittances, inheritance, renting of land and house, share cropping and others.
Poverty line: The poverty line, which is also sometimes called the poverty threshold, is the smallest amount of money a person or a family needs to live on; to buy what is needed. It is the imaginary line drawn by the experts which has a particular amount if anybody earn income which is lower than this amount is known as poor3 . National headcount poverty rate is measured as people leaving on less than $1.25 a day4
Stunting: is the impaired growth and development that children experience from poor nutrition, repeated infection, and inadequate psychosocial stimulation. Children are defined as stunted if their height-for-age is more than two standard deviations below the WHO Child Growth Standards median.
Wasting, or low weight for height: is a strong predictor of mortality among children under five. It is usually the result of acute significant food shortage and/or disease5.
Underweight: is a person whose body weight is considered too low to be healthy. Underweight people have a body mass index (BMI) of under 18.5 or a weight of 15 % to 20 % below normal for their age and height group.6
3 https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_line 4 IMF Country Report No.18/18. The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Staff Report for 2017. 5 https://www.unicef.org/progressforchildren/2007n6/index_41505.htm
6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underweight
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 11
Final Report
III. METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH OF THE STUDY
3.1 Approach
The study used participatory approach including both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection. To this end, the consultant developed both quantitative and qualitative data collection instruments for Households, KIIs and FGDs and accordingly implemented during the Survey.
3.2 Methods of Data Collection
In order to collect the necessary data required for generation of the baseline, the following methods were employed:
3.2.1 Document Review In this respect, the consult reviewed project documents such as the PDR and PIM, including several documents on basic concepts on the variables covered in the study as well as irrigation and policies and strategies of the country as presented in the inception report. In the course of the study, feasibility studies of the small scale irrigation schemes completed in each region were further reviewed, the results of which were summarized and presented as annex- to this report (Annex 3-6).
3.2.2 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)
The objective of KII was to collect qualitative information in the form of primary data for triangulation of the data to be collected at lower and household levels. To this end, KIIs were conducted with at least three professionals at each level, particularly at Regional, Zonal and District levels. Relevant offices at each level included; PASID II Coordination Unit, Agriculture and Natural Resources, Water Desk, Human Health and Cooperative Promotion. Furthermore, DAs were interviewed at each Kebele in which the SSI was located for collection of information relating to small scale irrigation schemes and watershed management systems. Wherever possible representatives of other organizations such as NGOs and Cooperatives of various forms operating in the schemes were also interviewed using the checklists of issues developed. The results are attached to this Report as Annex-5.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 12
Final Report
3.2.3 Focus Group Discussions
The objective of the FGD was to collect qualitative data through organized discussions with potential beneficiaries from the schemes including micro watersheds. This was to be based on samples of 8-10 participants selected from the 74 schemes. However, only 69 FGDs were conducted during the Survey. The total FGD participants were also 625 of which male were 547 and female 78. It is to be noted that the FGDs were conducted with mixed groups, male, female-headed household and youth by inviting all available beneficiaries in a particular command area and randomly selecting individuals until the required numbers has been obtained. Mixed groups were used since organizing separate groups was not possible because of the general situation at the time of the survey work, particularly the seasonal farming activities, Muslim fasting period as well as the unfavorable political condition in most of the survey areas. The details are shown in table 2 below.
Table 2: Summary of FGD by Region No. Region # of FGD FGD participants M F Total
1 Amhara 22 231 23 254 2 Tigray 7 54 19 73 3 Oromia 30 193 22 215 4 SNNPR 10 69 14 83 Total 69 547 78 625 3.2.4 Household Survey
The target populations for the household survey were beneficiary households of the 74 schemes distributed over the four regions. There were two groups of beneficiary households: irrigation scheme and watershed scheme beneficiaries.
3.2.4.1 Sample Design
Sample design for this survey is made with considerations of numerous elements in order to produce the desired outcomes. The sample is selected in stages to pinpoint the locations where interviews are to take place and to choose the respondents efficiently. The design considered stratifications in such a way that
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 13
Final Report
the sample actually selected is spread over geographic sub areas and population sub-groups properly.
3.2.4.2 Sample Size and Sample Allocation The sample size for this survey was calculated on the basis of the measurement objectives of the survey. The key parameters considered include the desired estimates, target populations, precision and confidence level required, estimation domains, and allowance for non-response.
The total sample size (n) for the structured questionnaire interview is calculated as 3000 eligible households using the formula hereunder by taking 5% alpha () level that represents 5% risk or 95% confidence level (z/2 = 1.96), 5% margin of error (d) at estimating population parameter, 0.5 as estimate of variance (p) assuming that the target population is split 50/50 on a dichotomous question using Cochran’s method, q=1-p, design effect (k) considered as 2, 9% considered for non-responses, inflating the result by 4 (number of regions to be covered) and applying correction for finite population.
k ∗ z2 ∗ p ∗ q n = 2 d2
The sample size determined above is distributed over the four regions with weight proportional to the number of beneficiary households of the regions for both groups of beneficiaries by considering the investment budget (87% for irrigation and 13% for watershed) following the suggestion and preference by the client, as detailed in the table 3. Table 3: Sample Size Allocation by Region
Region Number of Beneficiary Sample size allocation Households Irrigation Watershed Total Irrigation Watershed Total Tigray 2421 4793 7214 250 49 299 Amhara 6943 10892 17835 710 118 828 Oromia 12877 16867 29744 1322 177 1499 SNNPR 3155 4849 8004 324 50 374 Total 25396 37401 62797 2606 394 3000 The regional sample allocations shown above are further distributed over the schemes per region with weight proportional to the number of beneficiaries per scheme by considering both irrigation and watershed schemes as follows (Tables 4-7).
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 14
Final Report
Table 4: Sample size allocation by Scheme – Tigray
Name of Type of Zone district Tabia Irrigation Name of Watershed Sample Sample Scheme Scheme Beneficiaries Watershed Beneficiaries Allocation: Allocation: Irrigation Watershed Baekel R.Diversion Central T/maichew Wuhdet 121 Baekel 108 12 1 Daero R.Diversion Central Ahferom Hoya-medeb 144 Daero 140 15 1 Mai-auso R.Diversion Central Adwa Mai-tium&Adis- 102 Mai-auso 246 10 3 alem Mai-tsahlo R.Diversion Central M/leke Haftom 313 Mai-tsahlo 834 32 9 Ruba-Chemiet Pump Central W/leke Adi-hedem 222 Ruba-Chemiet 645 23 7 Dagabir Spate South H/wajerat Hintalo 424 Dagabir 363 44 4 Eastern Gereb-dagiorgis Spate South Enderta Arato 160 Gereb-dagiorgis 557 16 6 Eastern Gereb-fyaye R.Diversion South H/wajerat Muja 181 Gereb-fyaye 421 19 4 Eastern Gereb-giba Pump South Enderta Mahbere-genet 301 Gereb-giba 421 32 3 Eastern Misrar-telli R.Diversion South Enderta Mahbere-genet 200 Misrar-telli 578 21 6 Eastern Adi-kerakiro R.Diversion Southern Emba-Alaje Tekh'a 253 Adi-kerakiro 480 26 5 Total 2421 4793 250 49
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 15
Final Report
Table 5: Sample size allocation by Scheme – Amhara
Name of Scheme Type of Zone District Kebele Irrigation Name of Watershed Sample Sample Scheme Beneficiaries Watershed Beneficiaries Allocation: Allocation: Irrigation Watershed
Ambo Woha Diversion North Gondar W/beleesa Filiklik 500 Ambo wuha 573 51 6
Aderkayna Diversion North Gondar W/Belesa Tebitebta 320 menetereho 500 33 5
BahirLibo Diversion North Gondar E/Belesa Goga 124 Koga 103 13 1
Gulana Intake North Gondar W/Belesa Gulana 460 weyebela 467 45 7
Mena Dawuch Intake North Gondar W/Belesa Dauch 320 cherecharite 257 32 4
AgamWuha Diversion North Gondar W/belesa Baja Ferfere 113 Aba gebru 555 12 6
Awajo Intake North Shoa MojanaWodera Wodera 158 Awajo 615 16 6 Amitu Intake North Shoa Asagrt Tamo 400 Wuduager 133 41 1 Keskash Intake North Shoa MojanDistrict ZebAmba 420 kesekash 271 43 3
BorkenaArtumafursi Diversion Oromia ArtumaFursi BishaeEidada 126 Butu 545 13 6
Workie Intake Oromia DewaChefa Didin 172 Kerambe 664 19 6
Sewr-3 Intake Oromia JileTimuga Balchi 115 Erara 913 12 10
Cheleka Diversion North Wollo Habru Abichu 186 Cheleka 570 19 6
Eyela-2 Intake North Wollo Gidan Chibina 556 Kombelu 162 57 2
Gobu-3 Spate North Wollo Kobo Jarota 271 Gedeba 217 28 2
Sideni Diversion North Wollo Habru Girana 604 Gorareba 1313 62 14 Amid Intake North Wollo Kobo 12 300 weleh 307 31 3
Gobu-4 Spate North Wollo Kobo Hujira 830 Gedeba 218 85 2 Golina Intake North Wollo Raya Kobo 22 350 wefela 743 35 9
Burka Diversion South Wollo Tehuledere 17 200 bureka 280 21 3 Jerma Intake South Wollo Wereilu 017 & 018 106 Jeram 971 11 10
Challi Diversion South Wollo Worebabu 12 92 Argoba 215 8 3 Sherif Intake South Wollo Argoba Gobera 07 220 sedeta 300 23 3 Total 6943 10892 710 118
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 16
Final Report
Table 6: Sample size allocation by Scheme – Oromia
Name of Scheme Type of Scheme Zone District Kebele Irrigation Name of Watershed Sample Sample Beneficiari Watershed Beneficiari Allocation: Allocation: es es Irrigation Watershed Adeyi Diversion Bale HarenaBulka 200 Adeyi 199 23 2 BiliJiso MED Borena Taltale 160 BiliJiso 182 27 3 Danada Diversion Bale D/mena 100 Danada 311 10 3 LediCheket Diversion Bale Girawa 300 LediCheketa 800 33 12 Welmel Diversion Bale D/Mena Melka Amana 500 Welmel 810 56 9 WelmelTika Diversion Bale H/bulluk SoduWelmal and 500 WelmelTika 735 54 11 Anole Odajeneta Spring Dev't East Hararghe Gurawa 160 Odajeneta 201 15 3 AfranKello Diversion East Hararghe KurfaChelle 176 AfranKello 500 19 4 BeredaLencha Spring protection East Hararghe GolaOda BaredaLencha 270 BeredaLencha 750 29 7 HargettiTirtiro Diversion East Hararghe GolaOda Hargeti&Tirtiro 540 HargettiTirtiro 750 55 8 Ifabas Diversion East Hararghe MeyuMuluke 200 Ifabas 241 21 3 KarraHorda Diversion East Hararghe Gurawa KarraHorda 603 KarraHorda 1162 62 12 Kura Meta Diversion East Hararghe Meta 600 Kura Meta 419 62 4 Lanagano Spring protection East Hararghe Jarso Burka Misoma 136 Lanagano 270 14 3 Misil Spring East Hararghe MelkaBalo 452 Misil 219 46 2 LagaArba Diversion West Hararghe Chiro 576 LagaArba 261 60 2 LagaChiro Diversion West Hararghe Miesso 462 LagaChiro 588 46 7 Laku Pump West Hararghe Chiro 789 Laku 209 80 3 Melka Spring West Hararghe Gemechis 248 Meka 25 5 OdaRacha Spring West Hararghe OdaBultum 425 OdaRacha 170 44 2 Kelatie Diversion North Shoa Jida 156 Kelatie 545 16 6 Koruha Diversion North Shoa Kimbibit 144 Koruha 317 15 3 Wando Diversion Borena Taltale 840 Wando 2005 140 9 Figa Bike Diversion Guji Saba Boru Figa bike 754 Figa Bike 680 91 9 HusseMandhera Pump West Hararghe Miesso 520 HusseMandhera 267 62 3 Jirimite Pump Guji Shakiso 200 Jirimite 348 22 3 Kojo'aCheketa Diversion Guji Saba Boru Kojo'a 1250 Kojo'aCheketa 918 113 25 Gebene Pump Guji S/Boru 352 Gebene 330 48 7 Damin Leman Spring West Arsi Siraro 160 Damin Leman 683 18 5 RophiSinxa Pump West Arsi Sirraro 160 RophiSinxa 163 16 2
Total 12877 16867 1322 177
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 17
Final Report
Table 7: Sample Size Allocation by Scheme – SNNPR
Name of Type of Zone District Kebele Irrigation Name of Watershed Sample Sample Scheme Scheme Beneficiaries Watershed Beneficiaries Allocation: Allocation: Irrigation Watershed Bisho Diversion Hadiya Gibe Buge 290 Bisho 160 31 1
Gomboro Diversion Hadiya Habicho&Addina Habicho 480 Gombora 821 49 9
GuderKembata Diversion Hadiya Anga Bidika 610 Guder 309 61 4
Shapa Diversion Hadiya Hawaro Hawara 420 Shapa 586 43 6
Simbita Pump Halaba Halaba Simibita 110 Sembita 425 11 4
Gombolozo Diversion Kenbata Haderao Gelbe 204 Gombolozo 556 21 6
Chancho Diversion Sidama Lake abaya Chelebesa 141 Chanco 2 691 15 6
Koshere Diversion GamoGoffa D/Goffa Koshere 280 Koshere 555 28 7
Ottora Diversion GamoGoffa Bonke Dambileottora 240 Otora 295 26 2
Manisa Diversion Wolayeta Offa W/Deyeka 380 Menisa 451 39 5
Total 3155 4849 324 50
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 18
Final Report
3.2.4.3 Sample Selection Scheme Developing sampling frame requires complete and updated list of beneficiary households which was not available during the survey period. Therefore, in order to maintain randomness, random walk and quota sampling technique were applied to select the respondent households from the schemes, where quota refers to the number of households allocated for a particular scheme. First, a data collector calculates sampling interval by dividing the total number of beneficiary households of a particular scheme by the quota or sample size allocated for that scheme. Then, he/she randomly selects a route within the scheme and interviews eligible households following the calculated sampling interval. When an identified household as per the sampling interval turns out to be a non-beneficiary household, the data collector skips that household and moves to the next beneficiary household. The procedure continues until the total sample allocated for that particular scheme is covered. The sample selection process was closely monitored by a team leader and a supervisor.
3.2.4.4 Data Collection
In order to collect the required data, interviews were conducted in local languages. Throughout the fieldwork, continuous and close communication was maintained between the central office and the data collection teams. Computer Assisted Personal Interview (CAPI)) is applied using tablets. CSPro7.0 software was used to design database application in order to gather the data using the tablets. Data collectors and supervisors who were well experienced in collecting survey data using tablets were deployed. The completed responses were reviewed at field level by the supervisors. . 3.2.4.5 Data Cleaning and Analysis
Properly captured data using CSPro7.0 is exported to the popular statistical software package called Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), which is suitable for surveys of similar types due to its wide ranges of analytical features and functionalities, for further data cleaning and analysis. Thematic techniques were used to organize and analyze the qualitative data.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 19
Final Report
3.3 Major Challenges of the Survey
There were several challenges experienced during the field data collection. Some of the challenges were natural, while others were the socio-political environment that existed in some of the areas. Highlights of these challenges/limitations have been indicated below:
• Some of the small scale irrigation scheme sites (E.g., Mai-tsahlo SSI of MerebLeke District, Daero SSI of Ahiferom District and Baikal SSI of Tahtay marched District of Tigray Region) were not only far off road and serviced with very poor road network connection but had also undulating topography (Gorges, valleys and hilly) which proved difficult for the enumerators to walk and collect data and determination of GPS locations of the respondent HHs. As a consequence the team faced a problem in completing the task within the given time frame.
• The coordination between District Agriculture and District Water Sector was very weak. The District Irrigation staff do not know the exact sites of SSIs in some Districts. In such case the District Water Sector staff helped the team. E.g. Enderta and Hintalo Wajirat Districts of Tigray Region.
• Awareness creation to the target beneficiaries on the methods of irrigation constructions, community participation, etc. from District Water and Agriculture offices appeared to be weak. As a result, some households using traditional irrigation on the upper part of the scheme had objection during the baseline survey suspecting that their perennial trees (mango, orange, hops, etc.) would be damaged during constructions of river diversion and canals of the SSI. E.g. Gereb Fyaya SSI of Hintalo Wajirta of Tigray region.
• The lack of all-weather road coupled with heavy rainfall made most of the roads impassable. Many rivers overflew in some areas due to heavy rains created inaccessibility problem? A case in point was Gelana District of Borena Zone.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 20
Final Report
• Conflicts among communities in some areas where it was not possible to travel to scheme site e.g. Quoricha District of Guji Zone, where it had to be replaced by another site in West Hararghe.
• Lack of preparation by the District Office on the complete list of irrigation and watershed beneficiaries in advance to the baseline survey. Listing of beneficiaries requires the verification of land ownership of farmers in the irrigation catchment as well as the watershed area. As this was not done in advance, identification of beneficiaries in most of the schemes was found to be very difficult and time consuming.
IV. SURVEY FINDINGS
4.1 Characteristics of Households 4.1.1 Gender of Household Heads This study covered a total of three thousand household heads (89 % male and 11 % female) nationally. Aggregated by regional states; 1499, 828, 374 and 299 HHs, were sampled from Oromia, Amhara, SNNPR and Tigray, respectively (Table 8). The proportion of crospondent female HH heads across regions were; 9.1, 12.1, 9.6 and 16.1 %, respectively.
Table 8: Distribution of Household Heads by Gender
Sex Region Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Coun % t Coun % Count % Coun % Coun % t t t 251 83.95 728 87.92 1,36 90.93 338 90.37 2,68 89.33 Male 3 0 Female 48 16.05 100 12.08 136 9.07 36 9.63 320 10.67 Total 299 100.0 828 100.00 1,49 100.0 374 100.0 3,00 100.00 0 9 0 0 0
4.1.2 Gender of Respondents It is important to note that the gender distribution of respondents is not the same with that of the sample Household heads. For, instance, the number of female respondents is greater that of female houshold heads, while that of male house heads is vise versa. This is because of the fact that female household members
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 21
Final Report
usually stay at home than male household members. The result is shown in table 9. As shown in the table overall, 2309 (77 %) HHs and 691 (23 %) HHs, of the respondents were male and female, respectively.
Table 9: Number of Respondents by Gender and Region, 2017/18
Sex Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Male 235 78.60 661 79.83 1134 75.65 279 74.60 2309 76.97 Female 64 21.40 167 20.17 365 24.35 95 25.40 691= 23.03 Total 299 100.00 828 100.00 1499 100.0 374 100.0 3000 100.00 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.1.3 Respondents by Agro-ecology
The largest proportion of the respondents reside in Kolla agro-ecological zone (49.8 %) and a little less live in W/Dega areas (44.4 %) while a very small proportion (5.7 %) are found in the highlands (Table 10). Region-wise, HHs residing in the highlands are proportionally consistently low across all regions while the HH’s proportion varied inconsistently between W/Dega and Kolla areas. Tigray (72.2 %) and SNNP (82.4 %) hold comparably higher HHs living in W/Dega than those HHs in Oromia (28.8 %) and Amhara (45.5) regions. The highest proportion of the respondent HHs (67.2 % live in Kolla zone in Oromia Region than the rest of the regions covered under this study. Table 10: Respondents by Agro-ecological Zone, 2017/18
Agro - Region Overall ecological Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Coun % Zone t Count % Count % Count % Coun % t 21 7.02 80 9.66 59 3.94 12 3.21 172 5.73 Dega W/Dega 216 72.24 377 45.53 432 28.82 308 82.35 1333 44.43 62 20.74 371 44.81 1008 67.24 54 14.44 1495 49.83 Kolla 299 100.0 828 100.0 1499 100.0 374 100.0 3000 100.0 Total
Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 During the survey, respondents were initially asked about their expected benefits from the PASSIDP II. The summary of the responses of the respondents showed that 76 % expect benefits from the small scale irrigation schemes, 13 % from watersheds while only 11 % expected benefits from both (Table 11).
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 22
Final Report
Table 11: Respondents by Type of Expected Benefits from the Program, 2017/18
Direct Benefits Region Overall from Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % SSI 250 83.61 540 65.22 1,307 87.19 181 48.40 2,278 75.93 Micro watershed 49 16.39 118 14.25 177 11.81 50 13.37 394 13.13 Both 170 20.53 15 1.00 143 38.24 328 10.93 Total 299 100.0 828 100.0 1,499 100.0 374 100.0 3,000 100.0 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.2 Basic Demographic Characteristics
4.2.1 Total Population of Respondents and HH Heads by Gender The total family members of respondent involved in this survey by region and gender is indicated in table 12. Across studied regions, a total number of 16,690 were involved of male and female respondents comprised 8770 (52.6) and 7920 (47.4 %). Oromia, Amhara, SNNP and Tigray account for 52.6, 24.1, 12.9 and 10.4 %, of the total population of respondents, respectively. Each household has about six family members across the four regions. Male respondents consistently comprised more than 50 % of the total sample across all regions. The family size, which is the number of persons per household is 5.8 in Tigray, 4.9 in Amhara, 5.9 in Oromia and 5.8 in SNPPR.
Table 12: Total Family Members of Respondent HHs by Gender and Region, 2017/18
Sex Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Coun % Count % Count % t Male 913 52.59 2137 53.25 4599 52.39 1121 51.85 8770 52.55
Female 823 47.41 1876 46.75 4180 47.61 1041 48.15 7920 47.45
Total 1736 100 4013 100 8779 100 2162 100 16,690 100.0 Family 5.8 4.9 5.9 5.8 5.6 size Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 Of the total three thousand HHs covered in the study 2680 and 320 were male- and female-headed, respectively (Table 13). Overall, female-headed HHs account only for about 11 % of the total studied HHs and ranged between the lowest in Oromia (9.1 % and the highest (16.1 %) in Tigray regions.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 23
Final Report
Table 13: Number and Percentage of HH Heads by Gender and Region, 2017/18
Sex Region Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Coun % Count % Coun % t t Male 251 83.95 728 87.92 1363 90.93 338 90.37 2680 89.33 Female 48 16.05 100 12.08 136 9.07 36 9.63 320 10.67 Total 299 100.00 828 100.0 1499 100.00 374 100.0 3000 100.0 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.2.2 Age Distribution of Respondents’ HH Members by Region and Gender
The distribution of household heads age by region and sex is shown in Table 14. Across regions, the male group under and equal to 18 years of age accounted for 0.03 % whereas those between 19 and 49 years, the agriculturally active age group, comprised 62.5 %. Those aged above 50 years make only 26.8 %. The corresponding figures for the female group were 0.03, 5.2 and 5.4 %, respectively. Regional distributions of the proportion of agriculturally active HH age groups for Oromia, SNNP, Amhara and Tigray were 70.8, 67.4, 51.3 and 45.2 %, respectively. Table 14: Distribution of Household Heads by Age and Gender
Sex Age Region Overall Range Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Male Age 15 - 18 1 0.12 1 0.03 Group 19 - 24 1 0.33 17 2.05 106 7.07 8 2.14 132 4.40 25 - 29 6 2.01 54 6.52 241 16.08 40 10.70 341 11.37 30 - 34 28 9.36 67 8.09 225 15.01 50 13.37 370 12.33 35 - 39 30 10.03 102 12.32 200 13.34 60 16.04 392 13.07 40 - 44 35 11.71 109 13.16 160 10.67 60 16.04 364 12.13 45 - 49 35 11.71 76 9.18 130 8.67 34 9.09 275 9.17 50 - 54 39 13.04 79 9.54 101 6.74 21 5.61 240 8.00 55 - 59 18 6.02 66 7.97 59 3.94 16 4.28 159 5.30 60 - 64 17 5.69 67 8.09 49 3.27 17 4.55 150 5.00 65 + 42 14.05 90 10.87 92 6.14 32 8.56 256 8.53 Female Age 15 - 18 1 0.12 1 0.03 Group 19 - 24 1 0.33 2 0.24 3 0.20 6 0.20 25 - 29 1 0.33 4 0.48 6 0.40 3 0.80 14 0.47 30 - 34 4 1.34 8 0.97 10 0.67 2 0.53 24 0.80 35 - 39 4 1.34 11 1.33 15 1.00 3 0.80 33 1.10 40 - 44 6 2.01 6 0.72 11 0.73 8 2.14 31 1.03 45 - 49 8 2.68 10 1.21 23 1.53 7 1.87 48 1.60 50 - 54 5 1.67 18 2.17 19 1.27 3 0.80 45 1.50 55 - 59 7 2.34 10 1.21 23 1.53 5 1.34 45 1.50
60 - 64 5 1.67 11 1.33 12 0.80 3 0.80 31 1.03 65 + 7 2.34 19 2.29 14 0.93 2 0.53 42 1.40 Total Total 299 100.00 828 100.00 1499 100.00 374 100.00 3,000 100.00 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 24
Final Report
The family size of the 3000HHs that were involved in the survey study as respondents (Table 15) were 16,690. Their distribution by gender and region in both sex groups comprised of 52.5 % male and 47.4 % female. Overall, respondents aged under 18, 19-49 and above 50 years comprised 31.6 % male and 27.7 % female, 16.1 % male and 16.7 % female and 4.8 % male and 3.0 %
female proportions of the total respondent age groups, respectively.
Table 15: Age Distribution of Population of Respondent Households by Region and Gender, 2017/18 Sex Age Region Overall group Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count %
Count % Count % Count % Count %
Male Under 5 93 5.36 237 5.91 863 9.83 159 7.35 1352 8.10
5 – 9 151 8.70 299 7.45 917 10.45 194 8.97 1561 9.35
10 – 14 134 7.72 316 7.87 762 8.68 162 7.49 1374 8.23
15 – 18 120 6.91 273 6.80 451 5.14 143 6.61 987 5.91
19 – 24 116 6.68 183 4.56 286 3.26 92 4.26 677 4.06
25 – 29 42 2.42 134 3.34 284 3.23 64 2.96 524 3.14
30 – 34 32 1.84 95 2.37 237 2.70 57 2.64 421 2.52
35 – 39 34 1.96 106 2.64 203 2.31 66 3.05 409 2.45
40 – 44 37 2.13 110 2.74 160 1.82 63 2.91 370 2.22
45 – 49 35 2.02 78 1.94 132 1.50 34 1.57 279 1.67
50 – 54 39 2.25 80 1.99 102 1.16 21 .97 242 1.45
55 – 59 18 1.04 66 1.64 59 .67 16 .74 159 .95
60 – 64 17 .98 67 1.67 49 .56 17 .79 150 .90
65 + 45 2.59 93 2.32 94 1.07 33 1.53 265 1.59
S-Total 913 52.6 2137 53.24 4599 52.38 1121 51.84 8770 52.54
Sex Age Region Total group Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Female Under 5 82 4.72 194 4.83 781 8.90 122 5.64 1179 7.06
5 – 9 130 7.49 291 7.25 828 9.43 172 7.96 1421 8.51 10 – 14 149 8.58 268 6.68 693 7.89 172 7.96 1282 7.68 15 – 18 93 5.36 209 5.21 319 3.63 123 5.69 744 4.46
19 – 24 67 3.86 142 3.54 305 3.47 79 3.65 593 3.55 25 – 29 46 2.65 150 3.74 358 4.08 94 4.35 648 3.88
30 – 34 47 2.71 107 2.67 216 2.46 76 3.52 446 2.67
35 – 39 56 3.23 159 3.96 246 2.80 82 3.79 543 3.25
40 – 44 41 2.36 85 2.12 129 1.47 43 1.99 298 1.79
45 – 49 37 2.13 97 2.42 111 1.26 22 1.02 267 1.60
50 – 54 25 1.44 68 1.69 74 .84 24 1.11 191 1.14
55 – 59 15 .86 28 .70 49 .56 14 .65 106 .64
60 – 64 15 .86 35 .87 32 .36 12 .56 94 .56
65 + 20 1.15 43 1.07 39 .44 6 .28 108 .65
S-Total 823 47.4 1876 46.75 4180 47.59 1041 48.17 7920 47.44 Total Total 1736 100.00 4013 100.00 8779 100.00 2162 100.00 16690 100.00
Fmily Size 5.8 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 25
Final Report
4.2.3 Marital Status
4.2.3.1 Marital Status of Heads of HHs
Household heads covered by this survey largely had a monogamous marriage about (85 %) status at the time of the study. Never married, polygamous marriage, divorced, widowed and separated all together accounted only for 15 % of the total household heads (Table 16). Disaggregated by regions; monogamous marriage was about 85, 84, 85 and 84 %, respectively of the total studied households in Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP. Table 16: Distribution of Household Heads by Marital Status
Marital Status Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Cou % nt Coun % Count % Count % Count % t Never married 1 0.33 15 1.81 11 0.73 10 2.67 37 1.23 Married 253 84.62 699 84.42 1,273 84.92 314 83.96 2,53 84.63 (monogamous) 9 Married 5 1.67 6 0.72 114 7.61 12 3.21 137 4.57 (polygamous) Divorced 8 2.68 26 3.14 20 1.33 2 0.53 56 1.87 Widowed 32 10.70 76 9.18 81 5.40 34 9.09 223 7.43 Separated 6 0.72 2 0.53 8 0.27 Total 299 100.0 828 100.0 1,499 100.00 374 100.00 3,00 100.0 0 0 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 4.2.3.2 Marital Status of Respondents’ HH Members When the marriage status of all respondents’ HH members is considered, however, about 60 % were engaged in a monogamous marriage system and disaggregated by region; Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP had 50, 56, 65 and 55 % married proportion, respectively (Table 17). Table 16 refers to household heads while table 17 is about respondents who are household memebrs not necessarily heads. Table 17: Marital Status of Respondents’ HH Members, 2017/18
Marital Status Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count %
Count % Count % Count % Count %
Never married 458 43.33 936 37.17 1190 28.62 483 39.33 3067 34.23
Married 533 50.43 1422 56.47 2704 65.03 681 55.46 5340 59.59 (monogamous) Married 7 .66 16 .64 118 2.84 16 1.30 157 1.75 (polygamous) Divorced 16 1.51 41 1.63 39 .94 5 .41 101 1.13
Widowed 39 3.69 92 3.65 106 2.55 41 3.34 278 3.10
Separated 4 .38 11 .44 1 .02 2 .16 18 .20
Total 1057 100.0 2518 100.0 4158 100.0 1228 100.0 8,961 100.0 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 26
Final Report
4.2.4 Educational Status of Respondents
4.2.4.1 Educational Status of HH Heads The majority of household head covered under this study were illiterate in both sex groups (54 % in the male and 10 % in the female). While 24 % of the male HHs attended 1-8 grade only 0.9 % of their female contempoararies were enrolled in the same grade (Table 18). As could be observed from this table, more proportion of male HH heads had better access to education opportunity than females across all educational levels. Table 18: Distribution of of Household Heads by Education and Gender
Sex Education Status Region Overall
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count %
Cou % Count % Count % Count % nt Male Illiterate 103 34.45 522 63.04 848 56.57 154 41.18 1,627 54.23 Read and Write 24 8.03 59 7.13 83 5.54 32 8.56 198 6.60
Primary (1-8) 114 38.13 123 14.86 372 24.82 113 30.21 722 24.07 Secondary (9-10 10 3.34 22 2.66 40 2.67 23 6.15 95 3.17
Preparatory (11-12) 2 0.24 4 0.27 3 0.80 9 0.30
Vocational (10+) 8 0.53 6 1.60 14 0.47
Tertiary (>12) 8 0.53 7 1.87 15 0.50 Female Illiterate 39 13.04 89 10.75 127 8.47 32 8.56 287 9.57 Read and Write 3 0.36 3 0.10 Primary (1-8) 7 2.34 8 0.97 7 0.47 4 1.07 26 0.87 Secondary (9-10 2 0.67 1 0.07 3 0.10 Vocational (10+) 1 0.07 1 0.03 Total 299 100.00 828 100.00 1,499 100.00 374 100.00 3,000 100.00
4.2.4.2 Educational Status of Respondents’ HH Members
Educational status of the population of the respondents is indicated in Table 19. Over all, about 25 % and 19 % of the male and female respondents attended primary school (1-8 grade) while correspondingly about 23 % and 27 % of these gender groups are illiterate. Those who can read and write and received any educational opportunities beyond secondary school make a trivial proportion (2.6 % for male and 0.8 for female groups).
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 27
Final Report
Table 19: Education Status of Respondent HHs Members by Region and Gender, 2017/18
Sex Educational status Region Overall
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count %
Count % Count % Count % Count %
Male Illiterate 258 16.01 921 24.93 1846 24.55 315 16.11 3340 22.60
Read and Write 26 1.61 70 1.89 112 1.49 39 1.99 247 1.67
Primary (1-8) 472 29.30 814 22.03 1827 24.30 518 26.50 3631 24.57
Secondary (9-10 77 4.78 124 3.36 98 1.30 89 4.55 388 2.63
Preparatory (11-12) 12 .74 26 .70 12 .16 16 .82 66 .45
Vocational (10+) 3 .19 1 .03 12 .16 14 .72 30 .20
Tertiary (>12) 1 .06 11 .30 19 .25 13 .66 44 .30
S-Total 849 52.69 1967 53.24 3926 52.21 1004 51.35 7746 52.42
Female Illiterate 325 20.17 952 25.76 2284 30.38 388 19.85 3949 26.72
Read and Write 5 .31 16 .43 25 .33 15 .77 61 0.41
Primary (1-8) 354 21.97 663 17.94 1258 16.73 475 24.30 2750 18.61
Secondary (9-10 67 4.16 74 2.00 20 .27 54 2.76 215 1.45
Preparatory (11-12) 7 .43 14 .38 1 .01 8 .41 30 0.20
Vocational (10+) 2 .12 1 .03 3 .04 7 .36 13 0.09
Tertiary (>12) 2 .12 8 .22 2 .03 4 .20 16 0.11
S-Total 47.28 1728 46.76 3593 47.79 951 48.65 7034 7034 47.58
Total 1611 100.00 3695 100.00 7519 100.00 1955 100.00 14,780 100.00 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.2.5 Occupation and Religion of Respondents
Table 20 depicts distribution of HHs by occupation of the surveyed HHs by scheme. Virtually all surveyed HH heads (98 %) were farmers and the balance proportion was shared among the other occupations, i.e. trading, civil service, student, artisan, pensioner, enemployed and others. When it comes to the family memebrs of the respondents, the larger (> 49 %) overall percentage are similarly farmers (Table 21). Students make the next higher occupation (40 %) of the HH members. Traders, civil servants, artisans, pensioners and others account for a minor portion (About 3 %) of the total occupation. HHs reporting unemployed members consist about 11 % of these respondents. The relative proportions of farmers to other categories of occupations in the family of respondents were higher in Amhara (54 %) and Oromia (49 %) regions than in SNNP (44 %) and Tigray (43 %).
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 28
Final Report
Table 20: Distribution of Household Heads by Occupation
Occupation Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Farmer 296 99.00 816 98.55 1,472 98.20 355 94.92 2,939 97.97 Trader 1 0.33 3 0.36 4 0.27 4 1.07 12 0.40 Civil 1 0.12 13 0.87 7 1.87 21 0.70 Servant Student 4 0.27 6 1.60 10 0.33 Artisan 1 0.12 1 0.03 1 0.33 2 0.24 4 0.27 7 0.23 Unemployed Pensioner 2 0.24 1 0.07 2 0.53 5 0.17 Others 1 0.33 3 0.36 1 0.07 5 0.17
Total 299 100.00% 828 100.00% 1,499 100.00% 374 100.00% 3,000 100.00%
Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 21: Family members of Respondent Households by Occupation and Region, 2017/18
Occupation Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Coun % t Farmer 630 42.54 1896 54.20 3448 49.24 802 44.14 6776 49.11 Trader 5 0.34 15 .43 44 0.63 18 0.99 82 0.59 Civil Servant 12 .81 24 .69 22 0.31 19 1.05 77 .56 Student 680 45.91 1222 34.93 2406 34.36 788 43.37 5096 36.93 Artisan 4 .27 6 .17 1 0.01 4 0.22 15 0.11 Unemployed 100 6.75 262 7.49 988 14.11 157 8.64 1507 10.92 Pensioner 3 .20 8 .23 7 0.10 8 0.44 26 0.19 Others 47 3.17 65 1.86 87 1.24 21 1.16 220 1.59 Total 1481 100.0 3498 100. 7003 100.0 1817 100.0 13799 100.0 0 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.2.6 Religion of Respondents
4.2.6.1 Religion of Household Heads Household heads of this study consisted of 32, 24 and 41 %, respectively of Orthodix, Protestant and and Muslim religions (Table 22). While the entire HHs heads in Tigray were Orthodox, only about 69, 4 and 11 % of HH heads from Amhara, Oromia and SNNP come from a similar religion background. While Protestant beliver HH heads were only confined to Oromia (28 %) and SNNP (84 %), about 31, 65 and 4 % of the HH heads were Muslims respectively in Amhara, Oromia and SNNPR
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 29
Final Report
Table 22: Distribution of Household Heads by Religion
Religion Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count %
Count % Count % Count % Count % Orthodox 299 100.00 573 69.20 54 3.60 40 10.70 966 32.20 Protestant 418 27.89 314 83.96 732 24.40 Catholic 1 0.07 2 0.53 3 0.10 Muslim 255 30.80 968 64.58 16 4.28 1,239 41.30 Indigenous 44 2.94 44 1.47 belief Others 14 0.93 2 0.53 16 0.53 Total 299 100.00 828 100.00 1,499 100.00 374 100.00 3,000 100.00
4.2.6.2 Religion of Respondents’ HH members
The survey showed that Muslims account for the highest (About 41%) of the overall religion of members the respondents (Table 23). Religion-wise members of HH respondants from Oromia hold a higher mix of all categories of considered religions while those from Tigray region are confined only to Orthodox religion.
Table 23: Population of Respondent HHs by Religion and Region
Religion Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Coun % Coun % Count % Count % t t Orthodox 1736 100. 2710 67.53 279 3.18 206 9.53 4931 29.54 0 Protestant 2799 31.88 1824 84.37 4623 27.70 Catholic 8 .09 8 .37 16 .10 Muslim 1302 32.44 5385 61.34 116 5.37 6803 40.76 Indigenous belief 276 3.14 276 1.65 Others 1 .02 32 .36 8 .37 41 .25 Total 1736 100. 4013 100.0 8779 100.0 2162 100.0 16690 100.0 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.3 Housing Conditions and Asset Ownership
4.3.1 Housing Conditions
4.3.1.1 Houses by Type of Roof Types of residential houses inhabited by HH heads were distinguished by the kinds of their; roofs, walls and floors. Corrugated iron sheet and thatched-roofed houses together accounted for about 96 % (Table 24). Amhara region has the highest proportion of iron sheet roofed-houses than those from the other three regions while Oromia has about equal proportions of iron sheet- and thatched-roofed
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 30
Final Report
houses. Houses with sand spread roofs were reported by Tigray and Amhara regions HH heads only in this study. Table 24: Houses by Type of Roof by Region
Type of Region Overall roof Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Coun % Count % Coun % Count % t t Corrugated 131 43.81 649 78.38 740 49.37 173 46.26 1693 56.43 iron sheet Thatched 79 26.42 177 21.38 736 49.10 199 53.21 1191 39.70 Sand spread 23 7.69 2 .24 25 .83 Others 66 22.07 23 1.53 2 .53 91 3.03 Total 299 100.0 828 100.0 1499 100.0 374 100.0 3000 100.0 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 4.3.1.2 Houses by Type of wall Most houses inhabited by HH heads (About 95 %) were constructed from mud and wood walls (Table 25) and earthen floor (Table 26). Constructing house walls from mud appears relatively higher in SNNP (About 89 %) and Oromia (About 84 %) regional states than the other two regions under consideration. Flooring of houses with materials like plastic, ceramic and cement is not common and account only for less than 2 % of the total number of houses reported. Table 25: Houses by Type of Wall by Region, 2017/18
Type of Wall Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Mud 166 55.52 575 69.44 1281 85.46 331 88.50 2353 78.43 Wooden 6 2.01 240 28.99 217 14.48 42 11.23 505 16.83 Masonry/bricks 3 1.00 3 0.36 1 .07 1 .27 8 .27 Others 124 41.47 10 1.21 134 4.47 Total 299 100.0 828 100.00 1499 100.00 374 100.0 3000 100.0 Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 Table 26: Respondents by Type of Floor by Region, 2017/18
Type of Region Overall Floor
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Coun % Coun % Count % Cou % t t nt Earth 291 97.32 799 96.50 1489 99.33 364 97.33 2943 98.10 Plastic tiles 1 .12 3 0.20 4 .13 Ceramics 2 .24 2 0.13 4 .13 Concrete 4 1.34 25 3.02 5 0.33 10 2.67 44 1.47 Others 4 1.34 1 .12 5 .17 Total 299 100.0 828 100.0 1499 100.0 374 100.0 3000 100.0
Source: PASSIDP Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 31
Final Report
4.3.2 Access of Household Heads to Clean Water
Overall, about 57 % of HH heads had access to clean water (Table 27) and the rest live without access to tap water. Disaggregated by region; the challenge of getting access to clean water by HHs seems worse in Oromia region (About 59 % are w/out access) than the rest of the surveyed regions. This has been attested by the fact that 77, 72 and 71 % HHs in Tigray, Amhara and SNNP have been reported to get access, respectively Table 27: Percent Accessible to Clean Water by Region, 2017/18
Region Overall Respons Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % e Count % Cou % Count % Count % nt Yes 230 76.92 597 72.10 609 40.63 266 71.12 1702 56.73
No 69 23.08 231 27.90 890 59.37 108 28.88 1298 43.27
Total 299 100.0 828 100.0 1499 100.0 374 100. 3000 100. 0 0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.3.3 Access and Type of Latrine Used by Households
Situation of the ownership of latrine by the surveyed HH heads is highlighted in Table 28. Overall, about 53 % of the surveyed household heads have latrine. Of those who have latrine, about 88.9% were male and 11.1% were female heads of households. Generally higher proportions of male HHs have access to latrine than their female contemporaries across all regions. Access to a private than a communal type of latrine is most frequent with all HH heads in all regions considered for this study (Table 29).
Table 28: Household Heads Ownership of Latrine by Gender 2017/18
Response Sex Overall Male Female Count % Count % Count % Yes 1,357 52.56 169 53.82 1,526 52.69 No 1,225 47.44 145 46.18 1,370 47.31 2,582 100.00 314 100.00 2,896 100.00 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 32
Final Report
Table 29: Regional Distribution of HHs by Type of Latrine Owned by Gender, 2017/18
Sex Type of Region Overall Latrine Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Cou % Coun % Count % Count % nt t Male Private 128 70.33 385 76.85 444 72.43 222 77.62 1179 74.53 Communal 6 3.30 24 4.79 20 3.26 5 1.75 55 3.48 S- 134 73.63 409 81.64 464 75.69 227 79.37 1234 78.01 Total Female Private 48 26.37 83 16.57 137 22.35 53 18.53 321 20.29 Communal 9 1.80 12 1.96 6 2.10 27 1.71 S-total 48 48 92 18.37 149 24.31 59 20.63 348 22 Total 182 100.0 501 100.0 613 100.0 286 100.0 1582 100.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.3 4 Sources of Energy of Households
The potential sources of energy for rural HHs are firewood, cow dung, fuel (Kerosene) and other minor items like crop stalks and leaves. Nevertheless, a chunk of the male (74 %) and female (22 %) groups rely more on firewood than other alternative sources (Table 30). The use of fuel and biogas is virtually non- existent in all regions and sex groups with the exception of Amhara region where a trace of individuals in both sex groups indicated its use. This tendency of more dependence on firewood as a source of energy will have an immense negative consequences on the regions’ forest resources (deforestation) and the resultant environmental degradation since the culture of planned development and protection of community forest for firewood purpose is generally uncommon in the country. Table 30: Source of Energy for Cooking and Lighting by HH Heads and Region, 2017/18
Sex Sources Region Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Male Firewood 209 69.90 607 73.31 1132 75.52 279 74.60 2227 74.23 Cow dung 25 8.36 41 4.95 1 .07 0 0 67 2.23 Fuel 0 0 5 .60 0 0 0 0 5 .17 Biogas 0 0 1 .12 0 0 0 0 1 .03 Others 0 .33 7 .85 1 .07 0 0 9 .30 S. Total 234 78.59 661 79.83 1134 75.66 279 74.6 2309 76.96 Female Firewood 56 18.73 152 18.36 365 24.35 94 25.13 667 22.23 Cow dung 8 2.68 10 1.21 0 0 1 .27 19 .63 Fuel 0 0 2 .24 0 0 0 0 2 .07 Others 0 0 3 .36 0 0 0 0 3 .10% S. Total 64 21.41 167 20.17 365 24.35 95 25.4 691 22.93 Total 299 100.0 828 100.0 1499 100.0 374 100.0 3000 100.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 33
Final Report
4.4 Asset Ownership
4.4.1 Land Holding and Use of Households The average regional land holding of HH heads is a hectare per household (Table 31 and Fig.1). It was only from the Amhara region that a mean land holding of less than a hectare per HH was reported in this survey. The maxium land holding reported was 10 hectares in Oromia, 8 hectares in Tigray, and 5 hectares each in Amahara and SNNPR. These figires are outliers and had no significant effect on the mean. Total owned land is utilized for different purposes by dividing it into various parcels according to the needs of the households. Use for the production of annual crops commonly takes precedence over other uses in getting a greater plot (Table 32) across all regional states. Table 31: Average Land-holding (ha) of HH heads by Region, 2017/18
Region Minimum Mean Median Maximu Std Valid N m Deviation Tigray 0.250 1.08 1.000 8.000 0.85 299
Amhara 0.125 0.81 0.750 5.000 0.54 828 Oromia 0.000 1.15 1.000 10.000 1.02 1,499 SNNP 0.000 1.10 1.000 5.000 0.82 374 Overall 0.000 1.04 0.875 10.000 0.88 3,000
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Figure 1: Average Size of Holding in Ha by Respondents, 2017/18
1.1 1.08 Tigray Amhara Oromia 0.81 SNNP 1.15
Fig 1. Average land holding per Houseold in Ha by Region
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 34
Final Report
Table 32: Average Land-holding (ha) by Use of HH Heads by Region 2017/18
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Annual Crops 0.87 0.69 0.75 0.83
Perennial Crops 0.01 0.01 0.17 0.19
Private Grazing 0.03 0.01 0.12 0.05
Woodlot 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.01
Fallow land 0.10 0.01 0.03 0.00
Irrigated Crops 0.05 0.10 0.06 0.01
Total 1.08 0.81 1.15 1.10
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.4.2 Availability of Communal Land
Gerally speaking, the issue of communal land may not be dealt with in household surveys. In this survey, however, the Consult has tried to involve all survey targets through the various instruments used such as household survey, KII and FGDs.This is with the assumption that communal lands are important to households as grazing for livestock, summply of construction materials, development of community centers ,venue for community meetings and the like.,
Accordingly, the result of the household survey showed that About 56 % of the total HH heads reported the existence of communal lands in the surveyed regions (Table 33). A higher proportion of its existence in Tigray (87 %) and Amhara (64 %) than Oromia (53 %) and SNNP (22 %) was reported. The average size of the communal land holding reported in the shems by region is 14.0 ha and it ranges from the highest of 20 ha in Tigray to the lowest of 6 ha in SNNPR regions, respectively (Table 34). Virtually all communal lands are used for grazing (74 %) and forestry (25 %) purposes throughout regional states (Table 35).
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 35
Final Report
Table 33: Household Heads Reporting Availability of Communal Land Holdings by Region, 2017/18
Respons Region Total e Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Coun % t Count % Coun % Count % Count % t Yes 260 86.96 529 63.89 792 52.84 84 22.46 1665 55.50 No 39 13.04 299 36.11 707 47.16 290 77.54 1335 44.50 Total 299 100 828 100 1499 100 374 100 3000 100
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 Table 34: Size of Communal Land Holding (ha) Reported by Respondents from PASSIDP II Schemes by Region, 2017/18
Regions Hectares Sample Size Tigray 20.3 299 Amhara 19.31 828 Oromia 11.84 1499 SNNP 5.77 374 Average 13.99 3000
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 35: Percent Distribution of Respondents Who Reported Communal land by Purpose from PASSIDP II Schemes by Region, 2017/18
Purpose Region Overall
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP N %
N % N % N % N % For grazing 100 38.46 292 55.20 766 96.72 81 96.43 1239 74.4 1 Forest 160 61.54 237 44.80 12 1.52 3 3.57 412 24.7 4 Social purposes 13 1.64 13 .78 Religion 1 .13 1 .06 purpose Total 260 100.0 529 100.0 792 100.0 84 100.0 1665 100. 0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.4.4 Ownership of Productive Assets The different types of durable-productive assets owned by HHs are shown in Table 38. This list of assets was predetermined by the client and that is why it was confined only to the indicated items which do not present exhaustive list of all productive assets that a farm HH could own. As can be seen from this table, most farm HHs own sickle, axe, hoe, traditional plough, shovel and pick axe. An insignificant proportion of farmers in the studied regions have access to modern agricultural productive assets like; modern ploughs, water pumps and chemical sprayers. Ownership of grain mills and beehives is also confined only to a very few
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 36
Final Report
HHs. Absence of ownership of modern farm implements signifies that agriculture in the country still, by and large, remains too traditional calling for a better extension effort in farm mechanization than currently offered.
