ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY THE SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
DETERMINANTS OF LAND DEGRADATION, IN NEJO WOREDA, WESTERN ETHIOPIA
BY WAKETOLA GETACHEW
MA THESIS SUBMITTED TO SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
AUGUST, 2017 ADAMA, ETHIOPIA.
i
ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY THE SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
DETERMINANTS OF LAND DEGRADATION, IN NEJO WOREDA, WESTERN ETHIOPIA
BY WAKETOLA GETACHEW
ADVISOR DR. TSETADRGACHEW LEGESSE
MA THESIS SUBMITTED TO SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES INPARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREEOF MASTER OF ARTS IN GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
AUGUST, 2017 ADAMA, ETHIOPIA.
i
Declaration I declare that this thesis is my original work and that all sources of materials used for this thesis have been duly acknowledged. I solemnly declare that this thesis has never been presented to any other institution anywhere for the award of any academic degree. This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for M.A. Degree in Geography and Environmental Studies at Adama Science and Technology University.
Name: Waketola Getachew Signature______Date______
i
Acknowledgment Above all, I would like to thank the Almighty God for his help in all aspects to finalize my study. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor Dr. Tsetadrgachew Legesse for his invaluable advice, comments, encouragement and assistance throughout the thesis work. I have no words to thank and appreciate Ato Girma Wadajo and Ato Tesfa Mosisa for their continuous support morally and materially. My special thanks go to Ato Dula Tafese for his continuous support during data collection. All enumerators are also acknowledged for their cooperation during data gathering. I owe my deepest thanks to Ato Bojia Tariku for his continuous and tireless support during data collection and field survey. I would like to extend my thanks to Nejo Preparatory School Staff for their support materially. I would like to express my thanks to Nejo Woreda Agriculyural and Rural Development Office and Nejo WoredaFinance and Development Office Staff for their giving relevant data. Last but not list, my heartfelt appreciation and great thanks goes to my wife Bayeti Fikiru and my sister Elfinesh Erena for their blessing and moral support.
I
Table of Contents
Content Page ACKNOWLEDGMENT...... I TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... II LIST OF TABLES ...... V LIST OF FIGURES ...... VI ACRONYMS ...... VII ABSTRACT ...... VIII CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1.Background of the Study ...... 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem ...... 3 1. 3 Objective of the Study ...... 4 1.3.1 General Objective of the Study ...... 4 1.3.2 Specific Objective of the Study ...... 4 1.4 Research Questions ...... 4 1.5 Significance of the Study ...... 5 1.6 Scope of the Study ...... 5 1.7 Limitation of the Study ...... 6 1.8 Organization of the Research ...... 6 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE...... 7 2.1 The Concept of Land Degradation ...... 7 2.2 Causes of Land Degradation ...... 7 2.2.1 Population Pressure as Causes of Land Degradation ...... 8 2.2.2 The Causal Relationship between Deforestation and LD in Ethiopia ...... 10 2.2.3 The Impact of Termite on Forest Resource ...... 11 2.2.4 Mining and Quarrying Activities as Cause of Land Degradation ...... 12 2.3 Effects of Land Degradation...... 13 2.4 Consequences of Land Degradation ...... 15 2.5 Empirical Literature ...... 15
II
2.5.1 Previous Studies Concerning Causes of Land Degradation ...... 15 2.5.2 Previous Studies and Causes of LD in Context of Ethiopia ...... 16 2.6 Literature Gap ...... 17 2.7 Conceptual Framework ...... 17 CHAPTER THREE: DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA AND THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...... 20 3.1 Description of the Study Area ...... 20 3.1.1 Physical Background of the Study Area ...... 20 3.1.2 Demographic and Socioeconomic Condition of the Study Area ...... 23 3.2 The Research Methods (Methodology)...... 27 3.2.1 Research Design ...... 27 3.2.2 Study Population ...... 27 3.2.3 Sampling Techniques ...... 27 3.2.4 Data Type and Data Source ...... 29 3.2.5 Data Gathering (Collection) Tools ...... 30 3.2.6 Method of Data Analysis ...... 31 3.3 Data Validity and Reliability ...... 31 3.4 Ethical Consideration ...... 32 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULT AND DISCUSSION ...... 33 4.1 Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics of the Respondents ...... 33 4.1.1 Demographic Characteristics of the SHHs ...... 33 4.1.2 Socioeconomic Characteristics of the SHHs ...... 35 4.2 Prevalence, Extent, Causes, Effects, and Measures Against LD in Nejo Woreda ...... 39 4.2.1 Prevalence and Forms of Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda ...... 39 4.2.2 Extent of Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda ...... 44 4.2.3 Causes of Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda ...... 44 4.2.3.1 Proximate and Underlying Causes of Land Degradation ...... 44 4.2.4 Effects of Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda ...... 51 4.2.5 Measures Against Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda...... 53
III
4.3 Summary of Regresion Result ...... 56 CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND ...... 58 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 58 5.1 Summary ...... 58 5.2 Conclusion ...... 59 5.3 Recommendations ...... 60 REFERENCES ...... 62 APPENDICES ...... 68 ANNEX A: ...... 68 ANNEX B ...... 83 ANNEX C ...... 85 ANNEX D ...... 86 ANNEX E ...... 87 ANNEX F ...... 88 ANNEX G ...... 89
IV
List of Tables
Table 3.1Major land use types and proportion share for Agar Genasi watershed ...... 21 Table Table 3.2 Major soil types in Nejo Woreda ...... 22 Table 3.3 Number of sample households from sample kebeles ...... 29 Table 4.1The Sex and Age Charecteristics of the SHHs ...... 33 Table 4.2 The Marital Status and the Family Size of the SHHs ...... 34 Table 4.3 Socioeconomic characteristics of the SHH respondents ...... 35 Table 4.4 Soil types and the major uses of the land possessed by the SHHs ...... 37 Table 4.5 The major cultivable crops of the study area ...... 38 Table 4.6 Prevalence of land degradation and its major forms in Nejo Woreda ...... 41 Table 4.7 The most degraded topography of the study area ...... 42 Table 4.8 Theassociation between degrees of LD problemandlocation, demographic andsocioeconomic characteristics of the SHHs ...... 43 Table 4.9 Extent of land degradation on farm lands of the study area ...... 44 Table 4.10 Causes of land degradation in the area as perceived by the respondents ...... 85 Table 4.11 The relationship between economic activities, termites and LD ...... 45 Table 4.12 Determinants of LD in Nejo Woreda as Perceived by the Respondents ...... 86 Table 4.13 Population growth - Agricultural land r/p in the area as perceived by the respondents...... 87 Table 4.14 The uses of forest and factors contribut for its degradation as perceived by the respondents...... 88 Table 4.15 Deforestation and soil/environmentaldegradation r/p in the studyarea ...... 48 Table 4.16 Types of grazing lands and location relationship ...... 49 Table 4.17 Gold mining and sand quarrying and their effects on land resources in Nejo Woreda ...... 50 Table 4.18 Land degradation and its effect in the study area ...... 51 Table 4.19 Action Taken by the Community to Mitigate the Problems of LD in Nejo Woreda ...... 53
Table 4.20 Solution taken by the Government and NGOs to mitigate the problems of LD in Nejo Woreda ...... 54 Table 4.21 The effort of government/NGO in restoration of degraded lands in Nejo Woreda ...... 55 Table4.22 Parameter Estimates of land degradation in Nejo Woreda ...... 56
V