Table 36: Percent of Respondent HH Heads Reporting the Ownership of Productive Assets by Region, 2017/18
Type of Product Asset Region Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall Sickle (machete) 100.0 94.0 69.0 97.0 82.0 Axe 67.0 51.0 78.0 45.0 66.0 Pick axe 40.0 17.0 51.0 53.0 41.0 Hoe 68.0 69.0 33.0 63.0 50.0 Plough (Traditional) 96.0 89.0 50.0 79.0 69.0 Plough (Modern) 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Water pump 7.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 Beehive 8.0 1.0 13.0 6.0 9.0 Shovel or spade 61.0 40.0 53.0 28.0 47.0 Chemical sprayer 5.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 Grain mill 0.0 0.0 4. 1.0 2.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.4.5 Number of Productive Assets Owned by Type and Region Each HH on average currently owns at least more than one sickle, axe, hoe and traditional plough across regions and less of the other productive assets (Table 39). Assets that are owned more than those kept less are necessities for agricultural business for the survival of the family of the HH for timely land preparation, planting and harvesting of crops unlike those that are not determinants for existence and could be borrowed from neighbors as deemed necessary. Table 37: Number of Productive Assets Currently Owned Per HH by Type and Region, 2017/18
Type of Productive Asset Region Tigray Amhara Oromo SNNPR Overall Sickle 3.3 2.4 0.9 1.7 1.7 Axe 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.8 1.1 Pick axe 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.7 Hoe 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.8 1.2 Plough 2.3 0.8 4.2 0.9 3.8 Water pump 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Beehive 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 Shovel or spade 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.6 Chemical sprayer 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 37
Final Report
4.4.6 Estimated Value of Productive Assets Owned by Type and Region The mean values of the productive assets across regions are indicated in Table 40. Average regional values for traditional ploughs, sickles, axes and hoes are estimated at Birr 259.00, 87.00, 77.00 and 64.00; respectively. Prices of these assets consistently appear to be cheaper in Amhara than the rest of the regions and the reason for this is not apparently clear. Average total values for all productive assets across regions are Birr 851.00 varying over regions from the lowest Birr 497.00 in Amhara to the highest Birr 1,377.00 in Tigray. Table 38: Estimated Value (ETB) of Productive Assets Currently Owned per HH by Type and Region, 2017/18
Region Type of Productive Asset Tigray Amhara Oromo SNNPR Overall Sickle 122.9 44.4 64.5 94.0 87.4 Axe 77.1 27.8 98.3 40.1 77.0 Pick axe 35.3 12.8 60.7 42.4 46.3 Hoe 68.7 24.8 45.1 73.3 64.1 Plough (traditional) 244.4 88.2 176.5 261.4 258.9 Water pump 630.4 227.7 174.5 83.0 170.1 Beehive 139.1 50.2 140.9 87.9 98.1 Shovel or spade 59.3 21.4 67.9 16.4 49.5 Total 1377.2 497.3 828.4 698.5 851.4 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.4.7 Ownership of HH Durable Assets
4.4.7.1 Type and Percent of Respondents Owning Durable Assets The kinds of durable asset considered are those indicated in Table 41. The most frequent owned assets by the surveyed HHs are mobile phones and radio/tape recorders. Regional averages of number of these items by a household are less than one (Table 42). Nevertheless, farmers in the surveyed regions, generally, do not have important live simplifying and entertaining facilities such as; stoves (Biogas, kerosene and cylinder gas), fixed line phones, video sets, sofa sets, bicycles, sewing and weaving machines, electric plates for making injera, refrigerators and private cars. Ownership of such assets is an indication of modern live and not owning them implies that the households still depend on the traditional way of live without access to technological innovations that contribute to enhancing the livelihood of the communities. A very few number of HHs,
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 38
Final Report
nevertheless, have wrist watches, televisions, electric and energy-saving stoves across regions.
Table 39: Percent of HH Heads by Type of Durable Assets by Region, 2017/18
Type of Durable Assets Region
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall % % % %
Kerosene stove 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Electric stove 1.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Wrist watch/clock 7.0 6.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 Mobile phone 60.0 53.0 43.0 52.0 48.0 Radio/tape recorder 44.0 10.0 21.0 10.0 19.0 Television 3.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 2.0 Satellite dish 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 Motorcycle 0.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 Cart (hand pushed or animal drawn) 0.0 1.0 0.0 4.0 1.0 Energy saving stove 0.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 2.0
Table 40: Number of Currently Owned Durable Assets by HH Heads and Region, 2017/18
Type of Durable Asset Region Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall
Electric stove 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 Wrist watch/clock 0.08 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.04 Mobile phone 0.78 0.63 0.52 0.69 0.60 Radio/tape recorder 2.45 0.11 0.64 0.10 0.61 Television 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.02 Satellite dish 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 Motorcycle 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.02 Cart (hand pushed or animal drawn) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.01 Energy saving stove 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.4.7.2 Estimated value of Durable Assets
Estimated total values (Birr) of all currently owned durable assets for Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP were 751.00, 79.00, 1650.00 and 1273.00, respectively (Table 43). Accordingly, HHs in Oromia and SNNP have higher total asset values than those in the Tigray and Amhara regions.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 39
Final Report
Table 41: Estimated Value (ETB) of Currently Owned Durable Assets by Respondents by Region, 2017/18
Type of Durable Asset Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Wrist watch/clock 7.2 0.68 1.90 0.70 3.63 Mobile phone 425.7 35.97 291.29 308.22 325.71 Radio/tape recorder 134.7 4.44 101.39 35.67 80.78 Television 82.3 18.93 23.96 0.00 72.44 CD/VCD/DVD/video set 0.0 0.80 5.54 0.00 4.97 Satellite dish 11.6 2.09 14.31 0.00 14.09 Sofá set 33.4 2.96 23.02 4.81 23.60 Bicycle 16.7 0.60 1.20 0.00 3.93 Motorcycle 0.0 0.00 806.47 823.53 505.63 Cart (hand pushed or animal 0.0 1.13 8.89 90.11 18.81 drawn) Sewing machine 0.0 0.06 4.00 0.00 2.17 Weaving equipment 0.0 0.00 0.00 1.67 0.21 Energy saving stove 0.0 0.17 14.03 8.42 8.53 750.7 78.5 1,649.7 1,273.1 1,274.6 Total Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.5 Livestock Ownership
4.5.1 Percent of Respondents Owning Livestock
Higher proportion of households generally own more oxen (62 %) and local cows (65 %) than other classes of livestock (Table 44) across regions in Tigray, Amhara and Oromia regions apart from a lower proportion for Oxen in the case of the latter region. Local calves and heifers, sheep and goats and donkeys are also kept by a reasonable proportion of the households. Improved classes of cattle breeds are virtually not kept by all farmers in all regions meaning that nearly all use the indigenous breeds of animals of poor productive and reproductive traits.
Regional average number of the different classes of livestock is generally below one animal in all regions with the exception of local cows, oxen, goats and chicken (Table 45). The average number of livestock per household is the total number of livestock divided by the sample size of each region and 3000hhs for the overall. There are also possibilities of having more than one type of animal such as for example oxen. Local calves, small ruminants, donkeys and chicken are also kept by a relatively reasonable proportion of HHs. The ratio of HHs rearing crossbred animals, horses, mules and camels is comparatively much low.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 40
Final Report
Table 42: Percent of Household, Headss Owing Livestock by Type and Region, 2017/18
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall Type of Livestock Local Calf 26.0 33.0 53.0 55.0 45.0 Crossbreed Calf 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 Local Bull 4.0 6.0 30.0 16 19.0 Local Cow 55.0 51.0 72.0 76 65.0 Crossbreed Cow 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 Ox 82.0 77.0 48.0 70.0 62.0 Local Heifer 10.0 12.0 31.0 14.0 21.0 Crossbred Heifer 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Local young bull 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 Cross breed Bull 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sheep 31.0 28.0 19.0 12.0 22.0 Goat 27.0 20.0 64.0 25.0 43.0 Horse 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 Donkey 64.0 29.0 32.0 31.0 35.0 Mule 0.0 2,0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Camel 0.04 0.06 0.01 0.0 3.0 Chicken 57.0 40.0 0.36 54.0 41.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 43: Average Number of Livestock Owned Per Household, by Region 2017/18
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall Type of Livestock Number N/HH Number N/HH Number N/HH Numbe N/HH Total N/HH Local Calf 112 0.37 391 0.47 1,596 1.06 325 0.87 2,424 0.81 Crossbreed Calf 2 0.01 1 0.00 22 0.01 8 0.02 33 0.01 Local Bull 14 0.05 72 0.09 951 0.63 87 0.23 1,124 0.37 Local Cow 247 0.83 608 0.73 2,761 1.84 526 1.41 4,142 1.38 Crossbreed Cow 4 0.01 8 0.01 20 0.01 10 0.03 42 0.01 Ox 432 1.44 1,015 1.23 1,307 0.87 416 1.11 3,170 1.06 Local Heifer 33 0.11 132 0.16 929 0.62 71 0.19 1,165 0.39 Cros sbred Heifer 0 0.00 2 0.00 7 0.00 2 0.01 11 0.00 Local Young bull 13 0.04 20 0.02 73 0.05 11 0.03 117 0.04 Cross breed Bull 1 0.00 1 0.00 3 0.00 1 0.00 6 0.00 Sheep 538 1.80 1,031 1.25 1,278 0.85 95 0.25 2,942 0.98 Goat 567 1.90 717 0.87 5,407 3.61 263 0.70 6,954 2.32 Horse 5 0.02 7 0.01 38 0.03 1 0.00 51 0.02 Donkey 254 0.85 306 0.37 711 0.47 162 0.43 1,433 0.48 Mule 6 0.02 13 0.02 12 0.01 1 0.00 32 0.01 Camel 13 0.04 55 0.07 64 0.04 0 0.00 132 0.04 Chicken 878 2.94 1,418 1.71 2,987 1.99 880 2.35 6,163 2.05 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.5.2 Livestock Sold in the last Year
A total of 53,302 animals of all livestock species and classes in all regions were sold in the past one year by 10,911 households (Table 46). Oromia, Amhara, SNNP and Tigray regions accounted for 70.71 %, 27.67 %, 0.87 % and 0.75 %, respectively of the total animal sales. Households earned ETB 10.9 million from
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 41
Final Report
these sales (Table 47). Oxen, Goats, local cows and young bulls and chicken were the highest type and number of animals sold in a descending order of all animals sold in all regions. Donkeys are the most marketed equines in the sampled households.
Table 44: Average Number and Type of Livestock Sold During the Past Year by Region, 2017/18
Regions Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Local Calf 0.01 0.62 0.65 0.13 0.51 Crossbreed Calf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 Local Bull 0.00 0.01 0.14 0.05 0.08 Local Cow 0.07 0.04 1.63 0.10 0.84 Crossbreed Cow 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ox 0.18 14.58 12.96 0.17 10.54 Local Heifer 0.00 0.00 1.08 0.02 0.54 Crossbred Heifer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Local Young bull 0.00 0.00 1.68 0.00 0.84 Cross breed Bull 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sheep 0.39 0.35 0.91 0.06 0.59 Goat 0.35 1.48 5.18 0.13 3.05 Horse 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Donkey 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.02 0.04 Mule 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Camel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Chicken 0.32 0.72 0.84 0.56 0.72 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Total sales from all animals earned by households in Oromia, Amhara, SNNP and Tigray in the past one year were 7.9, 1.5, 0.8 and 0.7 million Birr, respectively (Table 47). Cattle accounted for the largest proportion, i.e. about 88, 75, 66 and 59 % of the total earned money from animal sales for SNNP, Oromia, Tigray and Amhara regions. The second highest share came from small ruminants for the households contributing to about 36 % in Amhara, 31 % in Tigray, 22 % in Oromia and 9 % in SNNP. Donkeys, camels and chicken contributed insignificantly to the total sales of the livestock species in all regions.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 42
Final Report
Table 45: Average Amount of Money Earned (ETB) Per HH from Sales of Livestock in the Past One Year, 2017/18
Regions Overall
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Local Calf 17.39 28.02 218.73 203.26 144.10 Crossbreed Calf 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.37 1.67 Local Bull 20.07 31.76 491.14 250.28 287.37 Local Cow 285.95 238.16 938.01 249.87 594.07 Crossbreed Cow 0.00 0.00 39.03 0.00 19.50 Ox 1,202.01 711.72 2,025.96 1,153.48 1,472.34 Local Heifer 0.00 14.01 155.54 74.06 90.82 Crossbred Heifer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Local Young bull 0.00 6.16 60.24 0.00 31.80 Cross breed Bull 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sheep 350.17 349.93 191.43 73.53 236.30 Goat 355.25 287.89 980.02 120.86 619.61 Horse 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Donkey 40.47 9.30 81.80 21.93 50.21 Mule 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Camel 0.00 39.86 20.68 0.00 21.33 Chicken 38.71 39.64 48.46 50.59 45.33 Total 2,310.01 1,756.45 5,251.04 2,211.22 3,569.13 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.5.3 Livestock Died Over the Last One Year
Over the last one year, a total of 2,787 animals died (Table 48) due to various calamities across the surveyed locations within regional states. The highest death rate of all animals occurred in Oromia, 1,926 animals (69.1 %); followed by Amhara, 489 animals (17.5 %); Tigray, 204 animals (7.3 %) and the lowest in SNNP region, 168 animals (6.0 %). This shows that higher proportion of cattle died. In general, poultry, cattle, small ruminants and equines accounted for 34.5, 34.4, 28.3 and 2.6 % of all the livestock deaths reported in this survey. The relative number of losses is much higher in Oromia for oxen (148), local cows and bulls (386) and smallruminants (554) than in other regions implying that food security is endangered more as a consequence of loss of productive animals. Generally a high mortality rate of animals is an indication of inadequate health delivery services due either to poor coverage and/or lack of vet drugs.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 43
Final Report
Table 46: Number by Type of Livestock Died during the Past One Year by Regional Schemes, 2017/18
Type of Livestock Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Local Calf 0 10 249 29 288 Crossbreed Calf 0 0 0 1 1 Local Bull 0 1 124 5 130 Local Cow 6 11 262 22 301 Crossbreed Cow 0 1 3 0 4 Ox 4 15 148 13 180 Local Heifer 0 0 90 2 92 Crossbred Heifer . 0 0 0 0 Local Young bull 0 0 6 0 6 Cross breed Bull 0 0 0 0 0 Sheep 38 81 142 11 272 Goat 52 69 412 14 547 Horse 0 0 3 0 3 Donkey 4 4 57 8 73 Mule 0 0 1 0 1 Camel 0 3 2 . 5 Chicken 110 294 427 168 999 Total 204 489 1926 168 2787 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.6 Crop Production
4.6.1 Area and Production Under Rain-fed
Average crop plot size for rain-fed farming across surveyed regional states was 1.1 ha in the 2009/10 cropping season (Table 49). Farmers allocate about 82 % of the total crop field to temporary and the remaining 18 % to permanent crops. Cereals, pulses, root crops, oilseeds, vegetables and others accounted for 72, 5, 0.8, 0.6, 0.3 and 2 %, respectively of the total land holding of the temporary crops. Maize, Sorghum and teff alone occupied about 65 % of the total cereal crop land holding.
Regional average total yields obtained in the reference year from all crops per household was 11.5 quintals (Table 50). Corresponding figures for; Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP were 8.2, 9.5, 10.6 and 22.2 quintals, respectively. While cereals made the greater contribution to total yields than pulses, root crops, vegetables, oilseeds and others put together in Tigray (89 %) and Amhara (73 %)
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 44
Final Report
their contribution is exceeded by permanent crops in Oromia (45% Vs 38 %) and SNNP (57 % Vs 32 %). Table 47: Average Area (Ha) Allocated for Rain-fed Crops in 2017/18 by Respondent Households by Region, 2017/18
Crop Type Regions Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR
1. Cereals Teff 0.223 0.241 0.063 0.736 0.212 Wheat 0.183 0.053 0.014 0.082 0.050 Barley 0.116 0.006 0.012 0.005 0.020 Maize 0.033 0.022 0.482 0.393 0.300 Sorghum 0.194 0.247 0.243 0.042 0.215 Millet 0.092 0.054 0.004 0.001 0.026 Sub-total 0.859 0.445 1.491 0.735 0.611
2. Pulses Field Peas 0.008 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Horse Bean 0.032 0.016 0.013 0.001 0.014 Haricot Bean 0.011 0.001 0.041 0.015 0.024 Lentil 0.008 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.003 Sub-total 0.06 0.073 0.056 0.017 0.056
3. Oilseeds Sub-total 0.005 0.023 0.0 0.001 0.007
4. Vegetables Garlic 0.001 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 Onion 0.003 0.006 0.001 0.000 0.003 Green pepper 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.001 Head cabbage 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.001 Tomatoes 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.001 Sub-total 0.012 0.012 0.003 0.005 0.007
5. Fruits Avocado 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.001 Banana 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.008 0.002 Mango 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.018 0.003 Sub-total 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.037 0.006
6. Root crops Cassava 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.023 0.003 Enset 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.041 0.005 Irish Potato 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.008 0.001 Yam 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.021 0.003 Sweet Potato 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.001 Sub-total 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.100 0.013
7. Others Chat 0.000 0.009 0.356 0.012 0.182 Coffee 0.000 0.000 0.019 0.036 0.014 Sugarcane 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.002 0.002 Others 0.002 0.033 0.014 0.053 0.023 Sub-total 0.002 0.042 0.393 0.103 0.221 Total 0.924 0.775 1.276 1.524 1.133 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 45
Final Report
Table 48: Average Production of Rain-fed Crops in Quintals per HH by Type of Crop by Region in year 2017/18
Region Overall
Type of Crop Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR
1. Cereals Teff 1.411 2.161 0.249 1.156 1.005 Wheat 2.181 0.725 0.089 1.163 0.607 Barley 1.343 0.084 0.085 0.041 0.204 Maize 0.216 0.236 3.570 4.344 2.412 Sorghum 1.690 4.168 1.267 0.436 2.006 Millet 0.529 0.250 0.055 0.009 0.151 Oats 0.023 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.003 Sub-total 7.393 7.624 5.316 7.149 6.388
2. Pulses Chick Pea 0.002 0.557 0.003 0.000 0.156 Field Peas 0.159 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.017 Haricot Bean 0.057 0.005 0.158 0.099 0.098 Horse Bean 0.182 0.174 0.091 0.007 0.112 Lentil 0.041 0.039 0.002 0.000 0.016 Vetch 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.002 Sub-total 0.448 0.786 0.254 0.106 0.401
3. Oilseeds Sunflower 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 Lin Seed 0.007 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.001 Sesame 0.000 0.110 0.000 0.003 0.031 Ground Nuts 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.016 0.004 Subtotal 0.007 0.113 0.005 0.019 0.037
4. Vegetables Garlic 0.005 0.048 0.000 0.000 0.014 Green pepper 0.237 0.013 0.006 0.019 0.033 Lettuce 0.007 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.002
Head cabbage 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.840 0.115 Red Beets 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.000 0.003 Spinach 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.001 Tomatoes 0.018 0.013 0.028 0.053 0.026 Sub-total 0.367 0.543 0.104 0.912 0.352
5. Fruits Avocado 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.407 0.051 Banana 0.000 0.000 0.146 0.326 0.114 Lemon 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.001 Mango 0.004 0.005 0.003 1.253 0.160 Orange 0.010 0.002 0.000 0.062 0.009 Papaya 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.024 0.004 Sub-total 0.024 0.009 0.149 2.077 0.339
6. Root Crops Cassava 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.854 0.231 Enset 0.000 0.000 0.010 1.017 0.132 Irish Potato 0.002 0.008 0.007 0.302 0.044
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 46
Final Report
Region Overall
Type of Crop Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Sweet Potato 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.358 0.052 Yam 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.061 0.132 7. 0.002 0.008 0.032 4.592 0.591
8. Others Chat 0.000 0.055 1.972 4.562 1.569 Coffee 0.000 0.000 0.156 0.590 0.152 Sugarcane 0.000 0.000 2.465 1.634 1.435 Others 0.004 0.359 0.116 0.595 0.232
Sub-total 0.004 0.414 7.381 3.388 Total 8.245 9.498 10.568 22.236 11.496
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.6.2 Productivity of Major Crops Produced under Rain-fed
Productivity per hectare is the total production in quintals of each crop reported by respondents divided by hectares under the crops during the 2009/10 E.C. During the crop year the reported productivity of the crops was very low. The Low productivity could be attributed to low use of improved inputs and unfavorable climatic conditions during the crop year. The details are shown in table 51.
Table 49: Yield per Hectare of Major Crops under Rain-fed Production by Respondents by Region, 2017/18
Region Overall Type of Crop Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR
Teff 6.33 8.97 3.95 2.0 4.74 Wheat 11.92 13.68 6.36 14.18 12.14
Barley 11.58 14.00 7.08 8.20 10.20 Maize 6.55 10.73 7.41 11.05 8.04 Sorghum 8.71 16.87 5.21 10.38 9.33 Millet 5.75 4.63 13.75 9.00 5.81 Haricot Bean 5.18 5.00 3.85 6.60 4.08 Ground Nuts 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 1.33 Garlic 1.67 48.00 0.00 0.00 14.00 Spinach 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.17 Avocado 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.88 51.00 Banana 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.52 38.00
Lemon 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.71 1.00 Mango 0.00 5.00 3.00 12.53 12.31 Papaya 0.00 0.22 0.00 2.00 0.02 Cassava 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.98 10.04 Enset 0.00 0.00 0.03 9.87 0.60 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Total value of major crops produced by HHs in the surveyed area under rain-fed agriculture in 2017/18 production year is shown in Table 52. The overall mean total value per household of the four regions is Birr 20,948.33. Cereals,
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 47
Final Report
vegetables, others, pulses, fruits and root crops have accounted for 38.83, 28.64, 27.71, 3.10, 0.94 and 0.78 %, respectively of the overall total crop values of each household. The value of oilseeds is virtually negligible across regions. Values of coffee, sugarcane and chat are much higher in Oromia and SNNP than in Tigray and Amhara where they are nearly nil.
Table 50: Total Value (Birr) of Production per Household under Rain fed Production, 2017/18
Type of Crop Region
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall
1. Cereals
Teff 3,004.32 4884.45 501.47 2845.54 2215.23
Wheat 2,925.03 962.24 117.93 2103.4 821.14
Barley 1,717.00 101.2 110.89 41.37 257.04
Maize 324.55 236.97 3464.91 4455.11 2372.87
Sorghum 2289.09 4702.03 1394.58 296.37 2255.34
Millet 907.1 264.92 73.13 32.53 211.72
Sub-total 11,167.09 11,151.81 5,662.91 9,774.32 8,133.34
2. Pulses
Chick Pea 3.33 804.56 4.55 0 229.65
Field Peas 253.93 10.4 0 0 33.07
Haricot Bean 66.26 7.25 199.57 90.67 116.61
Horse Bean 290.66 361.76 208 10.59 217.89
Lentil 94.3 119.96 8.14 0 52.11
Sub-total 708.48 1303.93 420.26 101.26 649.33
3. Oilseeds
Lin Seed 12.88 0 0 0 1.4
Subtotal 12.88 0 0 0 1.4
4. Vegetables
Garlic 1080.01 6257.19 0 1600 6000.01
Green pepper 0 0 0 0 0
Lettuce 0 0 0 0 0
Head cabbage 0 0 0 0 0
Red Beets 0 0 0 0 0
Spinach 0 0 0 0 0
Tomatoes 19.44 16.65 15.53 12.06 0.3 Sub-total 1099.45 6273.84 15.53 1612.06 6000.31
5. Fruits Avocado 2.85 0 0 162.8 58.42 Banana 0 0 73.86 91.13 52.66 Mango 4.32 6.4 1.66 285.17 75.37
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 48
Final Report
Type of Crop Region
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall
Orange 12.18 4.8 0 14.4 7.2 Papaya 8.4 2.25 0 6.8 2.3 Sub-total 27.75 13.45 75.52 560.3 195.95 6. Root Crops Cassava 0 0 0 0 0 Enset 0 0 0 0 0
Irish Potato 0.02 0.07 0.06 2.88 0.4 Sweet Potato 0 0 10.5 214.08 32.03
Yam 0 0 0 745.65 130.35 Sub-total 0.02 0.07 10.56 962.61 162.78
8. Others
Chat 0 4.5 71.09 463.8 60.05
Coffee 0 0 1004.53 4691.34 1212.96
Sugarcane 0 0 8185.5 5201.57 4532.21
Sub-total 0 4.5 9261.12 10356.71 5805.22
Total 13,015.67 18,747.60 15,445.90 23,367.26 20,948.33
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.6.3 Crop Prices Average prices per quintal of of crops produced by a significant number of HHs in the study areas are shown in table 53 below. There is variation among regions in the prices reported which might be due to the location of the schemes. The further away the schemes are from market centers the lower the prices of crops reported.
Table 51 : Average Price (ETB) Per Quintal of Major Crops Reported by HHs by region, 2017/18.
Crops Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Wheat 584.35 676.52 0.00 486.08 Teff 743.81 966.24 1182.97 1398.02 Barely 491.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maize 409.08 0.00 605.78 278.00 Sorghum 581.35 664.54 806.70 275.71 Chat 0.00 0.00 2632.00 0.00 haricot Bean 0.00 0.00 791.00 0.00 Enset 0.00 0.00 750.00 347.58 Chickpea 0.00 891.92 0.00 0.00 Coffee 0.00 0.00 3362.83 3033.80 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.6.4 Agricultural Inputs Use
4.6.4.1 Organic Fertilizers
In the absence of in-organic fertilizers, some farmers traditionally make use of organic fertilizers such as manure, compost and crop residues to improve soil
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 49
Final Report
fertility and increase the productivity of their crops. However, the average use of organic fertilizers by HHs, measured in hectares and quintals, is very low. Overall average hectare for which organic fertilizer is used is only 0.12, while the average organic fertilizers used during 2017/18 was only 3.02 quintals/household with an estimated value of Birr 65.82 (Table 54). This implies the need for strengthening training of farmers on the use of these inputs to minimize the utilization of chemical fertilizers whose cost is escalating from time to time.
Table 52: Average Area (Ha), Quantity (Qt.) and Estimated Value (ETB) of Organic Fertilizer Used by HHs for crop Production, 2017/18
Region Type Unit Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overalll Manure Hectare 0.57 0.11 0.05 0.09 0.12 Quantity Used 9.80 58.25 1.22 1.86 2.29 (Qt.) Value ETB 217.25 58.25 11.83 14.60 45.46 Compost Hectare 0.79 0.04 0.35 0.06 0.27 Quantity 1.60 0.51 0.19 0.49 0.45 Used(Qt.) Value ETB 70.29 34.29 0.18 4.09 17.07 Crop Hectare 1.67 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.18 Residue Quantity 0.02 0.00 0.32 0.87 0.27 Used(Qt.) Value ETB 1.32 0.00 1.06 21.11 3.29 Total Hectare 3.03 0.11 0.05 0.09 0.12 Quantity 11.42 58.75 1.74 3.23 3.02 Used(Qt.) Value ETB 288.87 92.54 13.06 39.81 65.82 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.6.4.2 In-organic Fertilizers
The average area (Ha), quantity (Qt.) and estimated value (ETB) of In-organic Fertilizer used by respondents for crop production in 2017/18 is shown in table 55. The overall use of in-organic fertilizers by regions averages 0.98 quintals estimated at Birr 453.06 on 0.43 ha while means for DAP, Urea and Others are 1.73, 1.15 and 0.05 quintals, respectively.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 50
Final Report
Table 53: Average Area (Ha), Quantity (Qt.) and Estimated Value (ETB) of In- organic Fertilizer Used by Respondents for crop Production, 2017/18
Type Unit Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall DAP Hectare 0.80 0.27 0.18 0.89 0.36 Quintals 2.62 1.10 0.96 5.52 1.73 Value (ETB) 819.65 255.79 68.08 660.09 268.60 UREA Hectare 0.73 0.33 0.07 1.30 0.40 Quintals 3.05 1.74 0.51 3.58 1.15 Value (ETB) 708.33 123.25 32.81 1.39 182.14 Others Hectare 0.93 0.40 0.34 1.39 0.53 Quintals 4.81 2.50 0.06 0.14 0.05 Value (ETB) 341.32 298.16 1.19 4.84 2.31 Total Hectare 0.82 0.33 0.20 1.20 0.43 Quintals 3.49 1.78 0.51 3.08 0.98 Value (ETB) 1869.30 677.20 102.08 666.32 453.06 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.6.4.3 Chemicals Used Chemicals used such as pesticides and herbicides for the production of crops in 2017/18 and money spent on them are indicated in Table 56. Average total areas under pesticide and herbicide application were 0.06 and 0.08 ha, respectively on which 0.44 and 0.30 liters of each chemical type was used. The total cost of pesticide was Birr 31.96 and that of herbicide was Birr 24.77 per household in the production year. When total used chemical by all schemes across regions is considered each household on average used 0.74 liter of chemicals (Pesticide, herbicides and others together) on a total of 0.14 ha and spent Birr 56.80. Table 54: Average Area (Ha), Quantity (Qt.) and Estimated Value (ETB) of Chemicals Used by Respondents for Crop Production, 2017/18
Type Unit Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall
Pesticide Area (Hectares) 0.24 0.10 0.02 0.02 0.06 Qty/Lt 0.36 0.16 0.47 1.02 0.44 Cos (ETB) 119.38 60.75 5.19 5.66 31.96 Herbicide Area (Hectares) 0.33 0.06 0.02 0.16 0.08 Qty/Lt 0.53 0.09 0.25 0.75 0.30 Cost (ETB) 115.36 22.48 4.56 38.43 24.77 Others Area (Hectares) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Qty/Lt 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cost (ETB) 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.21 0.07 Total Area (Hectares) 0.57 0.16 0.04 0.18 0.14 Qty/Lt 0.90 0.26 0.72 1.78 0.74 Cost (ETB) 234.73 83.38 9.74 44.31 56.80 Source: Calculated form the PASSIDP II Baseline Survey basic data, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 51
Final Report
4.6.5 Crop Production under Traditional Method of Irrigation These are schemes generally based on diversion of small streams, with diversion structures, constructed by the farmers from mud, rocks, twigs or mixtures of these. The structures are generally, washed away during each rainy season by floods, consequently, requiring maintenance or full reconstruction by the beneficiaries at the end of each rainy season. During the survey, respondents were asked the size of the area allocated to different crops under this method of irriation. Accordingly, Average area in hectares is the total area reported by respondents in each region divided by the sample size of the region. As it can observed from table 57, the average area per household of different crops has been very low during the last crop season mainly because of the landholding size which is also small in almost all of the areas selected for the project. The total area in hectares allocated to cereal crops was 0.130 which is equivalent to 1300 m2 of land and less than that of a quarter of a hectare. The land allocated to pulses was also about 60m2, while that of fruits and vegetables was about 120m2 only. Table 55: Average Area (Hectares) Cultivated Per HH by Type of Crop Produced Under Traditional Irrigation by Region, 2017/18
Type of Crop Regions Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR
1. Cereals Teff 0.009 0.022 0.008 0.000 0.011 Wheat 0.009 0.004 0.002 0.000 0.003 Barley 0.004 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.001 Maize 0.005 0.009 0.125 0.003 0.066 Sorghum 0.007 0.014 0.087 0.000 0.048 Millet 0.001 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 Sub-total 0.035 0.054 0.223 0.003 0.130
2. Pulses Chick Pea 0.003 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001 Lentil 0.001 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.002 Vetch 0.002 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.002 Sub-total 0.006 0.013 0.000 0.000 0.005
3. Vegetables Green pepper 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Lettuce 0.016 0.015 0.001 0.000 0.007 Onion 0.003 0.005 0.002 0.001 0.003 Tomatoes 0.002 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.001
Sub-total 0.022 0.024 0.004 0.002 0.012 4. Root Crops Irish Potato 0.003 0.001 0 0.002 0.001
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 52
Final Report
4.6.6 Production per Household under Traditional Irrigation Average production of irrigated crops under traditional methods was very low (Table 58) as determined by a small size of the plots used. The data also show that there was no traditional production of irrigated crops in SNNPR with the exception of maize probably for green cob use. The production of millet under traditional irrigation was also absent in the three regions with the exception of Amhara which has a negligible amount. The overall production of fruits and vegetables was also low being about 42kg/household. Similarly, the production of root crops was also negligible.
Table 56: Average Production Per HH in Quintals by Type of Crop Produced Under Traditional Irrigation Region, 2017/18
Type of Crop Regions
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall 1. 1. Cereals Teff 0.037 0.239 0.021 0.000 0.080 Wheat 0.085 0.046 0.021 0.000 0.032 Barley 0.038 0.018 0.011 0.000 0.014 Maize 0.052 0.104 1.441 0.134 0.771 Sorghum 0.080 0.202 0.644 0.000 0.386 Millet 0.007 0.033 0.000 0.000 0.010 Sub-total 0.299 0.642 2.138 0.134 1.293 2. Pulses Chick Pea 0.002 0.049 0.003 0.000 0.015 Horse Bean 0.023 0.018 0.003 0.000 0.009 Lentil 0.013 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.007 Vetch 0.000 0.023 0.000 0.000 0.006 Sub-total 0.038 0.11 0.014 0.000 0.041 4. Vegetables Green pepper 0.033 0.010 0.021 0.011 0.018 Onion 0.736 0.658 0.039 0.005 0.275 Tomatoes 0.057 0.312 0.052 0.040 0.123 Sub-total 0.826 0.980 0.112 0.056 0.416 3. Root Crops Irish Potato 0.062 0.008 0.000 0.046 0.014 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.6.7 Crop Yields under Traditional Irrigation The yield per hectare of crops produced under traditional irrigation is shown under table 59. As shown in the table, the average yield per hectare of the crops produced during 2017/18 crop year was lower than the national averages for all crops. This is evident from the fact that most of the areas using the traditional
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 53
Final Report
irrigation in this study are marginal areas and higher yields are not expected. The number of crops planted under traditional irrigation are also limited.
Table 57: Average Yield per Hectare of Crops Produced under Traditional Irrigation Methods by Region, 2017/18
Type of Crop Regions
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall
1. Cereals Teff 4.11 10.86 2.63 0 7.27 Wheat 9.44 11.5 10.5 0 10.67 Barley 9.5 18 11 0 14 Maize 10.4 11.56 11.53 44.67 11.68 Sorghum 11.43 14.43 7.4 0 8.04 Millet 7 8.25 0 0 10 Total 8.65 12.43 7.18 7.45 10.28 2. Pulses Chick Pea 2 9.8 0 0 7.5 Horse Bean 7.67 6 0 0 9 Lentil 6.5 3.8 0 0 3.5 Vetch 0 7.67 0 0 6 Total 4.04 6.50 3. Fruits and Vegetables Green pepper 33 10 21 11 18 Onion 1.06 5.53 0 0 39.29 Tomatoes 1.06 5.53 0 0 3.57 Total 37.6 13.0 28.0 28 34..7 5. Root Crops Irish Potato 20.67 8 0 23 14 Total 20.6 8 0 23 14 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.6.8 Total Value of Crops Produced under Traditional Irrigation
The total value of crops produced per household under traditional irrigation system is shown in table 60. Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP regions have total values of Birr; 1,259.00, 1,807.00, 2,287.00 and 1,832.00, respectively. These values were very small as compared to the value of crops produced under rain-fed farming. It is understandable that not many farmers have water resources as well as a suitable land for irrigation both of which could undermine the total values. However, cereals, here too, have been the highest contributor to the total values than the other crop categories
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 54
Final Report
Table 58: Estimated Value (Birr) of Total Production per Household under Traditional Irrigation, 2017/18
Type of Crop Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall
1. 1. Cereals Teff 78.78 540.21 42.29 0.00 176.34 Wheat 114.00 61.05 27.83 0.00 43.29 Barley 48.58 21.69 14.35 0.00 17.64 Maize 78.13 104.43 1,398.58 137.43 758.49 Sorghum 108.36 227.88 708.85 0.00 433.98 Millet 12.00 34.97 0.00 0.00 14.02 Sub-total 439.86 990.22 2,191.90 137.43 1,443.76 2. Pulses Chick Pea 3.33 70.78 4.55 0.00 22.08 Horse Bean 36.73 37.42 6.86 0.00 17.51 Lentil 21.61 27.44 0.00 0.00 10.30 Sub-total 61.67 135.65 11.41 0.00 49.90 4. Fruits and Vegetables Green pepper 0.49 1.06 22.28 0.54 8.83 Onion 699.20 670.45 60.30 2.00 315.00 Tomatoes 0.54 3.18 0.80 0.16 1.41 Sub-total 700.24 674.69 83.38 2.70 325.24 3. Root Crops Irish Potato 57.29 6.87 0.00 43.93 12.79 Sub-Total 57.29 6.87 0.00 43.93 12.79 Total 1,259.05 1,807.43 2,286.70 184.06 1,831.68 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.6.9 Total Value of Crop Production under Different Water Supply The total value of crops produced per Household by respondents during the 2017/18 crop year is shown in table 61. Currently, rain-fed production system gave the highest overall total crop value ( ETB 20,948.33.00) than the traditional (ETB 1,831.68) irrigation systems in the surveyed areas. The overall value from both rainfed and traditional irrigation was estimated at ETB 22,780. As it can be understood from the table, SNNPR ranked first, while Amha second, Oromia third and Tigray fourth in the estimated value of crops produced per Household.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 55
Final Report
Table 59: Total Value of Crop Production Per Sampled Household from PASSIDP II Schemes in ETB during 2017/18
Water Supply System Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Value under Rain-fed (ETB) 13,015.67 18,747.60 15,445.90 23,367.26 20,948.33 Value Under traditional Irrigation 1,259.05 1,807.43 2,286.70 184.06 1,831.68 (ETB) Total (ETB) 14,274.72 20,555.03 17,732.6 23,551.32 22,780.01 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.7 Gender Role in Crop Production Activities
This section of the report is included on the assumption that the implementation modern irrigation schemes being intensive farming, would impact positively or negatively on the role of male and female members of farm households in farming affectivites. To this end, the participations of men, women and youth in the various types of farm operations in traditionally irrigated crop production is shown in Tables 62, 63, and 64, respectively. Men are involved across schemes in the regions in; 35 % of the land preparation, 31 % of the crop planting, 19 % of the fertilizer application, 14 % of the chemical application, 33 % of the crop weeding, 34 % the crop harvesting, 30 % of the threshing, 28 % of transporting to stores and 33 % of the marketing jobs of the crop productions. Table 60: Percent of Current Male Participation in Crop Production with Irrigation by Region
Farming operation Region Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP % % % % land preparation 20.40 31.04 47.30 6.15 35.0 Planting 21.07 29.95 39.56 6.15 31.0 Fertilizer application 20.07 27.54 17.41 6.15 19.0 Chemical application 18.73 14.86 14.94 5.35 14.0 Weeding 20.40 30.07 43.03 6.42 33.0 Harvesting 21.40 31.16 45.23 6.15 34.0 Threshing 20.74 26.81 38.89 5.35 30.0 Transporting to store 20.07 25.72 36.29 5.35 28.0 Marketing 17.73 29.59 44.76 5.61 33.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
The overall regional participation of women in the production and marketing operations appears higher in crop marketing (29 %) and harvesting (26 %) than the rest of the farm activities (Table 63). Higher proportion of women is involved in land preparation and crop planting in the Amhara than other regional states.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 56
Final Report
More women participate in crop harvesting and weeding in Oromia and Amhara than in SNNP and Tigray. The proportion of women participating in the various activities of crop production farm operations including marketing is lower in SNNP than other regions.
Overall regional average proportion of participation of youth in irrigated crop production and marketing operations is generally below 16 % (Table 64). Their participation ranged from the lowest 9 % in chemical application to the highest 16 % in land preparation, weeding and harvesting of crops. Within regions, youth’s participation gets only as highest as 20 % in crop harvesting in Amhara and as lowest as 4 % in application of chemicals in SNNPR.
Table 61: Percent of Current Female Participation in Crop Production with Irrigation by Region, 2017/18
Region Type of Activity Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Total % % % % land preparation 19.06 25.36 24.22 4.55 22.0 Planting 18.39 23.91 20.08 4.81 19.0 Fertilizer application 16.05 19.08 12.21 4.81 14.0 Chemical application 11.37 8.21 11.27 4.55 10.0 Weeding 20.74 25.00 25.42 4.81 22.0 Harvesting 19.06 26.93 32.42 5.61 26.0 Threshing 17.73 22.10 22.82 4.28 20.0 Transporting to store 18.06 18.84 28.22 4.81 22.0 Marketing 18.39 22.71 39.83 4.55 29.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
What is evident from the abobe tables 62 and 63 that there is a difference of opinion between male respondents and female respondents. Evidence to this fact is that the percent of male reporting their participation in land prparation is 35%, while that of female is 22%. Regardless of the differences in opinion, the information is important as a baseline for assessment of the impact of the introduction of modern irrigation under PASSIDP II on the beneficiary households.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 57
Final Report
Table 62: Percent of Current Youth Participation in Crop Production with Irrigation by Region, 2017/18
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Total % % % % Farming operations land preparation 18.39 17.63 16.54 4.81 16.0 Planting 17.73 17.27 15.08 5.08 15.0 Fertilizer application 15.72 15.22 12.54 4.55 13.0 Chemical application 11.37 7.61 11.41 4.28 9.0 Weeding 19.40 19.57 15.74 5.08 16.0 Harvesting 17.73 20.17 15.88 5.61 16.0 Threshing 17.06 16.67 15.54 4.81 15.0 Transporting to store 17.39 15.70 15.01 4.55 14.0 Marketing 15.05 14.25 16.81 4.81 14.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.8 Distance Travelled to the Nearest Market Average distance travelled by farmers to the nearest market place is about 12 km with a mean range varying from 7.0 km in Amhara to 17 km in Oromia (Table 65). Most rural HHs in Ethiopia are not well-connected to village market places with road networks suitable for vehicle transportation and people would commonly be obliged to either carry farm products on their backs and/or use pack animals to transport them to these market places. Not all HHs own pack animals and travelling over a distance up to 17 km often with a bundle of farm goods on the back of humans is a daunting task and women are usually the ones facing such challenge. Table 63: Mean Distance Travelled (km) to the Nearest Market by Respondents by region, 2017/18
Regions Mean Valid N Tigray 9.92 299
Amhara 7.31 828 Oromia 16.58 1,499 SNNP 7.68 374 All Regions 12.25 3,000 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.9 Access to Small-scale Irrigation Services
The majority (69 %) of the surveyed HHs had no access in the past four months prior to this survey while only the minority (31 %) had access to some form of irrigation services on average (Table 64) over the last four months prior to data
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 58
Final Report
collection for this study. The type of irrigation used is traditional where farmers use their own experiences.
According to the Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources7 (2008 E.C), the primary objective of giving farmers access to small-scale irrigation is to enable them to make the best use of available and suitable irrigation water from the various sources through different water use types for the sustainable production and enhanced productivity of crops in areas where rainfall is not adequate to serve this purpose. Sustained production and productivity in turn creates the capacity to overcome the problems of food insecurity and abject poverty of farm HHs. Irrigated agriculture has a number of advantages over rain-fed farming: • avoids crop yield reduction created by lack of sufficient precipitation • ensures production of quality crop yields • enhances labor and land productivity • creates opportunities for sustained employment and income generation for unemployed women and youth and reduce poverty • allows a better use of available water resources, and • creates a better opportunity for an integrated farming of fishery, birds and crops The strategy used uner PASSIDP II is, therefore, to upgrade existing schemes where farmers already have experience and also develop new schemes where there are water potentials. Hence, improving the current poor access of HHs to irrigation services help them reap the benefits mention above and contribute to poverty reduction in the community. Table 64: Percent of Respondents ‘Access to Irrigation in the Past Four Months by Region, 2017/18
Region Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Responses Count % Count % Count % Count % Yes 64 21.40 333 40.22 496 33.09 44 11.76 937 31.23 No 235 78.60 495 59.78 1,003 66.91 330 88.24 2,063 68.77 Total 299 100.00 828 100.00 1,499 100.00 374 100.00 3,000 100.00 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
7 Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources. 2008. Use of Irrigation Water and Improved Production Methods of Irrigated Crops Manual, Amharic Version. December 2008, Addis Ababa.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 59
Final Report
4.10 Membership in Water Users Associations
Despite the fact that all irrigation beneficiaries under PASSIDP II Schemes have to establish IWUAs and become memebrs WUA, only about 36 % of the surveyed total HHs reported to have become members of water users’ association implying that the majority of them are not yet members (Table 65). While the highest (42 %) proportion of HH membership to association appears in Oromia, the lowest (27 %) is in Tigray. Membership is, howver, expected to grow as the construction of the schemes progresses and farmers become more confident on the completeion.
Table 65: Percent of Household Reporting Having Membership in Water Users Association by Region, 2017/18
Responses Region Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count %
Yes 81 27.09 248 29.95 634 42.29 107 28.61 1,070 35.67 No 218 72.91 580 70.05 865 57.71 267 71.39 1,930 64.33 Total 299 100.0 828 100.0 1,499 100.0 374 100.00 3,000 100.00 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.11 Relationship with Financial Institutions
Oromia made the lowest mean (ETB 336.00) saving. An insignificant proportion (13 %) of farmers maintain relationship with financial establishments and the overwhelming majority (87 %) do not have access to services from these institutions (Table 66). More proportion of households in Tigray and Amhara regions have relatively better access to the institutions than those in Oromia and SNNP. Commercial banks, microfinance, saving and credit and other financial sources account for 39, 36, 23 and 2 %, respectively of the total sources (Table 67). Comparatively, higher percentage of farmers in Amhara have linkages with saving and credit associations for financial services than those in the other surveyed regions.
The current condition of loan and saving of surveyed HHs is shown in Tables 68 and 69. Mean outstanding amount of loan from the various sources of each household in all regions is about ETB 349.31. Households in Tigray region have the highest average ( ETB 615.11) while those in SNNP region carry the lowest average (ETB 106.95) loan burden among regional states. Similarly, average
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 60
Final Report
saving made by a household at the time of this study in all regions was ETB 1,149.61. Households in Tigray region made the highest mean saving (ETB 2,929.33) whereas those in Amhara and Oromia 1970 and 336.19, respectively.
Table 66: Percent of Respondents Reported as Having Relationship with Financial Institutions by Region, 2017/18
Responses Region Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Yes 112 37.46 194 23.43 62 4.14 32 8.56 400 13.33 No 187 62.54 634 76.57 1,437 95.86 342 91.44 2,600 86.67 Total 299 100.0 828 100.0 1,499 100.0 374 100.0 3,000 100.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 67: Distribution of Respondents Having Relationship by Type of Financial Institution by Region, 2017/18
Type of financial Total Institution Region Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Microfinance 48 42.86 67 34.54 20 32.26 8 25.00 143 35.75 Branch Commercial 42 37.50 66 34.02 26 41.94 22 68.75 156 39.00 bank branch Saving and 22 19.64 59 30.41 9 14.52 2 6.25 92 23.00 Credit Association Others 2 1.03 7 11.29 9 2.25 Total 112 100.00 194 100.00 62 100.00 32 100.00 400 100.00 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 68: Average Amount of Outstanding Loan per Household with Financial Institution by Region, 2017/18
Region Average Amount (Birr) Tigray 615.11 Amhara 559.89 Oromia 240.44 SNNPR 106.95 Total 349.31
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 61
Final Report
Table 69: Average Amount of Savings (Birr) Per Household with Financial Institutions by Region, 2017/18
Average Amount (Birr)Mean Regions Tigray 2,929.33 Amhara 1,970.08 Oromia 336.19 SNNPR 1,170.57 Total 1,149.61 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.12 Farmers’ Access to Road and Cooperative Marketing Services
The average distance travelled by farmers to the nearest market place ,as reported elsewhere in this document under the crop production section, was 12 km with a mean range varying from 7.0 km in Amhara to 17 km in Oromia. About 80 % of the interviewed household across regions reported to have access to road in their villages (Table 70). Within regional access proportions stand at 92, 88, 77 and 72 %, respectively for Amhara, Tigray, SNNP and Oromia regions.
The types of available roads in village are about 65 % earthen, 28 % gravel and 6 % Asphalt (Table 71). Earthen and most of the gravel roads if not properly constructed and lack regular maintenance services could be impassible during the rainy season and be a potential hindrance to market accesses via vehicle transportation.
Overall, less than 29 % of the surveyed HHs in the four regions have cooperative marketing services for their farm products (Table 72). Higher proportion of HHs in Tigray (77 %) and Amhara (55 %) enjoy cooperative marketing services than those of their contemporaries in Oromia (10 %) and SNNP (9 %). Similar discrepancies are observed among regional states in being members to farm products marketing cooperatives. While 72 and 70 % households in Amhara and Tigray are members to farmers’ cooperatives, corresponding figures for Oromia and SNNP are only 6 and 12 %, respectively (Table 73).