List of Figures Figures Page Figure 1: Determinants of Land Degradation...... 19 Figure 2: Location of Nejo Woreda in its National and Regional Settings...... 20 Figure 3: Mean Annual Temperature and Mean Annual Rainfall of Nejo Woreda...... 23 Figure 4: The Ten Years Population Size of Nejo Woreda (2008-2017)...... 24 Figure 5: The Ten Years Livestock Population Size of Nejo Woreda (2008-2017)...... 26 Figure 6: Land Size Currently Owned by the Household Heads...... 36 Figure 7: Developments of Huge Gullies and Bare Lands in Bushane Aleltu and Muchucho Gorgis Study Area on Farm Land...... 40 Figure 8: Development of Landslides in Gute Weni Study Area...... 40 Figure 9: Development of Landslide and Physical Deformation of the Land in Gute Weni Study Area ...... 42 Figure 10: Bare Land Developed Due to the Impact of Termite in Muchucho Gorgis Study Area ...... 47 Figure 11: People Involved in Traditional Gold Mining in Bushane Aleltu Study Area . 51 Figure 12: Deformed Land in Gute Weni Study Area ...... 52
VI
Acronyms
ARDO: Agriculture and Rural Development Office BoFED: Bureau of Finance and Economic Development DA: Developmental Agent EHRS: Ethiopian Highlands Reclamation Study FNRC: Forest and Natural Resource Conservation FAO: Food and Agricultural Organizations of the United Nation GDP: Gross Domestic Product KG: Kindergarten LD: Land Degradation LEPO: Land and Environmental Protection Office MoA: Ministry of Agriculture NGO: Non Governmental Organization NWARDB: Nejo Woreda Agriculture and Rural Development Bureau NWEO: Nejo WoredaEducation Office NWFEDO: Nejo Woreda Finance and Economic Development Office NWHO: Nejo Woreda Health Office NWLFRDA: Nejo Woreda Livestock and Fish Rural Development Agency NWRPHC: Nejo Woreda Rural Population and Housing Census NWSLMPO: Nejo Woreda Sustainable Land management Project Office ONRS Oromia National Regional State SHH: Sample household head SLM: Sustainable Land Management SLMP: Sustainable Land Management Project SSA: Sub-Saharan Africa TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit UNDP: United Nation Development Program WUFSS: Wollega University Faculty of Social Science WWLEPO: Western Wollega Land and Environment Protection Office
VII
Abstract
Land degradation is nowadays threatening millions of people in the world particularly in developing countries like Ethiopia where inappropriate land use and farming systems are practiced. This thesis is concerned with the determinant of land degradation in Nejo Woreda, Western Ethiopia. The main objective of this study is to assess the demographic and socio-economic factors that responsible for accelerated land degradation at plotlevel. In order to achieve the objective of the study, this study employed a mixed design and therefore both primary and secondary data were generated by employing qualitative and quantitative approaches. The data gathering tools for this study were questionnaire, key informant interview, and field survey. The sample kebeleswere purposively selected while the sample size from each kebeles was selected by using stratified random sampling techniques. The sample respondents were selected from sample kebeles by using systematic random sampling techniques. The data gathering tools were questionnaire, key informant interview and observation. The data were analyzed by using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics such as chi-square and logistic regression and the data were presented by using percentage, mean, frequency tables and graphs. The qualitative data were analyzed through description, narration and interpretation. The logistic regression was used to determine the effect of demographic and socioeconomic factors that determine land degradation. The model was used for analysis of 11 explanatory variables of which 4 were found to be statistically significant at less than 5% significant level. The result showed that location, soil type, traditional gold mining and over cultivation have effect on land degradation. Besides, the results of analyzed quantitative data and qualitative data showed that termite, population pressure and deforestation have effect on land degradation. It is recommended that in order to rehabilitate the land, priority should be given to family planning, appropriate soil and forest conservation techniques, generation of other off farm activities such as petty trade and cottage industries, and termite infestation control. Key words: Land degradation, determinant factors, rehabilitation.
VIII
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Study
Land degradation is a complex phenomena triggered by the interplay of environmental, economic and social factors, and is reaching a significant dimension especially in rural areas of developing countries where its effects are more severe. The environmental and socio-economic effects of land resources degradation are severe, especially in developing nations, where inappropriate land use and farming sysems are practiced(Mangistu & Mekuria, 2015). It is stated that the highest number of causalities arising from land degradation is on the livelihoods and well-beings of the poorest households in the rural areas of developing countries (Baraun, et al.,2013).
The scale and severity of land degradation is increasing in many parts of the world with more than 20% of all areas used for plants or crops, 30% of wood lands, and 10% of grass lands experiencing degradation(Bai, et al.,2008). It is estimated that 2.6 billion people are affected by land degradation and expansion of desert in more than a hundred countries, affecting more than 33% of the earths land surface, and millions of hectares of land in all climatic regions are being degraded per year(Adams and Eswaran, 2000). Desertification, deforestation, overgrazing, salinization, and soil erosion are the more noticeable forms of land degradation.These forms can result from either human activities or natural causes. In spite of the fact that land can be degraded by natural factors, accelerated land degradation is most commonly caused as a result of human intervention in the environment(Nkonya, et al., 2011).
The degradation of land causes soil erosion, loss of soil fertility, and soil cover and chemical pollution. Furthermore, over cultivation, overgrazing and deforestation are the underlying causes of land degradation in rural areas. These unwise uses of natural resources led millions of Africa‟s people located at different sites of the continent, where 43% of the land is affected by land degradation at different degree ranging from moderately to severely degraded area to be threated by its resultant effect starvation (Eswaran,et al.,2000).Land Degradation is one of the severe problems in Sub-Saharan
1
Africa threaten the lives of millions of people. The problem is the result of different human activities in different climatic zones of the region (Dominic,et al.,2004). The SSA is also the region experiencing poverty and repeated droughts on a scale of not known anywhere also in the world and about 200 million people of the region are affected by land degradation which is widespread (20-50% of the land) (FAO,2000).
Like that of other east African countries, Ethiopia has faced the problem of environmental degradation, mostly land degradation which has been known as a major challenge facing majority of the region. The country is losing 1.5 to 2 billion tons of top soil per year which could haveproduced 1 to 2 million tons of grain and equivalent to a monetary value of US $ 1 to 2 billion annually by erosion(Girma, 2001).As reported by Haile Mariam and Guner(2010), soil degradation is one of the most severe environmental problems in the highlands of Ethiopia. Land degradation highly affects the agricultural development and food security of Ethiopia and therefore considered as one of the major challenges in the county(Addise,2014).
In Ethiopia,land degradation is the result of complex interaction between physical, chemical, biological, socio-economical and political issues (Taffa,2002). In addition, Temesgen,et al.,(2014), stated that the principal process of land degradation in Ethiopia at a national level are rapid population expansion, severe soil erosion, deforestation, low vegetative cover. Unsustainable and unbalanced agricultural production, physical topography of the area, soil type and agro-ecological parameters are also stated as factors influenced by human made and natural causes. Alemneh,( 2003) has revealed that the extent of land resources degradation in Ethiopia especially the degree of soil erosion, nutrient depletion and deforestation in highland areas of Ethiopia is very high.
According to Bezuayehu, et al., 2002, In Oromia region (which is one of the regional states in Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia), many events are considered to cause land degradation that decline the potential productivity to long-term, sometimes irreversible, deterioration of land. These processes include soil erosion, chemical degradation, biological degradation and physical degradation. Considering its determinants, erosion in the region it stated rugged topography with steep slopes, high
2 amount of rainfall, the soil types, loss of forest and other vegetation cover, and excessive tillage for some crops are statedas the major determinant factors. The same source stated that the biological degradation is associated with decline in humus content, while the chemical degradation is related with nutrient depletion, and the physical degradation is due to compaction, sealing, reduced aeration and permeability.