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 62
Final Report
Table 70: Percent of HHs Reporting the Presence of Access Road in their Villages by Region, 2017/18
Responses Region Total Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Tigray Count % Count % Count % Count % Yes 264 88.29 759 91.67 1,092 72.85 290 77.54 2,405 80.17 No 35 11.71 69 8.33 407 27.15 84 22.46 595 19.83 Total 299 100.00 828 100.00 1,499 100.00 374 100.00 3,000 100.00 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 71: Percent of Respondents by Type of Access Road and Region, 2017/18
Type of Region Total Road Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Tigray Count % Count % Count % Count % Earth 162 61.36 319 42.03 858 78.57 231 79.66 1,570 65.28 Gravel 66 25.00 383 50.46 173 15.84 59 20.34 681 28.32
Asphalt 36 13.64 57 7.51 61 5.59 154 6.40 Total 264 100.00 759 100.00 1,092 100.00 290 100.00 2,405 100.00 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 Table 72: Percent of Respondents Having Access to Marketing Cooperatives by Region, 2017/18
Responses Region Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Yes 231 77.26 455 54.95 143 9.54 34 9.09 863 28.77 No 68 22.74 373 45.05 1,356 90.46 340 90.91 2,137 71.23 Total 299 100.00 828 100.00 1,499 100.00 374 100.00 3,000 100.00
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 73: Percent Marketing Cooperatives Membership by Region, 2017/18
Responses Region Total Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Tigray Count % Count % Count % Count % Yes 161 69.70 328 72.09 9 6.29 4 11.76 502 58.17 No 70 30.30 127 27.91 134 93.71 30 88.24 361 41.83 Total 231 100.0 455 100.0 143 100.0 34 100.0 863 100.0
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 63
Final Report
4.13 Access to Information The various information on; weather condition, irrigation water use and facilities, improved crop/livestock varieties/breeds and their production, crop/livestock commodity and labor market prices and education on; gender, health and nutrition and the like are shown in Table 74. Households are better informed in child nutrition and health (48%), crop production technology 36 % (improved seeds, fertilizers, etc.) and crop production agronomy 31 % (input use, planting and harvesting time) across surveyed regions than other considered type of information. Within regional condition also follows this same trend through increased corresponding figures for Tigray of 60, 56 and 66 %; Amhara of 49, 50, 41 %; Oromia of 43, 25 and 18 % and SNNP of 54, 50, and 34 %, respectively. Only Oromia’s lower proportion than the regional average has, in fact, kept the overall figure low.
Overall households receiving any kind of information on; long term weather patterns; water frequency/water timing/water supply in canals; crop and livestock product prices; livestock technologies, labor market price; education on gender and skill enhancing opportunities are below 20 %. This indicates that extension activities in the country is much more skewed towards crop production which may seem justified from the point of view its higher contribution to the overall household income. Nevertheless, this higher crop contribution could not be achieved without the crucial complementary role the livestock and the natural resources play which also deserve a due attention in the extension services.
With respect to sources of information, Agricultural Extension Agents were reported to be the major sources (Table 75). As shown in the table about 60% of the respondents reported that they received information from Agricultural Extension Agents. About 18% of the respondents also reported that they received information from Health Extension Agents.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 64
Final Report
Table 74: Percent of HHs Received Information by Type and Region, 2017/18 Type of Information Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Total Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Long-term weather 127 42.47 188 22.71 204 13.61 50 13.37 569 18.97 patterns Rainfall prospects or 146 48.83 217 26.21 252 16.81 63 16.84 678 22.60 weather prospects for coming season Water 133 44.48 203 24.52 178 11.87 69 18.45 583 19.43 frequency/water timing/water supply in canals, holes o Water 133 44.48 280 33.82 157 10.47 74 19.79 644 21.47 frequency/water timing/water supply from irrigation so Use and maintenance 134 44.82 283 34.18 149 9.94 92 24.60 658 21.93 of irrigation facilities Crop production (input 198 66.22 343 41.43 268 17.88 126 33.69 935 31.17 use, planting time, harvest time, etc. Crop production 172 57.53 343 41.43 371 24.75 187 50.00 1,073 35.77 technology (improved seeds, fertilizer, etc. Livestock, products 124 41.47 158 19.08 176 11.74 128 34.22 586 19.53 and crop prices Livestock production 100 33.44 153 18.48 161 10.74 120 32.09 534 17.80 technology (improved breeds, feed, etc. Local market 103 34.45 50 6.04 94 6.27 38 10.16 285 09.50 conditions for wage labor Child nutrition and 179 59.87 409 49.40 645 43.03 201 53.74 1,434 47.80 health information Education and other 77 25.75 90 10.87 254 16.94 66 17.65 487 16.23 skill-enhancing opportunities Gender education 73 24.41 99 11.96 254 16.94 65 17.38 491 16.37 298.57 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 Table 75: Percent of Respondents by Source of Information Used by Region, 2017/18 Sources of Information Region Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Agricultural Extension agent 954 56.15 1,756 62.36 1,725 54.54 913 71.38 5,348 59.71 Health extension agents 208 12.24 445 15.80 756 23.90 254 19.86 1,663 18.57 water Users Association 116 6.83 182 6.46 12 0.38 8 0.63 318 3.55 Cooperative Office 62 3.65 5 0.18 76 2.40 28 2.19 171 1.91 Livestock Officers 79 4.65 44 1.56 61 1.93 7 0.55 191 2.13 Livestock extension Agent 117 6.89 186 6.61 68 2.15 11 0.86 382 4.26 Natural Resources Office 42 2.47 56 1.99 160 5.06 2 0.16 260 2.90 Mass Media 27 1.59 21 0.75 38 1.20 18 1.41 104 1.16 Others 94 5.53 121 4.30 267 8.44 38 2.97 520 5.81 ource: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 65
Final Report
4.14 Sources of Income
The proportion of HHs receiving income from various sources during the last cropping season in the surveyed areas are indicated in Table 76. Those received income from sales of livestock and livestock products have been the highest in number, i.e. 1,269 (42 %) from among the considered sources across regional states. HHs receiving income from; other sources, remittance, non-agricultural wage labor (off-farm) are comparatively significant accounting for 18, 14 and 11 %, respectively to the total number of household responded. The overall proportion of households generating income from grain milling, pension, other investment/bank interest, inheritance and land and house renting has been less than 1 %. In all regions, household members are engaged more in non-agriculture off-farm than agricultural wage opportunities which is 16 Vs 14 % in Tigray, 6 Vs 0.7 in Amhara, 10 Vs 2.9 % in Oromia and 19 Vs 7 % in SNNP. The reason for such difference is not apparent whether it is driven by more availability of opportunities and/or a higher labor wage for the former than the latter.
Table 76: Percent of Respondents Received Income during the Last Crop Season by Source and Region, 2017/18
Source of Income Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total N % N % N % N % N % Livestock/livestock product 131 43.81 211 25.48 817 54.50 110 29.41 1,269 42.30 Firewood/charcoal sales 1 0.33 5 0.60 109 7.27 1 0.27 116 3.87 Trading 12 4.01 60 7.25 126 8.41 27 7.22 225 7.50 Sales of other goods or assets 1 0.33 4 0.48 22 1.47 10 2.67 37 1.23 Grain milling 0 0 2 0.24 5 0.33 0 0 7 0.23 Sale of tree crops 10 3.34 20 2.42 178 11.87 4 1.07 212 7.07 Food processing business 2 0.67 1 0.12 73 4.87 4 1.07 80 2.67 Sale of local drinks (tella, teje, 13 4.35 39 4.71 41 2.74 6 1.60 99 3.30 araqi, etc) Repair business 10 3.34 13 1.57 11 0.73 6 1.60 40 1.33 Agricultural wage labor (on-farm) 41 13.71 6 0.72 44 2.94 25 6.68 116 3.87 Non-agricultural wl (off-farm) 48 16.05 52 6.28 155 10.34 72 19.25 327 10.90 Pension 11 3.68 6 0.72 3 0.20 3 0.80 23 0.77 Interest or other investment 0 0 0 0 8 0.53 0 0 8 .0.27 Remittances 77 25.75 172 20.77 151 10.07 19 5.08 419 13.97 Inheritance 6 2.01 0 0 6 0.40 3 0.80 15 0.50 Income from renting land 3 1.00 4 0.48 6 0.40 4 1.07 17 0.57 Income from renting house 1 0.33 1 0.12 14 0.93 0 0 16 0.53 Income from share cropping 10 3.34 105 12.68 25 1.67 46 12.30 186 6.20 Others 107 35.79 209 25.24 228 15.21 9 2.41 553 18.43 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Households across region received a total of Birr 7761.00 in the last cropping season (Table 77). Mean income for Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP have been
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 66
Final Report
ETB 8799.00, 7679.00, 8482.00 and 5422.00, respectively. The major sources generating higher income for households in order of importance are; sales of livestock, livestock products, others and non-agricultural wage labor. Overall, sales from firewood/charcoal and other assets/goods, grain milling, food processing, repair business, pension, other investment/bank interest, inheritance, land and house renting contributed to less than 1 % as sources of income to households.
Table 77: Average Income (ETB) Received during the Last Crop Season by Source and Region, 2017/18 Source of Income Regions Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total % Livestock/livestock product 1,869.05 1,323.23 4,633.98 1,556.94 3,061.04 39.44 Firewood/charcoal sales 0.84 19.32 123.31 13.37 68.70 0.89 Trading 192.14 619.37 716.58 539.44 615.40 7.93 Sales of other goods or assets 8.36 31.52 71.47 187.43 68.61 0.88 Grain milling 0.00 19.34 16.56 0.00 13.61 0.17 Sale of other tree crops 298.34 48.42 482.29 33.96 288.32 3.72 Food processing business 102.51 0.00 70.58 9.09 46.62 0.60 Sale of local drinks (tella, teje, etc0tc) 238.09 141.55 243.23 50.27 190.60 2.46 Repair business 98.66 74.40 24.57 35.17 47.03 0.61 Agricultural wage labor (on-farm) 288.13 24.52 101.17 285.29 121.60 1.57 Non-agricultural wage labor (off) 1243.59 624.02 932.48 1706.84 974.89 12.56 Pension 12.07 2.10 11.34 21.39 10.12 0.13 Interest or other investment 0.00 0.00 2.75 0.00 1.38 0.02 Remittances 1,064.21 1,464.01 216.83 475.94 677.81 8.73 Inheritance 34.88 0.00 14.14 8.83 11.64 0.15 Income from renting land 54.52 9.66 13.94 26.20 18.33 0.24 Income from renting house 30.10 6.04 15.83 0.00 12.57 0.16 Income from share cropping 114.31 703.95 37.03 394.67 273.39 3.52 Others 3149.41 2567.28 753.98 77.22 1259.11 16.22 Total 8,799.21 7,678.70 8,482.06 5,422.06 7,760.74 100.00
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
14.15 Poverty Status of Respondent Households
In the calculation of proverty status of respondents, the aggregate of the value of crops produced, sales of Livestock/livestock product and firewood/charcoal, trading, sales of other goods or assets and tree crops, grain milling, food processing business and local drinks, repair business, agricultural wage labor (on- farm), non-agricultural wage labor (off-farm), pension, interest/dividend earned on other investment, remittances, inheritance, renting of land and house, share cropping and others was used.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 67
Final Report
The annual income of Birr 70,263 per year per household was taken as a minimum poverty threshold for a household. This figure was arrived at by taking 5.6 persons/HH and USD 1.25 per person per day (PP/day) used by IMF for Ethiopia as the minimum poverty threshold and 365 days per year, which is converted to ETB at the rate 27.5 to one USD at the time of the Survey. Across regional schmes, 2932 HHs (98 %) overall earned less than Birr 70, 263.00 income per year with a regioal distribution of 96 % for Tigray, 97 % for Amhara, 99 % for Oromia and 97 % for SNNP under this income group category (Table 78).
Table 78: Distribution of HHs by Estimated Annual Income (ETB) by Region, May-June 2017/18
Income Region Overall category Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP N % N % N % N % N % Less than 288 96.32 801 96.74 1482 98.87 361 96.52 2932 97.73 Birr 70,263
Birr 70,263 11 3.68 27 3.26 17 1.13 13 3.48 68 2.27 and above Total 299 100.00 828 100.00 1499 100.0 374 100.00 3000 100.0 0 0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.16 Household Food Expenditures and Consumptions
Types of food items consumed over a week in the surveyed areas comprised; cereals, pulses, oilseeds, fruits/vegetables, root crops and other miscellaneous foods such as meat, milk, butter/cheese, sugar, salt, coffee/tea and chat (Table 79). Among the cereals, most people consumed maize (63 %) followed by sorghum (40 %) and teff (37 %) in all regions. Less than one percent consumed barley and finger millet. Relatively higher proportion of the HHs ate; haricot beans (22 %) and chick peas (15 %) among pulses; onion (71 %) and potato (27 %) among vegetables; salt (95 %), coffee/tea (57 %) and sugar (42 %) among miscellaneous foods. Households generally consume a negligible amount of the oilseeds, fruits, root crops except potato and carrot among vegetables.
While teff and sorghum hold a significant importance for a higher proportion of HHs as food items in Tigray and Amhara, maize replaces them in Oromia and SNNP regions. As expected comparatively more proportion of HHs in SNNP consumed
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 68
Final Report
more fruits (Banana, mango and avocado) and root crops (potato, sweet potato, cassava and Kocho) than in the rest of the regions.
Milk, among the livestock products, is the only commodity consumed by a comparatively higher proportion of HHs (18 %) across regions. Other commodities like; meat, butter/cheese and eggs are consumed only by less than one percent of the visited households. Nevertheless, HHs in Oromia and SNNP regions consumed more milk over the last week of survey than those in Amhara and Tigray. The absence of livestock products and fruits from the diet of the overall society, however, entails the lack of vitamins and minerals which are *essential components for human health and body functions and this situation requires a serious attention.
Proportion of households that consumes chat is alarmingly high (86 %) in Oromia whereas it is none-existent in Tigray, only prevails 2 % in SNNP and 11 % in Amhara regions.
Table 79: Percent of Respondents Who Consumed Different Types of Food during the Last Seven Days by Type and Region
Type of Food Regions Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR
Count % Count % Count % Count % 1. Cereals Total % Teff 238 79.60 688 83.09 88 5.87 85 22.73 1,099 36.63 Wheat 166 55.52 241 29.11 294 9.61 75 20.05 776 25.87 Barley 107 35.79 45 5.43 70 4.67 8 2.14 230 07.67 Maize 92 30.77 156 18.84 1,287 85.86 364 97.33 1,899 63.30 Sorghum 184 61.54 574 69.32 378 25.22 77 20.59 1,213 40.43 Finger millet 66 22.07 56 6.76 28 1.87 4 1.07 154 05.13
2. Pulses Faba beans 111 37.12 226 27.29 72 6.00 11 2.94 420 14.00 Chickpeas 41 13.71 328 39.61 90 3.34 4 1.07 463 15.43 Lentils 63 21.07 223 26.93 50 33.89 37 9.89 373 12.43 Haricot beans 14 4.68 25 3.02 508 1.00 105 28.07 652 21.73 3. Oilseeds Groundnuts 0 1 0.12 15 59.37 0 0 16 00.53 Linseeds 10 3.34 3 0.36 2 3.34 0 0 15 00.50 4. Fruits and 17..68 Vegetables Onion 269 89.97 743 89.73 890 0.27 225 60.16 2,127 70.90 Garlic ) 15 5.02 251 30.31 50 8.81 18 4.81 334 11.13 Cabbage 49 16.39 124 14.98 265 2.27 219 58.56 657 21.90 Carrot 15 5.02 57 6.88 4 0.80 1 0.27 77 02.57 Tomato 91 30.43 183 22.10 132 1.73 6 1.60 412 13.73 Banana 4 1.34 18 2.17 34 1.53 53 14.17 109 03..63 Enset 0 1 0.12 12 0.33 102 27.27 115 03.83 Mango 18 6.02 68 8.21 26 0.00 95 25.40 207 06.90
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 69
Final Report
Type of Food Regions Total Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR
Count % Count % Count % Count % Avocado 6 2.01 0 23 0.00 42 11.23 71 02.37 Papaya 3 1.00 15 1.81 5 0.20 6 1.60 29 .00.97 Orange 8 2.68 22 2.66 0 0.00 1 0.27 31 01.03 Pineapple 0 0 0 25.15 2 0.53 2 00.07 Cucumber 1 0.33 10 1.21 3 0.33 1 0.27 15 00..50 Water Mellon 0 1 0.12 0 0.00 0 1 00.03 5. Root Crops 2.87 Potato 47 15.72 249 30.07 377 1.73 142 37.97 815 27.17 Sweet potato 1 0.33 4 0.48 5 0.00 49 13.10 59 01.97
Cassava 0 0 0 6.54 43 11.50 43 01.43
Yam 2 0.67 0 43 22.01 42 11.23 87 02.90 Kocho 0 3 0.36 26 3.14 44 11.76 73 02.43
Bulla 0 0 0 1.67 8 2.14 8 00.27 6. Others Meat 29 9.70 95 11.47 98 96.80 7 1.87 229 07.63 Milk/yogurt 20 6.69 104 12.56 330 31.22 88 23.53 542 18.07 Butter/cheese 52 17.39 49 5.92 47 42.56 18 4.81 166 05.53 Eggs 29 9.70 65 7.85 25 0.00 16 4.28 135 04.50 Sugar 143 47.83 302 36.47 789 5.87 40 10.70 1,274 42.47 Salt 278 92.98 739 89.25 1,451 19.61 369 98.66 2,837 94.57 Coffee/tea 233 77.93 712 85.99 468 4.67 297 79.41 1,710 57.00 Chat 0 0 92 11.11 638 85.86 8 2.14 738 24.60 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
The average quantities of food items consumed by each household from the various sources over the week preceding the collection of data for this report are shown in Table 80. Mean consumptions of maize, sorghum, teff and wheat per household per week were 9, 4, 3 and 2 kg, respectively. HHs consumed less than 1 % on average of barley and finger millet over the same period. Mean pulse crop consumed over this same period by each household put together amount only to 1.6 kg while households’ consumption of oilseed during the same week has generally been negligible. Corresponding figures for consumptions of fruits/vegetables, root crops and other miscellaneous foods respectively were; 3.0, 1.3 and 4.0 kg. While the overall mean for chat consumption is 1.3 kg per house per week, HHs in Oromia, SNNP and Amhara, on average, consumed 2.4, 0.3 and o.2 kg, over the same period of time.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 70
Final Report
Table 80: Average Quantity (Kg) Food Consumed per Household during the Last Seven Days by Region, 2017/18
Food Items Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total
1. cereals Teff 7.58 6.60 0.80 1.03 3.11 Wheat 5.08 1.93 2.57 9.37 2.44 Barley 3.17 0.21 0.22 1.08 0.50 Maize 1.21 0.99 18.75 90.52 10.88 Sorghum 5.18 6.36 2.92 12.58 3.89 Millet 1.58 0.62 0.17 0.68 0.42 23.8 16.71 25.43 115.26 21.24 Sub-Total
2. Pulses Faba beans 1.03 0.66 0.09 0.84 0.34 Chickpeas 0.24 1.16 0.11 0.43 0.41 Lentils 0.22 0.26 0.08 0.80 0.14 Haricot beans 0.08 0.06 1.09 11.95 0.72 Sub-Total 1.57 2.14 1.37 14.02 1.61
3. Oilseeds Groundnuts 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 Linseeds 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Sub-Total 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 4. Fruits and Vegetables Onion 1.26 1.37 0.83 7.73 1.02 Garlic 0.04 0.27 0.03 0.41 0.10 Cabbage 0.30 0.26 0.83 23.60 0.81 Carrot 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.27 0.03 Tomato 0.47 0.37 0.12 0.77 0.22 Banana 0.03 0.04 0.15 6.87 0.17 Enset 0.00 0.00 0.09 10.26 0.17 Mango 0.15 0.21 0.09 19.27 0.36 Avocado 0.12 0.00 0.11 3.63 0.11 Papaya 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.57 0.02
Orange 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.11 0.02 Pineapple 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 Cucumber 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.08 0.01 Water Malone 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-Total 2.5 2.69 2.27 73.65 3.04
5. Root Crops Potato 0.25 0.59 0.85 14.90 0.80 Sweet potato 0.01 0.01 0.01 13.01 0.17 Cassava 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.84 0.06 Yam 0.01 0.00 0.06 3.62 0.08 Kocho 0.00 0.01 0.09 11.43 0.19 Bulla 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.01 0.27 0.61 1.01 48.35 1.31 Sub-Total 6. Others Meat 0.10 0.19 0.12 0.32 0.13 Milk/yogurt 0.11 0.32 1.47 11.10 0.97
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 71
Final Report
Food Items Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total Butter/cheese 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.37 0.03 Eggs 0.78 0.62 0.16 4.30 0.38 Sugar 0.20 0.13 0.56 0.55 0.34 Salt 0.31 0.39 0.78 5.00 0.59 Coffee/tea 0.33 0.30 0.29 3.50 0.30 Chat 0.00 0.21 2.38 0.26 1.25 Sub-Total 1.89 2.18 5.79 25.4 3.99 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
The quantities of foods consumed by a household from, various sources, in a week preceding the data collection for this study are shown in Tables 81-84. Types of food are categorized under cereal, pulse, oilseed, fruit/vegetable, root crops and other miscellaneous food items. Households fulfilled their weekly food requirements from three sources, i.e. purchase, own-production and food aid. Total average regional schemes consumptions of these food types per household per week were; 33.0, 3.0, 0.0, 5.0, 2.0 and 6 kg, respectively of cereals, pulses, oilseeds, fruits/vegetables, root crops and other miscellaneous food items. Households purchased; 11.0, 1.0, 2.0, 0.8 and 2.0 kg, respectively of cereals, pulses, fruits/vegetables, roots crops and miscellaneous items (Table 81) to compensate for the weekly food demand gap that own-production (Table 82) and food aid (Table 83) could not meet. Maize, Faba and haricot beans, cabbage and onion, potato, salt/coffee/tea/sugar alone accounted for about 64, 66, 81, 85 and 66 % of the whole purchased cereal, pulse, fruit/vegetable, root crops and miscellaneous food items.
Own-production and food aid together contributed; 22.0 kg in cereals, 2.0 kg in pulses, 3.0 kg in fruits/vegetables, 2.0 kg in root crops and 4.0 kg to the overall average food consumption (Table 84). The general contribution of food aid to the consumption of the households was minimal, i.e. 1.5 kg in cereal, o.1 kg in pulse, 0.1 kg in fruit/vegetable crops and 0.1 in miscellaneous food items. This implies that households relied more on own-production and purchases to meet their food demands in the considered period of time. Food aid consumption of per households in Oromia region was relatively higher (5 kg) than in the rest of the regions which remained less than a kilogram in cereal crops. About 80 % of the cereal aid food consumed in Oromia region was wheat.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 72
Final Report
Table 81: Average Quantity (Kg) Purchased per Household during the Last Seven Days, 2017/18
Food Item Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total
1. Cereals Teff 2.81 2.11 0.52 4.42 1.17 Wheat 0.69 0.46 0.71 1.58 0.57 Barley 0.46 0.13 0.09 0.30 0.13 Maize 0.38 0.57 12.93 36.99 7.11 Sorghum 1.20 1.45 1.74 6.41 1.47 Finger millet 0.20 0.12 0.09 0.54 0.11
Sub-Total 5.74 4.84 16.08 50.24 10.56 2. Pulses Faba beans 0.79 0.50 0.07 0.70 0.26 Chickpeas) 0.11 0.51 0.11 0.43 0.21 Lentils 0.17 0.33 0.04 0.79 0.14 Haricot beans 0.03 0.06 0.72 1.68 0.40 Sub-Total 1.1 1.4 0.94 3.6 1.01 3. Oilseeds Groundnuts 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 Linseeds 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-Total 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 4. Fruits and vegetables Onion 1.20 1.33 1.03 7.84 1.10 0.03 0.24 0.09 0.40 0.12 Garlic Cabbage 0.28 0.27 0.64 8.20 0.52
Carrot 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.27 0.03 Tomato) 0.46 0.33 0.12 0.77 0.21
Banana 0.02 0.03 0.08 2.57 0.08 Enset 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.41 0.01 Mango 0.04 0.12 0.05 3.86 0.11 Avocado 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.68 0.03 Papaya 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.16 0.01 Orange 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01
Pineapple 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00
Cucumber 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01
Water Malone 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.18 2.45 2.05 25.21 2.24 Sub-Total
5. Root Crops Potato 0.19 0.59 0.78 8.43 0.68 Sweet potato 0.01 0.01 0.02 2.41 0.04 Cassava 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.01 Yam 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.41 0.04 Kocho 0.00 0.01 0.06 1.75 0.05 Bulla 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-Total 0.21 0.61 0.92 13.62 0.82
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 73
Final Report
Food Item Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total
6.Others Meat 0.08 0.18 0.09 0.24 0.11 Milk/yogurt 0.03 0.05 0.19 0.11 0.11 Butter/cheese 0.06 0.02 0.10 0.06 0.06 Eggs 0.03 0.30 0.11 1.81 0.16 Sugar 0.20 0.13 0.58 0.68 0.35 Salt 0.32 0.41 0.79 5.24 0.61 Coffee/tea 0.36 0.37 0.38 2.60 0.36 Chat 0.00 0.17 0.41 0.23 0.26 Sub-Total 1.08 1.63 2.65 10.97 2.02 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 82: Average Quantity (Kg) of Food Consumed Per Household from Own Production by Region, 2017/18
Food Item Regions
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total 1. Cereals Teff 4.75 4.50 0.23 0.76 1.92 Wheat 4.25 1.38 0.21 0.75 0.96 Barley 2.64 0.10 0.22 0.07 0.36 Maize 0.68 0.41 9.74 5.73 3.58 Sorghum 3.94 4.84 2.18 0.64 2.41 Finger millet 1.30 0.56 0.15 0.01 0.33 Sub-Total 17.56 11.79 12.73 7.96 9.56
2. Pulses Faba beans 0.18 0.19 0.05 0.01 0.08 Chickpeas 0.04 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.18 Lentils 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.02 Haricot beans 0.04 0.00 0.59 0.98 0.29 0.34 0.85 0.65 0.99 0.57 Sub-Total 3. Oilseeds Groundnuts 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Linseeds 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Fruits and Vegetables Onion 0.11 0.17 0.09 0.08 0.09 Garlic 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.02 Cabbage 0.02 0.00 0.50 1.64 0.34 Carrot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tomato 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.02 Banana 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.45 0.09 Enset 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.96 0.16 Mango 0.09 0.04 0.07 1.36 0.21 Avocado 0.04 0.00 0.13 0.25 0.07 Papaya 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.01 Orange 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 Pineapple 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 74
Final Report
Food Item Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total Cucumber 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 Water Malone 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sub-Total 0.37 0.31 1.11 4.8 1.02 5. Root Crops Potato 0.05 0.04 0.17 0.37 0.11 Sweet potato 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.07 Cassava 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.05 Yam 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.04 Kocho 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.79 0.12 Bulla 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 Sub-Total 0.06 0.04 0.25 2.39 0.39 6. Others Meat 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.02 Milk/yogurt 0.09 0.27 2.20 1.06 0.82 Butter/cheese 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.02 Eggs 0.74 0.31 0.10 0.25 0.22 Sugar 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 Salt 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.01 Coffee/tea 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.09 0.03 Chat 0.00 0.04 3.47 0.00 0.97 Sub-total 0.86 0.63 5.97 1.46 2.1 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 Table 83: Average quantity of food (Kg) Consumed per House per Week from Food Aid, 2017/18
Regions
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total 1. Cereals Teff 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.04 Wheat 0.08 0.06 3.79 0.04 1.07 Barley 0.07 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.03 Maize 0.18 0.02 0.88 0.09 0.28 Sorghum 0.06 0.06 0.14 0.03 0.06 Finger millet 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Sub-Total 0.56 0.22 4.89 0.18 1.49
2. Pulses Faba beans 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 Chickpeas 0.11 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.03 Lentils 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.02 Haricot beans 0.02 0.00 0.09 0.06 0.04 Sub-Total 0.22 0.1 0.14 0.06 0.1 3. Oilseeds 4. Fruits and Vegetables Onion 0.07 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.03 Garlic 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 Cabbage 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.01 Carrot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tomato 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 Banana 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.01 Enset 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 Mango 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.14 0.03 Avocado 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.01 Papaya 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 75
Final Report
Sub-Total 0.14 0.18 0.28 0.51 0.12 5. Root Crops Potato 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.01 Sweet potato 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.01 Sub-Total 0.0 0.1 0.04 0.17 0.02
6. Others Milk/yogurt 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.01 Eggs 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 Sugar 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 Salt 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 Sub-Total 0.02 0.04 0.11 0.02 0.05
Table 84: Average Food Consumed (Kg) Per Household per Week from Own Production and Food Aid, 2017/18 Food Items Regions Total
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR
1. Cereals Teff 7.53 6.57 0.79 1.04 3.09 Wheat 5.08 1.91 2.75 0.93 2.52 Barley 3.16 0.21 0.22 0.11 0.50 Maize 1.17 0.97 18.99 10.83 11.22 Sorghum 5.12 6.40 2.87 1.58 3.91 Finger millet 1.56 0.62 0.27 0.07 0.47 23.62 16.68 25.89 14.56 21.71 Sub-Total 2. Pulses Faba beans 1.02 0.67 0.07 0.08 0.33 Chickpeas 0.24 1.26 0.11 0.04 0.43 Lentils 0.25 0.25 0.07 0.09 0.14 Haricot beans 0.08 0.06 1.22 1.20 0.79 Sub-Total 1.59 2.24 1.47 1.41 1.69 3. Oilseeds Groundnuts 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 Linseeds 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 4. Fruits and Vegetables Onion 1.24 1.39 0.87 0.84 1.04 Garlic 0.04 0.27 0.04 0.04 0.10 Cabbage 0.30 0.26 0.89 2.56 0.87
Carrot 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.03 Tomato 0.46 0.37 0.13 0.08 0.22
Banana 0.03 0.04 0.17 0.88 0.21 Enset 0.00 0.00 0.09 1.07 0.18 Mango 0.15 0.21 0.11 2.03 0.38 Avocado 0.13 0.00 0.11 0.36 0.11 Papaya 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.04 Orange 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.02
Pineapple 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 Cucumber 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 Water Malone 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Subtotal 2.52 2.71 2.45 7.98 3.21
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 76
Final Report
Food Items Regions Total
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR
5. Root Crops Potato 0.25 0.59 0.86 1.67 0.83 Sweet potato 0.01 0.01 0.01 1.98 0.25 Cassava 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.07 Yam 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.36 0.08 Kocho 0.00 0.00 0.11 1.13 0.20 Bulla 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.02
Sub-Total 0.27 0.6 1.04 5.9 1.45 6. Others Meat 0.09 0.18 0.15 0.03 0.14 Milk/yogurt 0.12 0.32 1.53 1.17 1.01 Butter/cheese 0.06 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.03 Eggs 0.76 0.62 0.16 0.43 0.38 Sugar 0.19 0.13 0.58 0.06 0.36 Salt 0.30 0.38 0.79 0.64 0.61 Coffee/tea 0.33 0.29 0.28 0.35 0.30 Chat 0.00 0.21 2.52 0.03 1.32 Sub-Total 1.85 2.15 6.05 2.75 4.15 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.17 Estimated Value of Consumed Food
The estimated overall mean total value of consumed food by each household in a week was ETB 811.90 while respective means for Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP were; ETB 928.40, 770.30, 852.00 and 649.20 (Table 85). Teff has the highest total values in Tigray (ETB 160.00) and Amhara (Birr 149.00) while maize took over the rank in Oromia (ETB 111.00) and SNNP (110.00) among the cereal crops in food consumption patterns.
Cereals and miscellaneous food items accounted for 94 % in Tigray, 90 % in Amhara, 93 % in Oromia and 81 % in SNNP of the total value of the consumed foods. The contribution of root crops to the total value of consumed foods is much higher in SNNP (8.90 %) compared to Oromia (1.27 %), Amhara (0.69 %) and Tigray (0.26 %).
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 77
Final Report
Table 85: Estimated Total Food Value (Birr) Consumed Per Week per Household, 2017/18
Food Item Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total
1. Cereals Teff 160.33 148.50 15.91 25.60 68.11 Wheat 68.13 25.35 36.44 16.82 34.09 Barley 40.40 2.53 2.87 1.11 6.30 Maize 17.58 9.74 184.31 111.07 110.38 Sorghum 69.35 72.20 31.59 10.74 43.96 Finger millet 26.75 6.57 3.59 2.53 6.59 Sub-Total 382.54 264.89 274.71 167.87 269.43 2. Pulses Faba beans 16.29 13.93 1.60 1.21 6.42 Chickpeas 3.99 18.20 1.67 0.64 6.33 Lentils 5.75 7.69 2.85 3.52 4.56 Haricot beans 0.93 0.87 15.41 10.99 9.40 Sub-Total 26.96 40.69 21.53 16.36 26.71 3. Oilseeds Groundnuts 0.00 0.02 0.23 0.00 0.12 Linseeds 0.92 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.14 Sub-Total 0.92 0.1 0.27 0.0 0.26
4. Fruits and Vegetables Onion) 11.86 12.59 10.75 9.91 11.26 Garlic) 0.54 4.38 0.94 0.48 1.80 Cabbage 1.79 1.97 7.61 16.61 6.59 Carrot 1.76 0.99 0.04 0.13 0.49 Tomato 4.37 3.77 2.01 0.32 2.52 Banana 0.21 0.78 0.86 2.46 0.97 Enset 0.00 0.02 0.80 13.01 2.03 Mango 1.62 2.69 0.61 4.62 1.79 Avocado 0.32 0.00 0.65 2.12 0.62 Papaya 0.24 0.45 0.12 0.17 0.23 Orange 0.87 0.96 0.00 0.06 0.36 Pineapple 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.02 Cucumber 0.05 0.17 0.05 0.04 0.08 Water Malone 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-Total 23.63 28.78 24.44 50.12 28.76 5. Root Crops Potato 2.31 5.07 7.93 15.95 7.58 Sweet potato 0.04 0.09 0.07 11.84 1.54 Cassava 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.84 0.48 Yam 0.10 0.00 0.92 2.53 0.79 Kocho 0.00 0.13 1.86 22.40 3.76 Bulla 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.21 0.15 Sub-Total 2.45 5.29 10.78 57.77 14.3 6. Others Meat 11.50 27.22 16.88 3.30 17.50 Milk/yogurt 1.52 4.67 32.04 15.43 19.37 Butter/cheese 2.61 1.12 2.72 6.15 2.69 Eggs 2.37 1.80 0.45 1.11 1.10 Sugar 5.29 3.56 19.26 1.91 11.37
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 78
Final Report
Food Item Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total Salt 3.91 3.89 8.54 6.13 6.49 Coffee/tea 28.23 31.34 18.03 27.83 23.94 Chat 0.00 17.20 90.84 3.05 50.52 Sub-Total 491.91 430.57 520.50 357.04 472.45 Total 928.41 770.32 851.96 649.16 811.91 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.18 Household Non-food Expenditure
Types of non-food service/household item expenditures by HHs in the surveyed areas in the last month are indicated in Table 86. Overall, the highest number of people expended in donations for religions purposes (Churches, mosques and others) than other items or services across all regions. The next highest service expenditure has been, in ranking order; contribution to Iddir (Traditional saving groups), taxes and other levies paid to the government, marriage ceremony expenditures and educational expenditures (School fees, textbooks and uniforms).
In Tigray region, the highest number of people had expenditure on government taxes and levies followed by purchase of soap for body/clothes and donation to religious organization. In Amhara region, the order of expenditure has been highest in purchase of soap, followed by purchase of lighting related-items such as matches, batteries, candles/tua’af and incense stick and thirdly taxes and levies. The trend in SNNP follow that of the Amhara except that grain milling service cost in, the third position, replaces taxes and levies. In Oromia region, the ranking expenditure order goes first to purchasing of soap, grain milling service and thirdly to purchase of lighting-related items. None or an insignificant number of people had expenditures on the purchase of mosquito nets and bed/mattress in all regions.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 79
Final Report
Table 86: Percent of Respondents Purchased Services/Household Items during the Last 30 Days by Region, 2017/18
Purchased Service/HH Item Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR All regions Cou % Cou % Count % Count % Count % nt nt Grain milling service (not including 150 50.17 374 45.17 1,234 82.32 189 50.53 978 33.0 cost of grain itself) Matches, batteries, candles (tua’af), 185 61.87 445 53.74 1,071 71.45 237 63.37 1,295 43.0 incense stick Soap (either for body or for clothes) 272 90.97 616 74.40 1,393 92.93 245 65.51 1,239 41.0 Other personal care products 62 20.74 90 10.87 218 14.54 36 9.63 1,469 49.0 (Sanitary pads) Charcoal, firewood, kerosene or 37 12.37 46 5.56 113 7.54 56 14.97 1,525 51.0 other types of fuel Cigarettes, tobacco, suret, gaya, 6 2.01 31 3.74 141 9.41 0 0 1,395 47.0 etc. Transportation 112 37.46 322 38.89 871 58.11 161 43.05 1,223 41.0 Housing-related expenses (rent and 17 5.69 37 4.47 22 1.47 3 0.80 1,534 51.0 other fees) Donations , church, mosque, or 256 85.62 321 38.77 220 14.68 36 9.63 1,892 63.0 other religious organization Wage for hired labor 13 4.35 20 2.42 26 1.73 9 2.41 1,515 51.0 Repair costs for dwelling or 16 5.35 52 6.28 21 1.40 17 4.55 1,563 52.0 household items Healthcare expenditures 53 17.73 164 19.81 505 33.69 57 15.24 1,268 42.0 Formal insurance purchases 5 1.67 9 1.09 6 0.40 1 0.27 1,508 50.0 Clothes, shoes, fabric, scarves or 155 51.84 352 42.51 713 47.57 56 14.97 1,349 45.0 other apparel items Kitchen items (pots, pans, utensils, 20 6.69 48 5.80 33 2.20 19 5.08 1,553 52.0 etc.) Linens (sheets, towels, blankets, 42 14.05 120 14.49 154 10.27 15 4.01 1,522 51.0 napkins, handkerchiefs, et Household furniture items 2 0.67 23 2.78 56 3.74 8 2.14 1,476 49.0 Mattresses, beds 1 0.33 10 1.21 16 1.07 2 0.53 1,496 50.0
Mosquito nets 1 0.33 0 0 9 0.60 0 0 1,491 50.0 Lamps, torches, light bulbs 69 23.08 210 25.36 660 44.03 55 14.71 1,173 39.0 Marriage ceremony expenditures 51 17.06 125 15.10 22 1.47 7 1.87 1,660 55.0 Religious ceremony expenditures 56 18.73 141 17.03 126 8.41 30 8.02 1,600 53.0 Funeral Ceremony 32 10.70 82 9.90 12 0.80 5 1.34 1,606 54.0 Educational expenditures (school 189 63.21 277 33.45 388 25.88 48 12.83 1,625 54.0 fees, textbooks, school uniforms) Contributions to Iddir (traditional 104 34.78 248 29.95 181 12.07 61 16.31 1,731 .58.0 savings group) Taxes and other levies paid to the 281 93.98 437 52.78 561 37.42 20 5.35 1,676 56.0 government Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
All surveyed HHs in the four regions on average spent Birr 1582.00 in receiving various services (Table 87). Households overall incurred more cost (Birr 341.00) in clothing, shoes, fabric, scarves and/or other apparel items than other items/services. Transportation and health care expenditures assume the second and third highest position respectively. SNNP ( ETB 4,093.00), Oromia (Birr 1,443.00), Tigray (ETB 425.00) and Amhara ( ETB 366.00) ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th in average total expenditure in all services obtained. The highest within region expenditure has been on clothing and foot wear in SNNP, Tigray and Amhara whereas transport cost took precedence over other services in Oromia.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 80
Final Report
Table 87: Average Amount Paid (ETB) Per Household by Type of Purchased Services/Items by region, 2017/18
Purchased Items Regions Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall Grain milling service (not including cost of grain itself) 10.45 10.44 110.63 283.87 103.85 Matches, batteries, candles (tua’af), incensed stick or 8.59 10.37 83.82 144.79 61.89 others Soap (either for body or for clothes) 45.40 28.36 119.04 286.19 119.75 Other personal care products (Sanitary pads) 10.79 7.42 12.30 49.84 20.09 Charcoal, firewood, kerosene or other types of fuel 5.95 3.42 10.22 28.75 12.08 Cigarettes, tobacco, suret, gaya, etc. 0.26 0.34 2.45 0.00 0.76 Transportation 47.19 34.85 409.93 367.07 214.76 Housing-related expenses (rent and other fees) 1.79 0.56 3.92 145.29 37.89
Donations. 56.95 8.79 50.58 137.04 63.34 Wage for hired labor 13.88 7.17 9.53 38.40 17.24 Repair costs for dwelling or household items 0.92 1.27 54.59 373.76 107.64 Healthcare expenditures 15.94 18.51 153.30 467.24 163.75 Formal insurance purchases 0.32 0.40 0.68 3.21 1.15 Clothes, shoes, fabric, scarves or other apparel items 69.86 101.34 209.08 981.91 340.55 Kitchen items (pots, pans, utensils, etc.) 6.24 5.12 1.39 8.16 5.23 Linens (sheets, towels, blankets, napkins, handkerchiefs, et 8.24 5.92 27.76 44.00 21.48 Household furniture items 0.12 4.07 32.56 322.04 89.70 Mattresses, beds 0.32 0.25 4.62 6.42 2.90 Mosquito nets 0.06 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.09 Lamps, torches, light bulbs 7.05 7.80 15.70 52.36 20.73 Marriage ceremony expenditures 14.87 13.08 51.54 95.80 43.82 Religious ceremony expenditures 23.04 49.38 25.25 86.26 45.98 Funeral Ceremony 2.36 1.59 3.95 35.55 10.86 Educational expenditures (school fees, textbooks, school 20.35 12.89 27.10 101.88 40.56 un Contributions to Iddir (traditional savings group) 26.59 12.10 4.08 11.42 13.55 Others 27.02 20.82 18.64 21.41 21.97 424.55 366.27 1442.93 4092.66 1581.60 Total Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
2.19 Nutritional Status of Children
Indicators used in this study is taken from the 2016 EDHS (Conducted by CSA), as agreed with the client in the inception report and because of the fact that the study was done a year ago only and is expected to be relevant to this baseline survey. Since the nutritional study was done at a national level and is applicable to the SSI area in view of the scarcity of experts in such fields as nutrition of children in general in the country and the lack of skills of the enumerators deployed to collect data in the current study. Hence, the consultant was compelled to rely a literature review of a recent study in the country done on similar field which was the 2016 EDHs data.
Anthropometric indicators for young children were collected in the 2016 EDHS to provide outcome measures of nutritional status. As recommended by WHO, evaluation of nutritional status in this report had been based on a comparison of three indices for
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 81
Final Report
the children in the survey, with indices reported for a reference population of well- nourished children (WHO Multi-center Growth Reference Study Group, 20068). The three indices (height-for-age (stunting), weight-for-height (wasting), and weight-for- age (underweight) are expressed as standard deviation units from the median for the reference group. Children who fall below minus two standard deviations (-2 SD) from the median of the reference population are regarded as moderately malnourished, while those who fall below minus three standard deviations (-3 SD) from the reference population median are considered severely malnourished. Marked differences, especially with regard to height-for-age and weight-for-age, were often seen between different subgroups of children within a country.
In the 2016 DHS Ethiopia report, a total of 10,752 children under age 5 were eligible for weight and height measurements. For some of the eligible children, however, complete and credible data on height, weight and/or age were not obtained. In this report, height-for-age data were based on 88 percent of eligible children, weight-for- height data were based on 89 percent of eligible children, and weight-for-age data were based on 90 percent of eligible children.
Table 88 shows nutritional status for children under age 5, according to the three anthropometric indices, by background characteristics. Height-for-age is a measure of linear growth. Children whose height-for-age is less than two standard deviations below the median (-2 SD) of the reference population are considered short for their age or stunted, a condition reflecting the cumulative effect of chronic malnutrition.
The data showed that 38 percent of children under 5 were considered short for their age or stunted (below -2 SD), and 18 percent were severely stunted (below -3 SD). After being fairly stable in the first 6-8 months of life, the prevalence of stunting increases steadily from 9 months through the first 4 years of life, before declining slightly in the fourth year of life. Children aged 24-35 months had the highest proportion of stunting (48 percent). Stunting is slightly higher among male than female children (41 percent versus 35 percent).
8 World Health Organization (WHO) Multi-center Growth Reference Study Group, 2006- Child Growth Standards : Length/Height for Age, Weight for Age-for-Length, Weight -for- Height and Body Mass Index-for Age: Methods and Development , Geneva, WHO.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 82
Final Report
The study found that Stunting was greater among children in rural (40 percent) than urban areas (25 percent). There were some regional variations as shown table 82; stunting ranged from the highest of 46 percent in the Amhara region to the lowest of 15 percent in Addis Ababa.
Weight-for-height describes current nutritional status. A child who is below -2 SD from the reference median for weight-for-height was considered too thin for his or her height, or wasted, a condition reflecting acute or recent nutritional deficits. Overall, 10 percent of children in Ethiopia were wasted, and 3 percent were severely wasted (below -3 SD). Regional variations existed, with Somali and Afar having the highest percentages of children who were wasted, 23 percent and 18 percent, respectively. Table 88: Nutritional Status of Children Under 5 by Region, 2016
Regions Height-for-age Weight –for-height (Wasting) Weight-for-age) Underweight
(Stunting)
(-3SD) (-2SD) (-3SD) (-2SD) (-3SD) (-2SD)
Tigray 13.4 39.3 3.4 11.1 5.2 23.0
Amhara 19.6 46.3 2.2 9.8 8.3 28.4
Oromia 17.1 36.5 3.7 10.6 6.6 22.5
SNNPR 20.2 38.6 17 6.0 6.4 21.1
Ethiopian 18.0 38.0 3 10 7 24
Source: CSA EDHS 2016, Ethiopia
4.20 Shocks and Resilience
4.20.1 Shock Events The kinds of various shock events experienced by HHs are shown in Table 89. On average surveyed HHs suffered highest from drought (1,408) and crop diseases (1, 237) across regional states. Regionally shock from; excessive rains, frost/hail, sudden change in temperature, flood, landslide/avalanche/erosion, theft/robbery and other violence, destruction/damage of houses, local unrest, displacement due to infrastructural development and crop losses due to lack of storage space generally impact on relatively a minor proportion of the surveyed households. Factors such as crop loss due to lack of storage space which could hardly be considered as a skock factor was included in the report because the list of schock events was given by the client for the survey questionnaire. The relative importance of within regional shocks varies among HHs. In Tigray; shocks from
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 83
Final Report
delayed onset and/or early finish of rains, followed by drought/inadequate rainfall and livestock diseases assume the 1st to the 3rd highest proportion of HHs, while crop diseases, delayed onset and/or early finish of rains and surge in food prices take the 1st to the 3rd ranks in Amhara. Most HHs in Oromia experience shocks from; drought/inadequate precipitation firstly, crop diseases secondly and delayed onset and/or early finish of rains thirdly. In SNNP, crop and livestock diseases and drought/inadequate rainfall take shock ranking positions from 1st to 3rd, respectively.
Table 89: Percent of Respondents Experienced Shock Events during the Past Crop Year by Type of Event and Region
Type of Shock Event Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Excessive rains 7 2.34 12 1.45 142 9.47 26 6.95 187 6.0 Too little rain/drought 126 42.14 92 11.11 1,146 76.45 44 11.76 1,408 47.0 Frost/freezing rain/hail 13 4.35 11 1.33 43 2.87 2 0.53 69 2.0
Sudden change in 12 4.01 6 0.72 133 8.87 16 4.28 167 6.0 temperature Crop disease 15 5.02 167 20.17 846 56.44 209 55.88 1,237 41.0. Livestock disease 35 11.71 27 3.26 173 11.54 106 28.34 341 11.0 Flood 17 5.69 26 3.14 134 8.94 42 11.23 219 7.0. Early/late rain 134 44.82 119 14.37 317 21.15 16 4.28 586 20.0 Landslides/avalanches/eros 1 0.33 4 0.48 33 2.20 15 4.01 53 2.0 ion Theft/robbery and other 12 4.01 18 2.17 9 0.60 3 0.80 42 1.0 violence Destruction or damage of 0 0 0 0 12 0.80 5 1.34 17 1.0 house Loss of land/housing due 5 1.67 2 0.24 10 0.67 5 1.34 22 0.73 to conflict Local unrest/violence 0 0 0 0 2 0.13 4 1.07 6 0.20 Food price surges 33 11.04 102 12.32 54 3.60 41 10.96 230 8.00 Type of Shock Event Region Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNP Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Unavailability of 12 4.01 22 2.66 81 5.40 36 9.63 151 5.00 agricultural inputs No demand for agricultural 16 5.35 47 5.68 27 1.80 6 1.60 96 3.00 products Increase in price of 18 6.02 82 9.90 77 5.14 37 9.89 214 7.00 agricultural inputs Drop in price of 14 4.68 91 10.99 30 2.00 14 3.74 149 5.00 agricultural outputs Illness/death of a 5 1.67 14 1.69 62 4.14 39 10.43 120 4.00 household member Displacement due to 1 0.33 1 0.12 7 0.47 8 2.14 17 0.56 infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of 1 0.33 1 0.12 23 1.53 7 1.87 32 1.00 storage space Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 84
Final Report
The mean number of shock events reported by HHs has been 3.00. The average number over regions varied from the highest of 4.00 in Oromia and the lower of 1.5 in Amhara (Table 90).
Scrutiny of the severity of the shock of the events in Tigray region reveals that 179 HHs are in the none-impact, 160 HHs are in the moderate- impact and 112 HHs are in the slight-impact categories, respectively (Table 91). Virtually no household falls under the strong and worst ever happened groups in this region. Amhara region has 392, 200, 172and 19 HHs reporting under none-, slight- moderate-, and strong-impact shock categories, respectively (Table 92). Only three household reported worst than ever happened before in this region. Corresponding figures for Oromia are 1,198, 318, 26 and 750 HHs, respectively (Table 93). About 413 HHs experienced the worst ever shock happened to them during the last cropping season. SNNP HHs experience of shock scenario shows that 115 in none-, 75 in slight-, 283 in moderate- and 154 in strong-impact categories respectively (Table 94). About 45 HHs reported an experience of worst ever happened before shock condition in the region.