Ahmed Hussien, et al.,(2011), suggested that since the life of the people of the region predominantly based on agriculture, land is a resource having a decisive importance for livelihood earning of the people of Oromia.The source also stated that even though most of the soils of Oromia region have good agricultural potentials, soils on the highlands of Oromia have been subjected to serious erosion due to destructive exploitation activities, and has direct adverse implications on their cropping and livestock production processes. This study is therefore, aimed to identify the situation of land degradation at the current time and the determining factors at a plot (or Woreda) level and to recommend possible policies and strategies for sustainable land management of the study area.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The problem of land degradation is serious throughout the world. However, the intensity of the problem varies from region to region and even from area to area. Ethiopian highland is the area of the most intense population density, the area of greatest livestock density, and the area of greatest land degradation in the country. Since the study area (Nejo Wereda) is located in high land, similar to many other highlands of Ethiopia in general, and Nejo in particular, the primary source of livelihoods for the majority of the people of the study area depend on agricultural activities which is dominated by subsistence farming. However, as an occasional visit to the area clearly shows, the area is characterized by sever land degradation which is manifested with decline in forest coverage, formation of huge gullies, severe soil erosion and shrinkages of farm land which the rural population of the area is facing. It shows that the problem of land degradation is becoming an increasing problem in many parts of the study area; achievement in combacting land degradation to overcome the resultant problem requires an improved understanding of its determinant factors, consequences and situation at a particular time.
3
In addition to these, hence different studies conducted concerning land degradation in many highlands of the country (Ethiopia) show both spatial and temporary variation in the degree of severity and its causes, knowledge about the determinants of land degradation at any plot area where there is immense land degradation is very important. However, except the field survey conducted by the woreda‟s SLMP, research conducted on the determinants of land degradationspecifically for the study area is almost no. Therefore, the existence of gap in knowledge about the determinants of land degradation in the area calls for a study.
1. 3 Objective of the Study
1.3.1 General Objective of the Study
The general objective of this study is to assess the determining factors of land degradation in the study area.
1.3.2 Specific Objective of the Study
Specifically, the study was aspire: A. To investigate the main determinant factors of land degradation in the study area B. To analyze the effects of these factors on the productivity of the land C. To suggest possible measures for the problem in the study area.
1.4 Research Questions
Based on the objective, the study is going to answer the following basic questions: 1. What are the major determinant factors of land degradation in the study area? 2. What are the effects of these determinant factors on the productivity of the land in Nejo Woreda? 3. What are the possible measures for the problem of land degradation in the study area?
4
1.5 Significance of the Study
Different stake holders (both governmental and non-governmental organizations) need to understand the determinant factors of land degradation in rural areas at plot level in order to make measures to increase agricultural production and to make proper measure and plan effective policies and strategies for sustainable land-use management. Therefore, this study is intended to give significant information for the people in the area, the governmental organizations, the non-governmental organizations, and the agricultural experts who are engaged in the task of sustainable land management.
Hence the outcome of the study will generate information for policy makers, governmental and non-governmental organization to design and develop effective sustainable land management strategies and polices the study is significant to policy makers and local practice. The findings of the study give adequate information to local and regional government and NGOs for better uses of their environment and recommendation of this study can be used as alternative for rehabilitation of land degradation. The findings of this study can also be used as bench mark for future investigations on the study area.Thus,the study could help asa documentary source for those who want to work on the same or similar research problems in the study area.
1.6 Scope of the Study
The study was focused on the assessmentof the main determinant factors of land degradation in the study area. It gave particular emphases to population pressure, deforestation, overgrazing, and traditional gold mining and quarrying activities. In order to make the study more manageable within the given time and resource,theresearch work was conducted only in three kebelesout of 49 kebeles of Nejo woreda.The analytical scope of the study was not included all the methods and tools that could used for data analysis. Rather, it delimited to some descriptive and some inferential data analysis techniques. It also included description, narration and interpretation of the qualitative data. The study was tried to investigate the determinant factors of land degradation in the study area, at the current time.