Regional aggregate mean shock categories were; 1,890 none-, 1,047 slight-, 1,015 moderate- and 928 strong-impact HHs, respectively (Table 95). An overall of 470 HHs reported worst shocks ever experienced in this last cropping season.
Table 90: Average Number of Shock Events Reported by Respondents during the Last Crop Season, 2017/18
Type of Shock Regions Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Excessive rains 0.02 0.03 0.20 0.10 0.12 Too little rain/drought 0.61 0.12 1.25 0.18 0.74 Frost/freezing rain/hail 0.06 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.04 Sudden change in temperature 0.07 0.01 0.18 0.05 0.11 Crop disease 0.05 0.25 0.80 0.83 0.58 Livestock disease 0.13 0.05 0.21 0.48 0.19 Flood 0.06 0.04 0.17 0.30 0.14 Early/late rain 1.34 0.14 0.28 0.05 0.32 Landslides/avalanches/erosion 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.11 0.04 Theft/robbery and other violence 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.02 Destruction or damage of house 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.01 Loss of land/housing due to conflict 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.01 Local unrest/violence 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 Food price surges 0.40 0.33 0.15 0.44 0.26
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 85
Final Report
Type of Shock Regions Overall Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Unavailability of agricultural inputs 0.04 0.05 0.10 0.14 0.08 No demand for agricultural products 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.02 0.06 Increase in price of agricultural inputs 0.07 0.15 0.12 0.16 0.12 Drop in price of agricultural outputs 0.05 0.17 0.05 0.09 0.09 Illness/death of a household member 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.13 0.05 Displacement due to infrastructure development 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.01 (e.g. road, Others 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.03 Total 3.04 1.48 3.81 3.25 3.02 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 91: Percent of Respondents by Severity of Shock Events in Tigray, 2017/18
Event Tigray None Slight impact Moderate Strong Worst ever Overall impact impact happened Count % Count % Count % Count % Cou % Count % nt Excessive rains 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.0 6 2.00
Too little 20 7.00 30 10.00 74 25.00 2 1.00 0 0.00 126 42.0 rain/drought Frost/freezing 7 2.00 0 0.00 6 2.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 13 4.0 rain/hail Sudden change in 2 1.00 8 3.00 2 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 12 4.0 temperature Crop disease 3 1.00 2 1.00 10 3.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 15 5.0
Livestock disease 16 5.00 3 1.00 16 5.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 35 12.0 Flood 17 6.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 17 6.00
Early/late rain 64 21.00 49 16.00 21 7.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 134 45.0 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 Landslides/avalanc hes/erosion Theft/robbery and 3 1.00 6 2.00 3 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 12 4.00 other violence Destruction or 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 damage of house Loss of 1 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 5 2.00 land/housing due to conflict Local 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 unrest/violence Food price surges 4 1.00 0 0.00 15 5.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 33 11.0
Unavailability of 9 3.00 0 0.00 3 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 12 4.00 agricultural inputs No demand for 14 5.00 2 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 16 5.00 agricultural products Increase in price of 3 1.00 6 2.00 9 3.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 18 6.00 agricultural inputs Drop in price of 12 4.00 2 10.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 14 5.00 agricultural outputs Illness/death of a 3 1.00 2 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 2.00 household member Displacement due 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.0 to infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.0 lack of storage space 179 59 112 47 160 53 3 1 1 0.0 476 159 Total Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 86
Final Report
Table 92: Percent of Respondents by Severity of Shock Events in Amhara, 2017/18
Amhara None Slight Moderate Strong impact Worst ever Overall impact impact happened Cou % Cou % Count % Coun % Coun % Co % nt nt t t unt Excessive rains 0 0.00 4 0.00 7 1.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 12 1.00 Too little 19 2.00 30 4.00 42 5.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 92 11.00 rain/drought Frost/freezing 2 0.00 4 0.00 5 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 11 1.00 rain/hail Sudden change 4 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 1.00 in temperature Crop disease 35 4.00 33 4.00 89 11.00 10 1.00 0 0.00 167 20.00 Livestock 12 1.00 5 1.00 8 1.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 27 3.00 disease Flood 20 2.00 3 0.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 26 3.00 Early/late rain 110 13.00 8 1.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 119 14.00 Landslides/avala 1 0.00 1 0.00 2 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0.00 nches/erosion Theft/robbery 6 1.00 1 0.00 11 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 18 2.00 and other violence Destruction or 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 damage of house Loss of 2 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.00 land/housing due to conflict Local 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 unrest/violence Food price 32 4.00 26 3.00 44 5.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 102 12.00 surges Unavailability of 14 2.00 4 0.00 2 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 22 3.00 agricultural inputs No demand for 40 5.00 4 0.00 3 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 47 6.00 agricultural products Increase in price 38 5.00 27 3.00 12 1.00 4 0.00 1 0.00 82 10.00 of agricultural inputs Drop in price of 54 7.00 19 2.00 15 2.00 2 0.00 1 0.00 91 11.00 agricultural outputs Illness/death of 2 0.00 1 0.00 11 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 14 2.00 a household Member Displacement 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 due to infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 to lack of storage space
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 87
Final Report
Table 93: Percent of Respondents by Severity of Shock Events in Oromia, 2017/18
Events Oromia None Slight Moderate Strong Worst ever Overall impact impact impact happened N % N % N % N % N % N %
Excessive rains 15 1.00 30 2.00 33 2.00 43 3.00 20 1.00 142 9.00 Too little 434 29.00 248 17.0 71 5.00 235 16.00 157 10.00 1,146 76.00 rain/drought 0 Frost/freezing 21 1.00 11 1.00 3 0.00 4 0.00 4 0.00 43 3.00 rain/hail Sudden change in 32 2.00 52 0.03 32 2.00 10 1.00 7 0.00 133 9.00 temperature Crop disease 397 26.00 183 12.0 50 3.00 159 11.00 57 4.00 846 56.00 0 Livestock disease 20 1.00 12 1.00 23 2.00 89 6.00 29 2.00 173 12.00
Flood 7 0.00 15 1.00 16 1.00 42 3.00 54 4.00 134 9.00
Early/late rain 210 14.00 60 4.00 13 1.00 22 1.00 11 1.00 317 21.00
Landslides/avalanch 13 1.00 10 1.00 7 0.00 2 0.00 1 0.00 33 2.00 es/erosion Theft/robbery and 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 2 0.00 4 0.00 2 0.00 9 1.00 other violence Destruction or 7 0.00 2 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 12 1.00 damage of house 0 Loss of 2 0.00 1 0.00 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 0.00 10 1.00 land/housing due to conflict Local unrest/violence 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 2 0.00 0 Food price surges 10 0.01 14 1.00 7 0.00 8 1.00 15 1.00 54 4.00
Unavailability of 2 0.00 8 1.00 16 1.00 45 3.00 9 1.00 81 5.00 agricultural inputs No demand for 5 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 13 1.00 8 1.00 27 2.00 agricultural products Increase in price of 7 0.00 12 1.00 16 1.00 34 2.00 6 0.00 77 5.00 agricultural inputs Drop in price of 4 0.00 7 0.00 3 0.00 7 0.00 7 0.00 30 2.00 agricultural outputs Illness/death of a 3 0.00 4 0.00 20 1.00 29 2.00 6 0.00 62 4.00 household member Displacement due 4 0.00 1 0.00 0.0 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 7 0.00 to infrastructure 0 development ( Crop losses due to 5 0.00 2 0.00 2 0.00 3 0.00 11 1.00 23 2.00 lack of storage space
Table 94: Percent of Respondents by Severity of Shock Events in SNNPR, 2017/18
Type of Shock SNNPR
None Slight Moderate Strong Worst Overall impact impact impact ever happened N % N % N % N % N % N %
Excessive rains 2 1.00 3 1.00 8 2.00 10 3.0 3 1.00 26 7.00 0 Too little rain/drought 2 1.00 5 1.00 14 4.00 18 5.0 5 1.00 44 12.00 0 Frost/freezing rain/hail 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.0 0.00 2 1.00 0 Sudden change in temperature 11 3.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.0 2 1.00 16 4.00 0 Crop disease 45 12.00 24 6.00 68 18.00 54 14. 18 5.00 209 56.00 00
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 88
Final Report
Type of Shock SNNPR None Slight Moderate Strong Worst Overall impact impact impact ever happened N % N % N % N % N % N %
Livestock disease 30 8.00 19 5.00 45 12.00 11 3.0 1 0.00 106 28.00 0 Flood 10 3.00 3 1.00 18 5.00 9 2.0 2 1.00 42 11.00 0 Early/late rain 1 0.00 1 0.00 11 3.00 3 1.0 0 0.00 16 4.00 0 Landslides/avalanches/erosion 1 0.00 0 0.00 9 2.00 4 1.0 1 0.00 15 4.00 0 Theft/robbery and other 1 0.00 0 0.00 2 1.00 0 0.0 0 0.00 3 1.00 violence 0 Destruction or damage of 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 1.00 2 1.0 1 0.00 5 1.00 house 0 Loss of land/housing due to 0 0.00 1 0.00 2 1.00 1 0.0 1 0.00 5 1.0 conflict 0 Local unrest/violence 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 1.00 1 0.0 0 0.00 4 1.00 0 Food price surges 0 0.00 9 2.00 24 6.00 4 1.0 4 1.00 41 11.00 0 Unavailability of agricultural 2 1.00 1 0.00 21 6.00 8 2.0 4 1.00 36 10.00 inputs 0 No demand for agricultural 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 1.0 3 1.0 1 0.00 6 2.00 products
Increase in price of agricultural 1 0.0 0 0.0 19 5.0 15 4.0 1 0.00 37 10.00 inputs
Drop in price of agricultural 1 0.0 3 1.0 5 1.0 3 1.0 2 1.00 14 4.00 outputs Illness/death of a household 3 1.0 4 1.0 23 6.0 5 1.0 4 1.00 39 10.00 member Displacement due to 3 1.0 0 0.0 3 1.0 0.0 0.0 2 1.00 8 2.00 infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of 2 1 1 0.0 2 0.01 1 0.0 1 0.00 7 2.00 storage space
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 95: Distribution of HHs by Status of the Impact of the Shock on Production in All Regions, 2017/18
Type of Shock Event All Regions Combined
None Slight Impact Moderate Strong Impact Worst ever Overall Impact happened Coun % Coun % Count % Count % Cou % Coun % t t nt t
Excessive rains 23 0.8 38 1.3 48 1.6 54 1.8 23 0.8 186 6.2
Too little rain/drought 475 15.8 313 10.4 201 6.7 255 8.5 162 5.4 1,406 46.9
Frost/freezing rain/hail 30 1.00 15 0.5 15 0.5 5 0.2 4 0.1 69 2.3
Sudden change in 49 1.6 63 2.1 35 1.2 11 0.4 9 0.3 167 5.6 temperature Crop disease 480 16.0 242 8.1 217 7.2 223 7.4 75 2.5 1,237 .41. 2 Livestock disease 78 2.6 39 1.3 92 3.1 101 3.4 30 1.0 340 11.3 Flood 54 1.8 21 0.7 35 1.2 51 1.7 56 1.9 217 7.2
Early/late rain 385 12.8 118 3.9 46 1.5 25 0.8 11 0.4 585 19.5
Landslides/avalanches/e 15 0.5 12 0.4 18 0.6 6 0.2 2 0.1 53 1.8 rosion Theft/robbery and other 10 0.3 8 0.3 18 0.6 4 0.1 2 0.1 42 1.4 violence Destruction or damage 7 0.2 2 0.1 2 0.1 2 0.1 4 0.1 17 0.6 of house Loss of land/housing 5 0.2 2 0.1 6 0.2 3 0.1 6 0.2 22 0.7 due to conflict
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 89
Final Report
Type of Shock Event All Regions Combined None Slight Impact Moderate Strong Impact Worst ever Overall Impact happened Coun % Coun % Count % Count % Cou % Coun % t t nt t
Local unrest/violence 0 0.0 1 0.0 3 0.1 1 0.0 1 0.0 6 0.2
Food price surges 46 1.5 62 2.1 90 3.0 13 0.4 19 0.6 230 7.7
Unavailability of 27 0.9 13 0.4 42 1.4 54 1.8 14 0.5 150 5.0 agricultural inputs No demand for 59 0.02 6 0.0 6 0.0 16 .0.1 9 0.3 96 3.2 agricultural products Increase in price of 49 0.02 45 0.02 56 0.02 53 0.02 8 0.003 211 7.0 agricultural inputs Drop in price of 71 0.02 31 0.01 23 0.01 12 0.00 10 0.003 147 4.9 agricultural outputs
Illness/death of a 11 0.00 11 0.00 54 0.02 34 0.01 10 0.003 120 4.0 household member Displacement due to 8 0.00 2 0.00 3 0.00 1 0.00 3 0.001 17 0.6 infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack 8 0.00 3 0.00 5 0.00 4 0.00 12 0.004 32 1.1 of storage space
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.20.2 Trends in the Impact of Shock Events among Regional States
Opinions differ among regions on the trend of the shock events on production (Tables 96,97, 98, 99 and 100). Higher number of households in Tigray region noted that the major factors causing production shocks such as drought and the problem of late onset and early finish of rains, crop and livestock diseases are on a decreasing trend (Table 96).
In Amhara region, an average of 167 HHs reported that crop diseases are decreasing (Table 97). On the late onset and early finish of rains, while 80 HHs reported the shock is decreasing, about 32 HHs are of the opinion that it is increasing. Eighty-nine households indicated drought events are decreasing. While about similar number of HHs reported that food price surge is decreasing (29 HHs) and increasing (26 HHs), 47 HHs indicated no change in this particular factor. Trends in agricultural input price increase have been reported by 39 HHs as decreased and by 35 HHs as increased while 8 HHs noted no change.
In Oromia, an overwhelming majority of HHs reported a decrease in; drought/inadequate precipitation for crop production, crop and livestock diseases and late onset and early finish of rains (Table 98). Nevertheless, 80,
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 90
Final Report
29, 29 and 21 households were of the opinion that incidences of; drought, crop diseases, flood and food price surge show an increasing trend
Trends in; crop and livestock diseases, incidences of drought and flood and unavailability and price increase of agricultural inputs were reported decreasing in SNNP (Table 99). However, about 25 and 8 households felt that there was an increasing trend in food prices and crop diseases while another 14, 10 and 8 households indicated no changing trend in food prices, illness/death of household members and livestock diseases, respectively in the region. Across regions, the general trends of incidence of drought and crop and livestock diseases are decreasing (Table 100).
Table 96: Distribution of Respondents by Status of the Impact of the Shock on Production in Tigray, 2017/18
Type of Shock Event Trend in the Impact of the Shock Events
Decreased Unchanged Increased Over All Count % Count % Count % Count %
Excessive rains 5 2.00 2 1.00 0 0.00 7 2.00 Too little rain/drought 105 35.00 20 7.00 1 0.00 126 42.00
Frost/freezing rain/hail 7 2.00 6 2.00 0 0.00 13 4.00 Sudden change in 5 2.00 7 2.00 0 0.00 12 4.00 temperature Crop disease 14 5.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 15 5.00 Livestock disease 31 10.00 4 1.00 0 0.00 35 12.00 Flood 16 5.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 17 6.00 Early/late rain 123 41.00 8 3.00 3 0.00 134 45.00 Landslides/avalanches/eros 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 ion Theft/robbery and other 1 0.00 11 4.00 0 0.00 12 4.00 violence Destruction or damage of 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 house Loss of land/housing due 2 1.00 2 1.00 1 0.00 5 0.02 to conflict Local unrest/violence 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Food price surges 5 2.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 33 11.00 Unavailability of 9 3.00 3 1.00 0 0.00 12 4.00 agricultural inputs No demand for agricultural 11 4.00 5 2.00 0 0.00 16 5.00 products Increase in price of 11 4.00 7 2.00 0 0.00 18 6.00 agricultural inputs Drop in price of 10 3.00 3 1.00 1 0.00 14 5.00 agricultural outputs Illness/death of a 1 0.00 4 1.00 0.00! 5 2.00 household member Displacement due to 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 storage space Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 91
Final Report
Table 97: Distribution of Respondents by Status of the Impact of the Shock on Production in Amhara, 2017/18
Type of Shock Event Trend in the Impact of the Shock events Total
Decreased Unchanged Increased N %
N % N % N % Excessive rains 9 0.01 2 0.00 1 0.00 12 1.00 Too little rain/drought 89 0.11 2 0.00 1 0.00 92 11.00 Frost/freezing rain/hail 10 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.00 11 1.00 Sudden change in temperature 6 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 1.00 Crop disease 150 0.18 6 0.01 11 0.01 167 20.00 Livestock disease 25 0.03 2 0.00 0 0.00 27 3.00 Flood 14 0.02 4 0.00 8 0.01 26 3.00 Early/late rain 80 0.10 7 0.01 32 0.04 119 14.00 Landslides/avalanches/erosion 4 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0.00 Theft/robbery and other violence 10 0.01 8 0.01 0 0.00 18 2.00 Destruction or damage of house 0 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Loss of land/housing due to conflict 1 0.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.00 Local unrest/violence 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Food price surges 29 0.04 47 0.06 26 0.03 102 12.00 Unavailability of agricultural inputs 17 0.02 4 0.00 1 0.00 22 3.00 No demand for agricultural products 20 0.02 13 0.02 14 0.02 47 6.00 Increase in price of agricultural inputs 39 0.05 8 0.01 35 0.04 82 10.00 Drop in price of agricultural outputs 42 0.05 12 0.01 37 0.04 91 11.00 Illness/death of a household member 12 0.01 1 0.00 1 0.00 14 2.00 Displacement due to infrastructure 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of storage space 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Table 98: Distribution of respondents by status of the Impact of the Shock on Production in Oromia
Type Shock Event Trend in the impact of the Shock Events Overall
Decreased Unchanged Increased Count % Count % Count % Count % Excessive rains 125 0.08 9 0.01 8 0.01 142 9.00 Too little rain/drought 1,055 0.70 11 0.01 80 0.05 1,146 76.00 Frost/freezing rain/hail 39 0.03 3 0.00 1 0.00 43 3.00 Sudden change in temperature 129 0.09 1 0.00 3 0.00 133 9.00 Crop disease 806 0.54 11 0.01 29 0.02 846 56.00 Livestock disease 151 0.10 16 0.01 6 0.00 173 12.00 Flood 94 0.06 11 0.01 29 0.02 134 9.00 Early/late rain 314 0.21 3 0.00 0 0.00 317 21.00 Landslides/avalanches/erosion 31 0.02 2 0.00 0 0.00 33 2.00 Theft/robbery and other violence 5 0.00 1 0.00 3 0.00 9 1.00 Destruction or damage of house 10 0.01 2 0.00 0 0.00 12 1.00 Loss of land/housing due to conflict 7 0.00 1 0.00 2 0.00 10 1.00 Local unrest/violence 1 0.00 1 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.00 Food price surges 27 0.02 6 0.00 21 0.01 54 4.00 Unavailability of agricultural inputs 60 0.04 11 0.01 10 0.01 81 5.00 No demand for agricultural products 13 0.01 2 0.00 12 0.01 27 2.00 Increase in price of agricultural inputs 55 0.04 11 0.01 11 0.01 77 5.00 Drop in price of agricultural outputs 18 0.01 6 0.00 6 0.00 30 2.00 Illness/death of a household member 46 0.03 14 0.01 2 0.00 62 4.00 Displacement due to infrastructure 5 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 7 0.00 development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of storage 12 0.01 1 0.00 10 0.01 23 2.00 space Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 92
Final Report
Table 99: Distribution of Respondents by Status of the Impact of the Shock on Production in SNNPR, 2017/18
Type of Shock Event Trend in the impact of the shock events Decreased Unchanged Increased Overall
Count % Count % Count % Count %
Excessive rains 21 0.06 3 0.01 2 7.69 26 7,00 Too little rain/drought 40 0.11 0 0.00 4 9.09 44 12.00 Frost/freezing rain/hail 2 0.01 0 0.00 2 1.00 Sudden change in temperature 16 0.04 0 0.00 16 4.00 Crop disease 197 0.53 4 0.01 8 3.83 209 56.00 Livestock disease 94 0.25 8 0.02 4 3.77 106 28.00 Flood 38 0.10 1 0.00 3 7.14 42 11.00 Early/late rain 15 0.04 0 0.00 1 6.25 16 4.00 Landslides/avalanches/erosion 12 0.03 1 0.00 2 13.33 15 4.00
Theft/robbery and other violence 1 0.00 2 0.01 3 1.00 Destruction or damage of house 4 0.01 0 0.00 1 20.00 5 1.00 Loss of land/housing due to conflict 4 0.01 0 0.00 1 20.00 5 1.00 Local unrest/violence 3 0.01 1 0.00 4 1.00 Food price surges 2 0.01 14 0.04 25 60.98 41 11.00 Unavailability of agricultural inputs 32 0.09 2 0.01 2 5.56 36 10.00 No demand for agricultural 5 0.01 0 0.00 1 16.67 6 2.00 products Increase in price of agricultural 34 0.09 0 0.00 3 8.11 37 10.00 inputs Drop in price of agricultural outputs 12 0.03 2 0.01 14 4.00 Illness/death of a household 27 0.07 10 0.03 2 5.13 39 10.00 member Displacement due to infrastructure 6 0.02 1 0.00 1 12.50 8 2.00 development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of storage 6 0.02 1 0.00 7 2.00 space Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 Table 100: Distribution of Respondents by Trend in the Impact of the Shock on Production in All Regions, 2017/18
Trend in the Impact the Shock Event Type of Shock Event Decreased Unchanged Increased Percent of respondents Count % Count % Count % Count % Excessive rains 160 1.1 13 0.4 11 0.4 184 6.1 Too little rain/drought 1,204 2.4 33 1.1 86 2.9 1,323 44.1 Frost/freezing rain/hail 57 0.1 9 0.3 2 0.1 68 2.3 Sudden change in temperature 158 1.1 8 0.3 3 0.1 169 5.6 Crop disease 1,154 1.7 22 0.7 48 1.6 1,224 40.8 Livestock disease 274 0.8 30 1.0 10 0.3 314 10.5 Flood 147 0.5 17 0.6 40 1.3 204 6.8 Early/late rain 417 0.4 18 0.6 36 1.2 471 5.7 Landslides/avalanches/erosion 47 0.2 3 0.1 2 0.1 52 1.7 Theft/robbery and other violence 27 0.1 22 0.7 3 0.1 52 1.7 Destruction or damage of house 14 0.0 2 0.1 1 0.0 17 0.6 Loss of land/housing due to 14 0.1 4 0.1 4 0.1 22 0.7 conflict Local unrest/violence 4 0.0 2 0.1 0 0.0 6 0.2 Food price surges 86 0.2 95 3.2 72 2.4 253 8.4 Unavailability of agricultural 112 0.5 20 0.7 13 0.4 145 4.8 inputs
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 93
Final Report
Trend in the Impact the Shock Event Type of Shock Event Decreased Unchanged Increased Percent of respondents Count % Count % Count % Count % No demand for agricultural 43 0.0 20 0.7 27 0.9 90 3.0 products Increase in price of agricultural 135 0.5 26 0.9 49 1.6 210 7.0 inputs Drop in price of agricultural 75 0.1 23 0.8 44 1.5 142 4.7 outputs Illness/death of a household 89 0.7 29 1.0 5 0.2 123 4.1 member Displacement due to 12 0.0 2 0.1 2 0.1 16 0.5 infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of 18 0.1 2 0.1 11 0.4 31 1.0 storage space Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.20.3 Extent of Recovery from Shock Recovery situations of surveyed HHs in Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP from various previous shock events are shown in Tables 101, 102, 103, and 104. In Tigray regional state, 36 HHs reported they did not recover from drought shock, 27 HHs indicated they recovered somewhat but remained worse off than before, 21 HHs noted they recovered to the level they were in before and a further 21 HHs indicated full recovery and even better off than before while another 21 HHs revealed that they were not affected by the shock from drought (Table 101). In so far as shocks from delayed onset and early finish of rains are concerned; 11 HHs failed to recover from this shock, 48 HHs recovered somewhat but remained worse off than before, 39 HHs recovered to the original status, 28 HHs not only recovered but are in a better off position than before and only 8 HHs reported they were not affected by these factors.
Table 101: Percent of Respondents by Extent of Recovery in Tigray, 2017/18
Type 9f shock Extent of Recovery from Shock Event
Did not Recovered some, Recovered to Recovered Not affected Overall recover from but worse off than same level and better by [shock] the shock before as before off than occurred before N % N % N % N % N % N % Excessive rains 0 0.0 1 0.3 6 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 7 2.3 Too little rain/drought 36 .12.0 27 9.0 21 7.0 21 7.0 21 7.0 126 42.1 Frost/freezing rain/hail 0 0.0 9 3.0 3 1.0 0 0.0 1 0.3 13 4.3 Sudden change in 0 0.0 3 1.0 3 1.0 2 0.7 4 1.3 12 4.0 temperature Crop disease 5 1.7 5 1.7 2 0.7 1 0.3 2 0..7 15 5.0 Livestock disease 5 1.7 14 .4.7 14 4.7 0 0.0 2 0.7 35 11.7 Flood 1 0.3 6 2.0 7 2.3 3 1.0 0 0.0 17 5.7
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 94
Final Report
Type 9f shock Extent of Recovery from Shock Event
Did not Recovered some, Recovered to Recovered Not affected Overall recover from but worse off than same level and better by [shock] the shock before as before off than occurred before N % N % N % N % N % N % Early/late rain 11 3.7 48 16.1 39 13.. 28 9.4 8 2.7 134 44.8 0 Landslides/avalanches/erosi 0 0.0 1 0.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.3 on Theft/robbery and other 0 0.0 2 0.7 3 1.0 3 1.0 4 1.3 12 4.0 violence Destruction or damage of 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 house Loss of land/housing due to 2 0.7 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0..0 5 1.7 conflict Local unrest/violence 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Food price surges 2 0.7 5 1.7 16 5.4 5 1.7 5 1.7 33 11.0 Unavailability of agricultural 2 0.7 2 0.7 6 2.0 2 0.7 0 0.0 12 4.0 inputs No demand for agricultural 0 0.0 4 1.3 10 3.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 16 5.4 products Increase in price of 3 1.0 6 2.0 3 1.0 4 1.3 2 0.7 18 6.0 agricultural inputs Drop in price of agricultural 0 0.0 7 2.3 6 2.0 1 0.3 0 0.0 14 4.7 outputs Illness/death of a 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.3 4 1.3 5 1.7 household member Displacement due to 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.3 infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.3 storage space 67 10.62 141 43.5 142 47. 73 24. 54 18 477 7.59 3 3 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
In Amhara region, 49 HHs could not recover from crop disease shock, 71 HHs recovered to a certain extent but stayed worse off than before, 24 HHs recovered back to their initial status whereas only 6 HHs were better off before and 17 HHs have shown they were not affected by this shock factor (Table 102). With regard to shock created by drop in price of agricultural outputs; 24 HHs failed to get out of the shock, 37 HHs have shown some recovery though remained worse off than before, 17 HHs recovered back to their original condition, another 12 HHs were recovered and better off than before and only one household reported not being affected by the shock. Table 102: Percent of Respondents by Extent of Recovery in Amhara: 2017/18
Type of Shock Event Extent of Recovery from Shock Event Did not Recovered Recovered Recovered Not Overall recover some, but to same and better affected from the worse off level as off than by shock than before before [shock] before occurred N % N % N % N % N % Nt % Excessive rains 0 0.0 5 0.6 6 0.7 0 0.0 1 0.1 12 1.4 Too little rain/drought 1 0.1 59 7.1 19 2.3 13 1.6 0 0.0 92 11.1 Frost/freezing rain/hail 4 0.5 5 0.6 2 0.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 11 1.3 Sudden change in 0 0.0 1 0.1 4 0.5 0 0.0 1 0.1 6 0.7 temperature Crop disease 49 5.9 71 8.6 24 2.9 6 0.7 17 2.1 167 20.2 Livestock disease 2 0.2 17 2.1 4 0.5 3 0.4 1 0.1 27 3.3 Flood 3 0.4 15 1.8 5 0.6 3 0.4 0 0.0 26 3.1
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 95
Final Report
Type of Shock Event Extent of Recovery from Shock Event Did not Recovered Recovered Recovered Not Overall recover some, but to same and better affected from the worse off level as off than by shock than before before [shock] before occurred N % N % N % N % N % Nt % Early/late rain 2 0.2 84 10.1 27 3.3 6 0.7 0 0.0 119 14.4 Landslides/avalanches/erosion 0 0.0 2 0.2 2 0.2 0 0.0 0 0..0 4 0.5 Theft/robbery and other 0 00.0 6 0.7 3 0.4 2 0.2 7 0.8 18 2.2 violence Destruction or damage of 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 house Loss of land/housing due to 0 0.0 2 0.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.2 conflict Local unrest/violence 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Food price surges 2 0.2 48 5.8 41 5.0 7 0.8 4 0.5 102 12.3 Unavailability of agricultural 0 0.0 11 1.3 10 1.2 1 0.1 0 0.0 22 2.7 inputs No demand for agricultural 3 0.4 28 3.4 12 1.4 3 0.4 1 0.1 47 5.7 products Increase in price of 12 1.4 51 6.2 13 1.6 6 0.7 0 0.0 82 9.9 agricultural inputs Drop in price of agricultural 24 2.9 37 4.5 17 2.1 12 1.4 1 0.1 91 11.0 outputs Illness/death of a household 2 0.2 3 0.4 2 0.2 2 0.2 5 0.6 14 1.7 member Displacement due to 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1 infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1 1 0.1 storage space Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Drought, crop diseases and late and early finish of rains have been noted as major shock events in Oromia region. 617 HHs could not get out of drought shock, 421 HHs got recovered but still remained worse off than before, 71 HHs recovered to their initial status, 30 HHs were fully recovered and better off than before and only 7 HHs reported were not affected by the shock (Table 103). In the area of crop diseases; while 467 HHs failed to recover from the shock, 314 HHs have shown recovery though still remain worse off than before. 52 and 9 HHs recovered to the original status and better off than before, respectively in this shock category. Only 4 HHs reported had no problem with crop diseases. Situation in the problem of late and early finish of rains in Oromia reveals that 277 HHs failed to recover from the shock, 30 HHs shown some recovery but still not better off than before and only 7 HHs could recover to their original status and 3 HHs alone got better off than before.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 96
Final Report
Table 103: Percent of respondents by extent of recovery in Oromia, 2017/18
Type of Shock Event Extent of Recovery from Shock Event
Did not recover Recovered Recovered to Recovered Not affected Overall from the shock some, but same level as and better by shock worse off before off than than before before Count % Cou % Count % Count % Count % Count % nt Excessive rains 59 3.9 31 2.0 36 2.4 14 0.9 2 0.0 142 9.5
Too little rain/drought 617 41.2 421 28.1 71 4.7 30 2.0 7 0.0 1,146 76.5
Frost/freezing rain/hail 20 1.3 13 0.9 7 0.5 3 0.2 0 0.0 43 2.9 Sudden change in temperature 73 4.9 38 2.5 17 1.1 4 0.3 1 0.0 133 8.9
Crop disease 467 31.2 314 20.9 52 3.5 9 0.6 4 0..0 846 .56.4
Livestock disease 68 4.5 49 3.3 33 2.2 22 1.5 1 0.0 173 11.5
Flood 46 3.1 34 2.3 32 2.1 21 1.4 1 0.0 134 8.9
Early/late rain 277 18.5 30 2.0 7 0.5 3 0.2 0 0.0 317 21.1
Landslides/avalanches/erosion 17 1.1 13 0.9 3 0.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 33 2.2
Theft/robbery and other violence 2 0.1 2 0.1 3 0..2 2 0.1 0 0.0 9 0.6
Destruction or damage of house 6 0.4 2 0.1 3 0.2 1 0.1 0 0.0 12 0.8
Loss of land/housing due to conflict 4 0.3 2 0.1 1 0.1 2 0.1 1 0.0 10 0.7
Local unrest/violence 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.1
Food price surges 14 0.9 23 1.5 14 0.9 2 0.1 1 0.0 54 3.6
Unavailability of agricultural inputs 20 1.3 42 2.8 14 0.9 4 0.3 1 0.0 81 5.4
No demand for agricultural 9 0.6 13 0.9 4 0.3 1 0.1 0 0.0 27 1.8 products Increase in price of agricultural 23 1.5 38 2.5 13 0.9 2 0.1 1 0.0 77 5.1 inputs Drop in price of agricultural outputs 6 0.4 15 1.0 4 0.3 5 0.3 0 0.0 30 2.0
Illness/death of a household 12 0.8 15 1.0 14 0.9 19 1.3 2 0.0 62 4.1 member Displacement due to infrastructure 1 0.1 3 0.2 3 0.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 7 0.5 development (e.g. road,
Crop losses due to lack of storage 6 0.4 10 0.7 5 0.3 2 0.1 0 0.0 23 1.5 space Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Crop and livestock diseases have been indicated as major shock factors in SNNP. In crop diseases, 36 HHs could not recover from the problem, 116 HHs recovered but remained worse off than before, 38 HHs recovered to their original level while only 7 HHs recovered and exceeded their previous status. About 12 HHs indicated crop diseases as not their problem (Table 104). In the case of livestock diseases, 6 HHs did not recover from the shock of this havoc, 70 HHs remain still worse off irrespective of some progress, 21 HHs recovered to initial status while only 2 HHs moved beyond their original status. About 7 HHs reported livestock diseases had not affected them.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 97
Final Report
Table 104: Percent of Respondents by Extent of Recovery in SNNPR
Type of Shock Event Extent of Recovery from Shock event
Did not recover Recovered Recovered to Recovered and Not affected by Overall from the shock some, but worse same level as better off than [shock] off than before before before occurred Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Count %
Excessive rains 11 2.9 3 0.8 7 0.019 3 0.8 2 0.0 26 7.0
Too little rain/drought 8 2.1 24 6.4 9 0.024 3 0.1 0 0.0 44 11.8
Frost/freezing rain/hail 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0.000 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.5
Sudden change in 0 0.0 11 2.9 4 0.011 1 0.0 0 0.0 16 4.3 temperature Crop disease 36 9.6 116 31.0 38 0.102 7 0.2 12 0.0 209 55.9
Livestock disease 6 1.6 70 18.7 21 0.056 2 0.1 7 0.0 106 28.3
Flood 9 2.4 28 7.5 3 0.008 1 0.0 1 0.0 42 11.2
Early/late rain 1 0.3 11 2.9 4 0.011 0 .0.0 0 0.0 16 4.3
Landslides/avalanches/erosion 4 1.1 . 2.4 1 0.003 1 0.0 0 0.0 15 4.0 Theft/robbery and other 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0.000 0 .0.0 1 0.0 3 0.8 violence Destruction or damage of 3 0.8 2 0.5 0 0.000 0 0.0 0 0.0 5 1.3 house Loss of land/housing due to 2 0.5 1 0.3 1 0.003 1 0.0 0 0.0 5 1.3 conflict Local unrest/violence 0 0..0 2 0.5 0 0.000 1 0.0 1 0.0 4 1.1
Food price surges 8 2..1 4 1.1 15 0.040 1 0.0 13 0.0 41 11.0
Unavailability of agricultural 10 2..7 20 5.3 5 0.013 1 0.0 0 0.0 36 9.6 inputs No demand for agricultural 2 0..5 2 0.5 2 0.005 0 0.0 0 0.0 6 1.6 products Increase in price of 14 3.7 21 5.6 2 0.005 0 0.0.0 0 0.0 37 9.9 agricultural inputs Drop in price of agricultural 0 0.0 11 2.9 0 0.000 3 0.0.1 0 0.0 14 3.7 outputs Illness/death of a household 5 1.3 13 3.5 10 0.027 6 0.0.2 5 0.0 39 10.4 member Displacement due to 4 1.1 2 0.5 1 0.003 1 0.0.0 0 0.0 8 2.1 infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of 3 0.8 0.5 2 0.005 0 0.0.0 0 0.0 7 1.9 storage space
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
Drought, crop diseases, late onset and early finish of rains are the most important shock factors when the four surveyed regions are considered together. Across regions; 662 HHs failed to get out of the drought shock, 516 HHs achieved certain recovery but still remained in a situation worse than before the shock, 120 HHs have managed to come back to their original standing and 67 HHs were not only able to recovery but have also become better off than their original position (Table 105). About 28 HHs were not affected by the problem of drought. Regarding crop diseases; 557 HHs failed to come out of the shock, 428 HHs recovered but still remained worse off than before, 116 HHs were able to come back to their original status, 23 HHs were recovered and better off than before and 35 have had no shock from this event. In the case of late onset and early finish of rains; 29 HHs found it difficult to recover, 166 HHs though recovered could not be better off than before, 77 HHs were able to maintain their original position while 37HHs were able
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 98
Final Report
to recover and be better off than before. Only 8 HHs indicated that these events were not their concern.
Table 105: Percent of Respondents by Extent of Recovery in all Regions
Type of Shock Event Extent of Recovery from Shock event
Did not recover Recovered Recovered to Recovered and Not affected by Overall from the shock some, but worse same level as better off than [shock] off than before before before occurred Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Count %
Excessive rains 70 2.3 44 1.5 55 1.8 17 0.6 5 0.2 191 6.4
Too little rain/drought 662 22.1 516 17.2 120 4.0 67 2.2 28 0.9 1,393 46.4
Frost/freezing rain/hail 25 0.8 27 0.9 12 0.4 3 0.1 1 0.0 68 2.3
Sudden change in temperature 73 2.4 46 1.5 28 0.9 7 0.2 6 0.2 160 5.3
Crop disease 557 18.6 428 14.3 116 3.9 23 0.8 35 1.2 1,159 38.6
Livestock disease 81 2.7 101 3.4 72 2.4 27 0.9 11 0.4 292 9.7
Flood 59 2.0 58 1.9 47 1..6 28 0.9 2 0.1 194 6.5
Early/late rain 291 9.7 166 5.5 77 2.6 37 1.2 8 0.3 579 19.3
Landslides/avalanches/erosion 21 0.7 17 0.6 6 0.2 1 0.0 0 0.0 45 1.5
Theft/robbery and other violence 3 0.1 10 0.3 9 0.3 7 0.2 12 0.4 41 1.4
Destruction or damage of house 9 0.3 2 0.1 3 0.1 1 0.0 0 0.0 15 0.5
Loss of land/housing due to 8 0.3 6 0.2 3 0.1 4 0.1 1 0.0 22 0.7 conflict Local unrest/violence 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0..1 1 0.0 1 0.0 4 0.1
Food price surges 26 0.9 91 3.0 86 2.9 15 0.5 23 0.8 241 8.0
Unavailability of agricultural 32 1.1 60 2.0 35 1.2 8 0.3 1 0.0 136 4.5 inputs No demand for agricultural --14 0.5 47 1.6 28 0..9 5 0.2 2 0.1 96 3.2 products Increase in price of agricultural 52 1.7 97 3.2 31 1.0 12 0.4 3 0.1 195 6.5 inputs Drop in price of agricultural 30 1.0 59 2.0 27 0.9 21 0.7 1 0.0 138 4.6 outputs Illness/death of a household 19 0.6 28 0.9 26 0.9 28 0.9 16 0.5 117 3.9 member Displacement due to 5 0.2 4 0.1 6 0.2 1 0.0 0 0.0 16 0.5 infrastructure development (e.g. road, Crop losses due to lack of 9 0.0 12 0.4 8 0.3 0 0.0 1 0.0 30 0.1 storage space . Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.21 Food Insecurity Coping Strategies
4.21.1 Coping Strategies Used against Food Insecurity Strategies employed by regions for coping up with the challenges of food insecurity are detailed in Table 106. Across regions, higher proportion of HHs relied more on the use of less preferred and cheaper foods as a primary coping mechanism over the last seven days prior to the collection of data in this survey. The household’s secondary strategy choices were; borrowing of food from other sources and relying on assistant from friends or relatives. Purchasing food on credit, limit portion (size) at meal time, gather wild food/hunt/or harvest immature crops, reduce number of daily meals, consume seed stock meant for next crop season, restrict adult’s consumption in preference to infants, send HH members to eat elsewhere,
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 99
Final Report
send HH members to beg, skipping the entire day w/out eating and feed working members of the HH at the expense of non-working are other coping strategies followed in a descending order. There is no clear difference in pattern followed in utilizing these strategies among regions.
Table 106: Percent of Households Used Strategies over the Past Seven Days by Region, 2017/18
Type of Strategy Region Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall
Count % Count % Count % Count % Count %
Rely on less preferred and less 33 11.04 321 38.77 172 11.47 276 73.80 802 26.7 expensive foods Borrow food, or rely on help 13 4.35 55 6.64 81 5.40 30 8.02 179 6.0 from a friend or relative Purchase food on credit 9 3.01 30 3.62 38 2.54 8 2.14 85 2.8
Gather wild food, hunt, or 2 0.67 17 2.05 32 2.13 5 1.34 56 1.9 harvest immature crops? Consume seed stock held for 4 1.34 11 1.33 28 1.87 4 1.07 47 1.6 next season Send household members to eat 4 1.34 13 1.57 20 1.33 7 1.87 44 1.5 elsewhere Send household members to beg 2 0.67 13 1.57 24 1.60 5 1.34 44 1.5
Limit portion (size) at mealtimes 4 1.34 17 2.05 31 2.07 25 6.68 77 2..6
Restrict consumption by adults 2 0.67 8 0.97 26 1.73 11 2.94 47 1.6 in order for small children
Feed working members of HH at 2 0.67 6 0.72 23 1.53 8 2.14 39 1.3 the expense of non-working members Reduce number of meals eaten in 4 1.34 10 1.21 21 1.40 17 4.55 52 1.7 a day? Skip entire days without eating 3 1.00 6 0.72 22 1.47 9 2.41 40 1.3
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.21.2 Average Number of Days Strategy Used The average numbers of days each of these strategies are used by regions are shown in Table 107. The primary coping strategy is used for an average of 1.16 days across regions. Regional average ranged from the highest 3.8 days in SNNP to 0.25 day in Tigray region. The overall average number of day utilized for the secondary strategy is less than a day (0.12) with a range of 0.21 (Highest) days in SNNP to 0.06 (Lowest) in Tigray regions. The other strategies are used with very minor frequencies.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 100
Final Report
Table 107: Average Number of Days of the Strategy Used by ‘Type and Region, 2017/18
Type of Strategy Region
Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Overall
Rely on less preferred and less expensive foods? 0.25 1.85 0.29 3.80 1.16
Borrow food, or rely on help from a friend or relative? 0.06 0.14 0.10 0.21 0.12
Purchase food on credit? 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.05
Gather wild food, hunt, or harvest immature crops? 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03
Consume seed stock held for next season? 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.03
Send household members to eat elsewhere? 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.03
Send household members to beg? 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.03
Limit portion (size) at mealtimes? 0.03 0.06 0.04 0.31 0.08
Restrict consumption by adults in order for small children 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.11 0.04 Feed working members of HH at the expense of non-working members 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.11 0.03
Reduce number of meals eaten in a day? 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.22 0.05
Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.22 Eco System Health and Improved Watershed Management Practices
In perspective of PASDIP II three major indicators were employed for measuring improved ecosystem health. These included; water resource potential for water supply, soil erosion/degradation or sediment accumulation and its impacts on downstream irrigation schemes and diversity in vegetation cover like grasses, trees, etc.
According to sampled respondent HHs in the watersheds, current condition of the selected watershed intervention execution stand at 15 % good, 35 % moderate and 4 % poor (Table 108).
Table 108: Current Status of Executed Interventions in Watershed Management
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Good 11 14.9 27.5 27.5
Moderate 26 35.1 65.0 92.5 Poor 3 4.1 7.5 100.0 Total 40 54.1 100.0 Missing System 34 45.9 Total 74 100.0 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018
4.22.1 Tigray Region
4.22.1.1 Areas of Land under Improved Watershed Management Practices Conventional soil and water conservation (SWC) practices have been executed on about a total of 1059 ha of land in the schem’s watershed in varying extent with mass mobilization. The common SWC practices were farm terraces (soil bund,
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 101
Final Report
fanyajuu, cut off drain, and waterways), and the like. As the study area is located in middle or semi-arid rainfall area, the common features of all introduced SWC measures were to retain and/or drain excess run-off so that overland flow will be reduced, consequently, control soil erosion that might wash away through the surface flows. They also practiced SWC measures that were used to divert run-off to protect down slope lands. Regarding gullies in adjacent scheme micro watershed, estimated length and width are not recorded during the survey.
As observed during the field visit, the integration of physical and biological SWC measures were good physical conservation practices. Nevertheless, the biological conservation was limited in the surveyed watershed. Furthermore, the sustainability of the introduced SWC measures was poor due to various reasons. As per the information obtained from WoA, some of the implemented physical SWC measures could not sustain and provide the envisaged objectives. The main reasons to this failure were:
• Improper farming operation (Unwillingness of farmers to extension advices) • Free grazing system, • High runoff and flooding, • Lack of integration of biological SWC measures; and • Lack of maintenance and upgrading works. 4.22.1.2 Improvement of Eco-System Health a) Estimated Potential Annual Sediment Loss in Terms SDR
The major contributing factors for soil loss in all watersheds was diminishing vegetation cover (deforestation and overgrazing), soil types, population pressure and land use change, poor agricultural productivity and the topographic conditions of the watersheds.
From the sediment load analysis made for each watershed of the respective irrigation schemes in this region, the range of SDR varied from 0.44-0.50 in inverse relationship with watershed areas (Table 109). The least SDR was for the largest size of watershed. The identified SDR was significant in terms of creating negative impacts from silt load of the watershed run off discharges and subsequent sedimentation of the proposed irrigation schemes. Therefore, the
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 102
Final Report
most severely degraded area or high soil loss of the scheme watershed was Embalage District of Addi Kerere site which had 0.5 SDR value. The watersheds with the lowest soil loss was May Awso scheme watershed of Adwa District with 0.44 SDR value as compared within the regional PASDIP II scheme watershed sites as indicated in table 110 and Figure 2.
Table 109: Selected Scheme Watershed Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR) Analysis
TIGRAY Name of Name of Zone District Kebele Area Existing SDR scheme watershed Practice Mai Tsahlo Mai Tsahlo Central Mereb Leke Haftom 312 210 0.49 Daero Daero Central Ahferom Hya Medeb 393 256 0.47
Adi KeraKro Adi KeraKro South Emba Alaje TeKea 256 102 0.50
Mai Awso Mai Awso Central Adwa Addis Alem & 696 356 0.44 Mai Tium Baekel Baekel Central Tahtay Wuhdet 338 135 0.48 Maichew Ruba chimiti Central Werileke Ruba chimiti Na Na Na
Misrar Teli South Enderta Misrar Teli Na Na Na Eastern Gereb Fyaye South H/wajrat Gereb Fyaye Na Na Na Eastern Total 1995 1059 3 5 5 Source: PASSIDP II Baseline Survey, May-June, 2018 Graphically it is represented as follows.
A 696 r e a
393 i 338 n 312 256
H a 0.49 0.47 0.50 0.44 0.48 Mai Tsahlo Daero Adi KeraKro Mai Awso Baekel Watershed
Ha SDR
Figure 2: R/S SDR with MW (Ha)
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 103
Final Report
b) Surface Water and Ground Water Potential
In order to live, one among the basic necessary things is water. Not only to human beings but also a necessary factor to all living organisms. The supply of safe, clean and adequate water promotes public health. The provision of adequate clean water plays a great role in the prevention of public health and a healthy society from water borne diseases. In Tigray watershed, with the exception of MasiTsahlo, Misrar Teli, and Gerebfyaye schemes, the rest of the schemes have potential of ground water. Of the 70 HDWs that were constructed only 55 HDWs were currently functional (Table 120). There is also a potential for surface water at a depth of 10- 28m and springs with very smallest amount or less amount of discharge.
On the other hand, water is directly proportional with vegetation cover. For those areas having good vegetation cover, the water potential is also good.
Table 110: Surface and Groundwater Potential of Scheme Watersheds
TIGRAY
Name of scheme Name of Zone District Kebele Springs HDW HDWs Not watershed functional
Mai Tsahlo Mai Tsahlo Central Mereb Leke Haftom 13 3
Daero Daero Central Ahferom Hya Medeb
Adi KeraKro Adi KeraKro South Emba Alaje TeKea Unprotected 8
Mai Awso Mai Awso Central Adwa Addis Alem & 33 9 Mai Tium
Baekel Baekel Central Tahtay Wuhdet 16 3 Maichew
Ruba chimiti Central Werileke Ruba chimiti Misrar Teli South Enderta Misrar Teli Eastern Gereb Fyaye South H/wajrat Gereb Fyaye Eastern
Total 70 15 Source PASDIPII socio economic feasibility study for the Diversion irrigation project
C) Diversity of Vegetation Cover
Various indigenous tree species exist in the majority of the surveyed watersheds. The tree species identified during the field assessment were Acacia tortolies,
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 104
Final Report
Accacia Albida, Acacia melifera, Conyza stricta, Olea africana, Ficus vasta and Lantana camara, elephant grass.
4.22.2 Amhara Region Following the field level assessment made through HH survey and direct bio- physical data collection, further analysis has been carried out for observation and understanding of the baseline status regarding improvement of eco-system health and areas covered by improved watershed management practices. The survey areas covered for the study included five zones, namely North Gonder, North Wollo, South Wollo, North Shea and Oromia; twenty two schemes and twenty two Kebele/watersheds.
As per the analysis on the two indicators (improvement of eco-system health and areas covered under improved watershed management) the following outputs were described.
4.22.2.1 Improvement of Eco-System Health The main parameters considered for determination of eco-system improvement in the watersheds at upstream of the corresponding schemes were; water, soils and vegetation status and their effects on overall eco-system health of the targeted watersheds.
a) Water Resources Potential for Water Supply There are various sources of water supply in each watershed. The main sources assessed for their potential included springs and ground water. Some of the watersheds were with ample spring water potentials while others were rich in ground water potentials. However, few watersheds had poor water supply potentials due to their locations in unfavorable environment for water resources. Thus, such watersheds had poor water supply resource potential and the communities in those watersheds relied on water supply sources such as rivers, unprotected wells and springs.
As per the assessment made in the region there were 16 unprotected springs, 22 protected springs and 4 functional ground water points. This indicates that there seems to be rich potential in potable water resources for the community in the respective watersheds.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 105
Final Report
b) Soil Erosion/Degradation and its Impacts on Downstream Irrigation Schemes The analysis made in this regard indicated the areas were covered with gullies, but not recorded and their impacts of the sediment deposit ratio of the respective watershed on the corresponding downstream irrigation infrastructures. The SDR of the assessed watershed were in the ranges of 0.39-0.49 with watershed areas ranging from 320 to 1895 ha (111 and Fig.3). The least sized watershed generated the highest SDR. Thus larger watersheds have less effect in terms of SDR. Thus effect on the upstream in terms of generating run-off discharges had modest impacts on each of the schemes and requires proper mitigation measures to curb the problem.
Table 111: Amhara Region Improved Watershed Management Activities before Project Scenario Wereda Name of watershed Area SDR
Jeletemuga Erara 1448 0.40
Moja Wedera kesekash/key afer 1985 0.39
Asagerete Wuduager 366 0.48 Tehuledera Bureka 521.2 0.46
Aregoba Sedeta 654 0.44 Kobo Ababiya 605 0.45 Kobo Gedeba 340 0.48 Kobo Wefela 644 0.45 Kobo Weleh 632 0.45 Kinefaz Menetereho 485 0.46
W/Belesa Weyebela 789 0.43 W/Belesa Cherecharite 534 0.46 8 9,003 W/Belesa Aba gebru 489.99 0.46
Kinefaz Ambo wuha Eastbelesa Goka 617.66 0.45 Aretuma Butu 682.9 0.44 Werebabo Argoba Chalie 320.16 0.49 Kalu Cheleka 839.61 0.43 Gidan Kombelu 488.75 0.46 Wereilu Jeram 516.65 0.46 Haberu Gorareba 465.3 0.46 Dewachefa Kerambe 564.95 0.45 10 4,986 Source PASDIPII socio economic feasibility study for the Diversion irrigation project
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 106
Final Report
Figure 3: SDR with watershed Area (ha).
Area (HA) SDR
1985
1448
789 839.61 654 605 644 632 617.66682.9 521.2 485 534 489.99 340 320.16 0.4 0.39 0.480 0.46 0.44 0.45 0.48 0.45 0.45 0.46 0.43 0.46 0.46 0.45 0.44 0.49 0.43
c) Diversity in Vegetation Cover
From the existing land use of the respective watersheds, the vegetation coverage varied in the ranges of less than 1% to 50% and rarely exceeded 50% for very few watersheds. However, most watersheds were covered within 1-10% coverage of natural forests and bushes. Some of the tree and grass species around the schemes are Accacia decrence, gravelia robuta, Lantana camara, Acacia melifera, Olea Africana, Accacia Albida, juniperous procera, vetch, rodus grass, elephant grass
It is thus possible to conclude that forest depletion has been one of the main causes of environmental degradation observed in the upstream of the irrigation schemes.
d) Areas of Land Under Improve Watershed Management Practices As per the assessment made at field level regarding the extent/coverage of the watersheds with improved watershed management, the result shows that there were 175.6 Hectares under physical conservation, 40 hectares under biological conservation and 40 hectares of area closure.
Major technologies under each main watershed management practices included soil conservation, water harvesting, reforestation/community forest activities and areas protected as area closure implemented/constructed through individual
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 107
Final Report
households and community at large. Details of the specific activities implemented by HH survey result has been shown in table 112.
Table 112: Land under Improved Watershed Management Practices
No. Description Unit Number Number of beneficiaries
Men Female
1 SWC practices (Fanya-juu, Terrace, Trench, Micro- Ha. 1413 2165 257 basin, waterway, cutoff-drain)
2 Farm pond construction M3 10 5 Area closure Ha. 181 32 0 6 Bund (stone faced soil bund, trench) Ha. 290 420 224 7 Check dam construction (Brushwood, Gabion, M2 2 loose stone) 8 Develop spring and protect No. 9 9 Gully rehabilitation, retention-wall construction Ha. 30 28 2 and re-vegetation (multi-purpose tree seedlings, grasses and others) 10 Construction of Small Scale Irrigation (diversion Ha. 150.75 120 30 weir and canals or small gabion check dam pond) 11 Diversions (flood water harvesting for Ha. 6 supplementary irrigation)
13 Production of grass cuttings & split planting (e.g. 41.50 72 25 vetiver and elephant) (in ha)
14 Plant forage trees and grass on bunds (bund Ha. 38 87 21 stabilization) 15 Establish private, community or group nurseries No. 2.00
16 Planting useful and multipurpose trees Ha. 11.05 19 3
4.22.3 Oromia Region
4.22.3.1 Improvement of Eco-System Health Improvement in eco-system health for the watersheds based on field assessment and HH survey indicated that most watersheds at upstream of various irrigation schemes were with various eco-system health status.
The assessment survey covered 31 scheme in watersheds/Kebeles of the region. The parameters considered in the analysis of the improvement in eco-system health of the targeted watersheds included water resources potential, soils and vegetation status of the respective watersheds. The status and condition of each parameter has been explained as follows:
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 108
Final Report
a) Water Supply Potentials The region has very good water resource potential from unprotected springs in the ranges of 66-549 lit/sec specifically in the highland watersheds of East Hararghe zone. Moreover, there is ample potential of ground water in the region serving larger population through protected deep wells and developed shallow wells. Thus, in most of the watershed assessed and surveyed, more than 60% of the population depended on protected and developed water sources for their domestic water supply as shown in table 113. This implies that the majority of the population in the selected watersheds is with fair access to safe and clean water from developed shallow and deep wells and protected and unprotected springs. However, there is still further effort and attention required to meet the required standard for healthy life of the people.
Table 113: Water resource potential of the scheme watershed in Oromia
S. No Scheme Schemes Zone District Spring Ground water type Potential potential depth in in lit/sec m 1 Lanagano Spring E. Harerghe Jarso 66 20
2 ledi cheketa Diversion Bale Berbere 12 3 Welmel Tika '' Bale H/Bulluk
4 Bereda Lencha Spring East Gola oda 198 5 Harerghe 5 Haregetti Tirtiro Diversion East Gola oda 50 6 Harerghe 6 Kura Meta '' E. Harerghe Meta 246
7 Karra Horda '' E. Harerghe Gurawa 549 4
8 Oda Genta Spring E. Harerghe Gurawa 6.2 9 Welmel Diversion Bale D/Mena
10 Denda '' Bale D/Mena 0.5
11 Kojo'a cheketa New Div. Guji Saba Boru 12 Figa Bike New Guji Saba Boru Diversion 13 Lege Chiro '' W/Harerghe Miseo 92 150 14 Lege Arba '' W/Harerghe Chiro 446 50—70
15 Gonde Diversion Bale Dinsho
16 Awuchache spring Cap Bale G/Damole 17 Gebane Gravity Guji Saba Boru
18 Jimmitti Gravity Guji O/Shakiso
19 Kenifa Spate East Shoa Fentalle 20 Tebo '' East Shoa Boste
21 Awuchache Spring Bale G/Damole
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 109
Final Report
S. No Scheme Schemes Zone District Spring Ground water type Potential potential depth in in lit/sec m 22 Kenifa Spate E/Shoa Fentalle 23 Tebo Spate E/Shoa Boste
24 Baka Diversion W/Harerghe Chiro
25 Lege Kolu Diversion W/Harerghe Oda bultum 96
26 Mede Kechele Diversion W/Harerghe Gemechis 50 15—30
27 Adeyi Diversion Bale Haranna 4
28 Sarmale Diversion West Guji Gelena 29 S.J.Bilu Diversion Arsi Golocha 30 Burka Diversion E/Harerghe Kurfa Chele 35.65 15 31 Hargeye Diversion E/Harerghe Meyu 400 40
Bilojeso Diversion Borena Teltele
Wondo Borena Teltele Rophi sinxa E/Shoa Sirrarao Source District Agricultural and water sector offices
b) Soil Erosion and its Impacts on Downstream Irrigation Schemes From the sediment load analysis made for each watershed of the respective irrigation schemes, the range of SDR varied from 0.41-0.50 in inverse relationship with watershed areas (table 114 and Fig.4). The least SDR was for the largest size of watershed. The identified SDR is significant in terms of creating negative impacts from silt load of the watershed run off discharges and subsequent sedimentation of the proposed irrigation schemes.
Table 114: Oromia Region Improved Watershed Management Activities before Project
Name of scheme Name of Zone Wereda Kebele Area SDR watershed Lagano Lagano MWS East hararge Jarso Burka 350 0.48 Misoma Welmel Tike Sodu watershed Bale H/bulluk Sodu 1000 0.42 Welmal and Anole Berda Lecha Bereda East hararge Gola Oda Bareda 1228 0.41 watershed Lencha Hargeti & Tiritiro Mojo theritero East hararge Gola Oda Hargeti & 1000 0.42 watershed Tirtiro Kera horda Lugo watershed East hararge Gurawa Karra Horda 800 0.43
Welmel Arada Tilo Bale D/Mena Melka 1132 0.42 watershed Amana kojoa Cheketa Cheketa kojoa Guji Aga wayuu Kojo'a 600 0.45 MWS Figa Bike Figa Bike MWS Guji Saba Boru Figa bike 600 0.45
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 110
Final Report
Name of scheme Name of Zone Wereda Kebele Area SDR watershed Sermale korobo sermale W/Guji Galana Erganasa 240 0.50 watershed Kercha dawa Kecha dawa W/Guji Qoricha Bedesa 1132 0.42 MWS Fugnan Total 4 9 10 8,082 Ledi Cheket L/checketa Bale Berbere L/checketa 600 0.45 Husse Mandhera D/ lamane west Arsi Siraro D/ lamane 0.51 225 Oda Racha Oda racha west hararge O/Bultum Oda racha 540 0.46 Kelatie kelatie North shoa Jida kelatie 225 0.51 Koruha Koruha North shoa Qimbibit koruha 225 0.51 Wando wondo Borena Teltale wondo 0.40 1,680 Afran Kello Arfan kelo East hararge K/chalk Arfan kelo 225 0.51 Misil Misil East hararge M/Balo Misil 520 0.46 Kura Meta Melka west hararge Gemeschis Melka 340 0.48
Laga Chiro Laga chiro west hararge Mieso Laga chiro 0.42 1,020 Laga Arba Laga arba west hararge G/Bordode Laga arba 1,000 0.42 Ifabas Ifa bas East hararge Mayu muluk Ifa bas 0.42 1,000 Total 6 11 12 7,600 15682 Note physical conservation practices include soil bund ,stonefacedsoil bund ,fanayaju, cutoffdrain and waterway, ect Biological conservation ,include woodlot ,forage plantaion along bund and homstead plantation, fruit, gesho, grass plantation
The following the graphic reprsenetation of SDR, Oromia Region, 2017/18
Ha SDR Ha SDR
1,680 1228 1132 1132 1000 1000 800 600 600 1,0201,000 350 240 600 0.480.420.410.420.430.420.450.450.500.42 540 520 340 225 225225 225
0.450.510.460.510.510.400.510.460.480.420.420.42
Misil
Ifa bas Ifa
Melka
Koruha
wondo
kelatie
Laga chiro Laga
Laga arba Laga
Arfan kelo Arfan
D/ lamane D/ Oda racha Oda p L/checketa
Figure 4: SDR with MW Area (ha).
The main features/symptoms of soil erosion in the respective watersheds were manifested by rill and gully erosion covering specific land units having limited
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 111
Final Report
area coverage. As per the survey made at field level the total gulley area was 4.77 ha out of a total area of 15,682 ha as shown in Table 115.
Table 115: Gullies of the scheme watersheds in Oromia
S. No Scheme Schemes Zone District Gully in the Micro watershed type Length(m) Width (m) Depth(m)
1 Lanagano Spring E. Harerghe Jarso
2 ledi cheketa Diversion Bale Berbere 1100 6 1.5
3 Welmel Tika '' Bale H/Bulluk 100 5 3.5
4 Bereda Lencha Spring E. Harerghe Gola oda
5 Haregetti Diversion East Gola oda 68 10 4 Tirtiro Harerghe 6 Kura Meta '' E.Harerghe Meta 47 3.8 1.6
7 Karra Horda '' E. Harerghe Gurawa
8 Oda Genta Spring E.Harerghe Gurawa
9 Welmel Diversion Bale D/Mena 1600 5 3.5
10 Denda '' Bale D/Mena
11 Kojo'a cheketa New Diversion Guji Saba Boru
12 Figa Bike New Guji Saba Boru 4000 8 2.5 Diversion 13 Lege Chiro '' W/Harerghe Miseo
14 Lege Arba '' W/Harerghe Chiro 8 5.5 2.5
15 Gonde Diversion Bale Dinsho
16 Awuchache spring Cap Bale G/Damole
17 Gebane Gravity Guji Saba Boru 50 2 2.5
18 Jimmitti Gravity Guji O/Shakiso 150 1.5 1
19 Kenifa Spate East Shoa Fentalle
20 Tebo '' East Shoa Boste
21 Awuchache Spring Bale G/Damole
22 Kenifa Spate E/Shoa Fentalle
23 Tebo Spate E/Shoa Boste
24 Baka Diversion W/Harerghe Chiro
25 Lege Kolu Diversion W/Harerghe Oda bultum 100 5 3
26 Mede Kechele Diversion W/Harerghe Gemechis 10 3.93 4
27 Adeyi Diversion Bale Haranna
28 Sarmale Diversion West Guji Gelena
29 S.J.Bilu Diversion Arsi Golocha
30 Burka Diversion E/Harerghe Kurfa Chele
31 Hargeye Diversion E/Harerghe Meyu
Bilojeso Diversion Borena Teltele 85 2.5 1.5
Wondo Borena Teltele
Rophi sinxa E/Shoa Sirrarao 2500 8 3
Source: PASDIPII socio economic feasibility study for the Diversion irrigation project
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 112
Final Report
C) Diversity of Vegetation Cover
Various indigenous tree species exist in the majority of the surveyed watersheds. The trees species identified during the field assessment are Acacia tortolies, Oputa vulgaries, Acacia melifera, Conyza stricta, Olea africana, Ficus vasta, Lantana camara, Cordial Africana, elephant grass rodus, vetch and desho grass.
4.22.3.2 Areas of Land under Improved Watershed Management Practices According to the HH survey and field assessment made in sample watersheds, most of the watersheds have been partially covered with improved watershed management practices. The implemented practices mainly include physical soil conservation structures, water conservation/harvesting technologies, closed areas; community forests/wood lots and reforestation/afforestation activities (Table 116).
Table 116: Oromia Region Improved Watershed Activities before Project Scenario
Woreda Scheme Total Area of Enclosed and Physical Area closure Afforestation and reserved Area conservation (ha) Reforestation (ha) at (ha) at adj MCWs measure ( ha) MWS Jarso Lanagano 76 57
Berbere ledi cheketa 57
H/Bulluk Welmel Tika 200.25
Gola oda Bereda Lencha
Gola oda Haregetti Tirtiro
Meta Kura Meta 9
Gurawa Karra Horda 106.5 1.5
Gurawa Oda Genta 100m
D/Mena Welmel
D/Mena Denda
Saba Boru Kojo'a cheketa
Saba Boru Figa Bike 30
Miseo Lege Chiro
Chiro Lege Arba
Dinsho Gonde
G/Damole Awuchache
Saba Boru Gebane 50
O/Shakiso Jimmitti 50
Fentalle Kenifa
Boste Tebo
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 113
Final Report
Woreda Scheme Total Area of Enclosed and Physical Area closure Afforestation and reserved Area conservation (ha) Reforestation (ha) at (ha) at adj MCWs measure ( ha) MWS G/Damole Awuchache
Fentalle Kenifa
Boste Tebo
Chiro Baka
Oda bultum Lege Kolu
Gemechis Mede Kechele
Haranna Adeyi
Gelena Sarmale
Golocha S.J.Bilu
Kurfa Chele Burka 30 275 Meyu Hargeye 300 Teltele Bilojeso 5 6 Teltele wondo 18 400 12 12 Sirrarao Rophi sinxa 250 Source Baseline Survey, ITAB CONSULT PLC June, 2018
Summary of total areas under each watershed management practices shows that there were 76 hectares under Physical conservation, 100 hectares under biological conservation, 479 under gully rehabilitation, and 136.75 under Area Closure.
4.22.4 SNNPR
4.22.4.1 Improvement of Eco-System Health
Improvement in eco-system health for the watersheds based on field based assessment and HH survey indicated that most watersheds at upstream of various irrigation schemes were with various eco-system health status.
The survey covered 10 Scheme, watersheds/Kebeles of the region. The parameters considered in the analysis of the improvement in eco-system health of the targeted watersheds included water resources potential and soils and vegetation status of the respective watersheds. The status and condition of each parameter has been explained below:
a) Water Supply Potentials
The region has very good water resource potential from unprotected springs in the ranges of 6-18 lit/sec specifically in the highland watersheds of Hadiya and
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 114
Final Report
Sidama zones. Moreover, there is ample potential of ground water in the region serving larger population through protected deep and shallow wells. Thus, in most of the watershed assessed and surveyed, more than 55% of the population depends on protected and developed water sources for their domestic water supply. This implies that the majority of the population in the selected watersheds is with fair access to safe and clean water from developed shallow and deep wells and protected and unprotected springs. However, there is still a need for further effort and attention to meet the required standard for healthy life of the people.
b) Soil Erosion and its Impacts on Downstream Irrigation Schemes From the sediment load analysis made for each watershed of the respective irrigation schemes, the range of SDR varied from 0.37-0.52 in inverse relationship with watershed areas. The least SDR was for the largest size of watershed. For further reference please refer to table 127 and Fig.5. The identified SDR was significant in terms of creating negative impacts from silt load of the watershed run off discharges and subsequent sedimentation of the proposed irrigation schemes.
The main features/symptoms of soil erosion in the respective watersheds were manifested by rill and gully erosion covering specific land units having limited area coverage. As per the survey made at field level, the total gulley area was 17.77 ha out of a total area of 10,918 ha as shown in table 117.
Table 117: Gullies and sediment delivery Ratio (SDR) in SNNPR
SNNPR
Name of Name of Zone District Kebele Area SDR Gullies scheme watershed in ha
Bisho Bisho Hadya Gibe Megacho 1874 0.39 3
Gombora Gombora Hadya Gombora Habicho 1033 0.42 1
Guder Guder Hadya Angacha/Shashego Adancho/Bidika 620 0.45 13 Koshere Koshere GamoGoffa DembaGofa Docha Dembela 198 0.52 0.5
Menisa Menisa Wolaita Offa Yashocha Dekeya 768 0.44 na
Shappa Shappa Hadya M/ Badawecho Hawora 387 0.47 an
Simbita Simbita Halaba Halaba Sinbita 2646 0.37 na Chancho Chancho Sidama Lok Abaya Chelbesa 2324 0.38 Na
Gombolozo Gombolozo Kembata Hadero Tunto Golbe 882 0.43 0.2 Ottora Ottora GamoGoffa Bonke Otora 187 0.52 Na
As As Gurage Meskan As Na Sankura/dijo Dijo Silta Sankura Dijo na
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 115
Final Report
Source: PASIDP II Baseline Survey June, 2018
The following is the graphic reprsenation of SDR, SNNPR, 2017/18.
3000
A 2500 R 2000 E A 1500
1000 Series1 H A 500 Series2
0
Micro Watershed
Figure 5: R/s SDR with MW (Ha).
C) Diversity of Vegetation Cover
Similart to other regions, various indigenous trees and grass species also exist in the majority of the surveyed watersheds. The tree species identified during the field assessment were; Acacia tortolies, Oputa vulgaries, Acacia melifera, Conyza stricta, Olea africana, Ficus vasta, Lantana camara, Cordia Africana, elephant grass, desho grass, vetch and rodus grass.
4.22.4.2 Areas of Land under Improved Watershed Management Practices
According to the HH survey and field assessment made in sample watersheds, most of the watersheds had 420 ha (3.85%) covered with improved watershed management practices. Implemented practices mainly included physical soil conservation structures, water conservation/harvesting technologies, closed areas; community forests/wood lots and reforestation/afforestation activities. As indicated in Table 118, twelve districts/Kebeles had undertaken physical conservations, biological conservation and area closure activities on 397, 106 and 23 ha, respectively that together covered a total land area of 10,918 ha.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 116
Final Report
Table 118: Existing practices (Ha) in each scheme watershed in SSNP
` Existing Practices Name of Name of Zone District Kebele Area Physical Biologi Area scheme watershed conservat cal Closure ion in(ha) Conser in (ha) vation in (ha) Bisho Bisho Hadya Gibe Megacho 1874 310 97 10
Gombora Gombora Hadya Gombora Habicho 1033 11 2
Guder Guder Hadya Angacha/Sha Adancho/Bidik 620 9 3 11 shego a Koshere Koshere GamoGoffa DembaGofa Docha 198 6 1 Dembela
Menisa Menisa Wolaita Offa Yashocha 768 10 Dekeya Shappa Shappa Hadya M/ Hawora 387 8 Badawecho Simbita Simbita Halaba Halaba Sinbita 2646 12 Chancho Chancho Sidama Lok Abaya Chelbesa 2324 8
Gombolozo Gombolozo Kembata Hadero Tunto Golbe 882 11 3 3
Ottora Ottora GamoGoffa Bonke Otora 187 12
As as As Gurage Meskan As
Sankura/dijo Dijo Silta Sankura Dijo
Total 7 12 12 10,918 397 106 23
V. IDENTIFIED BASELINE INDICATORS FOR LOGFRAME
Under this section, the results of the baseline survey in terms of the required indicators are identified and analyzed following the hierarchy in the logframe of the programme (Annex-1).
5.1 Programme Goal
The stated goal of the programme was “Increased prosperity and improved resilience to shocks in food insecure areas of Ethiopia”. Four indicatres were also chosen for measuring the impacts of the interventions after completion of the programme with respect to the goal. The fist indicator is the “Number of HH participating in the Programme graduated above the poverty line 3/4 years after schemes are operational.” In order to determine the baseline, the average total income per household (none farm and farm income including livestock sales was determined for each household. Then the income at poverty line for Ethiopia of USD 1.25/day/person was taken and converted to Birr at USD=ETB 27.50 at the time of the survey. This Birr vaue was then multiplied by the number of persosn per household of 5.6 persons which was found by this survey. The average income per household was then compared with the average househokd income threshold to determe the number and percentage of household above and below the
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 117
Final Report
povertyline threshold, Accordingly, the total number of Households above the incme threshold is found to be 68 (2.27%) in the sample and 1,425 in the target number of Households. This is much less than the current level of population above povertyline (60-70%) in Ethiopia, because of the fact that the target areas are marginaly productive and the majority of the population are poor or very poor.
The second indicator is the percent increase in value of assets of participating households. This is expected on the rational that the target beneficiaries will accumulate wealth over time as the result of which their assets will increase in terms of household durable and productive assets. During the survey, smapled households were asked to estimate each type of household durable and productive assets including livestock and the mean values per household were calculated. Accordingly, the Average Value of Durable and productive Assets per Household at the time of the survey turned out to be ETB 1274.6, and ETB 851.14, respectively.
The third selected indicator is the percent reduction in prevalence of child malnutrition. In this case, the data from DHS by CSA for 2016 is used as the proxy indicator of the nutrition status of children for each region.
The fourth selected indicator is the number of smallholder household members supported in coping with the effects of climate change. This was determined at the beginning of the programme with the technical assistance of IFAD-ECD team by measuring household resilience index which turned out to be 0 as indicated in the programme logframe.
5.2 Development Objective
The stated development objective of the programme was “Improved income and food security for rural households on a sustainable basis.” In this respect two indicators were selected. These were number of direct beneficiary households and increase in household income from project support. Accordingly, the total number of planned direct beneficiaries is 62,797 of which 25,396 HHs are SSI and 37,401 are micro watershed beneficiaries. 5.2.1 Investment in Small-Scale Irrigation One of the the expected outcomes of the investment in small scale irrigation is “Farmers have sustainable access to irrigation schemes”. The selected indicator
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 118
Final Report
for measing the outcome is the number of farmers that have access to irrigation schemes. During the survey, which was about one year after commencement of implementation, five schemes have been completed , however, no household has reported as having started benefiting from the schemes. Therefore, the number of households having sustainable access to irrigation schems is nil at the time of the survey, April to June 2018.
5.2.1.1 Selection of Irrigation Schemes for Investment The selected indicators under this output are number of feasibility studies approved and 100% of Irrigation water Users Assocoations (WUAs) operate sustainably. While the feasibilities studies of 59 schemes have been completed at the time of the survey, none of them is approaved. However, 23 water Users Associations have been formed and are operational.
5.2.1.2 Irrigation Schemes Developed or Upgraded on 15,000 ha In this respect two indicators were selected and one of which is the number of ha farmland under operational irrigation, while the other is the Value of Infrastructure [USD] protected from extreme weather events. However, both the number of hectares of land under farm land under operational irrigation and the value of infrastructure protected from extreme weather conditions are nil as there was farm land under operational irrigation using PASSIDP II schemes up to the time of the survey. 5.2.2 Investment in Capacity for Sustainable Agriculture 5.2.2.1 Farmers have increased market oriented skills and capacity for sustainable agriculture. The indicators selected to monitor the achievement of this objective were three namely, (i) Number of functional cooperatives that provide at least 3 services to clients, (ii) number of households with strengthened financial literacy and (iii) In and off farm employment creation. These were to be monitored through progress reports on quarterly basis.
5.2.2.2 Improved Productivity in Intervention Areas
The selected indicator for this outcome is the number of people trained in sustainable production practices and technologies. At the time of baseline survey, there were no people trained in sustainable production practices, even though five schemes have been completed.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 119
Final Report
5.2.2.3 Improved and Sustainable Watershed Management Three baseline indicators were selected for this outcome. The first indicator was the number of ha under improved watershed management with a target of 60ha by the end of the program. The baseline was zero (0) during programme design, but was found to be 1947 ha at the tome of the survey. This is because of the fact that the survey was conducted one year after the commencement of the implementation of the program.
The second selected indicator was “Extent of land with rehabilitated or restored ecosystem services”, which was also zero at the time of programme design and a target of 40%. Ecosystem health is complex and is measured in terms of SDR, Vegetation cover: diversity of trees and grasspecies and surface water potential. While the SDR values at the time of the survey raged betwwen 0.37 and 0.52 of the adjcenet scheme micro watershed, the diversity of the tree and grass species of regions are shown in the table under Annex-1. The potentials of surface water is also indicated by region in the table under this same annex.
The third baseline indicator as speficied in the logframe was “Crop yield stability over seasons” which was to be determined through progress report and whose target was set at 70 %. The findings of the common crop yields per hectare at the time of the survey under rainfed and tradional irrigations practices is shown under table 119 below. By taking yield reports per production season, the yield stability of the crops can be assessed per ove the years. Table 119 : Yield/Ha in Quintals of Common Crops under Raifed and Tradional Irrigationat during 2017/18 Crop Year
Type of Crop Rainfed Traditional Irrigation Teff 5.0 7.3 Wheat 12.1 10.7 Barley 10.2 14.0 Maize 8.0 11.6 Sorghum 9.3 8.0 Green pepper 0.0 18.0 Onion 0.0 39.3 Tomato 0.0 3.6
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 120
Final Report
VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS
In this baseline survey work, a clear description of the program of PASIDP II for SSI has been made in which target areas and groups were identified and statement of the problem, significance and objectives of the study have been established. Respondents were identified and their basic demographic characteristics were determined.
A total of 3000 HHs (77 % male and 23% female) were covered in the survey work nationally. Region-wise; 1499, 828, 374 and 299 HHs, were sampled from Oromia, Amhara, SNNPR and Tigray, respectively. The total number of respondent population in the SSI scheme area was 16,690 (8770 male + 7920). About 85 % of the respondent HHs had a monogamous marriage and the mean proportion of the agriculturally active age (19-49 years) group was 63 % for male and 5 % for female. Majority of the HH heads were illiterate (54 % for male 10 % of the overall sample HHs and 61 % of the male and 91 % of the female groups), respectively.
The occupation of the majority (98 %) of the surveyd HHs was farming. Other occupations like; trading, civil service, students, artisian, pensioner and unemployement all together accounted for the remaining 2 %. Major religions in the area were; Muslim (41 %), Orthodox (32 %) and Protestant (24 %) and the remaining proportion being shared among minor groups.
Types of the respondent’s house were identified by the kind of roofs, walls and floors used in their construction. About 95 and 98 % of all houses in the SSI schemes were made from mud and wood walls and earthen floor, respectively while houses with corrugated iron sheet and thatched roof were 56 and 40 %, respectively. This revealed that the targeted households are typical of the rural poor. Only 57 % of the covered HHs had access to clean water and about 41 % of the male headed HHs and 12 % of the female headed HHs use latrine. Around 97 % of both sex groups utilize firewood as a major source of energy for cooking and lightening of their houses.
ITAB CONSUL T PLC Page 121
Final Report
This indicators also are indicative of the poor status and lack of access to basic services.
Ownership of assets of HHs was determined through measuring the type and size/number of land holding, productive and durable assets. Average mean for overall land holding per HH was about a hectare that was used for the production of different crops. About 0.80, 0.11 and 0.10 ha of the total land holding was put to the production of annual crops, permanent crops and private grazing, respectively. These indicators also are indicative of the fact that the target households are resource poor.
Farmers primarily rely on rains for crop production and when irrigation was used, 77 % across regions employed river diversion as sources of water where about 86 % utilized flooding method.
In addition to land, farmers also owned productive and durable assets and livestock. Productive assets, in this case, included small farm implements such as; sickles, axes, hoes, traditional ploughs, shovels, etc. that had an average value of Birr 851.00 per HH. Durable assets on the other hand included; electric stoves, wrist watches, mobile phones, radio/tape recorders, etc. for which total average values was ETB 1,274.00 per HH. Each HH on average owned an estimated total value of ETB 20,000.00 from crops under rain-fed agriculture, crops under traditional irrigation valued at Birr 1,831.68. and ETB3,569.00 from sales from livestock.
The highest average of women participation across regional states was in crop marketing (29 %) followed by harvesting in the overall operation of crop production system revealing that the role of women is more on the product marketing side than farm operations.
About 87 % of all sampled HHs lacked access to financial institutions to support their farm operations. Out of the 13% who reported as having access, 39 and 36 % of the respondents used commercial banks and micro-financial institutions as their
ITAB CONSUL T PLC Page 122
Final Report sources of finance, respectively. Less than 29 % of the surveyed HHs had cooperative market services though quite a number of them reported to be members to these cooperatives. Distance to the nearest market is also long, which does not encourage the production of irrigated crops, which are usually exposed to quality deterioration in the absence of access to market for immediate disposal.
Households on average spent ETB 811.90 on food consumption during a week prior to the collection of data for this baseline survey and had a total mean of ETB 1,520.00 expenditures on non-food items per year.
Households experienced climate-related shock events like too little rains (47 %), crop diseases (41 %) and late onset and/or early finish (20 %) in the year preceding this survey work in the SSI scheme areas. In the events of food shortage due to such shocks HHs employ primarily strategies such as eating more of less preferred and cheaper foods and secondly borrowing food from friends or relatives to cope up with the problem.
Eco-system health in Amhara, Oromia, SNNP and Tigray regions have been assessed in the perspective of SSI scheme operation on the environment. Hence, the above brief account of summary results conclude findings of this baseline survey work.
The results of the baseline survey viewed in terms of the economic, environmental and institutional set up of the target community highly justify the interventions planned under PASSIDP II. However, the interventions seem to require a more coordinated apparoach and strategies in the implementation and periodic monitoring.
ITAB CONSUL T PLC Page 123
Final Report
REFERENCES
Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey (EDHS) 2016. Central Statistical Agency, Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Participatory Small-scale Irrigation Development Programme Phase II (PASIDP II) Final program. 2017. Design Report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underweight https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_line https://www.unicef.org/progressforchildren/2007n6/index_41505.htm
International Monetary Fund (IMF) Country Report No.18/18. The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Staff Report for 2017.
Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources. 2008. Use of Irrigation Water and Improved Production Methods of Irrigated Crops Manual, Amharic Version. December 2008, Addis Ababa
Program Implementation Manual. 2017. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Participatory Small-Scale Irrigation Development Program (PASIDP- II)
Songsermsawas, G. A. T., 2017. Impact Assessment Plan: Participatory Small- scale Irrigation Development Programme – Phase II, Ethiopia. Rome: IFAD
World Health Organization (WHO) 2006. Multi-center Growth Reference Study Group- Child Growth Standards: Length/Height for Age, Weight for Age-for-Length, Weight -for- Height and Body Mass Index-for Age: Methods and Development, Geneva, WHO.
ITAB CONSUL T PLC Page 124
Final Report
Annex-1
Baseline Survey Indicators of PASIDP II, June 2018
Hierarachy Indicator Baseline Indicators Sources Goal: Increased 1. Number of HH Number HHs above poverty line =1,425 Based on USD 1.25 /person /day of poverty threshold and converted to ETB prosperity and participating in the (2.27%) at IUSD= ETB 27.5 and assuming 5.6 persons/hh (table 98)and improved Program graduated 365days/year resilience to above the poverty shocks in food line 3/4 years after insecure areas scheme are of Ethiopia Operational 2. % increase in Average Value of Durable Assets per Value of currently owned hh durable assests determined from estimates value of assets of Household made by the respondents themselves and presented in table 38 of the participating = ETB 1274.6 report Households Average value of productive Assets per Value of currently owned productive assests determined from estimates household = ETB made by the respondents themselves and presented in table 35 of the 851.14 report 3. % reduction in Stunting of Children Region (- (-2SD) Data taken from table prevalence of child under 5 (EDHS,2016) 3SD) which is based on the malnutrition Tigray 13.4 39.3 EDHS of 2016 reported by the Ethiopian Amhara 19.6 46.3 Statistical Agency, CSA. Oromia 17.1 36.5 The -3SD can be taken as benchmark for the SNNPR 20.2 38.6 project Wasting Ethiopian 18.0 38.0
Tigray 3.4 11.1
Amhara 2.2 9.8 Oromia 3.7 10.6 SNNPR 17 6.0 Ethiopia 10 3.0 Underweight Tigray 5.2 23.0 Amhara 8.3 28.4 Oromia 6.6 22.5 SNNPR 6.4 21.1
Ethiopian 7.0 24.0 4. # of smallholder 0 household members supported in coping with the effects of climate change DevelopmentObjective Number of direct Beneficiaries 62,797
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 125
Final Report
56,097 89.33% of total direct beneficiary HHS of the 74 Male Headed HHs Schemes and watersheds (Table 8) are male headed, while 10.67 are female headed. 6,700 Female Headed HHs Outcome 1:Farmers Number of farmers 0 Table 61 shows the number of farmers currently have sustainable that have access to benefiting from modern irrigation schemes access to irrigation modern irrigation under implementation by the programme. schemes scheme Currently 138 sample housholds are benefiting formin 0.22% of the sample and 4,6% of the total number of target beficiaries. Output 1.1. Selection 8. Number of 0 of irrigation schemes feasibility studies for investment approved Number of IWUAs 23 operate sustainably 9. Number of 23 According to the reported collected from the operational schemes most of the water users association are Irrigation Water in the process of establishment and only 23 are Users Associations operational so far, Output 1.2 Irrigation Number of ha 0 schemes developed or farmland under upgraded on 15,000 operational irrigation
Value of Infrastructure 0 To be determined [USD] protected from extreme weather events
# of ha under 1947 ha Data collected from Development agents improved watershed working at the 74 surveyed small scall management practice irrigations
Improvement in 1. SDR ranges from 0.37-0.52 of the adjcenet scheme micro Deriveed from the imperical formual using Ecosystem Health watershed adjacent scheme microwatershed area estimation from Woreda Agriculture offices
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 126
Final Report
2. Diversity of Tree and grass Species
Eisting tree species identified Tigray: Acacia tortolies, Accacia Albida , Acacia melifera, Conyza stricta, Olea africana, Ficus vasta and Lantana camara,elephant grass
Amhara:
Accacia decrence, gravelia robuta, Lantana camara, Acacia melifera, Olea Africana, Accacia Albida, juniperous procera, vetch, rodus grass, elephant grass Oromia:cordia Africana, haginia obicia, Acacia melifera, Olea Africana, vetch, rodus grass, elephant grass SNNPR: Olea Africana, ficus vasta, oputa vulgaris, cordia Africana, Acacia tortolies, Conyza stricta, vetc, desho grass, rodus grass, elephant grass 3. Water Potential
Tigray: Surface and ground water obtained at 10-2028m, sprong potential less than 0.06 liter/second Amhara: Surface water relatively good potential above 0.25lt/second, ground water above 8 meters depth
Oromia: unprotected springs ranges 66-549lts/second, ground water above 10meters depth
SNNPR: Unprotected springs in the ranges of 6-18lts/second, ground water above 10meters Output 1.2 Irrigation 10. Number of ha 0 Calcualted from table 57 by multiplying the schemes farmland under average area/HH (0.010 ha)by the total number developed or upgraded operational of HHs planned to use SSIs (25396 HHs) on Irrigation 15,000 ha 11. Number of 0 There are no households using modern irrigation people adopting assumed adopting water efficient practices water-efficient practices Outcome 2: Farmers 3.1 Yield increase Current Yield level in Quintals Per hectare under rainfed and The crops and yield figures are taken from table have Increased market per ha traditional and modern Irrigation. 2017/18 54. The yield are averages of the responses of oriented skills and the samples of households from the four regions capacity for Irrigated Crops Rianfed Traditional diveided by the total sample of 3000 households. sustainable Irrigation Agriculture. Teff 4.7 7.3 Wheat 11 10.7 Barley 10.2 14.0 Maize 8.04 11.6 Sorghum 9.3 8.0 Green pepper 0 18.0 Onion 0 39.3 Tomato 0 3.6
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 127
Final Report
Annex-2 Summary of Financial Anlysis Results of Feasibility Study of Schemes
No. Name of the District Zone Regi Financial Analysis Economic Analysis Soil irrigation on With project Without project lab scheme FNPV FIRR Financial BCR FNPV FIRR Financia BCR ENPV EIRR EBC test payback l R (PH paybac Value) k 1 Gobu 3 Raya N/Wollo Amh 39,083,227.30 29.7% NA 1.87 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Azebo ara 2 Gobu 4 Raya “ “ “ 68,853,423.70 41% NA 2.016 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Azebo 3 Golina Raya “ “ “ 27,086,801.54 37% NA 1.65 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Azebo 4 Amid Raya “ “ “ 37,325,423.35 62% NA 1.77 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Azebo 5 Eyela-2 Gidan “ “ “ 31,452,305.17 27% NA 1.8 NA NA NA NA 35,713,378.0 36% 2.03 NA 3 6 Sideni Habru “ “ “ 85,398,700.26 40.27% NA 1.48 NA NA NA NA 76,953,624.5 48.53% 1.51 NA 6 7 Burka Tehuleder S/Wollo “ 36,173,821.77 33.24% NA 1.52 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA e 8 Challi Worebabu “ “ “ 72,660,451.58 34.43% NA 1.49 NA NA NA NA 45.46% 1.53 NA 67,450,996.8 9 9 Jerma Woreilu “ “ “ 94,307,659.3 41.59% NA 1.66 NA NA NA NA 104,205,638. 61.89% 1.9 NA 76 10 Cheleka Kalu “ “ “ 87,827,295.07 0.60% NA 1.82 NA NA NA NA 78,760,478.3 68.66% 1.85 NA 7 11 Sherif Argoba “ “ “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 12 Gulana W/Belesa N/Gonder “ 99,657,804.92 45.86% NA 1.82 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 13 BahirLibo East “ “ “ 80,558,401 74% NA 2.22 NA NA NA NA 71,899,439.7 0.96% 2.32 NA Belesa 9
14 Ambo Wuha W/belesa “ “ “ 220,954,047 201% NA 2.6 NA NA NA NA 162,601,442 98% 2.05 NA 15 Aderkayina W/Belesa “ “ “ 57,701,237.7 19% NA 1.7 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 16 AgamWuha W/Belesa “ “ “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 17 Workie Dewa- Oromia “ 134,867,858.96 51.9% NA 1.89 NA NA NA 141,609,346. 69.08% 2.11 NA cheffa 8 18 Awajo Mojana N/Shoa “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 19 Keskesh Mojan “ “ 392,723,885.11 77.48% NA 2.66 NA NA NA NA 76.58% 1.90 NA 225,416,917. 19 20 Amitu Asagirt “ “ 227,214,221.69 208.61% NA 3.19 NA NA NA NA 228,536,225. 293.58 3.27 NA 21 %
21 Mena W/Belesa N/Gonder “ 125,541,494 74% NA 1.78 NA NA NA 129,456,066 101% 1.86 NA Dawuch 22 Borkena ArtumaFur Oromia “ 65,585,924.05 65.58% NA 1.42 NA NA NA NA 114,811,893. 141.5% 2.62 NA si 9 23 Sewr-3 JileTimuga “ “ 67,460,464.41 38.09% NA 1.7 NA NA NA NA 53,248,459.2 39.57% 1.64 NA 8 24 Baekel Tahtaymai Central Tigra 1019138.39 35% NA 1.54 NA NA NA NA 5540948.60 27% 1.26 NA chew y
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 128
Final Report
Annex-2 Continued
No. Name of the District Zone Regi Financial Analysis Economic Analysis Soil irrigation on With project Without project lab scheme FNPV FIRR Financial BCR FNPV FIRR Financia BCR ENPV EIRR EBC test payback l R (PH paybac Value) k 25 Maitsahlo M/Leke Central Tigra 35,662,557.47 40% NA 1.573 NA NA NA NA 32,885,811.66 42% 1.55 NA y 26 Daero Ahferom “ “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 27 Mai-auso Adwa “ “ 36,927,410.98 38% NA 1.52 NA NA NA NA 33,863,779.12 40% 1.49 NA 28 RubaChemi W/Leke “ “ 66,736,024.19 30% NA 1.90 NA NA NA NA 69,545,221.23 32% 1.81 6.59-8 et 29 Gereb- Enderata South “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA dagiorgis Eastern 30 Gereb-giba “ “ “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 31 Misrar-telli “ “ “ 5,576,703.82 19% NA 1.79 NA NA NA NA 49,816,180 48% 2.98 7.18- 8.18 32 Gereb- H/Wajirat “ “ 99,726,732.75 48% NA 2.54 NA NA NA NA 102,171,001.94 66% 4.93 6.96- fyaye 8.36 33 Degabir “ “ “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 34 Adi-kerakiro E/Alaje Southern “ 21,458,294.27 34% NA 1.65 NA NA NA NA 19,763,187.54 35% 1.61 NA 2 35 Damin Siraro W/Arsi Orom 37,426.78 62% NA 3.34 NA NA NA NA 27,468.04 72% 2.36 NA Leman ia 36 RophiSinxa “ “ “ 15,400.77 38% NA 1.95 NA NA NA NA 13,449.40 36% 1.89 NA
37 Jirimite Shakiso Guji “ 7208965.68 28% NA 1.47 NA NA NA NA 12620198.93 57% 3.11 NA
38 Kojo'aChek S/Boru “ “ 143,948,493 107 % NA 10.73 NA NA NA NA 122,356,219 90.95 9.12 NA eta % 39 Gebene S/Boru “ “ 4276773.89 17% NA 1.21 NA NA NA NA 20180882.62 54% 2.34 NA
40 Figa bike S/Boru “ “ 108,485,375 126 % NA 12.6 NA NA NA NA 92,212,375 107% 10.7 NA 1 41 BilaJiso H/Buluk Borena “ 3218,960,000 14% NA 19.0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 42 Wando Taltale “ “ -27,009,691.42 -1% NA 0.00 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
43 Meka Gemechis W/Hararge “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 44 Laku Chiro “ “ 47,765,948.25 43.3% NA 1.76 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 45 OdaRacha Oda “ “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Bultum 46 LagaArba Chiro “ “ 168827081.64 52% NA 3.06 NA NA NA NA 98640587.02 45% 2.45 NA
47 HusseMand Chiro W/Hararge Orom 15,736,859 34% NA 2.50 NA NA NA NA 15,604,177 40% 2.30 NA hera ia 48 LagaChiro Miesso “ “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 49 ArfanKallo KurfaChale E/Hararge “ 61,974,730 412% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50 HargetiTirtir GolaOda “ “ 50,171,811.24 46.8% NA 1.83 NA NA NA NA 49,070,543.32 50.3% 1.79 NA o 51 Kura Meta Meta “ “ 26,100,670,000 15.93% NA 21.0 NA NA NA NA 23,592.23 14.37% 19.4 NA 8 52 Ifabas MeyuMulu “ “ 1346,410,000 11.43% NA 65.74 NA NA NA NA 2287.41 21.18% 67.5 NA ke 9 53 OdaJaneta Gurawa “ “ 8,048,799 38.4% NA 5.00 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 54 BaredaLenc GolaOda “ “ 37,717,924.49 46.8% NA 1.84 NA NA NA NA 40,176,756.61 47.6% 1.78 NA ha
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 129
Final Report
Annex-2 Continued
No. Name of the District Zone Regi Financial Analysis Economic Analysis Soil irrigation on With project Without project lab scheme FNPV FIRR Financial BCR FNPV FIRR Financia BCR ENPV EIRR EBC test payback l R (PH paybac Value) k 55 Kara horda Gurawa “ “ 39,076,752 32.2% NA 7.30 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 5.7-7.6 56 Misil MelkaBalo “ “ 4,087,680,000 24.49% NA 100.8 NA NA NA NA 4,067.72 34.13% 363. NA 4 38 57 Langano Jarso “ “ 4,081,910 28% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 5.9-7.6 58 LediCheket Berbere Bale “ 17,410,000 20% NA 1.4 NA NA NA NA NA 32% 2.24 NA 59 Danada D/mena “ “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 60 Adeyi H/ Bulka “ “ 25139.57 19% NA 1.96 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 6.7-7.5 61 WelmelTika H/ Bulka “ “ 63,960,000 29% NA 2.1 NA NA NA NA 83,998,000 29% 2.1 NA 62 Welmel D/Mena “ “ 25,424.47 21% NA 1.13 NA NA NA NA 25,424.47 21% 1.13 NA 63 Kelatie Jida N/Shoa “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 64 Koruha Kimbibit “ “ 7,397.18 31% NA 1.57 NA NA NA NA 5,823.70 27% 1.45 NA 65 Simbita Halaba Halaba SNNP NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA R 66 Ottora Bonke GamoGoff “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA a 67 Koshere D/Goffa GamoGoff SNNP 52,540 49% NA 2.31 NA NA NA NA 17,544 23.9% 1.55 NA a R 68 Chancho Lake Sidama “ 80,730,000 39% NA 4.3 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Abaya 69 Bisho Gibe Hadiya “ 34,476 57% NA 1.85 NA NA NA NA 5,696 17% 1.22 NA 70 Gomboro Habicho& Hadiya “ 143,601,900 11.8 NA 3.07 NA NA NA NA 53,531,000 11% 2.7 NA Addina 71 Shapa Hawaro “ “ NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 72 Guder Angecha Kembata& “ 60,378,770 11.5% NA 2.53 NA NA NA NA 32,515,000 12% 2 NA and Hadiya Shashego 73 Gombolozo Hadero Kembata “ 10,598 19% NA 1.23 NA NA NA NA 15326 23.1% 1.5 NA 74 Manisa Offa Wolayita “ 30490 45% NA 1.6 NA NA NA NA 38,660 53.9% 1.84 NA
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 130
Final Report
Annex-3 Schemes Location Map LOCATION MAP
Annex-4
SAMPLE HOUSEHOLD LOCATION MAP
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 131
Final Report
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 132
Final Report
Annex-5
STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF IRRIGAITON PROJECT
a) Tigray Region Name of Scheme Type of Zone district Complted undere Not strted Comments Scheme construction 1 Baekel R.Diversion Central T/maichew √ 2 Daero R.Diversion Central Ahferom √ 3 Mai-auso R.Diversion Central Adwa √ 4 Mai-tsahlo R.Diversion Central M/leke √ Ruba-Chemiet Pump Central W/leke 5 √ Dagabir Spate South H/wajerat 6 Eastern √ Gereb-dagiorgis Spate South Enderta 7 Eastern √ Gereb-fyaye R.Diversion South H/wajerat 8 Eastern √ Gereb-giba Pump South Enderta 9 Eastern √ Misrar-telli R.Diversion South Enderta 10 Eastern √ Adi-kerakiro R.Diversion Southern Emba-Alaje 11 √ Sub-Total 2 4 5
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 133
Final Report
Annex-5 Continued b) Amhara Region
Name of Scheme Type of Zone District Complted undere Not strted Comments Scheme construction 1 Ambo Woha Diversion North Gondar W/beleesa √ 2 Aderkayna Diversion North Gondar W/Belesa √ 3 BahirLibo Diversion North Gondar E/Belesa √ 4 Gulana Intake North Gondar W/Belesa √ 5 Mena Dawuch Intake North Gondar W/Belesa √ 6 AgamWuha Diversion North Gondar W/belesa √ 7 Awajo Intake North Shoa MojanaWodera √ Amitu Intake North Shoa Asagrt 8 √ 9 Keskash Intake North Shoa MojanDistrict √ 10 BorkenaArtumafursi Diversion Oromia ArtumaFursi √ 11 Workie Intake Oromia DewaChefa √ 12 Sewr-3 Intake Oromia JileTimuga √ 13 Cheleka Diversion North Wollo Habru √ 14 Eyela-2 Intake North Wollo Gidan √ 15 Gobu-3 Spate North Wollo Kobo √ 16 Sideni Diversion North Wollo Habru √ 17 Amid Intake North Wollo Kobo √ 18 Gobu-4 Spate North Wollo Kobo √
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 134
Final Report
19 Golina Intake North Wollo Raya Kobo √ 20 Burka Diversion South Wollo Tehuledere √ 21 Jerma Intake South Wollo Wereilu √ 22 Challi Diversion South Wollo Worebabu √ 23 Sherif Intake South Wollo Argoba √ Total 2 17 4
Annex-5 Continued c) Oromia Region Name of Scheme Type of Zone District Complted under construction Not strted Scheme 1 Adeyi Diversion Bale HarenaBulka √ 2 BiliJiso MED Borena Taltale √ 3 Danada Diversion Bale D/mena √ 4 LediCheket Diversion Bale Girawa √ 5 Welmel Diversion Bale D/Mena √ 6 WelmelTika Diversion Bale H/bulluk √ 7 Odajeneta Spring Dev't East Hararghe Gurawa √ 8 AfranKello Diversion East Hararghe KurfaChelle √ BeredaLencha Spring East Hararghe GolaOda 9 protection √ 10 HargettiTirtiro Diversion East Hararghe GolaOda √ 11 Ifabas Diversion East Hararghe MeyuMuluke √ 12 KarraHorda Diversion East Hararghe Gurawa √ 13 Kura Meta Diversion East Hararghe Meta √ Lanagano Spring East Hararghe Jarso 14 protection √ 15 Misil Spring East Hararghe MelkaBalo √ 16 LagaArba Diversion West Hararghe Chiro √ 17 LagaChiro Diversion West Hararghe Miesso √ 18 Laku Pump West Hararghe Chiro √ 19 Melka Spring West Hararghe Gemechis √
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 135
Final Report
20 OdaRacha Spring West Hararghe OdaBultum √ 21 Kelatie Diversion North Shoa Jida √
Annex-5 Continued
Oromia
Name of Scheme Type of Scheme Zone District under Complted construction Not strted 22 Koruha Diversion North Shoa Kimbibit √ 23 Wando Diversion Borena Taltale √ 24 Figa Bike Diversion Guji Saba Boru √ 25 HusseMandhera Pump West Hararghe Miesso √ 26 Jirimite Pump Guji Shakiso √ 27 Kojo'aCheketa Diversion Guji Saba Boru √ 28 Gebene Pump Guji S/Boru √ 29 Damin Leman Spring West Arsi Siraro √ 30 RophiSinxa Pump West Arsi Sirraro √ 31 Gemechis √ Total 1 9 21 d) SNNP Region Name of Scheme Type of Zone District Complted undere construction Not strted Scheme 1 Bisho Diversion Hadiya Gibe √ 2 Gomboro Diversion Hadiya Habicho&Addina √ 3 GuderKembata Diversion Hadiya Anga √ 4 Shapa Diversion Hadiya Hawaro √
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 136
Final Report
5 Simbita Pump Halaba Halaba √ 6 Gombolozo Diversion Kenbata Haderao √ 7 Chancho Diversion Sidama Lake abaya √ 8 Koshere Diversion GamoGoffa D/Goffa √ 9 Ottora Diversion GamoGoffa Bonke √ 10 Manisa Diversion Wolayeta Offa √ Total 0 8 2 Overall 5 38 32
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 137
Final Report
Annex—6
SUMMARY OF FGD, KIIS AND OBSERVATION REPORTS OF THE SSI
I. Overall
The baseline survey was conducted in 74 SSI in four regions of the country. The number of the irrigation schemes SSIs are 30 in Oromia, 23 in Amhara region, 11 in Tigray and 10 SSI in SNNPR. The details are indicated in Figure 1, below
Figure 1: Number of SSI included in the sample survey by Region
80 74 70 60 50 40 30 Number 30 23 20 11 10 10 0 Tigray Amhara Oromia SNNPR Total
Source: Field survey data II. FGD PARTICIPANTS
During the baseline survey, 63 FGDs were conducted. The total FGD participants were 602 of which male were 525 and female 77.