5
1.7 Limitation of the Study
The limitation of this study wasthe inadequacy of some written documents concerning the socio-economic and data related to natural resources, and the some household heads refusal to answer some questions related to land size and the traditional gold mining.
1.8 Organization of the Research
This study paper contains five chapters. Chapter one deals with the introductory part consisting introduction, statement of the problem, objective, the significance and research questions, scope and limitation of the study. Review of related literatures and Conceptual frame works were described in unit two. Chapter three deals with the research design, research method and procedures.Chapter four deals with analysis and discussion of the result. Chapter five discusses the summary, conclusion and recommendation of the study
6
CHAPTER TWO:REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 The Concept of Land Degradation
Land degradation is defined as long-term decline of the biological or economic potential productivity of land (Manh, 2014). According to FAO (2005), the term Land Degradation include the entire environment but include separate factors about soils, water resources, forests, grasslands /crop land/, and biodiversity. Mosayeb, et al.,(2013), gave the meaning of land degradation as deterioration of land quality and productivity in a given area through natural means or persuaded by human activities. In other way, Raphel(2012), have also defined the term land degradation as decline in the rate at which land yields products useful to local livelihood within defined time lasting for a long time or forever. Though in many cases, land degradation and soil degradation are used interchangeable, the former one has wider concept than the later and refer to the degradation resources such as soil, water, climate, and fauna and flora(Asrat, 2014). In spite of the fact that several scholars defined it in several ways using various factors, the case is an important topic to be resolved and therefore has attracted the attention of researchers and policy makers worldwide and is considered as one of the critical issue. Degradation of the land leads to deterioration and depletion of other resources, while mitigating the problem helps to conserve other resources and reduce related effects(Debtanu, et al., 2013).
2.2 Causes of Land Degradation
The causes of land degradation are numerous, interrelated and complex. However, it can be classified in to proximate causes(further sub-divided in to biological or natural proximate causes and anthropogenic causes), and Underlying causes. The proximate causes are those that have a direct effect on the terrestrial ecosystem. It include topography, land cover, climate, soil erodibility, paste and diseases, unsustainable land management and infra structure development(Vortman et al.,2000; Gao and Liu, 2010; Safriel and Adee, 2005; bonilla and Johnson, 2012; Sternberg, 2008; Nkonya, et al.,2011; and Geist and Lambin, 2004,cited in Braun, et al., 2013).In line to this Bezuayehu, et al.,(2002), indicate that the proximate causes of land degradation include soil erosion due to deforestation, fragmentation from disturbances such as illegal logging, nutrient depletion due to low use of inorganicand organic fertilizer, decline of fallow periods,
7 cultivation of fragile lands, fragmentation of land holdings, forest degradation due to fire, pest out breaks and insects. The main causes of land degradation may be grouped into physical, chemical, biological processes and human induced activities(Mulatu,2014).
According to Nkonya et al., 2011, the underlying causes of land degradation are those that affect the proximate causes of land degradation. It includes population pressure, market access, land tenure, poverty, and access to agricultural extension services, infrastructure, and policies that promote the use of land degradation practices. It alsoindicated that natural hazards are the physical environment which acts as predisposing factors for land degradation such as steep slopes, rains of high intensity, high rainfall variability and soil types. The direct causes refers to unsuitable land use and inappropriate land management practices such as deforestation, overgrazing, non- adoption of soil-conservation practices(which may include improper crop rotation, unbalanced fertilizer uses, improper canal irrigation, etc). The s alsoame document also stated that, the underlying causes are the reasons why the inappropriate type of land use and management(direct causes) are practiced, such as lack of tenure security, land shortage, economic pressure, altitudes, poverty and population increase.
2.2.1 Population Pressure as Causes ofLandDegradation
Soil, the earth‟s skin that easily broken or damaged and fix firmly all living things on planet earth and consiste very great species that bring a dynamic and complex ecosystem into existence is one of the most important resources that have great value to humans. However, the increased desire for agriculture commodities due to population growth drive to clearance of vegetation land and change forests and grass lands to farm fields and grass land suitable for grazing cattle or sheep. The conversion of natural vegetation to agriculture exposes the land to erosion and some many of agricultural plants such as coffee, cotton, palm oil and wheat in fact increase the wearing away of this skin of the earth (soil) beyond its ability to maintain itself (WUFSS,2010).
The population growth as a cause of land degradation is a debatable case. Because, some scholars believes that population pressure has an adverse effect on land resources while others argue that the increase in human population positively affect the land resources.
8
For instance, Kirul and Mirzabaew, (2014), argue that population growth is an important factor that minimize natural resource degradation by increase agricultural productivities as well as technological and institutional innovation. Accordingly, population pressure can create a favorable condition for land improvement and environment protection. It may persuade labor-intensive investments in land management and soil management.
However,several studies reported that there is strong cause and effect relationship between land degradation and population pressure, deforestation and overgrazing. For instance, Mmom,etal., (2013), suggested that the rapid population growth led to different anthropogenic activities such as agriculture, urbanization, road construction, mineral exploitation and industrialization. These factors exert pressure on the natural as well as man-made environments and they are the major driving factors to forest degradation both globally and at local level. Inturn, deforestation increases the rate of soil erosion as well as land degradation. According toTegene, 2014, it is believed that while the world population has reached 7 billion, the world natural resource base has continued to be at a declining state leading to changes in every aspect of the natural environment.This rapid population growth pushes the farmers to cultivate steep slope and rang lands. Population pressure in turn, forces people to convert more marginal, existing forest and grazing lands to arable lands and over cultivation of the available cultivable lands. These human activities in turn may lead to accelerated soil erosion which is one of the major driving forces of land degradation.
As population number increased due to continues expanding of population, the pressure on resources increase, and there is additional demand for crop land for commercial and subsistence agriculture. The productive potential and the degree of maintaine at the existing arable land are to some extent determined how much additional forest and other land needs to be converted to agriculture. Population pressure is therefore, negatively affecting the environment and becoming the principal force behind many current environmental degradation in large areas of many rural and urban environment as it ease to cause very large resources degradation particularly affect the forest ecosystem (Out,etal.,2011). Keijiro(2001), suggested that the increasing rate of population growth at any time mainly in agrarian society causes a relative scarcity of land to labor. Increase in
9 population number led to increased demand for farmland which in turn led to deforestation of large area. Though there are many arguments about the population growth being the case of land degradation, it is repeatedly reported that in Ethiopia unchecked population growth and diminishing natural resources are among the well identified problems affecting the agricultural sector(Mulugeta, 2004). It has direct consequences for the environment increasing demand for farm land, for fuel wood, shortening of fallow cycles and help to cause over cultivation.
2.2.2 The Causal Relationship betweenDeforestation and LD in Ethiopia
In Ethiopia, the natural resource degradation is one of the critical problems of the country which include land degradation and forest degradation among others. There are multiple causative agents that caused and causing land degradation in the country and could be categorized under natural (ecological) and anthropogenic which include economic, social, policy related factors. Deforestation and its resultant effect land degradation is one of the problems threaten the world in general and Ethiopia in particular. Hence, the number of population of Ethiopia is growing rapidly; most people lead to an increasing need on land to alive and for agricultural production and therefore clear forests, and it is possible to say the forest degradation in Ethiopia is closely connected to the ongoing population increase. Deforestation enhance soil erosion, thus valuable agricultural land is degraded.
According to Adugnaw, 2014, as population increase, there is an increased requires of wood for fuel and construction, hence the very important materials for construction of houses and sources of fuel in Ethiopia are wood and wood products. The same document also reported that in Ethiopia, the causes of environmental degradation can be grouped in to proximate causes and a complex of social, political, economic, technological and cultural variables known as underlying causes. It also repored tha factors responsible to proximate causes include agricultural expansion, harvesting or extraction of wood, expansion of infrastructure. Accordingly, those associated with underlying causes include cultural factors, political factors, economic factors and poverty, low technology in agriculture, and policy and institutional factors.