Summary of FGD by Region
FGD participants
No. Region # of FGD M F T 1 Amhara 17 178 26 204 2 Tigray 7 29 4 33 3 Oromia 30 243 25 268 4 SNNPR 9 75 22 97
Total 63 525 77 602
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 138
Final Report
It is to be noted that during the survey, the FGDs were conducted with mixed groups, male , female headed household and youth as it was not possible to organize separate groups, because of the general situation at the time of survey, particularly the seasonal farming activities, muslim fasting period as well as the unfavourable political situation in most of the areas.
III. ISSUES OF DISCUSSION The core issues disused during FGDs included the extent of participation of the community in program development which mainly focued on the identification, programme design and designplanning stage as these are important in the determination of the relevance of the programme to the needs of the target community. Other issues incuded in the dissucsion were resource availability, institutional capacity, tehnological capacity, infrastructure and the intention of the community with respect to production by using the planned irrigation infrastructure.
3.1 Extent of Community Participationin in Programme Development
Extent of community participation in the development of PASIDP II, the focus group discussion result indicated that beneficiary discussion groups in 85 percent of the target SSIs participated in their identification, 40.5 percent in designing and 40.5 percent in planning. This indicated that the majorities of the community participated in irrigation scheme identification. However, the participation of the community is low in designing and planning since they need technical experts. In this regard the inclusion of indigenous knowledge of local smallholder farmers needs to be encouraged during designing and planning of SSI (Table 1).
Table 1: Community participation in the development of PASIDP II No. Description Frequency Percent 1 Identification 63 85.1 2 Design 30 40.5 3 Planning 30 40.5 Source: Field survey data
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 139
Final Report
3.2 Resources Availability
Regarding the perception of the community on the available resources for the development of SSI, the field data gathered from beneficiaay FGD participants showed that water, irrigable land, suitable soil, favorable climate and water, exist in 100 percent of SSIs while in 66 percent of the SSIs, smallholder farmers have experience of using irrigation (Table 2). The survey data also indicated that experience of using irrigation is new to target beneficiaries in 25 SSIs. Therefore, training and technical support will be required for them. The available water includes surface water, ground water and flood (spate irrigations).
Table 2: Resources available for SSI development No. Description Frequency Percent 1 Water 74 100 2 Irrigable land 74 100 3 Suitable soil and topography 74 100 4 Favorable climate 74 100 5 Experience 49 66.2 Source: Field survey data
In order to implement the irrigation projects the availability of institutional capacities of the Woredasare indispensible. In this regard the survey data revealed that 77 percent of the projects Woredas have some capacities.Accordingly, 70 percent of the projects Woredas have adequate numbers of professional staffs, 57 percent access to training facilities and 5 percent financial resources (Table 3). This showed that the project Woredas will need support in terms of financial resource and training facilities from MOA, Regional Bureau of Agriculture and other partners for effective implementation of the program.
Table 3: Institutional capacity No. Description Frequency Percent 1 Adequate number of professionals 52 70.3 2 Access to training facilities 42 56.8 3 Adequate financial resources 4 5.4 Source: Field survey data
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 140
Final Report
Availability of agricultural technologies in the SSI target Woredas are very essential to improve production and productivity the target smallholder farmers.In this regard the data collected from the field indicated that trget beneficiaries in about 74 percent of the target Schemes have access to fertilizer, 65 percent access to improved seed, 41 percent access to pesticides and 7 percent access other chemicals (Figure 2). Furthermore, the FGD participants in this schemes mentioned that the availability of vegetable seeds and pesticides need to get emphasis from agriculture input providers. Figure 2: Availability of technological inputs in the Surveyed Schemes
80 74.3 70 64.9 60
50 40.5
40 Percent 30
20
10 6.8 0 Fertilizer Improved seed Pesticides Other chemicals
Source: Field survey data
Availability of financial institutions is indispensible for irrigation users to access credit service that helps to purchase agricultural inputs. In this case the baseline survey data indicated that beneficiaries in about 68 percent of the SSI have access to financial institutions. This include loand from MFIs in 54 percent of the schemes, loans from Savings and Credit Association in 43 percent of the Schemes, loans from others in one percent of the schemes (Table 4). However, loans from banks are none in all schemes since they have no loan products for smallholder farmers.
In this regard the FGD result indicated that in Muslim community that are target small scale irrigationbeneficiaries do not use loan from MFIs in such as N/Wollo and S/Wollo Zones of Amhara region. The major reason is the MFIs loan products do not adapt to the Muslim religion that needs improvement for the future.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 141
Final Report
Table 4: Loan modalities of financial institutions for smallholder farmers that use irrigation No. Description Frequency Percent 1 Loan from banks 0 0 2 Loan from MFIs 40 54.1 3 Loan from Saving and Credit 32 43.2 Associations 4 Loan from others 1 1.4 Source: Field survey data
3.3 Infrastructure
The overall FGD result indicated that the small scale irrigation schemes target beneficiaries in 85 percent of the SSIs have access to infrastructure. In this regard, target beneficiaries in 81 percent of the schemes have access to education services, in 74 percent have access to health services, in 66 percent have access road, in 64 percent have access to communication facilities and in 49 percent have access to safe water supply (Figure 3).The information indicated that safe water supply needs improvement for target beneficiaries in most of the SSIs. Figure 3: Availability of infrastructure
90 81.1 80 74.3 70 66.2 63.5 60 48.6 50
40 Percent 30 20 10 0 Schools Health facilities Water supply Rural road Communication facilities
Source: Field survey data
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 142
Final Report
The FGD result indicated that the community participates in 100 percent, 51 Percent and 10% of the SSis in the form of labor contribution, materials provision and cash contribution, respectively, for the development of the SSI (Table 5). Table 5: Modality of community participation in the development of SSI No. Description Frequency Percent 1 Materials (stone collection and sand supply) 38 51.4 2 Labor provision 74 100 3 Cash contribution 7 9.5 Source: Field survey data
3.4 Intention of the community The FGD result showed that the major intentions of the community in the use of irrigation water for livelihood improvement are for crop production to ensure food security in 100 percent of the schemes, nutrition diversification in 96 percent of the schemes, enhanced marketable products in in 95.9% and livestock production in 39.2% of the schemes. (Table 6). Table 6: Major intention of the community in the use of SSI No. Description Frequency Percent 1 Crop production 74 100 2 Livestock production 29 39.2 3 Food/nutrition diversification 71 95.9 4 Enhanced marketable products 71 95.9 5 Ensuring household food security 74 100 Source: Field survey data Furthermore, the FGD result revealed that the landless households and youths can use the irrigation through various methods depending on the situation of the area. These include share cropping, share irrigation land from family, rent land from such as female headed households, old aged households, sick households and households that have shortage of manpower. In addition, they can undertake daily labor works on irrigation site on various payment arrangements as well as buy agricultural productsthat produced in the irrigation area and sell to others.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 143
Final Report
IV. REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE
4.1 Tigray and Eastern Amhara Region Report According to the field observation the constructions of 8 SSIs are on finishing stage, 4 SSIs under construction, construction of 4 SSIs on start-up stage and constructions of 6 SSIs not started at all (Table 1). In three SSIs smallholder target beneficiaries started using the irrigation water and planted crops (Mai-tsahlo and Adikerakiro SSIs of Tigray region and Amid SSI of N/Wollo Zone) during the survey time. However, none of the constructed schemes were handover to the target beneficiaries. The details are indicated in annex 1. 1: Status of the constructions of the SSI
No. Locations of the SSI Status of the construction of the SSIs
Finishing Under On start- Not started Total stage construction up stage
1 Tigray region 3 2 - 6 11
2 N/ Wollo Zone of Amhara Region 4 - 2 - 6
3 S/Wollo Zone of Amhara Region 1 2 2 - 5
Total 8 4 4 6 22
Source: Compiled from field survey data
4.2 Target irrigation areas and beneficiaries Socio-economic survey and feasibility study documents were conducted for 17 SSI schemes (7 in Tigray region, 6 in N/Wollo and 4 in S/Wollo Zones of Amhara region). According to these documents as well as key informant interview and focus group discussions results the target irrigable areas of the 22 SSIs are 2,375.85 hectares (671.8 hectares in Tigray region, 1162.75 hectares in N/Wollo Zone and 541.3 hectares in S/Wollo Zone of Amhara region). The target smallholder farmer beneficiaries are 4227 (1596 in Tigray region, 1939 in N/Wollo Zone and 692 in S/Wollo Zone). The details are indicated in annex 2.
4.2.1 IWUAs and O&M
The focus group discussion and key informant interview result indicated that 19 SSIs formed IWUAs while 3 SSIs not formed. In Tigray region 8 SSIs formed IWUAs and 3 of them not formed IWUAs. On the other hand in North and South Wollo Zones of Amhara region 11 of the SSIs formed the IWUAs. The IWUAs have 218 committee members (male 178 and female 40). Of the total committee members male represents 81.7 percent while the remains are females (Table 3). Furthermore, two IWUAs got legal Certificates and have offices (i.e. Adikerakiro SSI in Tigray region and Eyela-2 SSI in N/Wollo Zone).
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 144
Final Report
Of the formed IWUAs, 5 of them decided amount of payment from Birr 120 to Birr 200 per year for O&M while 14 of them not yet decide it (Table 2).
Table 2: Status of IWUA and O&M
No. Locations of the SSI Status of IWUA and O&M
IWUA IWUA not Decided Not formed formed amount decided of amount of payment payment for O&M for O&M
1 Tigray region 8 3 3 5
2 N/ Wollo Zone of Amhara 6 - 1 5 Region
3 S/Wollo Zone of Amhara 5 - 1 4 Region
Total 19 3 5 14
Source: Compiled from field survey data
Table 3: Committee members of the IWUAs
No. Locations of the SSI Members IWUAs committee Total
Males Females
1 Tigray region 83 24 107
2 N/ Wollo Zone of Amhara Region 57 10 67
3 S/Wollo Zone of Amhara Region 38 6 44
Total 178 40 218
Percent 81.7 18.3 100
Source: Compiled from field survey data
4.2.2 Challenges during baseline survey time, issues and concerns The major challenges that the Team faced during the baseline survey time are listed as follows. In addition, the issues and concerns of the irrigation target beneficiaries are presented consequently.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 145
Final Report
Challenges
1. Some of the Small Scale irrigation sites are very far from the Woreda center and the rural roads are very poor to access the schemes and target beneficiaries. E.g. Mai- tsahlo SSI of Mereb Leke Woreda, Daero SSI of Ahiferom Woreda and Baekel SSI of Tahtaymaichew Woreda of Tigray Region. The irrigation target beneficiaries are too far apart from each other in such as Mai-tsahlo, Daero and Baekel. In addition, the topography of the areas are undulating (gorge, valley and hilly) which is difficult to walk on foot for enumerators to undertake the baseline survey and fill the data as well as to capture the GPS locations of the residence of the sample households. This made the baseline survey team tiresome and time taking. 2. The coordination between Woreda Agriculture and Woreda Water Sector is very weak in the region. The Woreda Irrigation staffs (Woreda IFAD Focal persons) do not know the exact locations of the target SSIs in such as Enderta and Hitalo Wajirat Woredas. In such case the Woreda Water Sector staffs helped us. 3. Awareness creation works done are weak to the target beneficiaries on the methods of irrigation constructions, community participation, etc. from Woreda Water and Agriculture offices at one site in Tigray region. As a result some households that use traditional irrigation on the upper part of the planned SSI have objection during the baseline survey suspecting their perennial trees (mango, orange, hops, etc.) will be damaged during constructions of river diversion and canals. E.g. Gereb Fyaya SSI of Hintalo Wajirta of Tigray region.
4.2. 3 Issues and concerns
• Personal observations indicated that some of the SSI schemes are in the remote areas from the target beneficiaries. As a result, some people started stealing and damaging the iron gates of the SSIs. E.g. Golina SSI in Raya Kobo Woreda of North Wollo Zone of Amhra Region. So, the target beneficiaries need to serve as a guard turn by-turn or contribute money and hire guards to protect iron gates of the SSI from thieves.
• The focus group discussions and key informant interview result indicated that there is shortage of improved seeds and pesticides in all of the SSIs that need attention from MOA, Region, Zone and Woreda Agriculture Offices and Cooperatives.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 146
Final Report
• In North and South Wollo Zones of Amhara region where the majorities of the SSI beneficiaries are Muslim community the demand for credit from ACSI MFI is almost none since it does not adapt to Muslin religion.
• The majorities of SSI target beneficiaries will need market linkage for their vegetable products since it is perishable.
• The target households of some planned SSIs need access road to provide their agriculture products to market. These include Gereg Fyaye SSI of Tigray region and Golina SSI of N/Wollo Zone of Amhara region.
V. DETAIL REPORT OF EACH SSI
5.1. Tigray Region
5.1.1 Saekel SSI
Baekel SSI is found in Wuhdet Tabia of Tahtaymaichew Woreda, Central Zone of Tigray region. The population of the project area is about 4,236. The average land holding of a household is 0.5 hectare. The SSI site is about 26 km from Wukuro-Mariyam, the Woreda main town. About 4 km is poor dry weather road. During the baseline survey time the weir and main canals of the irrigation were under construction.
According to the feasibility study document of Baekel SSI its irrigable land is estimated to be 40 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 160 smallholder farmers. The total population of the irrigation area is estimated to be 800.
The key informant interview result indicated that there was no irrigation in the site before. However, there are some irrigation schemes in the surrounding Tabias of the Woreda. Thus, the Woreda arranged experience sharing visits to the SSI beneficiaries and provided training on irrigation. This helped them to create awareness about irrigation management, crop production using irrigation, etc.
The report from the Woreda and key informants indicated that the IWUA and watershed committee were formed. The members of the IWUA are 22 (16 males and 6 females). The irrigation beneficiaries participated in irrigation site identification, labour contribution for such as stone and sand collection in the Tabia. In addition, the community constructed about 4 kms of dry weather road that connects the irrigation site to the main rout. Awareness was created as the beneficiaries will manage the irrigation water management, maintain the
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 147
Final Report canals, etc. However, the IWUA has not yet decided the amount of payment for O&M of the irrigation scheme during the baseline survey time.
According to the key informant interview result the landless households and youths can benefit from the irrigation through various means. These include sharecropping, renting land from others, use family land, etc.
The Woreda Agriculture provides selected seeds of sorghum and maize. In addition, the Woreda Cooperative provides fertilizer to the farmers. However, the Cooperative does not provide marketing of agricultural products since the farmers do not produce surplus agricultural products. The farmers also have access to credit service from Dedebit Micro Finance Institute (MFI). However, smallholder farmers not feel happy with its’ lending procedures. In addition, the Cooperative does not provide Saving and Credit services.
Regards to marketing of the irrigation products, there are three market places around the SSI. These are Chila (in Mereb Leke Woreda), Wukuro-Mariyam (Woreda main town) and Axum. However, there is no regular transport service for the community. As supply creates its own demand, it is hoped that when irrigation users start producing surplus crops, vegetables and fruits many traders will come to the irrigation site to collect them and sell to the consumers, hotels and other merchants.
During the survey time the Woreda has enough experts that can provide support to the irrigation users. In addition there are 4 Development Agents at Tabia (i.e. Livestock = 1, NRM = 1, Coordinator = 1, Cooperative for 3 Kebeles = 1). But, the crop DA position was vacant for the time being.
According to the key informant interview, the Tabia has the following services.
✓ Safe water supply (hand pumps) ✓ Primary cooperative that supplies fertilizer, edible oil and sugar. ✓ Schools (Grade 1- 4 = 1 and Grade 1-8 = 2) ✓ Health post =1 ✓ Vet service (under construction) = 1 for 2 Kebeles.
The major issue raised during the baseline survey was lack of access to selected/improved seeds of crops, vegetables and fruits.
5.1.2 Mai-tsahlo small Scale irrigation Mai-tsahlo small Scale irrigation is found in Haftom Tabia of Mereb Leke Woreda, Centeral Zone of Tigray region. It is about 36 km far away from Rama, the Woreda main town. The
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 148
Final Report total population of the Tabia is 6404. The total area of the Tabia is estimated to be 2615.5 hectares The land use of the area is annual crop land 2615.5 hectares and irrigated land 119.5 hectares.
According to the feasibility study of Mai-tsahlo SSI, the irrigable land is estimated to be 70 hectares and its target beneficiaries are 300 smallholder farmers.
During baseline survey about 2.5 km of canal was already constructed in 2009 EC and 1.3 km extension of canal construction was recently allowed to increase its irrigable land potential as well as to increase the number of irrigation beneficiaries. During the baseline survey time some of the target beneficiaries started planting chickpea using the irrigation water.
The Woreda Agriculture provided training and arranged experience sharing visit to the irrigation users to improve their knowledge on irrigation. The IWUA and Watershed committee were formed. The IWUA has 16 members (i.e. 10 males and 6 females). The IWUA decided Birr 150 per person per year for O&M.
The focus group discussion result indicated that landless households and youths can benefit from the irrigation through various means. These include sharecropping, renting land from others, use family land, labour works on irrigation site, buy irrigation products and sell to consumers at different markets.
There is primary cooperative in the Tibia that supplies fertilizer, edible oil and sugar to the community. The community also has access to saving and credit services from both Saving and Credit Cooperative and Dedebit MFI. According to focus group discussion result, the smallholder farmers do not get access to credit from the MFI, due to lengthy procedures.
The irrigation beneficiaries have two market places. These are Asah, a village town that is about 17 km from the scheme and Adwa town market which is about 35 km from the irrigation site. The irrigation site has access of gravel road of 25 km and community road (poor dry weather road of about 11km).
During the survey time the Tabia has 4 Development Agents (i.e. Crop expert = 1, Livestock expert = 1, NRM expert = 1, Cooperative 1 for 3 Tabias and 1 Coordinator). The Woreda also has enough professionals in Agronomy, Crop protection, Irrigation, Fruit and vegetables production, animal science, NRM, Cooperative and vet service.
According to the FGD discussion the Kebele HHs have access to the following services.
✓ Safe water supply (hand pump): Partially ✓ Primary cooperative that supplies fertilizer, edible oil and sugar
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 149
Final Report
✓ School ✓ Health post service ✓ Vet service ✓ Mobile network service: Partially ✓ Access road: Partially
5.1.3. Daero SSI Daero SSI is found in Hoya-mesdeb Tibia of Ahferom Woreda of Tigray Region. The irrigation site is about 46 km from Inticho, the Woreda main town. The estimated population of the irrigation area is 720. The total land mass of the Tabia is estimated to be 1065 hectares. The land use of the area is annual crop area 965 hectares, irrigated 55 hectares and communal land 100 hectare.
According to data from the Woreda, the irrigable land is estimated to be 94.3 hectares. The irrigation beneficiaries are 144 smallholder farmers.
During the baseline survey time personal observation indicated that the weir of the irrigation was constructed on Belesa River at Daero site. According to the FGD report, the construction of the irrigation canal was started in 2009 EC and completed in 2010 EC. Weir, main canal and night-storage pit were constructed. The construction of the scheme was almost completed but, but gates and crossing structures will remain.
IWUA was established. The IWUA has 15 members (12 males and 3 females). The irrigation beneficiaries decided payment of Birr 200 per household per year for O&M.
The community gets fertilizer from Cooperative and selected seeds from Woreda Agriculture. In addition, they access financial services from Dedebit MFI and Saving and Credit Cooperative. However, the Cooperative does not provide marketing of agricultural products since the farmers do not produce surplus products.
According to FGD, the irrigation beneficiaries access to the following.
✓ Primary school (grade 1-8 = 1) ✓ Health post ✓ 1 vet clinic for 2 Tabias ✓ Road: Partially access to gravel road and partially dry weather road (community road). However, the majorities of the irrigation users and community members (that are estimated to be from 150-300 households) of the Tabia have lack of access to potable water supply for
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 150
Final Report more than nine months. In addition, some of the community has lack of access to telephone network service.
The major issues of Daero SSI were
1. The night storage needs maintenance since it has seepages. 2. The canals need crossing structure 3. Refilling soil in canals where design was changed and has concert covers.
5.1.4 Mai-auso SSI Mai-auso SSI is located in Mai-tium and Addis Alem Tabias of Adwa Woreda of Tigray Region. The site of Mai-auso SSI is about 12 km from Adwa town. The population of the project area is estimated to be 7523. According to the key interment interview result, the total land mass of the area is estimated to be 1352 hectares. The land use pattern of the area is crop land 1142 hectares, irrigated 208 hectares and communal land 210 hectares.
The target irrigable area of Mai-auso SSI is 95 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 163 smallholder farmers.
According to key informant interview, the target households have experience of modern irrigation (i.e. motor pump and river diversion). There are 674 households that produce vegetables, maize and fruits on about 208 hectares of land using modern irrigation in the project Tabias. The maintenances of the schemes have been undertaken by individual farmers. But, the Woreda assist them when its maintenance cost and technical requirement become beyond the capacity of the smallholder farmers.
IWUA was formed that has 24 members (19 males and 5 females). The irrigation beneficiaries decided Birr 125 per household per year for O&M.
During baseline survey time the irrigation was under construction. The weir of the irrigation was completed, while the canals are under-construction. The Mai-auso Tabia side is under construction lining by cement, while the Addis Alem Tabia side is not well constructed. It is rather at first stage dug by community participation that needs more adjustment of the slopes and cementing to protect seepages. Generally, the community participated in project identification and canals construction.
The key informant interview result indicated that the SSI beneficiaries have the following services. These include;
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 151
Final Report
✓ Primary school (grade 1-8) = 2 ✓ Health post = 2 ✓ Potable water supply ✓ Access road ✓ Extension workers (Crop production = 2, Animal Science = 3, NRM = 2, Irrigation = 2, Cooperative = 1) ✓ Access to saving and credit service: The small holder farmers access credit service from Dedebit MFI. ✓ The households also access agricultural inputs (fertilizer and selected seeds from primary Cooperative and vegetable seeds and fruit seedling from Woreda Agriculture). According to key informant interview result, the community planned to plant vegetables (onion, tomato, etc.). The target beneficiaries have access road as well as access market at farm gate (Mai-tium Tabia) and Adwa town. Regards to price of onion and tomato; it fluctuates from Birr 2.50 to Birr 20 per kilo gram depending on the season. The details are presented as follows.
✓ From the months of October to December its average price per kg is 2-3 Birr which is cheap. ✓ From January to April its average price per kg is Birr 8 which is good and ✓ From May to September its average price per kg is 20 Birr which is expensive (very good for farmers). Since the potential of irrigation water decreases starting from the month of March, the target households can plant vegetables and other crops starting from October to January and harvest from January to May. They can use the irrigation output for food diversification and sell the surplus to generate additional income. The key informant interview result indicated that the rural households have habits consuming vegetables.
5.1.5 Ruba-Chemiet SSI Ruba-Chemiet pump irrigation is found in Adi-hedem Tabia of Werie Leke Woreda of Tigray region. The Tabia has 900 households. The SSI site is about 23 km from Dega-Arbi, the Woreda main town. The Tabia has an estimated land mass of 1496.5 hectares. The land use pattern of the community indicated that cultivated land 843.5 hectares, irrigated land 103 hectares, settlement and communal land 550 hectares.
The total population of the Tabia is 8,932 (49% are male and 51% female). There are 1,808 households in the area of whom 533 female headed households and 1,175 male headed
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 152
Final Report households. The average family size of the project area is 4.1 and the average land holding is 0.75 hectare.
According to the feasibility study document the target irrigation area is 102 hectares and the irrigation beneficiaries are 222 smallholder farmers.
The project community is very happy for the plan of the irrigation and participated in irrigation scheme identification since the community is affected by drought most of the time. The irrigation beneficiaries formed IWUA that has 7 members (4 males and 3 females). However, they did not decide the amount of payment for O&M.
Regards to the status of Ruba-Chemiet pump irrigation scheme, personal observation indicated that there is grid hydro-electric electric power line that passes from Nebelt town to Hagere-Selam village near the site of the SSI. But, there are no constructions of weir, canal, no electric pole installation, no pump installation, etc. during the baseline survey time.
About 17 percent of the project community has experience of modern irrigation using motor pump. The maintenance of the schemes have been undertaken individually. Most of the times the households use single cropping. According to the key informant interview result, the productivity of the crops are; sorghum 12 quintals, maize 8 quintals, teff 4 quintals and millet 3 quintals.
The FGD result indicated that the community gets agricultural inputs such as fertilizer from primary Cooperative. It also gets saving and credit service from Dedebit MFI and Saving and Credit Cooperative. However, the smallholder farmers complain about the expensiveness of the agricultural inputs.
The SSI beneficiaries have the following services. These are;
✓ School (Grade 1-4 = 1, Grade 1-8 =2), ✓ Health Center = 1, ✓ Safe water supply: About 60% of the households have access to safe water supply in the tabia and 40% of the households have critical shortage of safe water supply since 6 hand pumps were not function. The Tabia has 4 Development Agents. These are Crop = 1, Animal Science = 1, NRM = 1, Cooperative = 1 for three Tabias and 1= Water sector expert.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 153
Final Report
The FGD result indicated that the SSI target beneficiaries planned to produce vegetables (tomato and onion) and fruits (mango, papaya, etc.). The markets of the outputs are Hagere- Selam (at near the SSI), Nebelet town (at 10 km), Daga-arbi town (at 23 km), Hawuzen town (at 29 km) and Adwa (at 41 km) from the scheme.
The landless households and youths can use the irrigation scheme through share cropping, hiring irrigation land, use family land, buy and sell agriculture products from irrigation users, etc.
5.1.6 Gereb Diagiorgis SSI Gereb Diagiorgis spate irrigation is found in Arato Tabia of Enderta Woreda of Tigray Region. The SSI is about 10 km from Quiha, the Woreda main town. About 5 km of community road is very poor. The total area of the Tabia is estimated to be 4078 hectares. The land use pattern of the Tabi is 2202 hectare used for annual crops, 276.3 hectares irrigated land and 1876 hectares communal land. The major crops produced in the tabia in priority order are wheat, sorghum, teff and Beans. The productivity of the crops are wheat 24 quintals, sorghum 18 quintals, teff 12 quintals and faba bean 8 quintals. The households undertake single cropping system.
The total households of the Tabia are 2525. The households of the Tabia undertake both traditional and modern irrigation.
According to the key informants the target irrigation area of the SSI is 23.5 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 41 (34 male headed households, 2 women headed households and 5 youths).
The target households planned to plant vegetable (onion, tomato, lettuce, etc.), wheat and barley. They want to produce for both consumption and market to generate income.
The target beneficiaries formed IWUA that has 6 members (4 males and 2 females). However, payment for O&M not yet decided. In addition, training on irrigation not given since it is recently studied.
According to FGD participants the tabia has 5 schools (Grade 1-5=3 and Grade 1-8= 2), poor water supply, health center 1 and 1 vet service. The major markets of the irrigation users are Quiha (10 km) and Mekele (15 km).
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 154
Final Report
The community gets fertilizer from Cooperative and selected seeds from Woreda Agriculture. In addition, they access financial services from Dedebit MFI and Saving and Credit Cooperative. However, the Cooperative does not provide marketing of agricultural products since the farmers do not produce surplus products.
The major problems are access to improved vegetable seed (onion) and market for the produce during harvest time.
5.1.7 Gereb Giba SSI Gereb-Giba pump irrigation is found in the Western part of Mahibere-genet Tabia of Enderta Woreda of Tigray Region. The total households of the Tabia are 1686 (1137 males and 549 females). The average family size of the area is 5 people.
According to key informant interview the target SSI will irrigate 45 hectares of land and the total target beneficiaries are 120 smallholder farmers.
The land use of the community is annual crop 1,112 hectare, 325.5 hectares irrigated land and 449.5 communal land. The average landholding of a household is 0.5 hectare. The major crops produced in the area are wheat and sorghum. The average productivity of the crops is wheat 18 quintals and sorghum 25 quintals per hectare.
The households undertake both traditional and modern irrigation in the area. They produce vegetables such as onion, tomato, lettuce, cabbage, carrot, etc. According to the data from the Development Agents of the Tabia 774 households used irrigation during the survey time.
The Tabia has the following services. These includes 3 schools (grade 1-4 = 1, grade 1-8 = 1 and grade 9-10 = 1), health center 1, vet service and potable water supply as well as Development Agents that provide extension service. In addition, there is access asphalt road to market the irrigation products.
The major markets of the irrigation users are Romanat (near-by Tabia center market) and Mekele markets which is about 12 km.
The community gets fertilizer from Cooperative and selected seeds from Woreda Agriculture. In addition, they access financial services from Dedebit MFI. However, the Cooperative does not provide saving and credit as well as marketing of agricultural products. During the baseline survey time the IWUA was not formed since it was recently studied.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 155
Final Report
The major problem is fluctuation of vegetable price from time to time depending on the market supply in the country. For example;
✓ From January to February the price of onion and tomato is cheap (about Birr 1.50 per kg). ✓ From July to October the price of onion and tomato is high (i.e. average price per kg is 15 Birr) and ✓ During the rest of the months its average is about 8 Birr per kg.
5.1.8 Misirar Telli SSI Misirar Telli SSI irrigation is found in South Eastern part of Mahibere-genet Tabia of Enderta Woreda, Tigray Region. The total households of the Tabia are 1686 (1137 males and 549 females). The average family size of the area is 5 people.
The land mass of the Tabia is estimated to be 3180.5 hectares. The land use of the area is cultivated land 1112 hectares including irrigated land 265.3 hectares, forest and bush land 1184 hectares, grazing land 174 hectares, area closure 650 hectares and settlement 633 hectares. The average landholding of a household is 0.5 hectare.
The target area of the SSI is 52.5 hectares of land and the target beneficiaries are 76 smallholder farmers.
The major crops produced in the area are wheat and sorghum. The average productivity of the crops is wheat 18 quintals and sorghum 25 quintals per hectare. In addition households undertake both traditional and modern irrigation in the area. They produce vegetables such as onion, tomato, lettuce, cabbage, carrot, etc.
The Tabia has the following services. These includes 3 schools (grade 1-4 = 1, grade 1-8 = 1 and grade 9-10 = 1), health center 1, vet service and potable water supply as well as Development Agents that provide extension service. In addition, there is access asphalt road to market the irrigation products. However, there is poor community road of about 7 km to access the SSI site.
The major markets of the irrigation users of the area are Romanat (Tabia center market) and Mekele markets which is about 12 km.
The community gets fertilizer from Cooperative and selected seeds from Woreda Agriculture. In addition, they access financial services from Dedebit MFI. However, the Cooperative does not provide saving and credit service as well as marketing of agricultural products. According
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 156
Final Report to the report from Development Agents and the community members IWUA was not formed since it was recently studied.
The major problem is market price of vegetable fluctuates from time to time depending on the market supply in the country. For example;
✓ From January to February the price of onion and tomato is cheap (about Birr 1.50 per kg). ✓ From July to October the price of onion and tomato is high (i.e. average price per kg is 15 Birr) and ✓ The rest of the months is average which is about 8 Birr per kg.
5.1.9 Gereb Fyaye SSI Gereb Fyaye SSI is found in Hitalo Wajirat Woreda of Tigray region. It has no access road in Hintalo Wajirat Woreda that connects the site with Woreda main town. However, through Seharti Samre Woreda it is about 85 km from Adigudom (Hintalo Wajirat Woreda) main town. Of the total distance it has gravel road of 66 km, poor community road of 12 km and no access road of about 7 km. Thus, the survey team travelled on foot about 3 hours round trip to access the SSI site
The total population of the Tabia is 9190 and the average family size is 5. The total land mass of the Tabia is estimated to be 12348 hectares. The land use pattern of the Tabia is 1855 hectare cultivated land, irrigated land 222 hectares, forest and wood land 925 hectares, grazing land 3907 hectares, gorges and hills 537 hectares and settlement 372.2 hectares.
The major crops produced in the Tabia are wheat, barley, teff and sorghum. The average productivity of the crops indicated wheat 13 quintals, barley 14 quintals, teff 8 quintals and sorghum 19 quintals. The households undertake single cropping system. The community has practice of using traditional irrigation.
According to key informant interview, the targeted irrigation area Gereb Fyaye SSI is 97 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 181 smallholder farmers.
The community has one First Cycle Primary School (grade 1-4). However, it has no access to potable water supply, health service, vet service and no access road during the baseline survey time.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 157
Final Report
The community uses three markets (Samre, Hareqo and Muja). Samre is about 22 km, Hareqo 8 km and Muja 6 km from the irrigation users. However, the community has no access road to take its production to the market that needs emphasis.
The community gets agriculture inputs (fertilizer and improved seed) from Cooperative on cash basis. There is credit service from Dedebit MFI and Saving and Credit Cooperative, but the demand for credit service is very low due lack of access road to market the agricultural products. However, the IWUA was not formed during the baseline survey time since it was recently studied.
According to personal observation awareness raising works on the use of the irrigation has not done Woreda Agriculture and Woreda Water sectors. As a result, the community has suspicion on the scheme. The FGD participants reported that the construction of the SSI (diversion weir and canals) will affect their perennial crops as well as affects traditional irrigation users on the upper side of the scheme.
5.1.10 Dagabir SSI Dagabir SSI is found in Hintalo Tabia of Hintalo Wajirat Woreda of Tigray Region. It is located at about 12 km from Adigudom (Woreda main town). It has about 6 km gravel road and very poor dry weather road of about 6 km from the junction of the gravel road to the irrigation site. The total population of the Tabia is estimated to be 8103. The average family size is 5 people.
The total land mass of the Tabia is about 2321 hectares. The land use pattern of the Tabia is 2210 annual crop land, 275 hectares irrigated land and 111 hectares community land. The major crops produced in the area include wheat, barley, teff, lentils, sorghum, chick pea and grass pea. The data from the extension agent indicated that the productivity of the crops are wheat 12 quintals, barley 12 quintals, teff 6 quintals, lentils 8 quintals, sorghum 24 quintals, chick pea 13 quintals and grass pea 4 quintals.
The households of the Tabia practices traditional and modern irrigation systems. The FGD participants mentioned that the traditional irrigations are managed by the individual households. But, three modern irrigation schemes were damaged due to poor management. The households mentioned that the community practices single cropping system.
According to key informants interview result, the potential irrigation area of the SSI is 12.5 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 85 (54 male headed households, 11 youths and 20 women headed households). The irrigation users formed IWUA that has 6 members (6 males and 0 females). However, the amount of O&M not yet decided.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 158
Final Report
The community has 2 primary schools (Grade 1-8 = 2), safe water supply, network mobile telephone service, health post.
The community has plan to produce vegetables (onion, tomato, etc.) using spate irrigation. Thus, the community may have two crop seasons (annual rainfall and spate irrigation). The major market of the community is Adigudom.
The community gets fertilizer from Cooperative and selected seeds from Woreda Agriculture. In addition, they access financial services from Dedebit MFI and Saving and Credit Cooperative. However, the Cooperative does not provide marketing service since the farmers do not produce surplus products.
5.1 11 Adi-Kerakiro SSI Adi-Kerakiro SSI irrigation is found in Emba-Alaje Woreda, Southern Zone of Tigray region. It is located in Tekh’a Tabia. The scheme is about 7 km from Endeashu, the Woreda main town. The total land mass of the Tabia is estimated to be 1990 hectares. The land use pattern of the indicated that 1634 hectare used for crop production, 329.6 irrigated land and 356 hectare communal land. The total households of the Tabia are 2113.
The target irrigation area of the SSI is 40 hectares and the irrigation beneficiaries are 104 smallholder farmers.
The community produces crops such as wheat, barley, field pea, teff and lentils. According to the report from the Development Agents, the productivity of the crops are wheat 30 quintals, barley 28 quintals, field pea 25 quintals, Teff 15 quintals and lentils 15 quintals. The community uses single cropping system. The households of the area have practice of using irrigation. They use both traditional and modern irrigations. The households maintain the schemes.
The community has access to school (Grade 1-8=2 and grade 1-10=1), health center, safe water supply, all-weather road and mobile telephone network.
The status of the SSI indicated that it is on completion stage. But, fitting the gates and crossing structure will remain. The target households planted different crops using the irrigation water during the baseline time such as maize, onion, carrot, cabbage, potato, etc. in Block1-4. The stands of the crops are good.
The irrigation uses formed IWUA on 09/10/2009 EC that has 15 members (12 males and 3 females). Its name is called Firehiwot IWUA. It has office, legal Certificate, seal, legal
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 159
Final Report vouchers, etc. The registration fee of the IWUA is Birr 15. However, it did not decide the amount of payment for O&M.
The community gets fertilizer from Cooperative and selected seeds from Woreda Agriculture. In addition, the households access financial services from Dedebit MFI and Saving and Credit Cooperative. However, the Cooperative does not provide marketing of agricultural products.
According to focus group discussion, the landless households and youths can use the irrigation share cropping, hiring land from others, etc. The cost of hiring 0.25 hectare of land is about Birr 5000 per year in the area.
The main market of the community is Endeashu, Maichew and Mekele. The main challenge in the area is market problem of the vegetables. For example the price of 1 kg of onion is;
➢ Birr 5-6 from in July ➢ On average 8 Birr in August and ➢ Birr 15-20 from end of August to end of September. According to the report from Woreda Agriculture, to overcome the problem there is start-up works to link the farmers with merchants.
5.2. North Wollo Zone of Amhara Region
5.2.1. Gobu-4 SSI The head of Gobu-4 spate irrigation is found in Hujira Kebele of Raya Kobo Woreda of N/Wollo Zone of Amhara Region. It is about 15 km from Kobo, the Woreda main town. The irrigation target households are found in Jarota and Adis kigni Kebeles. The total households of Gobu- 4 are 2,123 (male 1,769 and female 354).
The total land mass of Gobu-4 is 6898 hectares. Its land use pattern indicated that annual crop 2644 hectares and irrigated crops 48 hectares and gullies 150 hectare, grazing land 1928 hectare, forest and bush land 1078 hectares and other 1098 hectares.
The target irrigation area of Gobu-4 SSI is 400 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 189 smallholder farmers. According to personal observation the status of the Gobu-4 spate irrigation is on completion stage. However, fitting gates and crossing structures will remain. The irrigation users formed IWUA that has 11 members (male 10 and female 1). However, the payment for O&M not yet decided.
The community has access to school (Grade 1-8=2), health service, safe water supply and rural road. The community access to inputs (fertilizer, selected seed and chemicals) from
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 160
Final Report
Cooperative. However, the Cooperative does not provide Saving and credit service. According to focus group discussion result, the demand of the households for fertilizer is also low due to moisture stress. There is access to credit service from ACSI MFI. But, its demand is low since it does not adapt to Muslim religion.
The markets of the irrigation users are Addis Kigni (village market), Tumuga and Kobo. Tumuga market is about 14 km and Kobo market is about 15 km from Gobu-4 irrigation site. The irrigation site has access road and transport service such as ISUZU, Bajaj and carts.
5.2.2 Gobu-3 SSI Gobu-3 spate irrigation is found in Jarota Kebele of Raya Kobo Woreda of N/Wollo Zone of Amhara region. The site of the SSI is about 15 km from Kob, the Woreda main town. The target beneficiaries are found in Jarota Kebele.
The total land mass of Gobu-3 is estimated to be 2922 hectares. The land use pattern of the area is crop land 2005 hectares (including 250 hectares irrigated land), grazing land 212 hectares, forest and bush land 85 hectares, others 620 hectares.
The target households produce sorghum, maize, teff and mung in priority order. According to the report from the Kebele Development Agents the productivity of the crops are sorghum 30 quintals, maize 20 quintals, teff 13 quintals and mung 12 quintals. The households of the area practice single cropping system. There are both modern and traditional irrigations in the area. The individuals manage the traditional irrigations while the modern irrigations are managed by water committee.
The community access to inputs (fertilizer, selected seed and chemicals) from Cooperative. However, the demand for fertilizer is low due to moisture stress. The community also access to credit service from ACSI MFI and Saving and Credit Cooperative. But, the demand for credit is low since it does not adapt to Muslim religion.
The target irrigation area of Gobu-3 SSI is 250 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 271 smallholder farmers. According to personal observation, the status of the SSI indicated that its diversion and canal are completed. However, fitting gates and crossing structures will remain. According to the FGD result, the landless households and youths can use share cropping, hire land, use their family land, etc.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 161
Final Report
The SSI target beneficiaries formed IWUA that has 11 members (8 males and 3 females). But the O&M not yet decided. The HHs have plan to plant crops such as maize, sorghum, teff, chickpea, mung and onion for both household consumption and supply to market.
The SSI has access road and means of transport to market the products. The major markets of the irrigation users are Waja, Tumuga and Kobo. The community also has access to school (Grade 1-4=2 and grade 1-8=1), health post, safe water supply, means of transport and mobile network service.
5.2.3 Amid SSI Amid SSI is found in Waramigna Kebele of Raya Kobo Woreda, N/Wollo Zone of Amhara Region. It is about 7 km from Kobo, the Woreda main town. The total households of the Kebele are 2240 and the average family size is 5. The total land mass of the Kebele is 6504 hectares. The land use pattern of the Kebele indicated that annual crop 1592 hectares (including irrigated area 94.7 hectare), gullies 175 hectares, grazing land 175 hectares, forest and bush land 4065 hectares and others 333 hectares. The average land holding of a household is 0.75 hectare.
The target irrigable land of Amid SSI is 72 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 143 smallholder farmers. The SSI users formed IWUA that has 11 members (9 males and 2 females). However, the payment for O&M not yet decided.
The households produce crops such as teff, sorghum and maize in priority order. According to the report from the Development Agents the productivity of the crops indicated teff 14 quintals, sorghum 24 quintals and maize 35 quintals. The households undertake single cropping system.
The households have experiences of using traditional and modern irrigation systems. The traditional irrigations are managed by individual households while the modern irrigations are managed by water committee.
The irrigation users have access to school (Grade 1- 4 =1, Grade 1-8 = 1 and Grade 1-12 = 1), health service (health center) and safe water supply. But the SSI users have no access road starting from the junction of the asphalt road up-to the SSI site which is about 4 km.
According to FGD report, the landless households and youths can use the irrigation land by sharecropping, hiring land and use family land, etc. According to personal observation the inlet, main canal and night storage are constructed. However, gabion works at the head,
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 162
Final Report fitting gates, flow channels and crossing structures will remain. The irrigation beneficiaries planted mango seedlings and teff. During the baseline survey some of the irrigation beneficiaries’ harvested teff. The Woreda planned the SSI users as mango cluster. According to the Woreda report 2400 mangos were planted on the farm lands of the target beneficiaries.
The households access agriculture inputs from Cooperative and credit service from ACSI MFI. However, the demand of the households for fertilizer is none due to moisture stress. In addition the Cooperative does not provide Saving and Credit service.
5.2.4 Golina SSI Golina intake irrigation site is about 34 km from Kobo, the Raya Kobo Woreda main town, N/Wollo Zone of Amhara Region. Its headwork is found in Addisalem Kebele while its target beneficiaries are located in Kebele 22 of Raya Kobo Woreda of N/Wollo Zone of Amhara region. The total households of the Kebele are 1712. The land mass of the Kebele is 10374 hectares. The land use of the Kebele indicated that 1610 hectares crop land including 185 hectare irrigated land, gully, rocky and bare land 200 hectares, grazing land 2100 hectares, forest and bush land 3664 hectares and others 2800 hectares.
The major crops produced in the area are sorghum, teff, maize, sesame, flax, nueg and chickpea. The data from Development Agents indicated that the productivity of the crops area sorghum 24 quintals, teff 8 quintals, maize 26 quintals, sesame 3 quintals, flax 2 quintals nueg 4 quintals, chickpea 7 quintals. The households practice single cropping system.
The target irrigable land of Golina SSI is 170 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 176 smallholder farmers. The irrigation target beneficiaries formed IWUA that has 11 members (male 9 and female 2). However, the contribution for O&M is not yet decided. According to FGD report there are many landless households and youths in the Kebele. The landless households and youths can use irrigation land by sharecropping, hiring land, etc.
There are traditional and modern irrigations in the Kebele. The traditional irrigations are managed by the individuals while the modern irrigations are managed by water committee.
The households access agriculture inputs (selected seed) from Cooperative (Woreda Agriculture) and credit service from ACSI MFI and Saving and Credit Service. But the demand of the households for fertilizer and credit service is low. The major reasons are (1) there is moisture stress (2) the MFI does not adapt to Muslin religion.
Regards to the status of the construction of the SSI gabion, intake, water outlets and canal were constructed. However, fitting the gates and crossing structures will remain.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 163
Final Report
The SSI users have the following infrastructure. These include school 5 (Grade 1-4 = 3 and grade 1-8 = 2), health service (health post), safe water supply, and gravel road up-to the Kebele center (Afaf). However, the irrigation site has no access road starting from Kebele center to SSI site which is about 12 km. The baseline survey team observed the constructions of the SSI through railway which is 17 km single trip from the Kebele center. However, the Kebele center has both access road and transport service.
According to focus group discussion result there were three deep wells constructed by the region to provide irrigation service to many households of the area, but not started functioning due to shortage of electric power supply. This indicated that Federal Government needs to support the households providing electric power supply.
The SSI beneficiaries planned to plant maize, vegetables (onion, tomato, cabbage, carrot, etc.) and fruits like mango, papaya, banana, etc. The landless households and youths can use share cropping and hiring irrigation land from others, etc. The cost of hiring 0.25 hectares of irrigation land is about Birr 700 per year in the area.
The major markets of the irrigation users are Afaf gulit market (at Kebele center), Gobuye (9km) and Robit (16 km). Since there is access road up-to the Kebele center (Afaf) merchants will come and buy the irrigation products. However, the major challenge is absence of access road from Kebele center (Afaf) to SSI site which is about 12 km. Thus, it needs construction of this feeder road with community, government and others participation in order to help the irrigation users to provide their agricultural production to market.
The baseline survey team observed the following that need improvement.
1) The main gate was taken by thieves. In addition, the opening and closing handle of one main gate was cut by grander by unknown person to damage the structure. Thus, the irrigation target beneficiaries need to keep by turn or contribute money and hire guards. 2) The irrigation canal was filled with silt, weeds and grasses in many areas; thus needs cleaning. 3) Crossing structures and additional water flow channels will be required in the farmers’ field.
5.2.5 Eyela-2 SSI Eyela-2 SSI is found in Chibina Kebele of Gidan Woreda, N/Wollo Zone of Amhara region. It is about 12 km from Muja, the Woreda main town. The total households of the Kebele are
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 164
Final Report
817 (male 607 and female 210). The average family size of the area is 5. The land mass of the Kebele is 7539 hectares. The land use pattern of the Kebele is 1684 hectare annual crop including 113 hectare irrigated land, 2500 hectare grazing land, forest and bush land 60 hectares, gullies 250 hectares, settlement area 3010 hectares and others 35 hectares. The major crops of the area are wheat, barley, field pea, faba bean, lentils, maize, grass pea and chickpea. The average land holding of a household is about 0.25 hectares which is very low. The community uses single cropping system.
The data from the Development Agents office indicated that the productivity of the crops is wheat 19 quintals, teff 10 quintals, field pea 12 quintals, faba bean 10 quintals, lentils 15 quintals and chickpea 14 quintals.
The target irrigable land of Eyela-2 SSI is 116.75 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 556 smallholder farmers. The SSI users formed IWUA in October 2017 that has 14 members (male 10 and female 4). The name of the IWUA is “Edget Behibiret Yemesino Tetekamiwoch mahiber”. The association has office, legal Certificate, seal and vouchers. The IWUA decided registration Birr 15, contribution Birr 185 and O&M of Birr 10 per month.
The households of the Kebele use traditional irrigation, which is managed by individuals and water committee depending on the situation. They also manage water distribution among the beneficiaries and maintenance of the canals.
The households access to inputs from Cooperative. The households have access to the following services. These include schools (grade 1-4 = 1), health post, access road, credit service from ACSI MFI and Saving and Credit Cooperative. But, half of the community did not get safe water supply and mobile network services.
The SSI users planned to plant market oriented vegetables and fruits. These include vegetables (onion, pepper, tomato, cabbage, etc.) and apple.
The major markets of the irrigation beneficiaries are Eyela, Densa and Muja (12 km). There is access road as well as transport service to these market places. The major challenge is fluctuation of market prices for the vegetables. In this regard, the price of onion it becomes about Birr 5 per kg during November to December and increase to Birr 8-10 during March to June. Similarly the price of garlic becomes Birr 20 when it is cheap and Birr 50 when its price is good.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 165
Final Report
Personal observation indicated that the construction of Eyela-2 SSI is on start-up stage. The contractor (ORDA) conducted survey, clearing access road to the construction site, collecting sand and started digging the canal manually.
5.2.6. Sideni SSI Sideni SSI is found in Gora Arba and Girana Kebeles of Habru Woreda, N/Wollo Zone of Amhara region. It is located at a distance of about 21 km from Mersa, the Woreda main town. The irrigation site is found in Gorarba and Girana Kebeles. The total population of the Kebeles is 2738 (male 1583 and female 1155). The average family size of a household is 5.3 persons. The land mass of the Kebeles is 3363.5 hectares. The land use pattern of the area indicated that cultivated land 1786 hectares including irrigated land of 450 hectare, grazing land 296 hectares, forest and bush land 871 hectares, gullies 17.5 hectare and others 393 hectares. The major crops grown in the area are Sorghum, maize, Teff, sesame, chickpea and Nueg. The average productivity of the crops indicated that sorghum 12 quintals, maize 25 quintals, teff 8 quintals, sesame 5 quintals, chickpea 20 quintals and nueg 7 quintals.
The households of the Kebeles use both traditional and modern irrigations. The traditional irrigations are managed by individuals, while the modern irrigation is managed by Water committee. The smallholder farmers’ of the Kebele have experience of intercropping. For example the households plant sesame, mung and forage which are legume plants under sorghum and maize crops. These crops have multiple purposes. First, they undertake nitrogen fixation and serve to protect soil erosion. In addition, forage is used for animals feed.
The community used Kalicha River for many years for traditional irrigation. Now, they want to improve it since landslide and flood affected their traditional irrigation canal at the head.
The target irrigation area of Sideni SSI is 154 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 556 smallholder farmers. The irrigation target households’ formed IWUA that has 11 members (i.e. 11 males and 0 females). The IWUA decided registration of Birr 25 per household but not yet decided the amount of payment for O&M during the baseline survey time.
Personal observation indicated that the status of the irrigation is on start-up. The contractor started digging the site of weir and a few canal using manually.
The project community has the following social services. These are school (Grade 1-4 = 1, Grade 1-8 = 1 and Grade 9-10 = 1), health service, access road, transport service and inadequate safe water supply. The households get inputs from Cooperative (Woreda Agriculture). But, the demand for fertilizer is none due to moisture stress. In addition, the
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 166
Final Report smallholder farmers have access to credit from ACSI and Saving and Credit Cooperative. But, the demand for credit is low since it does not adapt to Muslim religion.
The irrigation target households planned to plant vegetables (onion, tomato, cabbage, carrot), fruits (mango, avocado, papaya and banana).
The major markets of the irrigation users are Girana, Mersa and Urgessa. However, the farmers reported as they have less support on creating market linkages from Woreda Government. This situation may affect the irrigation target beneficiaries since they have no bargaining power.
5.3 South Wollo Zone of Amhara region
5.3.1. Burka SSI Burka SSI is found at about 18 km from Hayk (the Woreda main town), Tehuledere Woreda of South Wollo Zone of Amhara Region. The irrigation target beneficiaries are found in Kebele 16 and Kebele 17. The total populations of the Kebeles are 15,712 (male 9108 and female 6604). The data from the Development Agents Office indicated that the land mass of the Kebeles is 3500 hectares. The land use pattern of the Kebeles indicated that cultivated land 1675 hectares including irrigated land of 371.6 hectares, grazing 179 hectares, forest and bush land 68 hectares, settlement 6 hectares, hills and gullies 1572 hectares. The average land holding of a household is 0.5 hectare in the area.
The major crops produced in the area are sorghum, teff, maize, mung, haricot bean and sesame. The average productivity of the crops are sorghum 18 quintals, teff 9 quintals, maize 24 quintals, mung 14 quintals, haricot bean 12 quintals and sesame 5 quintals. The community mainly uses single cropping system. According to the focus group discussion result, the landless households and youths use family land, share cropping and hire land from others and produce crops, etc.
There is traditional irrigation in the Kebeles. Individuals and water committee manages the maintenance of the schemes depending on the situation. The water committee also manages proper distribution of the water to irrigation users.
According to FGD and key informant interview result the target irrigable area of Burka SSI is 80 hectares and the total target beneficiaries are 123 households (78 households from Kebele 17 and 45 households from Kebele 16). The target beneficiaries formed IWUA that has 7 members (6 males and 1 female). However, the amount of payment for O&M not yet decided. The target beneficiaries planned to produce vegetables (onion, tomato, tomato, potato,
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 167
Final Report cabbage, etc.), fruits like mango, papaya, avocado, as well as Mung crop. The major markets of the community are; (1) Seglen (village market) and (2) Hayk (18 km).
Regards to the status of the Burka SSI irrigation, personal observation indicated that weir constructed and canal under construction. It is on completion stage. However, fitting gates, flow channels and crossing structure, etc. will remain.
According to focus group discussion result, the project community has access to school (grade 1-4=2 and grade 1-8=1), health center. In addition about 31 percent of the project community has access to safe water supply (i.e. Kebele 17), while the majorities have no access to safe water supply (i.e. Kebele 16). There is access gravel road for both dry and rainy season. There is mobile telephone network and transport service in the project area.
According to key informants and focus group discussion results, the households get inputs from Cooperative (Woreda Agriculture). But, the demand for fertilizer is low due to moisture stress. In addition, the smallholder farmers have access to credit service from ACSI and Saving and Credit Cooperative. But, the demand for credit is low since it does not adapt to Muslim religion.
5.3.2 Challi SSI Challi SSI is found in Werebabo Woreda of South Wollo Zone of Amhara Region. The irrigation site is about 35 km from Bistima, the Woreda Main town. The total population of the Kebele is 3425 (males 2008 and females 1417). The average family size is 5 persons. The land mass of the Kebele indicated 3650 hectares. The land use of the area indicated that cultivated land 489 hectares including irrigated land of 55 hectares, grazing land 412 hectares, forest and bush land 1746 hectares, hill and gorges 641 hectares and settlement 362 hectares. The average land holding of a household is 0.75 hectare.
The target irrigable land of Challi SSI is 163 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 92 smallholder farmers. The irrigation target households formed IWUA that has 7 members (males 6 and female 1). In addition, the target beneficiaries decided payment of Birr 50 per household per month for O&M. According to key FGD participants the landless households and youths of the area can use share cropping system most of the time.
Regards to construction of the SSI, personal observation indicated that the contractor is gathering construction materials. So, its construction is on-startup stage.
The major crops produced in the area are sorghum, sesame, mung, maize, haricot beans, ground nuts and pepper. The average productivity of the crops showed that sorghum 22
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 168
Final Report quintals, sesame 5 quintals, mung 8 quintals, maize 24 quintals, haricot beans 7 quintals, ground nuts 4 quintals and pepper 40 quintals. Some households use intercropping system. In this regard mung and sesame crops are planted under sorghum crop.
The households use traditional irrigation. In this regard some households use motor pump to irrigate their crop lands. The households maintain their irrigation schemes. According to key focus group discussion result, the households get inputs from Cooperative (Woreda Agriculture). But, the demand for fertilizer is low due to moisture stress.
There is ACSI MFI and Saving and Credit Cooperative in the Woreda, but households do not use it since the credit does not adapt to Muslim religion.
Key informant interview and personal observation result indicated that the community has access to school (Grade 1-4=2 and grade 1-8=1), health service (health post), vet service, all-weather road (gravel road) and transport service. In addition, about 44% of the households’ access to potable water supply and about 70% of the households has access to mobile network services.
The major markets of the community are (1) Bokeksa 7km, (2) Bistima about 35km and (3) Chifera (Afar Region) 37 km. Furthermore, the project target community has access road and transport service for their products.
5.3.3 Jerma SSI The SSI is found in Wereilu Woreda of South Wollo Zone of Amhara Region. The irrigation site is about 55 km from Wereilu, the Woreda main town. The project beneficiaries are from Kebele 18, 17 and 19. The total population of the project Kebeles are 971 (males 525 and females 446). Of the total target households the majorities (about 75% are from Kebele 18. The average family size of the area is 4.
The land mass of the project area is 4344.8 hectares. The land use pattern of the community is cultivated land 2441 hectares including irrigated land of 50 hectares, grazing land 870 hectares, forest and bush land 581.3 hectares, settlement 450 hectares and gully and others 2.5 hectares. The average land holding of a household is 0.75 hectare.
The target irrigable area of Jerma SSI is 140 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 106 smallholder farmers. The target beneficiaries formed IWUA that has 12 members (10 males and 2 females). However, the amount of payment for O&M not yet decided.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 169
Final Report
With regard to the status of the construction of the SSI, personal observation indicated that its construction was on start-up stage during the baseline survey. The contractor started camp construction and canal digging manually.
The major crops produced in the area are wheat, barley, lentils, fenugreek, field pea, faba bean and maize. The average productivity of the crops are wheat 32 quintals, barley 12 quintals, lentils 7 quintals, fenugreek 6 quintals, field pea 3 quintals, faba bean 15 quintals and maize 2 quintals. The households use single cropping system. The landless households and youths use sharecropping most of the time. The households use traditional irrigation. Individuals and water committee manage maintenance of the traditional irrigation schemes based on the situations.
The households access agriculture inputs from Cooperative and credit service from ACSI and Saving and Credit Cooperative.
According to focus group discussion result, the target community has access to school (grade 1-4=1, Grade 1-8=1 and grade 9-10=1), health service and safe water supply. The community also has dry weather road which needs improvement. But, it does not have transport service.
The markets of the community are (1) Kulumbi (village market), (2) Guguftu (12.5 km) and (3) Kabe (10 km) from the scheme.
5.3.4 Cheleka SSI Cheleka SSI is found in Degan Kebele, Kalu Woreda of S/Wollo Zone of Tigray region. The irrigation site is about 25 km from Kombolcha, the Woreda main town. The total households of the Kebele are 831. The land mass of the Kebele is 3201 hectares. The land use pattern of the community indicated that annual crop 889 hectares including irrigated crop land of 281 hectares, grazing land 23 hectares, forest and bush land 1660 hectares, settlement 528 hectares and hills and gorges 101 hectares. The average landholding of a household is 0.5 hectare. The landless households and youngsters use share cropping and hiring land from others, etc.
The households produce the following major crops. These include sorghum, teff, mung, chick pea and millet. The average productivity of the crops are sorghum 20 quintals, teff 12 quintals, mung 19 quintals, chick pea 3 quintals and millet 5 quintals. Some of the households undertake double cropping system in the area.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 170
Final Report
There are both traditional and modern small scale irrigations. The maintenance of the irrigation schemes are managed by individuals and water committee depending on the situations. The target irrigation area of Cheleka SSI is 80 hectares and the target beneficiaries are 186 smallholder farmers. The target beneficiaries formed IWUA that has 11 members (9 males and 2 females). However, the amount of payment for O&M has not yet decided. Concerning the status of the SSI personal observation indicated that the construction of the irrigation is on start-up stage. The contractor already conducted survey and started camp construction during the baseline survey time. The households access agriculture inputs (selected seed) from Cooperative (Woreda Agriculture) and credit service from ACSI. But, the community members do not use chemical fertilizer due to moisture stress. However, the demand for credit from the households is almost none since it does not adapt to Muslim religion. In addition, the Cooperative does not provide saving and credit service. The focus group discussion result indicated that the target beneficiaries have access to school (grade 1-8=2 and grade 1-12=1), health service (health center), safe water supply, road, mobile telephone network and transport service. The irrigation target households planned to produce vegetables and fruits. These include onion, tomato, mango, papaya, banana, etc. The major markets of the irrigation users are (1) Degan (village market), Bati (20 km) and Kombolcha (25 km). In addition, the potential markets of the target households are Djibouti and Asseb. 5.3.5 Sherif SSI Sherif SSI is found Argoba Special Woreda of S/Wollo Zone Amhara region. It is about 7 km from Senkele (Medina), the Woreda main town. The total population of the Kebele is 5166 (male 2671 and female 2495). The average family size of the area is 5 persons. The land mass of the Kebele is estimated to be 2304 hectares. The land use pattern of the community indicated that cultivated land 654 hectares including irrigated land of 125 hectares, grazing land 150 hectares and forest and bush land, gorges and settlement 1500 hectares. The average landholding of a household is 0.65 hectares. The major crops that the community produces are sorghum, mung, maize, teff and sesame. The data from the Development Agents indicated that the productivity of the crops are sorghum 22 quintals, mung 11 quintals, maize 25 quintals, teff 10 quintals and sesame 8 quintals. The majorities of the households use single cropping system in the area.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 171
Final Report
According to data from Woreda Agriculture, the target irrigable land of Sherif SSI is 78.3 hectare and the target beneficiaries are 185 smallholder farmers. The target beneficiaries formed IWUA that has 7 members (male =7 and female = 0). But, the amount of payment for O&M not yet decided.
Personal observation indicated that the construction of the irrigation is on completion stage. But, the fitting gates and crossing structures will remain.
There are traditional and modern irrigations in the Kebele. The individuals and water committee manage the maintenance and proper water distribution to the water based on the 1 situation. The landless households and youths use share cropping, Yeligibile ( ⁄3) and hiring land from others. The irrigation target beneficiaries have plan to produce vegetables (onion, tomato, mango, papaya, banana, etc.
The focus group discussion result indicated that the target community members have access to the following. These include school (grade 1-8=3), health post service, access road and mobile telephone network services. However, about 30% of the households have access to safe water supply while the majorities have no access to it. There is access to credit service from ACSI MFI. But, the community does not use it since it does not adapt to Muslim religion. On the other hand, the community gets improved seed of maize, mung and chick pea from the government extension service. But, the households do not use fertilizer since there is moisture stress in the area. In addition, the Cooperative does not provide saving and credit service. The major markets of the target beneficiaries are (1) Medina 6 km, (2) Harawa 20 km and (3) Harbu 34 km.
5.4. Shemes in North Gonder and South Wollo 5.4.1 Gulana
Gulana is located in West Belesa Woreda, Gulana Kebele. The scheme is new one and it is under construction. About 90 percent of the canal construction is completed. The scheme name is derived from Gulana River on which some smallholder farmers used to produce crops using the river in irrigating their own farmland on traditional basis. The new small scale irrigation scheme is expected to irrigate 535 hectares of farmland owned by smallholder
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 172
Final Report
farmers. The scheme is located at about 42 km from Arbaya, the Woreda capital of West Belessa. The road is very rough and difficult one and it is dry weather road.
Those smallholder farmers use the river for irrigating their farm land are organized into traditional water users association and they have their own committee members consisting of seven members.
5.4.2 Direct Beneficiaries The farm land area identified to be irrigated is reported to be 535 hectares and the total households of Gulana Kebele are 460. Among these households, 238 households (29 women headed and 209 men headed) are registered to be direct beneficiaries of the irrigation scheme, and all them have their own farmland that will be used for production of crops using the irrigation scheme.
5.4.3 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Smallholder farmers living within the new irrigation scheme have been using the same river for producing their own choices of crops on individual basis but using irrigation water on traditional system. The farmers consisting 238 households among which 29 are women headed are in the process organized into full flagged irrigation water users association (WUA). The WUA members have elected their Management Committee (MC), Control Committee (CC) and Grievance Redress Committee (GRM). Even though there are 29 women headed households in the WUA, women were not elected. The WUA is also not yet become operational but in the process of getting strengthened. . 5.4.4 Other Cooperative Societies In Gulana Kebele, cooperatives like Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative and Savings and Credit Cooperative engaged in providing different services are not yet organized.
5.4.5 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not give.
5.4.6 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 173
Final Report
The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
5.4.7 Farmland area under improved water management Expect that some smallholder farmers have been using Gulana River for irrigation on tradition basis for production of some crops, the new scheme is not operational, and there is farmland a under improved irrigation water.
5.4.8 Micro-watershed development Three micro – watersheds (Wuyibela, Snaila and Aba Mara), are identified within Gulana River, and intervention like Terracing, Trench, and Micro- basin, gully rehabilitation using Gabion etc., are implemented. And, so far, 6 hectares of land are covered with community forest, 5 hectares of private woodlots, 38 hectares enclosure area and 15 hectares of demarcated reserve area and three hectares covered with shrubs and wood. Gabion is the only input provided by IFAD project while others are done through Safety- Net programme because the Kebele is within Safety –Net Programme. Micro-watershed committee is established and engaged in coordinating and mobilizing labour power for different activities to be carried out within the watershed.
5.4.9 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, and so far only some Gabion distribution is made and that didn’t contribute much to climate resilience. It is insignificant.
5.4.10 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed even if productive safety programme has been going within the Kebele.
5.4.11 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 174
Final Report like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
5.5 AGAM WUHA The scheme is located in West Belesa, Ferfer Kebele. The irrigation scheme to be developed in in Ferfer Kebele, particularly at Agam Wuha is new one to e developed. The contracted firm hired to construct the irrigation canal is building its camp site. The head, the central and the tail part of the irrigation canal is not yet identified. The scheme site is on the all-weather road that takes to Beja Ferfer, small rural town and about 20km away from the all-weather road that takes from Arbaya West Belesa capital town to Gual capital town of East Belesa 5.5.1 Direct Beneficiaries The irrigated farmland area identified to be used is 190.5 hectares and the number of direct beneficiary households registered to be benefited from the irrigation scheme is 164. Among these 17 are women headed households while the remaining 147 are men headed households. The registered beneficiaries to use the new irrigation scheme to be developed have been using traditional irrigation for production of different crops based on their own choices.
The would be beneficiaries have started participating in the different activities of the canal construction work like collection of stones, discussion and consultation on issues of the development of irrigation scheme, participating in training and orientation on how to go about the implementation of the scheme. As to the direct beneficiaries, according to the information obtained from the focus group discussion (FGD) carried out at the scheme, those households who have land within the command area will be benefiting directly from the scheme, and others who do not have farmland may be able to get farmland on lease from others who have extra land and benefit from the irrigation scheme. This issue of land leasing from those who have applies for all including youth and women head households who do not own farmland within the command area . 5.5.2 Establishment of Water Users Association Initiation has been taken by the Woreda Irrigation Desk to organize those households who own farmland within the command area into irrigation water users association (WUA). According to information obtained from FGD participants within the site, committees like management, control and grievances redressing are established. Women are not represented
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 175
Final Report in any of the committees established. Over all, it seems that the committees are not strengthened and are not functioning properly. However, orientation on water users association for irrigation use and future perspective of the irrigation scheme was given for all the different committee members. Since the irrigation scheme has not yet become operational the different committees elected are not functioning properly. But all the registered beneficiary members have paid registration fee of Birr of 25.00
5.5.3 Other Cooperative Societies Other cooperative societies like Multi- Purpose Farmers’ Cooperative and Savings and Credit are not organized and smallholder farmers engaged different farm activities are not getting services they should have got from such institutions.
5.5.4 Access to provision of Agricultural inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ who can afford to purchase on cash the required inputs buy and use it. Agricultural inputs are promised to be provided by the Woreda Agricultural office many times, but the required inputs are not provided on time and there are also delays in the supply of the inputs. However, the FGD participants still have hope that the required inputs for the production of crops using irrigation scheme will be provided by Woreda Agricultural office.
5.5.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops using irrigation scheme. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies training are not given. The construction of the irrigation scheme itself has not started and currently camp site construction has started.
5.5.6 Farmland area under improved water management Some smallholder farmers who have been using the River for irrigation on tradition basis for production of some crops are still using, and since the new scheme has not been operational, and there is no farmland as such under improved irrigation scheme.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 176
Final Report
5.5.7 Micro-watershed development Only one micro – watershed named Aba Gebru is identified within the Watershed and some interventions like water and soil conservation activities (terracing, enclosure, rehabilitation works using Gabion) were implemented on ABA GEBRU micro-watershed. Gabion is the only input provided to the micro-watershed by the project and 62 m2 of the watershed area is protected. 36000 seedlings were planted.
Micro-watershed management committee has been initiated and the committee has started coordinating and mobilizing labour for the different interventions to be carried out in the micro-watershed area.
5.5.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, and so far only some Gabion distribution is made by the project and that didn’t contribute much to climate resilience.
5.5.9 Improvement in ecosystem Even if there were different interventions made towards improvements of in ecosystem through productive safety net programme, what is observed on the ground is insignificant.
5.5.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme.
In the case of Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Only those smallholder farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops. Cooperatives that could have been providing inputs are not organized.
5.6 MENA DAWUCH The scheme is locat in West Belesa Wereda and Dawuch Kebele. The is a new irrigation scheme under construction, and about 90 percent of the constriction of canal work is completed. Prior to the construction of this canal, smallholder farmers who have land within
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 177
Final Report the envisaged command area have been using irrigation on traditional basis and they have been producing different crops mostly consumed within the same Kebele. They have their own traditional system of managing water for irrigation and using the river they have been producing different crops.
The new SSI scheme is expected to irrigate a total are of 146 hectares of farmland. Among the smallholder farmers who own land within the envisaged irrigation site, there are 15 household headed women within the site. The irrigation scheme under construction is located at about 38 Km from Arbaya, the capital town of West Belessa Woreda. The road that takes to Dawuch starting from Beja Ferfer Kebele is rough one and difficult for vehicles during rainy season.
5.6.1 Direct Beneficiaries The irrigated farmland area identified to be is 146 hectares and the number of direct beneficiaries registered to benefit from the irrigation scheme are 215 among which and, women headed households are identified to be only fifteen(15). The beneficiaries have started participating in the different activities of the canal construction work like collection of stones, discussion and consultation on issues of the development of irrigation scheme, participating in training and orientation how to go about the implementation of the scheme. According to the information obtained from the focus group discussion (FGD) carried out at the scheme, those households who have land within the command area will be benefiting directly from the scheme and others who do not have farmland may be able to get farmland on lease from others who have extra land and benefit from the irrigation scheme. This issue of land leasing applies for all including youth and women head households who do not own farmland within the command area.
4.3.1 Establishment of Water Users Association Initiation has been taken by the Woreda Irrigation Desk to organize those households who own farmland within the command area into irrigation water users association (WUA). According to information obtained from FGD participants within the site, committees like management, control and grievances redressing are established. Women are not represented in any of the committees established. Over all, it seems that the committees are not strengthened and are not functioning properly. However, orientation on water users association for irrigation use and future perspective of the irrigation scheme was given for all
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 178
Final Report the different committee members. Since the irrigation scheme has not yet become operational the different committees elected are not functioning properly.
4.3.2 Other Cooperative Societies Other cooperative societies like Multi- Purpose Farmers’ Cooperative and Savings and Credit are not organized and smallholder farmers engaged different farm activities are not getting services they should have got from such institutions.
4.3.3 Access to provision of Agricultural inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ who can afford to purchase on cash the required inputs use it. Agricultural inputs are promised to be provided by the Woreda Agricultural office many times, but the required inputs are not provided on time and there are also delays. 4.3.4 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops using irrigation scheme. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
4.3.5 Farmland area under improved water management Expect that some smallholder farmers who have been using Gulan River for irrigation on tradition basis for production of some crops, the new scheme has not been operational, and there is no farmland as such under improved irrigation water.
4.3.6 Micro-watershed development Only one micro – watershed named ‘Wuyibela’ is identified within the Watershed of Gulana, and different intervention that include Terrace, Trench, Micro- basin, gully rehabilitation using Gabion etc. are carried out. Gabion is provided by IFAD project while others activities are done through Safety- Net programme since the Kebele is within Safety –Net Programme area. Micro-watershed committee has been initiated and the committee has started coordinating and mobilizing labour for the different interventions carried out within the watershed.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 179
Final Report
4.3.7 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, and so far only some Gabion distribution is made by the project and that didn’t contribute much to climate resilience.
4.3.8 Improvement in ecosystem Even if there were different interventions made towards improvements of in ecosystem through productive safety net programme, what is observed on the ground is insignificant. 4.3.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
4.4 ADERKAYINA The scheme is located in Kinfazi Begela Woreda and Tebtabta Kebele. The Schemeis a new irrigation scheme under construction, and about 92 percent of the constriction of canal work is completed. Prior to the construction of this canal, smallholder farmers who have land within the envisaged command area have been using irrigation on traditional basis and they were engaged in producing different crops mostly consumed within the same Kebele. They have their own traditional system of managing water for irrigation and have been producing different crops using irrigated water. The new SSI scheme is expected to irrigate a total are of 240 hectares of farmland. Smallholder farmers who own land within the envisaged irrigation site and have been using irrigation are registered to be 460 households. Among these 33 are women headed households while 427 are men. The irrigation scheme under construction is located at about 25 Km from Arbaya, the capital town of West Belessa Woreda. The road that takes to Aderkayina from Arbaya is rough and considered to be dry weather road. There are rivers with bridges and without to be crossed at different locations, and some of the rivers could not be crossed during rainy season. Driving up the hill and down is common. There is no public transport service to the scheme site and Aderkayina small rural town.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 180
Final Report
4.4.1 Direct Beneficiaries The would be irrigated farmland area is identified to be 240 hectares and the number of direct beneficiaries registered to benefit from the irrigation scheme are 460 households, among which 33 are identified to be women headed households.
Those households who have been using traditional irrigation engaged producing different crops that include Chick Pea, Maize, Onion, Tomatoes, Cabbage, and other perennial crops like Mango, Lemon, Chat, Papaya, Guava and Hop, and these crops are mainly used for home consumption since there is no market outlet for the crops.
The would be beneficiaries of the envisaged irrigation scheme have started participating in the different activities of the canal construction work like collection of stones, discussion and consultation on issues of the development of irrigation scheme, facilitation of the construction work, participating in training and orientation on how to go about the implementation of the scheme.
According to the information obtained from the focus group discussion (FGD) carried out at the scheme, those households who have land within the command area will be benefiting directly from the irrigation scheme and others who do not have farmland may be able to get farmland on lease from others who have extra land and may be benefit from the irrigation scheme. This issue of land leasing applies for all including youth and women head households who do not own farmland within the command area.
4.4.2 Establishment of Water Users Association Initiation has been taken by the Woreda Irrigation Desk to organize those households who own farmland within the command area into irrigation water users association (WUA). According to information obtained from FGD participants within the site, committees like management, control and grievances redressing are established. However women are not represented in any of the committees established. Over all, it seems that the committees are not strengthened and are not functioning properly. However, some orientation on water users association for irrigation use and future perspective of the irrigation scheme was given for all the different committee members and to all members of the irrigation water users association. Since the irrigation scheme has not yet become operational the different committees elected are not functioning properly.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 181
Final Report
4.4.3 Other Cooperative Societies Other cooperative societies like Multi- Purpose Farmers’ Cooperative and Savings and Credit are not organized and smallholder farmers engaged different farm activities are not getting services they should have got from such institutions.
4.4.4 Access to provision of Agricultural inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers who can afford to purchase on cash the required inputs buy and use it. Others who cannot afford to buy on cash are deprived from using agricultural inputs. Agricultural inputs are promised to be provided by the Woreda Agricultural office many times on cash, but the required inputs are not provided on time, and there are also delays.
4.4.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops using irrigation scheme. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
4.4.6 Farmland area under improved water management Expect that some smallholder farmers who have been using the River for irrigation on tradition basis for production of some crops, the new scheme has not been operational, and there is no farmland as such under improved irrigation water.
4.4.7 Micro-watershed development Two micro – watersheds named ‘Bewul Tefases’ and ‘Mintero’ are identified for treatment and rehabilitation. All community members’ labour force was mobilized for 40 days and different watershed treatment intervention like terracing, galley rehabilitation, half-moon terracing etc., were carried out. Since the Woreda is one the Food in-secured woredas of the Central Gonder PSNP is contributing a lot in watershed treatment. Gabion is provided by IFAD project while others activities are done through PSNP. Micro-watershed committee has been initiated and the committee has started coordinating and mobilizing labour for the different
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 182
Final Report interventions carried out within the watershed. However, shortage of tools and equipment required for working with on water-shed treatment is reported as a serious problem.
4.4.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, and so far only some Gabion distribution is made by the project and that didn’t contribute much to climate resilience. 4.4.9 Improvement in ecosystem Even if there were different interventions made towards improvements of in ecosystem through productive safety net programme, what is observed on the ground is insignificant. 4.4.10. Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops. 4.5 AMBO WUHA The scheme is located in central Gonder zone, Kinfazi Begela Woreda and Filklik kebele. It is a new irrigation scheme its construction is not yet started. Smallholder farmers who have land within the envisaged command area have been using irrigation on traditional basis and are producing different crops mostly consumed within the same Kebele. The traditional irrigation users have their own traditional system of managing water for irrigation and have been producing different crops using irrigated water.
The new SSI scheme is expected to irrigate a total command area are of 123 hectares of farmland. Smallholder farmers who own land within the envisaged irrigation scheme and have been using irrigation and currently registered to use the modern irrigation scheme are 460 households among which 442 are men households while women headed households are 18. The irrigation scheme under construction is located at about 35 Km from Arbaya, the capital town of West Belessa Woreda. As indicated above, Filkliki number 1 is within Kinfazi Begela Woreda of Central Gonder Zone and this Kebele is 110 km from Gonder Zonal Town. Even though it is considered to be very near to Arbaya capital town of West Belesa Zone, the condition of the road from Arbaya to Aderkayina and then to Mar Gebeya of Filkilik 1 kebele
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 183
Final Report rural town is also rough and difficult one. It is only dry weather road. There are rivers with bridges and without to be crossed at different locations, and some of the rivers could not be crossed during rainy season. Driving up the hill and down is common. There is no public transport service to the scheme site and Mar Gebeya of Filklik number 1 Kebele.
4.5.1 Direct Beneficiaries The irrigated farmland area identified to be used is 153 hectares and the number of direct beneficiaries registered to benefit from the irrigation scheme are 460 among which women headed households are identified are only 18. The beneficiaries have started participating in the different activities of the canal construction work like collection of stones, discussion and consultation on issues of the development of irrigation scheme, participating in training and orientation how to go about the implementation of the scheme. According to the information obtained from the focus group discussion (FGD) carried out at the scheme, those households who have land within the command area will be benefiting directly from the scheme and others who do not have farmland may be able to get farmland on lease from others who have extra land and benefit from the irrigation scheme. This issue of land leasing applies for all including youth and women head households who do not own farmland within the command area.
4.5.2 Establishment of Water Users Association Initiation has been taken by the Woreda Irrigation Desk to organize those households who own farmland within the command area into irrigation water users association (WUA). According to information obtained from FGD participants within the site, committees like management, control and grievances redressing are established. Women are not represented in any of the committees established. Over all, it seems that the committees are not strengthened and are not functioning properly. However, orientation on water users association for irrigation use and future perspective of the irrigation scheme was given for all the different committee members. Since the irrigation scheme has not yet become operational the different committees elected are not functioning properly.
4.5.3 Other Cooperative Societies Other cooperative societies like Multi- Purpose Farmers’ Cooperative and Savings and Credit are not organized and smallholder farmers engaged different farm activities are not getting services they should have got from such institutions.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 184
Final Report
4.5.4 Access to provision of Agricultural inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ who can afford to purchase on cash the required inputs use it. Agricultural inputs are promised to be provided by the Woreda Agricultural office many times, but the required inputs are not provided on time and there are also delays. The provision of inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, chemical and others are provided to small holder farmers by the Woreda Agricultural office and the FGD participants confirmed that they will not encounter any challenges in getting required inputs.
4.5.4 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops using irrigation scheme. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
4.5.6 Farmland area under improved water management Majority of the farmers registered to use the irrigation scheme under construction have the practice of using water for irrigating their farmland. Smallholder farmers have been using water for irrigation on tradition basis for production of some crops. However the new scheme has not been operational, and there is no farmland as such under improved irrigation water. The scheme is under construction.
4.5.7 Micro-watershed development Three micro – watershed areas namely Aba Tena, Silbiz and Bine Giorgis are identified, and different intervention that include Terrace, Trench, Micro- basin, gully rehabilitation using Gabion etc. have been performed and these covers a total of 153 hectares of rehabilitated land. Gabion is provided by IFAD project while others activities were done through free labour mobilization from the community/Kebele.
Micro-watershed committee has been initiated and the committee has started coordinating and mobilizing labour for the different interventions carried out within the watershed.
4.5.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 185
Final Report
Interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, and so far only some Gabion distribution is made by the project and that didn’t contribute much to climate resilience.
4.5.9 Improvement in ecosystem Even if there were different interventions made towards improvements of in ecosystem through productive safety net programme, what is observed on the ground is insignificant. 4.5.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
4.6 BAHIR LIBO The scheme is located in North Gonder. East Belesa Woreda and Goga Kebele. Bahir Lobo is a new irrigation scheme and its construction has started. Smallholder farmers to be engaged in using water for irrigation are new and they have not used irrigated water for crop production. There is only one model farmer within the scheme area who has been using water and engaged in producing fruits like Mango , Papaya, Onions and other horticultural crops
Bahir Libo SSI scheme is expected to irrigate a total command area are of 120 hectares of farmland. Smallholder farmers who own land within the envisaged irrigation scheme and among which 109 are male while 11 are women.
The location of the SSI is very far from East Belessa Woreda Capital. The road that takes to the irrigation scheme is rough particularly from the off road that takes to Sakota. Eight smallholder farmers participated in the consultation and discussion carried out on the spot within the irrigation site at its head. Construction of the scheme has started. All the participants of the consultation and discussion are female. As reported during the consultation, all of the participants do not have the practice of using water through irrigation.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 186
Final Report
4.6.1 Direct Beneficiaries The irrigated farmland area identified to be used is 120 hectares and the number of direct beneficiaries registered to benefit from the irrigation scheme is 120 among which women headed households are identified to be only 9. The beneficiaries have started participating in the different activities of the canal construction work like collection of stones, discussion and consultation on issues of the development of irrigation scheme, participating in training and orientation how to go about the implementation of the scheme. According to the information obtained from the focus group discussion (FGD) carried out at the scheme, those households who have land within the command area will be benefiting directly from the scheme and others who do not have farmland may be able to get farmland on lease from others who have extra land and benefit from the irrigation scheme. This issue of land leasing applies for all including youth and women head households who do not own farmland within the command area.
4.6.2 Establishment of Water Users Association Initiation has been taken by the Woreda Irrigation Desk to organize those households who own farmland within the command area into irrigation water users association (WUA). According to information obtained from FGD participants within the site, committees like management, control and grievances redressing are established. As to their numbers, 10 executive committee members, 5 control committee and 5 Grievance redress committee members were elected Women are not represented in any of the committees established . Over all, it seems that the committees are not strengthened and are not functioning properly. However, orientation on water users association for irrigation use and future perspective of the irrigation scheme was given for all the different committee members. But adequate training is not given to all households and beneficiaries of the irrigation scheme. Since the irrigation scheme has not yet become operational the different committees elected are not functioning properly. Overall, factors of production that include, water, irrigable farmland, suitable soil and topography and favorable climate are fulfilled. But the smallholders would like to be engaged in irrigating their farmland do not have adequate practice/knowledge of using irrigation.
4.6.3 Other Cooperative Societies Other cooperative societies like Multi- Purpose Farmers’ Cooperative and Savings and Credit are not organized and smallholder farmers engaged different farm activities are not getting services through their cooperatives. Inputs (Fertilizer) are provided through Woreda
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 187
Final Report
Agricultural Office and sold on cash for those who can afford to buy. Those who cannot afford to buy are not using. Cooperatives (multipurpose/saving and credit do not exist.) Credit is given to smallholder farmers by Amhara Credit and Saving Micro Financial Institution. It gives only to those who are its client. Others do not get. There is Savings and Credit Cooperative within the Kebele but that is not strong.
4.6.4 Access to provision of Agricultural inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ who can afford to purchase on cash the required inputs use it. Agricultural inputs are promised to be provided by the Woreda Agricultural office many times, but the required inputs are not provided on time and there are also delays.
4.6.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops using irrigation scheme. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
4.6.6 Farmland area under improved water management Only one individual smallholder farmer is practicing irrigation farm. Others do not have the knowledge of using it.
4.6.7 Micro-watershed development There is only one micro – watershed area identified to be developed and its name is ‘Bahir Libo Tefases’/watershed. Free labour is mobilized and activities that include, Terracing, Trench, Micro- basin, half –moon have been carried out and 125 hectares of land has rehabilitated. The site of the scheme is within food insecure Kebele of the Woreda.
Micro-watershed committee has been initiated and the committee has started coordinating and mobilizing labour for the different interventions carried out within the watershed.
4.6.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 188
Final Report
Interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, and so far only some Gabion distribution is made by the project and that didn’t contribute much to climate resilience.
4.6.9 Improvement in ecosystem Even if there were different interventions made towards improvements of in ecosystem through productive safety net programme, what is observed on the ground is insignificant. 4.6.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
4.7 Workie The scheme is located in Chefa Dewa Woreda and Dinidin kebele. The scheme with its water Karambe is a new irrigation scheme in Chefa District of Oromo Zone of Amhara National Regional State. The scheme construction is not started and even the command area is not identified. Construction of the scheme is not yet started. Smallholder farmers who have land within the envisaged command area expected to be used by those who own farmland within the command area to be used for irrigation. Traditional use of water for farming through irrigation has been going within the envisaged command area of the Kebele. The traditional irrigation users have their own traditional system of managing water for irrigation and have been producing different crops using irrigated water. The new SSI scheme is expected to irrigate a total command area are of 230 hectares of farmland. Smallholder farmers who own land within the envisaged irrigation scheme and have been using irrigation and currently registered to use the modern irrigation scheme are 172. Women are not registered to use water for irrigation. The planned SSI to be constructed at Workie community found in Dindin Kebele of Dewa Cheffa Woreda of Oromo Zone of Amarha National Regional State. The scheme’s location is very near to Kemisie Town of Oromo Zone. It was also reported that feasibility study of the irrigation scheme has been carried out.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 189
Final Report
4.7.1 Direct Beneficiaries The irrigated farmland area identified to be used is 230 hectares and the number of direct beneficiaries registered to benefit from the irrigation scheme is 172. Would be beneficiaries didn’t start to participate in the different activities of the canal construction and others related. Discussion and consultation on issues of the development of irrigation scheme, training and orientation how to go about the implementation of the scheme has not yet started. According to the information obtained from the focus group discussion (FGD) carried out at the scheme, those households who have land within the command area will be benefiting directly from the scheme and others who do not have farmland may be able to get farmland on lease from others who have extra land and benefit from the irrigation scheme. In the FGD carried out within the scheme, 9 would be irrigation users among which one woman participated in the discussion. As to beneficiaries’ knowledge in using water for irrigated cropping, all of them reported to have the experience of using irrigation water for production of different crops.
4.7.2 Establishment of Water Users Association Initiation has been taken by the Woreda Irrigation Desk to organize those households who own farmland within the command area into irrigation water users association (WUA). According to information obtained from FGD participants within the site, committees like management and control committees are established. Management committee members consisting 15 male and 2 women are elected to the position. Over all, it seems that the committees are not strengthened and are not functioning properly. However, orientation on water users association for irrigation use and future perspective of the irrigation scheme was given only to committee members. Since the irrigation scheme has not yet become operational the different committees elected are not functional.
4.7.3 Other Cooperative Societies There is ‘Kachure’ Multi- Purpose Agricultural Service Cooperative within the Woreda. It is not functioning and does not provide the required input supply and output marketing. Savings and Credit Cooperative is not welcome by the Community because of the Moslem Religion. Profit making is against Moslem Religion and that is why it is not favored. During the discussion it was raised that if there is a bank which gives service without interest is they will take it and benefit from it. There is Amhara Credit and Savings (ACS) Micro-Financial Institution within the Woreda and anybody who wishes to take from ACS can take it.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 190
Final Report
4.7.4 Access to provision of Agricultural inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ who can afford to purchase on cash the required inputs can buy and use it. Agricultural inputs are promised to be provided by the Woreda Agricultural office many times, but the required inputs are not provided on time and there are also delays. The provision of inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, chemical and others are provided to small holder farmers by the Woreda Agricultural office and the FGD participants confirmed that they will not encounter any challenges in getting required inputs.
4.7.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops using irrigation scheme. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
4.7.6 Farmland area under improved water management Smallholder farmers living within the scheme are using irrigation water on traditional base, and many of the smallholder farmers are using traditional water using production of different crops which are market orientated. FGD participants have also clearly stated they would like to be engaged in the production of market oriented crops like ‘Chat/Kat’, sugar cane, etc.
4.7.7 Micro-watershed development A Micro – watershed site namely ‘Karambe’ is identified. So far, there is no intervention carried out on the micro-watershed. IFAD fund for micro-watershed development is not released. Micro-watershed committee has been initiated. There is no intervention on the Micro- watershed.
4.7.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development are very much limited.
4.7.9 Improvement in ecosystem Even if there were different interventions made towards improvements of in ecosystem through productive safety net programme and what is observed on the ground encouraging. 4.7.10 Remarks:
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 191
Final Report
Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
4.8 Sakena Buta The scheme s located in Oromo zone Artuma Fursi Woreda and Beshiededa Kebele The scheme is new one under construction and it is on its initial stage, wire canal constructions have started. Practical use of irrigation water using generator has been going on and such activities are carried out by those who can afford to buy generator and fuel for using irrigation. This new scheme is planned to irrigate 192 hectares of land individually owned by smallholder households. The total registered farmers to be engaged in using irrigation water are 153 among which 40 of them are women headed. Others who would like to be engaged in production of crops using irrigation can get land freely from the Kebele, because there is abundant land that could be used for farming using irrigation. The location of the scheme is very near to the main Asphalt road that runs from Kemisie to Kombolcha- Dessie. Since Borken River need to be crossed a bridge connecting would be irrigated command area where beneficiaries live and to the main Asphalt Road is required.
On the focus group discussion carried out eight households have participated and among them four are women headed households while the rest four are men household heads.
4.22.5 Direct Beneficiaries As indicated above the command area to be used for irrigated farmland is 192 hectares and would be beneficiaries are identified to be 153 households among which 40 are women headed households. Many of them have the experience of using water for irrigation through the use of Generator. As far as their participation in the development of the Scheme they were informed long ago. The initiated irrigation water users association and particularly the committee members and Kebele Administration is following up the irrigation scheme and they have information about the identification of the scheme, its design and how it is going to be implemented. In the case of landholding, on average each household owns about one hectare. Others who want to be engaged can get land through Kebele Administration. In fact, farmers
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 192
Final Report living in five Woredas bordering Artuma Fursi are coming to the Borkan Valley during dry season with their cattle for grazing and stay there as Godantu. There is no shortage of farmland within the valley.
4.22.6 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Smallholder farmers who are living within the new irrigation scheme have been using the same river for producing their own choices of crops on individual basis using Generator for pumping the river, Borkana. The 153 members registered to be organized into WUA have initiated selection of different committees (Management Committee, Control Committee and Dispute Settling Committee). Women are included in the different committees initiated. The WUA is also not yet become operational but in the process of getting strengthened.
4.22.7 Other Cooperative Societies In Beshi Ededa Kebele, cooperatives like Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative used to exist, but currently not functioning. Savings and Credit Cooperative was established, but not functioning currently. Amhara Credit and Saving Share Company (ACS) are operating in the Woreda and some farmers within the irrigation scheme are taking credit from this Micro- Financial Institution.
4.22.8 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs and other Social Services The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not available. Shortage of Health Post/health service facility, lack of all-weather road and particularly serious problem during rainy season are some of the critical issues raised during discussion.
4.22.9 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational. Agricultural office staff assigned at Kebele level (about four staff on the average), it is expected that these staff could provide technical support required and facilitate the use of water to be used for irrigation.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 193
Final Report
4.22.10 Farmland area under improved water management In addition to the 153 households who reported to own 192 hectares of farmland to be used for irrigated farming since there is no shortage of farmland within the Kebele and even others farmers could be engaged in irrigation farming getting farmland through the Kebele Administration.
4.22.11 Micro-watershed development There is one micro – watershed named ‘Kotam ‘identified within the Kebele and intervention like Terracing has started. Plantation of Eucalyptus trees through community labour mobilization on ‘Kotam’ hill has started. Nursery site is established to grow seedlings and then to transplant trees on the hill around / identified Kotam watershed. Interventions started are very much limited.
4.8.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development are very much limited, and so far only of Eucalyptus trees plantation has taken place through labour mobilization. This didn’t contribute much to climate resilience. It is insignificant.
4.8.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed.
4.8.10 Remarks: There are a lot of opportunities for youth and women who want to be engaged in production of crops using irrigation water to be developed. There enough farmland around and the only thing to be done ii to make negotiations with the Kebele Administration to provide farmland for those who would like to be engaged in agricultural activities.
4.9 Melka Nanoftu Melka Nanoftu is located in Oro zone Jile Timuga (Dhumuga) Woreda Balchi Swere 3 kebele.
The construction of the scheme has already completed and 80 households (69 men and 11 women) are using water from the scheme for irrigation. The total irrigated farmland is 72 hectares. Even though, construction of the canal is 100 percent completed, focus group discussion participants reported that there are defects with construction of the canal and
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 194
Final Report seepage is observed. Excavated soils and materials are not yet removed or leveled and soil, sand and other materials are eroded to the cannel and sedimentation on the cannel has already started. In adequacy of water to be used for irrigation is also reported. Three smallholder farmers owning land on the right side of the canal are using Water Pumps. Since the scheme is located very much near to the Asphalt Road that runs from Addis Ababa to Kombolcha- Dassie town, there is no transportation problem for transport horticultural products to the nearby markets. One of the serious problem farmers engaged in production of horticultural crops is facing is lack of market for the agricultural produces. To overcome this problem formation of a union of water users association (UWUA) was planned but not yet materialized. For the formation of the planned UWUA, each of the 5 WUAs formed and engaged in production of horticultural crops using water from irrigation schemes have contributed Birr 26,000.00 each for the formation of the union but not yet not materialized and the issue remained at Oromo Zone of Amhara National Regional State. The irrigation canal constructed is not sustainable. Surface water/flooding coming into the canal comes with sand, soil and other materials and already sedimentation has started. The name of the contractor is Jamal and he didn’t do well. There was no adequate supervision made during the construction work and that is major reason for the fail to occur very soon.
4.9.1 Direct Beneficiaries As indicated above, 80 households (11 women headed and 69 men headed) are the direct beneficiaries and have already engaged in production of horticultural crops. Three households are also benefiting from the irrigation scheme developed using water pumps of their own, since their farmland is located on the right side direction where water from the canal cannot be used because those farmers’ farm plots are located on the right side of the canal, while water from the canal flows down ward on the left side.
4.9.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) The 80 households (69 men and 9 women headed) are already organized into water users association (WUA). The members of the WUA have elected Management Committee consisting 7 members, Control Committee consisting 3 members and Water Distributing Committee consisting of 4 members. In all the committee members only one woman is represented. In the case of participation of the beneficiaries in identification, design, planning and in all other aspect of construction of the canal, WUA members have reported that they have participated in it with their labour in collecting stones, sand and other materials . Each member of the WUA has worked for seven days without any payment/freely on construction of the canal.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 195
Final Report
4.9.3 Other Cooperative Societies In Jile Timuga woreda there is one Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative Society, but is not providing adequate services to its members. Savings and Credit Cooperative society is not yet organized and there is no much interest to form one, because it was reported that members of the communities are Moslems and it is against their religion to be engaged taking credit that is profiting making institutions. Amhara Credit and Saving Financial Institution is also not giving credit to the WUA.
4.9.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not made. 4.9.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not provided. There are not inputs provided by the Woreda Agricultural office. However, the irrigation scheme has become operational.
4.9.6 Farmland area under improved water management As indicated above, the total area of farmland under command area is 72 hectares. Households engaged in using irrigation water have been using it and they have the knowhow. Trainings are usually given. The major problem they are facing is lack of market for their produces and shortage of water.
4.9.7 Micro-watershed development There is one micro – watershed identified within the influence of the irrigation scheme. With the support obtained from IFAD, 168m2 area of land treated with Gabion, and an area of 148 hectares of land enclosed from any interference. About 1051 Mangos were distributed to beneficiary households from the micro-watershed development.
4.9.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 196
Final Report
Interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, and as indicated above only 168m2 of land abandoned due to erosion is treated with Gabion, and 148 hectares of land enclosed. These are minor interventions and didn’t contribute much to climate resilience.
4.9.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed even if productive safety programme has been going within the Kebele.
4.9.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command areas are using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, others who do not have land within the scheme area not benefiting.
Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops. Major crops grown on irrigated farmland are determined by individual growers.
V. SCHEMES IN NORTH SHEWA 5.1 Awajo The scheme is located in Zone: North Shoa, Mojana Wadera Woreda. The scheme is new and its construction is not yet started. There a big river to be crossed currently, of course on foot, but a bridge is required to be built when construction of the canal starts. The total command area envisaged to be cultivated by irrigation is reported to be 216.44 hectares of land according to the data obtained from Mojana Wadera Woreda Agriculture office. Expected beneficiary households are reported to be 195 HHs among which 149 would be men while 46 would be women headed households. Command area of the small scale irrigation scheme is owned by individual households. The location of the irrigation site does not access road. Focus group discussion was made within the envisaged irrigation scheme site; over 50 households attended the discussion. It was understood from the discussions made with community members that they have the desire if the scheme started soon. The scheme is located at about 30 km from Sela Dingaye, Woreda Capital town of Mojana Wadera Woreda. The road is very rough and difficult one. In addition to that a bridge is required to be built on the river to drive to the scheme site to be developed after construction of the irrigation canal.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 197
Final Report
5.1.1 Direct Beneficiaries The farm land area identified to be irrigated is reported to be 216.44 hectares and the total households registered to use the irrigation scheme are 195 households. Majority of the registered households do not have the experience of using irrigation, but have the desire to use it as reflected during focus group discussion made with them. It was also reported that those registered to the irrigation scheme own their farm land that they will use for production of crops using the irrigation scheme.
5.1.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Beneficiary households registered to use the envisaged irrigation scheme have formed water users association (WUA) and elected Management Committee, Control Committee and Property Managing Committee. All committee members are men and women are not represented. Farmers living within the new irrigation scheme have been using the same river for producing their own choices of crops on individual basis but using irrigation water on traditional system. It could be said that the WUA is initiated but not yet strengthened. In fact the irrigation scheme itself is not constructed. It was also reported that after the initiation of WUA by the technical support of the woreda Agricultural Office about ten months ago, nobody has come back again. 5.1.3 Other Cooperative Societies As to the existence of Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative within the Kebele, there used to be one. Currently its name exists because it not functional and does not provide any kind of services to its members. One of the participant of the focus group discussion said that the Multi-Purpose Cooperative exists within their area is like and “orphan”. Savings and Credit Cooperative is not organized within the Kebele. There is Amhara Savings and Credit Financial Institution, but farmers are not motivated to use it.
5.1.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and to get it, farmers walk on foot for about five to six hours to the Woreda capital town, Sela Dingaye to get agricultural inputs..
5.1.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 198
Final Report
The newly initiated members’ of WUA are not provided with adequate trainings. This may be due to that the irrigation scheme construction is not started.
5.1.6 Farmland area under improved water management Currently farmers are not using water for irrigation, even on traditional base. It will be a new venture to be practiced if the construction of canal is to be materialized. 5.1.7 Micro-watershed development The Kebele in which irrigation scheme is to be developed is under productive safety net programme (PSNP) and there has been public works going on within the Kebele. Due to this some micro-watershed development interventions have been going on in the Kebele. But this is not very much significant. But IFAD supported intervention programmes have not yet started.
5.1.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development are very much limited and significant changes are not observed within the project scheme area.
5.1.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed even if productive safety programme has been going within the Kebele.
5.1.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme.
Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, only those farmers who can afford to purchase inputs on cash use inputs for production of agricultural crops.
5.2 KESKESH The scheme is located North Shoa zone , Mojana Wadera Woreda and Zumba/ Debu Zuria Kebele.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 199
Final Report
The irrigation scheme is new one, and is under construction, out of which about 70 percent is completed. Households expected to be beneficiaries do not have the experience of using water for irrigation. The new small scale irrigation scheme is expected to irrigate 198 hectares of farmland owned by 237 households (154 men and 83 women). The scheme is located at about 30 km from Sela Gingaye capital town of Mojana Wadera. The road is rough and gravel but all weather road.
5.2.1 Direct Beneficiaries The farm land area identified to be irrigated is reported to be 198 hectares according to the survey made by the Woreda Agricultural office. The number of households registered to use the scheme when it will be completed 237(154 men and 83 women). Adequate trainings on the use and management of the irrigation scheme is not given to those registered to use the scheme.
5.2.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Water users association (WUA) is initiated to be established. Management Committee consisting seven members, Control Committee consisting three members, Committee for Property Administration with three members are initiated. Among the members of WUA registered 60 of them have paid contribution and registration fees of Birr 50.00 each. Smallholder farmers living within the new irrigation scheme have). The WUA members organized are not provided with trainings on how to use and manage the irrigation scheme. As to households’ participation in the development of the new irrigation scheme, they started on their own initiation to construct the canal, and the project financed by IFAD came late. Clearance of farmland and others on the direction which the canal is constructed made by labour of communities and would be users of the irrigation scheme. The rough road that takes to the mouth of the scheme is made by labour of the communities. It was also reported that there is full participation of the community members in the identification, design, and planning and implementation process carried out. All factors like availability of water, irrigable farmland, suitable soil and topography and favorable climate exists. But the households registered to use the irrigation scheme lack experience of using water for irrigation and producing crops. The WUA is also not yet become operational but it is in the process of getting strengthened.
5.2.3 Other Cooperative Societies
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 200
Final Report
There is a Savings and Credit cooperative in the Kebele and the members are only 32. Mobilization of savings has started and since members are aware of its benefits. Agricultural Multi-purpose Cooperative to which, their Kebele, Zumba is affiliated and used to exist, but currently not functioning.
5.2.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not give. Agricultural Multi-purpose Cooperative used to provide inputs to farmers are no more engaged in distribution of inputs farmers requiring.
5.2.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. In the case of Agricultural workers there adequate number of staff both at Kebele and Woreda level to provide required trainings. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational and it is expected that adequate training will be given in the future.
5.2.6 Farmland area under improved water management Currently there is no farmland under irrigation. Households registered to use water for irrigation do not have the experience of using water for irrigation.
5.2.7 Micro-watershed development Micro – watershed development interventions are being carried out. Interventions like Terracing, Trench, and Micro- basin, gully rehabilitation using Gabion have been started, and so, far 200 Gabions are provided and used for the rehabilitation of Gullies and protection lands ding. 5 hectares of land is also enclosed. There only one micro-watershed area is identified and different activities started. Gabion is provided by IFAD. In addition to the Micro- watershed management intervention, support for livelihoods promotion in a form credit is given has given to households working on the micro-watershed project. A total of Birr 22,000.00 has been distributed. Credit for chicken was also aimed to be distributed, but this
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 201
Final Report was not materialized due the numbers of chicken to be distributed is beyond the capacity of smallholders that is 50 chickens per person.
5.2.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Even though interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, focus group discussion participants appreciated what has been done through micro-watershed interventions.
5.2.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed even if productive safety programme has been going within the Kebele.
5.2.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
5.3 Kalate( Qalatee) It is located in North Shoa zone of Oromia, Jida Woreda, Ariya Kalate Kebele. The scheme is new one and identified to be developed. But the development intervention of the small irrigation scheme is not yet started. Feasibility study of the small scale irrigation scheme of Kalate in Ariya Kalate Kebele of Jida woreda of North Shoa has been made.
The total command area of the small scale irrigation scheme of Kalate is 137.5 hectares, and total households registered to use water for irrigation are 187 members among which 37 of them are women headed households. The registered households to use the irrigation water are those who have farmland within the command site. However, except hearing about the small scale irrigation scheme would be beneficiaries of the irrigation scheme are not yet organized into water users association (WUA). Detail trainings on the use of water for irrigation, management of irrigation water, crops to be produce, and others are not yet given to would be members and different committees to be established.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 202
Final Report
5.3.1 Direct Beneficiaries The farm land area identified to be irrigated is reported to be 137.5 hectares and the total households of registered to use the SSI are 187 out of which 37 are women head households. As understood from the focus group discussion made on the site, all the registered households have their own farmland to be used for irrigated farm. The possibility of other farmers to use water for irrigation within the command area is either through leasing farmland from others or engaged in production through share cropping. As indicated above, those households registered as direct beneficiaries have their own farmland within the command area. 5.3.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Smallholder farmers living within the envisioned command site are not properly informed about the irrigation scheme and due to this irrigation water users are not yet organized. Only few of the households who would be beneficiaries heard about the irrigation scheme, and due to members did not establish WUA. The would be irrigation command area is owned by households living in three Kebeles, Ariya Kelate/Qalatee,Waya Dega Narsi and Gogile Godeti Niser. As to the experience of using water for irrigation only some of the households know it and more detail trainings are required to be provided to the households.
5.3.3 Other Cooperative Societies It was reported during the discussion that there is Siba Sirk Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative within their area. But it is not functioning. It was also reported that there is a Union at Woreda level but it is not functioning. It was also reported that Savings and Credit Cooperative is initiated at Woreda level but they are not member to it.it.
5.3.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash from Woreda Agricultural office. Agricultural inputs are not provided on credit. Those farmers who use different agricultural inputs get it from the Woreda level since distribution is only made at Woreda level. Even though the envisaged command area is very much near to the Woreda town of Jida, there is lack of all-weather road to the Kebele and the envisaged command area.
5.3.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 203
Final Report
Trainings on how to establish water users association, the detail use and practices of irrigated water for production of crops and related are not yet given to the would be beneficiaries of the small scale irrigation scheme.
5.3.6 Farmland area under improved water management Households registered to use the irrigation scheme envisioned to be developed do not have farmland under improved water management system currently, and even many of them do not have the experience in using water for irrigation.
5.3.7 Micro-watershed development According to the information obtained from the focus group discussion made with some of would be small scale irrigation beneficiaries indicated that interventions made on micro – watersheds within the area is nil, and it was reported that this is because the project is not yet started.
5.3.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience So far, no interventions that contribute to increased climate resilience have been implemented.
5.3.9 Improvement in ecosystem Since there is not interventions made in watershed management, improvement made in ecosystem does not exist.
5.3.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme.
Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to smallholder farmers, and Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative Society used to exist is not functioning currently. 5.4 lega kora/spring Lega Kora/ Spring is located in North Shoa zone of Oromia, Kimbibit Woreda. The SSI scheme is not started. It is reported that only feasibility study was conducted and construction is not
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 204
Final Report yet strated. The scheme is envisaged to be developed from small spring available at Lega Kora. Households registered to use the irrigation scheme when it will be constructed are reported to be 182(30 women headed and 152 men headed) households. The exact command area of the irrigation scheme is not surveyed and not known. Some households used to produce crops using irrigation from the spring that was developed by Ethiopian Evangelical Church Mekane- Yesus some years back. But currently it is not functioning.
5.4.1 Direct Beneficiaries The exact farm land area to be irrigated is not identified. But the total households registered to use the SSI scheme are 182 and these are those who have their own farmland within the irrigation scheme to be developed.
5.4.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Some of the smallholder farmers living within the envisaged irrigation scheme have the experience of using water for irrigation and producing crops. But they do not have the experience of using irrigation water for producing crops through water users association (WUA). With the start of the new scheme, organizing members to form WUA has started, and formation of committees is initiated. But it is not yet well-organized.
5.4.3 Other Cooperative Societies There is Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative Society within the area. But it does not function properly. Rural Savings and Credit Cooperative is organized within the area. It is reported to be weak. The services required by smallholder farmers are not provided by cooperatives but by different micro-financial institutions like PEAC, African Village, Vision, Special Support, Ormia Credit and Savings S.C, etc.
5.4.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not give.
5.4.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 205
Final Report
The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are not given even the basic orientation on how to use of water for production of crops. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. Construction of the irrigation scheme itself is not started.
5.4.6 Farmland area under improved water management There is no farmland under improved water management system currently.
5.4.7 Micro-watershed development Tuka Kurfa is the name of the micro – watershed found within the SSI scheme. Some interventions like Gully Treatment using Gabion, Hillside Terracing, planting trees and tree crops are started. Labor mobilization for the different works required to be performed on watershed development has started. The total area coverage made in watershed management is about three hectares.
5.4.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development are very much limited, and so far only about three hectares are covered this does not mean much and contribution made in climate resilience is insignificant.
5.4.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed.
5.4.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
VI. Schemes in hadiya Zone 6.1 BISHo
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 206
Final Report
Bisho is located in Gibie Woreda of hadiya Zone, Megacho Kebele. The SSI scheme at Bisho in Megacho Kebele of Gibie Woreda is under construction. It started recently. Community members reported that they were informed about the SSI five years ago it delayed for so long years. The SSI is located at about 40 km from Hosina town, the capital city for Hadiya Zone. Particularly the Road from the Woreda town to the scheme site is very rough and difficult one to drive during rainy season. It could be said that the road is not all- weather road. The size of farmland that could be under the command area and number of beneficiaries could not be identified. During discussion carried out with community representatives it was indicated most of would be beneficiaries of the SSI do not have the experience of using water for irrigation. Individual farmland ownership could be used for irrigation is not identified and the exact size is also not determined. However, feasibility study made has justified that there adequate farmland and beneficiaries to use the SSI scheme.
As to labor contribution of the beneficiaries and their involvement in identification, design, planning and implementation of the scheme, FGD participants reported to be very minimal. The site is located at about 15kms from the Woreda Town and the road that connects to the Woreda town is very rough and difficult. Two big rivers also require bridges and the road require maintenance.
6.1.1 Direct Beneficiaries Even though beneficiaries participated in the FGD carried out could not tell the exact size of farmland to be under irrigation scheme, all of those who have farmland within the SSI confirmed to use water for irrigation. The beneficiaries have also confirmed that if water for irrigation is coming through the canal under construction, all of them have the desire to use the water for irrigation. They have also confirmed that there is irrigable farmland, suitable soil and topography and favorable climate to produce required crops. Beneficiaries consulted also witnessed that Agricultural staff at Kebele and Woreda level are providing them with adequate technical and material support that could capacitates them to produce crops using irrigation water and managing it.
6.1.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Water users association (WUA) is not properly organized. Different committees (Management, Control and Property Administration committees neither are nor elected. Generally all would be beneficiaries of the SSI are not trained and well orientated on the use, management of production system using irrigation water. Representative households and would be
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 207
Final Report beneficiaries of irrigation water participated in the focus group discussion carried out at site indicated that they should have trainings on capacity building on the use of irrigation water, its management and agricultural practices of producing crops using irrigation water.
6.1.3 Other Cooperative Societies Currently there is no saving and Credit cooperative organized with the scheme or in the Kebele. Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative used to exist does not function currently. As to the provision of agricultural inputs smallholder farmers who are able to purchase on cash go to the Woreda Agricultural Office and get it. .
6.1.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs As indicated above,the different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not give.
6.1.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming WUA is not yet organized to provide them trainings on the use of water for production of crops. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
6.1.6 Farmland area under improved water management There is farmland area under improved water management scheme. Only some smallholder farmers practice using water for irrigation.
6.1.7 Micro-watershed development The Woreda and the Kebele in which this SSI is envisioned to be developed are found with Productive Safety- Net Programme area. Through PSNP and Livelihoods programme significant watershed rogrammes have been carried, and due this intervention like Terracing, Trench, and Micro- basin, gully rehabilitations etc., are implemented. Vegetation cover of the area is considered to be good. Trees and fruits planted are providing yields. Most of the farmland is covered with eucalyptus trees, Mango, Avocado, False Banana, root crops and other natural forests grown within the area. Micro-watershed development carried out during the last several decades and
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 208
Final Report
traditional system of carrying for the environment within the society has contributed to the development of the watershed.
6.1.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the watershed development for decades and traditional protection existing among the community has contributed a lot to increased climate resilience.
6.1.9 Improvement in ecosystem The current condition of the ecosystem of the area is considered to be good. Any interventions to be made in the improvement of the ecosystem should focus on adding up what gained and focus should be made on gaps that exist. Such gaps could be identified through detail assessment particularly within the SSI site envisaged.
6.1.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
6.2 GOMBORA
Gombora scheme is located in Hadiya Zone, Gombora Woreda, Keransa kebele. The scheme is new, and its construction is not started. The total farmland area identified to be irrigated is 119 hectares, and households registered to use irrigation water are 450 among which 384 are men households while 66 are women head households. The number of households participated in the discussion and consultation is more than 35 households and due to this recording their names was left. It was also reported that all the households do not have the experience of using water for irrigation. The location of the site is very much near to the Woreda Town, and communication is not a problem. The command area is under
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 209
Final Report each household’s ownership and the surrounding areas are covered with planted forests like eucalyptus trees, ‘Zigiba’ Bisana, False Banana, Avocado, Mango and others. Due to the vegetation cover of the area, it could be categorized as agro-forestry area.
6.2.1 Direct Beneficiaries As indicated above the farm land area identified to be irrigated is reported to be 119 hectares and the total households of registered to use SSI are 450 households (384 men and 66 women). The 450 households are those owning farmland with the command area of SSI scheme. Others may be beneficiaries through the creation of employment opportunities or through share cropping mechanism to be arranged.
6.2.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Construction of the SSI scheme is not yet started. Would be SSI beneficiaries are not yet oriented and proper trainings on the use of water for irrigation, its management, and others are not given. Water Users Association itself is not yet formed.
6.2.3 Other Cooperative Societies Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative exists within their area, and Union of Multi-Purpose Cooperatives is also organized at Woreda level. The registered beneficiaries of SSI are not yet organized into Savings and Credit Cooperative. The services provided to the smallholder farmers through cooperatives are insignificant.
6.2.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ who are able to purchase the required inputs on cash get through the agricultural office.
6.2.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming So far, adequate trainings are not given on production practices and use technologies in irrigated farming. This may due to lack of formation of WUA and absence of construction the small scale irrigation scheme.
6.2.6 Farmland area under improved water management
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 210
Final Report
Since there is f no practice of crop production using irrigation, there is also no farmland area under improved water management.
6.2.7 Micro-watershed development There is one micro – watershed identified within SSI site or Gombora site. Gobora is the name of the river from which the irrigation scheme is envisaged to be developed. Households benefiting from the watershed are organized and engaged in development work interventions like Terracing, Trench, and Micro- basin, gully rehabilitation using Gabion etc. Trainings on watershed development are provided to the beneficiaries. The micro-watershed development programme within the watershed has been going on only for one year and, during this time, so far, 25 hectares of land is afforested on communal land area, 10 hectares of land on private farm/woodlot, 2.5 hectare of land enclosed. Even though the watershed is one, three Kebeles (Bole, Habicho, Tacha Gara) upper catchment, and one Kebele (Orde Bobicho) lower catchment are beneficiaries. The total beneficiaries of the households are 3798 (1820 men and 1978 women). Overall, the development intervention carried out is not considered to be significant.
6.2.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience So far the interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, since the project started a year ago. Tree fruits that include Apple, Mango, and Avocado, Dinsho Grass and, different types and species of trees and tree fruits are distributed during the last one year.
6.2.9 Improvement in ecosystem The ecosystem of the envisaged SSI is considered to be better when compared with others. The vegetation cover of the area is considered to be agroforestry type where natural grown trees and man-made improved natural resources co-exist. The man-mad improved environments made include existence of false Banana, Avocado, Mango and other trees planted and well managed.
6.2.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 211
Final Report like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
6.3 SHAPA Shapa is located in Hadiya Zone, West Badewocho Woreda, Hawaro Kebele. The scheme is new one. Identification of the site and feasibility study has been made. Constriction of the SSI site has started. Households registered to use the irrigation scheme are 238 among which 38 are women headed households. The size of farmland registered to be used for production using irrigation is 118 hectares. The households registered to use irrigation scheme do not have the experience of using water for irrigation. Participation of households during the survey, clearing the canal path, collection of stone and other materials, and the like is very much high. Focus group discussion participants indicated that they are always ready to provide any support required from them.
The location of the scheme is accessible to all-weather roads that take to Shone Town, East Bedewocho Woreda and Shenshcho Town of Kacha Birra Woreda of Kabata Zone.
6.3.1 Direct Beneficiaries As indicated above, direct beneficiaries registered are 238(200 Men and 38 Women). These are those who have farmland within the SSI site/command area. Those who do not have farmland are not registred.
6.3.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Households registered to use water for irrigation are initiated to form water users association (WUA). Different committees that include Management Committee (MC), Control Committee (CC), Property Administration committee (PAC) are conceptually initiated. But they are not well-organized and started to fulfill their responsibilities. Office is not arranged, registration fees and contributions are not paid. Women are not elected or represented. The WUA has not yet become operational but in the process of getting strengthened.
6.3.3 Other Cooperative Societies Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative society used to exist does not function currently. Rural Savings and Credit Cooperative society is not organized. Different services like provision of
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 212
Final Report
Credit and Saving input distribution and output marketing of produces etc., are provided through the societies stated above.
6.3.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not give.
6.3.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
6.3.6 Farmland area under improved water management There is not farmland under improved water management system within the SSI envisaged to be developed. Farmers registered to be beneficiaries of the SSI do not have the experience of using water for irrigation. It is not practiced within the area/Kebele.
6.3.7 Micro-watershed development There is one micro – watershed scheme within the area that covers 3100 hectares. Development interventions on micro-watershed within the area have been going on only for one year. Physical interventions like Terracing, Trench, and Micro- basin, gully rehabilitation using Gabion etc. are implemented. Similarly, different trees and fruit trees like Dinsho Grass, Pigeon Pea, Avocado, Mango etc., were distributed to households to be planted on individual farmland and communal area/hillside. The required supports are made by PASIDP II. Micro- watershed committee is also established and engaged in coordinating and mobilizing labour power for different activities to be carried out within the watershed.
6.3.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development were carried out only for the last year, and its impact on bringing increased climate resilience is very much low. This is mainly due its short duration, which is only one year.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 213
Final Report
6.3.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed.
6.3.10 Remarks Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme.
Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops. Cooperative societies like Agricultural multi- purpose and rural saving and credit are not organized and strengthened.
6.4 ADANCHO The cheme is on Guder River known as Adancho Site which is located in Kabata Special Zone, Angacha Woreda and Adancho Kebele. The scheme is new one and its construction has started on Guder River. Guder River is found between Hadiya and Kabata Zone, and it is also used a boundary between the two Zones. The wire for the irrigation scheme on both sides of the river is the same. Two canals are under construction starting from the same wire on both sides of Guder River. On the side of Kabata Zone, in Adancho Ebala 175 households (125 men and 50 women) are registered to use the SSI ,and the identified area to be used for irrigated farmland is reported to be 80 hectare/ or 53 hectare. This indicated that the exact area is not yet known. The beneficiaries registered reported to have experiences in using water for irrigation. The SSI is about 25 km from Angacha capital town. The road is very much rough and it is only used for dry season only.
6.4.1 Direct Beneficiaries The farm land area identified to be irrigated is reported to be 53 or 80 hectares on the Kabata side. The 175 households’ participation in the construction of the wire and the canal is very much minimal. The registered beneficiaries are those who have their own farmland, and the expected beneficiaries those who their own farmland. Labour mobilization made for the construction of the wire and canal is not well coordinated.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 214
Final Report
6.4.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) The 175 households registered to use SSI are not properly organized into WUA. Initiation has been made to organize them into WUA. But WUA is not properly organized, and the required committees such as Management Committee (MC), Control Committee (CC) and Property Administrational Committee (PAC) are also not properly organized. The WUA is also not yet become operational.
6.4.3 Other Cooperative Societies Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative and Savings and Credit Cooperative are not providing different services that households/farmers are requiring.
6.4.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ who can afford to purchase the required inputs on cash basis buy, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not give.
6.4.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops. But, detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices to be applied and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
6.4.6 Farmland area under improved water management Only few of the households who can afford to buy Generator have been using water for irrigation. There is no as such farmland area under improved water management within the scheme site.
6.4.7 Micro-watershed development There is one micro – watershed area identified within Guder River watershed. Most of the area of the watershed is bounded with Kabata land cover. As such, significant development intervention on the micro-watershed area has not been done.
6.4.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 215
Final Report
Significant development intervention is not implemented on the micro-watershed identified within the SSI influence area. 6.4.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed.
6.4.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
Two SSI schemes are under construction both in Kabata and Hadiya Zones from the same source, Guder River. There are issues like: • Adequacy of the River to irrigate 80 or 53 on Kabata side and 61 hectares on side of Hadiya side? • What would be the fate of the down users of Guder River for the five Kebele on the side of Hadiya Zone Shashego Woreda? • Where are the collaboration and coordination between Hadiya and Kabata Zonal Administrations on the issue of the common use of the wire? 6.5 Bidika The scheme is located in Hadiya Zone, Shashego Woreda, Bidika kebele.The scheme is new one and its construction has started on Guder River on side of Hadiya. Guder River is found between Hadiya and Kabata Zone, and it is also used a boundary between the two Zones. The wire for the irrigation scheme on both sides of the river is the same. Two canals are under construction starting from the same wire on both sides of Guder River. On the side of Hadiya Zone, in Bidika Kebele about 200 households, (number of men and women are not yet identified) are registered to use the SSI, and farmland registered to be used for the irrigation scheme is 61 hectares. As it was reported during focus group discussion, detail discussions between the two communities (those who are living in Bidika and Adancho) how to manage and use it, are not yet discussed. Most of the activities going on are based on informal discussion. Hadiya Zone Agricultural Department is serious about it and they reject even the construction started the wire and canals on both sides of Guder River. Due to this detail data
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 216
Final Report on the number of households would be using the SSI and farmland area to be covered is not known.
The road to the scheme site is about 20 km from Hosaina Town and some part of it is very rough. Bidika Kebele is in Shashego Woreda of Hadiya Zone, which is about 53 km form the Woreda Town, but on the contrary, Bidika Kebele and the scheme itself is near to Hosaina Town which is about 25 km. Overll, there is information gap between the regional PASIDEP II Coordination Office and Hadiya Agricultural and Natural Resource Department, the Zonal Administration and Shashgo Woreda Administration. On scheme site, there is water (Guder River), irrigable farmland, suitable soil and topography and favourable climate. But lack of experience of using water for irrigation is one of the challenges. There is also problem of accessible road to Hosaina Town.
6.5.1 Direct Beneficiaries As indicated above the exact number of beneficiaries of the SSI and farmland area to be used for irrigation could not be identified by Shashego Woreda Agricultural, Water and Energy Offices and the Bidika Kebele Agricultural office.
In the case of the experience of households using water for irrigating their farmland three households have generators and use water for irrigating their farmland. Other households within would be command area do not have the experience of using water for irrigating their farmland. The orientation and trainings given to would be beneficiaries of the scheme is very much minimal. Similarly, beneficiaries’ participation in identification, design, planning and implementation is limited. Some of would be beneficiaries are employed on land clearing, digging canal paths, collecting stone and the like. Would be beneficiaries of the SSI registered are those who have their own farmland within the command area identified.
6.5.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) As indicated above, the exact number of would be beneficiaries of SSI are not identified. Adequate orientation on the use of water for irrigation, necessity of forming Water Users Association (WUA) and the like was not given to would be beneficiaries. Due to this establishment of WUA and formation of the different committees was not done.
6.5.3 Other Cooperative Societies
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 217
Final Report
Cooperatives like Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative and Savings and Credit Cooperative that could provide different services (input, credit, output marketing etc) are not yet organized.
6.5.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are not provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office; Smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis form open market and even from individuals. Shashego Woreda Agriculture Office is very far from the would be operational SSI in Bidika Kebele.
6.5.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are not given even basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops, let alone provision of detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
6.5.6 Farmland area under improved water management There is no farmland owned by smallholder farmers that is under improved water management.
6.5.7 Micro-watershed development There is one micro – watershed identified within the SSI, and there is no development interventions made on the identified watershed. Shashego Woreda Administration in which the SSI scheme is to be established claims to be ignorant of the development interventions of the watershed, and therefore, it is indicated that nothing is going on within the watershed. Micro-watershed committee is not also established and beneficiaries of the watershed are not organized.
6.5.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development are insignificant. In fact it could be said that nothing that contributes to climate resilience has been done.
6.5.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 218
Final Report
6.5.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme.
Overall, from the side of Hadiya Zone Agriculture and Natural Resources Department and Shashego Woreda Administration including Agriculture and Water and Energy sector Offices the establishment of SSI scheme is not accepted. It could be said that there is objection to the idea of constructing SSI scheme on Guder River that could be used both by communities of Adencho in Angesch Wored of Kabata and Bidika in Shashego Woreda of Hadiya Zone . Due to this there is a delay in the construction of the SSI scheme and development interventions of the watershed.
On the issues of the supply of Agricultural input like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided to the households within the SSI scheme to be developed, and those who use agricultural inputs get it from individuals on cash.
6.6. KOMBOLOZ The scheme is located Kabata Tembaro Zone, Hadero Woreda and Galbe Kebele. It is a new one and its construction is not started. The total beneficiaries registered to use the SSI are 98 households. Men and women beneficiaries are not identified. The farmland to be used for irrigation scheme is 136.5 hectares. Feasibility study is done for the SSI scheme. The scheme is located at about 25 km from Hadaro Woreda capital Town. The road that takes to the SSI scheme is rough road built by universal road access project (URAP) and needs maintenance.
6.6.1 Direct Beneficiaries As indicated above, 98 households are registered to use the SSI scheme to be developed on voluntary basis. But the households registered to use the SSI scheme to be developed do not have the experience of using water for irrigation. Orientation on the use and management of water to be used for irrigation is given to would be beneficiaries. But that is not in detail, and
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 219
Final Report further, details on the use of water, its managing, application of water; and other inputs for production of crops using irrigation scheme, outputs use and marketing, and the like has to be given for would be beneficiaries. As to the number of beneficiaries, those who have farmland of their own are registered to use the SSI scheme.
6.6.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) Households registered to use the SSI scheme are not properly organized into water users association. Only 60 of them are registered and formation of WUA is initiated. Others remaining are not yet included. Committees that include, Management Committee (MC), Control Committee (CC) and Property Administration Committee (PAC) are not yet formed, and adequate trainings for the Committees are not yet give. Participation of the beneficiaries is not yet seen, and it could be said this may be due to the delay of the project construction.
6.6.3 Other Cooperative Societies Cooperatives like Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative and Savings and Credit Cooperative are not organized and due to this, households/smallholder farmers do not get provision agricultural inputs through cooperatives. Credit and Savings services do not exist.
6.6.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not give.
6.6.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA with the SSI scheme are not given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. Construction of the irrigation scheme itself has not started.
6.6.6. Farmland area under improved water management The registered households to use the SSI scheme to be constructed do not have farmland area under improved watershed management. Using water for irrigation is a new intervention to be implemented within the SSI scheme in Kombolozo.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 220
Final Report
6.6.7 Micro-watershed development Five micro – watersheds are identified within Kombolzo SSI scheme. Development interventions have been started only on Gobolo micro-watershed with the support made by IFAD. One nursery site is developed and eight different types/species of trees and fruit trees produced at the nursery site and trees produced at the Nursery site are planted on an area of 136 hectares of land, mostly on hillside. Trees planted include, Gravellier, Nim, and the like. In addition to the development of one Nursery site and production of different types/species of trees and fruits that are planted only on one micro-watershed, 42 households are trained on watershed management development. Micro-watershed committee is established and engaged in coordinating and mobilizing labour power for different activities to be carried out within the watershed.
6.6.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development is very much limited, and only development of Nursery site, production of seedlings and planting of different tree species were carried out since the start of the project that lasted only for one year. Such interventions contribution in climate resilience is insignificant.
6.6.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed.
6.6.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
6.7 MANISA Manisa is located in Wolayita zone, Offa/Town Gasupha Woreda and Gulana Keebele. The scheme is new one and it is under construction on initial stage. The scheme name is derived from Manisa River in Offa Woreda on which the diversion wire is constructed. The total farmland area to be used for the irrigation scheme is 124 hectares and households
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 221
Final Report registered to use the SSI scheme are 168 (100 men and 68 women). All the registered households do not have experience in using water for irrigated cropping. The SSI scheme is located on all-weather gravel road and it is about 10 km from Gasupha Town. The location is suitable for its irrigable land, soil and topography, favourable climate and of course Water from Manisa River. 6.7.1 Direct Beneficiaries As indicated above, the farm land area identified to be irrigated is reported to be 124 hectares and the total households registered to use it are 168. Registered beneficiaries participation in the construction of SSI scheme is reported to be encouraging, and so far they have participated in land clearing, digging path with their own labor for canal construction, and full participation in the follow up of the construction.
Since the beneficiaries are strictly following up the construction of the Canal, beneficiaries know the challenges encountering the construction and they reported during the discussion that, there is lack of coordination among the Contractor, Water and Energy Office, Agriculture and Natural Resources Office and the beneficiary community members.
6.7.2 Establishment of Water Users Association(WUA) The smallholder farmers//households living within the new small scale irrigation scheme registered to use the SSI scheme do not have the experience of using water for irrigation. However, it was realized that the households registered to use the scheme are oriented about the use of water for irrigated farming, how to manage and use it and the like. Based on the orientation given to would be beneficiaries, establishment of water users association is initiated but not properly organized. It was also reported that, water users association (WUA) have elected their Management Committee (MC), Control Committee (CC) and Property Administration Committee (PAC). The WUA is also not yet become operational but in the process of getting strengthened.
6.7.3 Other Cooperative Societies There is Dekaya Agricultural Multi-Purpose Cooperative Society within the SSI Scheme. But it is not engaged in the provision of agricultural inputs and output marketing. Rural Savings and Credit Cooperative Society is initiated within the Kebele and 40 members are registered among which there are some would be beneficiaries of the SSI scheme.
6.7.4 Access to provision of Agricultural Inputs
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 222
Final Report
The different agricultural inputs required by smallholder farmers are provided by the Woreda Agricultural Office and smallholder farmers’ purchase the required inputs on cash basis, and therefore, agricultural input provision on credit is not give.
6.7.5 Trainings provision on production practices and use of technologies in irrigated farming The newly initiated members of WUA from the scheme under construction are given basic orientation on the use of water for production of crops. Detail practices of using water for irrigation, farming practices and use of technologies are not given. The irrigation scheme itself has not become operational.
6.7.6 Farmland area under improved water management Currently, there is no farmland area under improved water management.
6.7.7 Micro-watershed development Different development interventions are aimed to be carried on Tantu Bosolo micro – watershed is identified within the SSI scheme under constructed on Manisa River. About 60 households are registered to beneficiaries of the micro watershed development interventions; and livelihood promotion component of the micro-watershed is focused on and distribution of chicken, beehives and small ruminants has been carried out. Martials and tools required to perform micro-watershed development interventions were distributed to the beneficiaries. Seedling site is developed and seedlings that could be planted on 310 hectares are produced. Trainings on micro-watershed development and management are given particularly for those who are engaged in the micro- watershed development interventions. The micro- watershed programme has been going on only for the last one year and much has not has been formed.
6.7.8 Targeted population with increased climate resilience Interventions made in the micro-watershed development are very much limited, and so far only seedling site was prepared and seedlings that could be planted on 310 hectares of land produced. It is expected that such interventions will contribute much to climate resilience in the future.
6.7.9 Improvement in ecosystem In the case of improvement made in ecosystem, significant change is not yet observed. This is due that the project has been going on only for the last one year.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 223
Final Report
6.7.10 Remarks: Only those households who have land within the envisaged SSI scheme command area will be using the irrigation water to produce crops to be determined by the beneficiaries; and, those men or women headed households or youth who do not have farm land within the command area are not expected to be benefited directly from the scheme. Agricultural inputs like fertilizer, improved seed, and chemicals are also not provided on credit to small holder farmers. Due to this, those farmers who can afford to purchase on cash are using inputs for production of agricultural crops.
VII. SCHEMES IN EAST AND WEST HARARGHE ZONES OROMIA
7.1 Issues and Results of FGDs
Focal Group Discussions were made in 15 Schemes with208 particpants of which 132 were amle and 75 female. The discussions were made 15 groups. The participants of focal group discussions were farmer beneficiaries (both men and women) in the command area. Key informant Interview particpants wer Kebele chairmen, development agents (DAs), irrigation experts at woreda level particularly contact person of IFAD and other government workers at woreda or DA centers as deemed necessary. The discussion was based on the questionnaire prepared by ITAB, the consulting firm, and facilitated by the team leaders of the group. Issues that were not on the questionnaire but rose by beneficiaries at SSI command areas were also treated by the facilitator as long as the questions were relevant to the subject of discussions.
The team leader of the group also discussed primarily with the zonal and woreda irrigation leaders and experts since they are key informant of irrigation activities in their respective zones and woredas and most importantly they are responsible for undertaking study, design and construction of small scale irrigation in their areas of operation.
The major points or issues discussed with the focal group of SSI projects are highlighted as follows:
7.1.2 Community participation The participation of the community in irrigation development definitely has a decisive role for the proper designing, implementation and sustainable management of the proposed development action when put on the ground. When discussions were held with the focal groups on behalf of the community at all project areas of the two zones, the key questions asked were about their willingness of participation during the construction of the schemes and management including sustainable maintenance when the projects are completed and hand over to them. It was noted that they unanimously agreed on behalf of their community they represent to cover parts of the cost through their labor participation and by providing locally available materials freely to the project. The beneficiaries in all the project areas have
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 224
Final Report long years of experience in labor mobilization which they gained from traditional irrigation that they have been passing from generation to generations in a sustainable manner. Moreover, they are also deeply interested to take over the operation and maintenance of the project during post implementation stage by participating in labor work and mobilization of local materials for repair and maintenance. But they were critically complaining about the delay of the project implementation, though they signaled positive response to the questions about their support and participation whenever they were asked.
The other opportunity is that most of the project areas are suitable for irrigation with fertile and suitable soil and highly experienced farmers having local knowledge and skill they accumulated from traditional irrigation for many years. The traditional irrigation water management systems have been conducted by local leaders called” Malaka Bishani”who distribute water in schedule. It is a traditional way of administering irrigation agriculture where one or two people manage water distribution by setting proper and fair scheduling to irrigation users in their community.
7.2.2 Opportunity for land allocation for youth and the disadvantaged groups
There is no opportunity for irrigable land distribution or redistribution to youth and disadvantaged groups due to shortage of land and the existing land ownership is through family inheritance that fragmented the land further into small pieces. According to the key informant and focal discussion group participants’ father allocate land to his sons, culturally mandatory, when they get married and form a family whereas women get the opportunity of sharing land only when their parents pass away. Generally, the small land holding of Hararaghe farmers coupled with high population density makes the issue of land redistribution very difficult. Besides majority of the farmland is covered with chat, which is a perennial crop as well as cash source for members of the community residing in the project areas.
7.2.3 Roles and responsibilities of household members (Gender based labor contribution) in irrigation related activities Women are involved in fertilizer applications, weeding, harvesting and marketing while ploughing and planting are the sole responsibility of men in the two zones according to the observation during FGD. Both men and women share activities like weeding, harvesting and sometimes marketing. Women are largely involved in irrigation related activities though, they are less represented in the traditional irrigation water user associations since their contributions are always undervalued. Besides irrigation activities, women are involved in all household chores such as water fetching, firewood collecting, and child care and above all prepare and provide food for their family and consequently they are highly vulnerable to work overload. Early marriage is still practiced in all scheme areas which are the main cause of early dropout of girls from school.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 225
Final Report
7.2 Results of the Discussion with KIIs
7.2.1 Major roles of Regional/Zonal office in SSI and organization The roles of Zonal Oromia Irrigation Development Authorities and the way they are organized and function are very similar in both East and West Hararghe. The Zonal Irrigation Development Authorities are responsible for planning, study, design and construction supervision of Small Scale Irrigation (SSI) projects.
They are also responsible for major repairs and maintenance work beyond community level and provision of technical support along the line.
The other important role of Zonal OIDA is to transfer completed irrigation schemes to beneficiaries and eventually perform agricultural extension work and promotion of new technologies in irrigation development activities to increase crop production and productivity. Training and capacity building of woreda staff in SSI management and maintenance is the mandate of zonal staff.
7.2.2 Monitoring and evaluation of irrigation projects for the existing projects
According to East Hararghe zone irrigation team leader, Michael Ibrahim, some kind of monitoring and evaluation of traditional irrigation is conducted before the start of the rainy season and after it is over. There is no formal monitoring and evaluation system put in place for traditional irrigation since modern irrigation schemes planned by IFAD have not yet become operational. However, there are other modern irrigation projects done by other organizations and / NGOs that are completed and operational and provide the necessary and required services to farmers. Under such conditions irrigation schemes monitoring and evaluation is formally done by zonal, woreda and FTC or DA experts. Water Users Associations (WUA) are also formed and registered in some areas. WUA are efficient in managing irrigation schemes and sustainable operation of the system wherever they are formed.
7.2.3 System for monitoring of operations and maintenance for irrigation schemes
After implementation of the project, result monitoring and evaluation shall be very critical in providing feedback and acknowledging if the project is moving in the right direction to achieve operational and results according to the set goals. When the rainy season is approaching the weirs have to be opened by farmers to save the irrigation structures from being removed or damaged by floods caused by heavy rains. Therefore, irrigation experts are expected to monitor and confirm the opening of the weirs and or the diversion canals before the onset of rainy season. Traditional irrigation structures and diversion canals, which can be easily removed or damage even by light floods as they are not strong and canals filled with silts, leaves and other materials should be monitored and cleaned by WUA or Malaka Bishani
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 226
Final Report elected by beneficiaries of the command areas after the rainy season is gone so that the irrigation systems become functional for use by farmers.
7.2.4 Small Irrigation schemes Access to Farm mechanization . The land escapes of most command areas of the schemes of Hararghe zones are not suitable for mechanization due to undulating and rugged nature of the lands. But there are few command areas e.g. Mieso woreda schemes have flat and suitable lands which suit for mechanizations are good opportunity for accessing mechanization in the future when the schemes become operational.
7.2.5 The Role of farmers’ organizations in the implementation of irrigation project
7.2.5.1 Malaka Bishani is a community organization system where the beneficiaries of the community are organized in group and take the responsibility of managing traditional irrigations. They are usually opinion leaders who are trusted and socially accepted by the community. The main responsibility of malakas is to manage the distribution of water and organize the community for maintenance and day- to-day operation of the irrigation scheme including water scheduling for beneficiaries.
7.2.5.2 Water Users Associations (WUA) are organized by woreda cooperative department which are primarily responsible for efficient management of irrigation scheme and sustainable operation of the system. WUA is organized only in few irrigation scheme areas though; they are not yet functional since the irrigation schemes are not completed or the constructions of most schemes have not yet started.
7.2.5 The Role of Woreda Offices
All roles and responsibilities assigned to zonal office is executed through woreda OIDA. Full implementation of the project at the grass root level is carried out by woreda office through DAs. Accordingly the woreda levels OIDA perform the following major activities in their areas.
Support irrigation schemes in agricultural extension services and water management as well as to provide technical advices in irrigation agronomy, input supply and transfer of other technologies of crop production by irrigation.
The woreda OIDA also play key roles of operation and maintenance, water utilization, and assisting community organization for sustainable utilization and operation of irrigation projects.
In general the agricultural support given by woreda irrigation development authority is in the following functional areas.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 227
Final Report
• Agricultural extension service and agronomy support which provides extension service, agronomy practice, technical advice on crop production and water management for irrigation farming. Supply of improved seeds, fertilizers; pesticides etc. are expected from this department.
• Woreda experts and Development Agents (DAs) support: The Woreda OIDA support irrigation through extension agents or DAs assigned to cover all agricultural activities at kebele level.
• Facilitating credit and saving services to farmers in their respective woredas
• Capacity building and training support which is the key factor to enhance skills and knowledge and transfer of other appropriate technology to the intended farmers so that the major objectives of small scale irrigation development, which is increasing crop production and productivity, is achieved.
• OIDA has the mandate of forming and registering Water Users Association (WUA) and Irrigation water users cooperatives in collaboration with woreda cooperative promotion office 7.2.6 Status of water users association, traditional organizations, training given Water users association is formed in few scheme areas though, they are not functional because the constructions of most of the irrigation schemes have not yet started, and the few organized WUA are in their rudimentary stage. Contrary to this fact, there are operational traditional irrigations at all kebeles of the project areas. Even though the traditional irrigations are less technical and constructed based on local knowledge and skills using local materials, they have been serving the community for many generations. Organization and management is bound by local community organization systems and managed by people who are socially accepted and elected by the community. They are also sometimes trained and guided by woreda irrigation experts and development agents in some scheme areas.
7.2.7 Issues related to land ownership and land use Due to the high population of East and West Hararghe, there is a shortage of farmland in general and irrigation land in particular. The small sizes of land owned by farmers are not adequate to produce enough food for large family members of each house hold. Such conditions create border conflict among farmers in the effort of getting more irrigable land. According to the opinion of FGD participants fathers are culturally bound to share portion of their lands to their sons when they get married no matter how small the size of their land is. But due to shortage of land fathers, sometimes, don’t have enough land to allocate or share to their sons. Such situations can cause serious conflict among fathers and sons in the traditional irrigation areas or even in the rain fed areas.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 228
Final Report
7.2.8 The presence of Traditional irrigations These traditional irrigations are constructed based on local knowledge and skills by using local materials such as mud, rocks, twigs etc. they have been serving the purpose of the community for generations. Organization and management of traditional irrigations is bound by local community organization systems where the beneficiaries of the community elect opinion leaders who are trusted and socially accepted by the community and able to take responsibility to manage water distribution. This elected people are locally called Malaka Bishani and are responsible for the operation, maintenance and fair distribution of irrigation water.
7.2.9 Supports given for the existing irrigation work The support given to the current traditional irrigation systems varies from woreda to woreda and from scheme to scheme. In the project kebeles there are traditional water management system working for long time. According to FDG and key informant some woredas provide training to traditional irrigation users and try to introduce better skills and knowledge to help them handle in an improved and better way thereby avoiding low water conveyance efficiency and high water loss. In other woredas no training on skill upgrading and improvement is delivered to traditional irrigation users and they continue managing their irrigation in a traditional way they have been doing for generations.
7.2.10 Level of supply of inputs The main inputs used in both East and West Hararghe Zones are Fertilizers, Improved seeds, pesticides and herbicides. According to the key informants most of the beneficiaries of the irrigation schemes are not using agricultural inputs to improve the fertility of the soil of their farms. The main reasons to the low commercial input use are attributed to rainfall shortage or prevalence of water stress, limited awareness caused by inadequate extension services, increasing price of agricultural inputs and farmers fear of risk and avert.
7.2.11 Strategies of Addressing problems
The main problem is water stress and it can be addressed by making the ongoing irrigation projects operational. In some woredas watershed management interventions are very poor and degradation of soil is severely affecting the watershed and eventually causes the stream, springs and rivers to dry up e.g. HuseMandhera. In the absence of enough moisture in the soil nutrients in the applied fertilizers are not available for plants and nutrient loss from applied fertilizers is main occurrence during shortage of moisture in the soil. Thus, it is not advisable to use inputs particularly fertilizers when moisture stress prevails in the soil. Strengthening watershed management through soil conservation, water conservation and reforestation is the way forward to address the problem in the long run. For short run it looks mandatory to rapidly construct and complete the irrigation schemes so that the problem of water shortage for crop production is addressed.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 229
Final Report
7.2.12 Condition of Access Roads and their maintenance
All the schemes with the exception of Laga Arba, Gumbi Bordode woreda, have roads that can be accessible by vehicles. During the rainy season some of the roads and bridges are partially damaged or completely removed by floods caused by heavy rains. Such roads are not repaired or maintained as soon as rainy season stopped. The community through their Kebele administration and Malakas mobilize the community and repair bridges and canals that are damaged by floods that are within the capacity of their skill, knowhow and finance.
ITAB CONSULT PLC Page 230