The Ethiopian Research Institute (2000), suggested that a position on a scale of poverty
10 of people, their level of knowledge, perception and attitudes, and degree of infrastructure and local market development has impact on land degradation. Besides, population pressure which led to cultivation of marginal land and steep slopes, which causes land degradation. The document also state that Ethiopian relief is steep slopes mainly with an altitude above 1500m above mean sea level. As a result, half of its landform is defined as mountain and the country can be termed as a mountainous. Its highland areas account about 90 percent of the country‟s arable land. Accordingly, the highlands are more suitable places for living and agriculture than the lowland areas of harsh climate that create favorable condition for malaria breeding and thus, population has extensively in habited the highland parts of Ethiopia since 150,000 years ago.
Adugnaw Birihanu (2014),Stated that the highlands of Ethiopia which is more densely populated was once endowed with wealthy natural resources are agriculturally exploited since millenniums and at the present time extremely degraded. According to Tesfahun and Temesgen (2014), there is a causal relationship between population growth and limited land resources in Ethiopia, as the series land resource degradation in the country is the result of deforestation, over cultivation, expansion of cultivation on marginal and steep lands, and overgrazing enhanced by the rapidly increasing population.
2.2.3The Impact of Termite on Forest Resource
Forests are significant to take action against land degradation and desertification by stabilizing soils, reducing water and wind erosion and maintaining nutrient cycling in soils (Eshetu, 2015). However, it is also reported that forests are increasingly harmed due to adverse human activities such as clearing of forest for different purposes, fragmentation and other stressors. Forests play a great role in protecting erosion, because if there are more trees the water would not be able to wash away the soil. Over exploitation of the forest resources and conversion of forest land to agriculture or changing to bare land results in soil erosion that leads to degradation of agricultural land, and loss of biodiversity(Tilahun, 2010). As stated in the same document, forests can be degraded not only through unwise human activities, but also by the impact of termites. In spite of the fact that termites are important for soil fertility, some termites negatively affect the soil by causing deforestation and disturbing the soil texture and profile.
11
Several researches conducted by different scholars reveal that termites haveboth positive influences (mainly on soil physico-chemical properties and plant growth) and adverse effects on crops and vegetation (Ehiglator and Okunima, 2015, and Salinger, 2012). The document also indicate that Africa is home to more than 660 species of termites and while many of them destroy crops like maize and sugarcane. According to Pearce (2004), different problems are associated with termite activities, especially that of mound builders. To name fewof these related problems listed in the document: the damage to crops, damage and changes on vegetation, soil problem (disturb the soil profile and affect the soil texture), nutrient imbalance among the others.
Termites can cause direct physical damage often affecting the structure support of crop plants. They can defoliate plants close to the ground and tunnel into, or eat steams and roots. They can damage pasture and forestry. They can also damage and fill wood with soil. Some types of subterranean termite can consume 15 pounds of wood per week(Pearce (2004). It also stated that a large termite colony, e.g. of micro termites, in a savanna habitat can remove more than one tone of vegetation per year. In addition, in many areas, which are favorable to termite breeding, they break down vegetation especially the regenerating wood land is highly susceptible to termite colonization. Also, termites can initiate reforestation and affect the kind of vegetation that eventually grows.
2.2.4 Mining and Quarrying Activities as Cause of Land Degradation
Mining refers to the extraction of mineral deposit for different purposes and quarrying generally for construction works. This activity includes the making of holes by digging and removal of soils from an area in order to find buried remains of minerals. Therefore, changes the structure of the land, stacking of top soil, leads to loss of soil due to dumping the mine wastes, and over burden causes lying on the land after mining (Vagholikar, and Moghe,2003).The participants of traditional gold mining uses very traditional equipments and arbitrary approaches. The activities resulting in different impacts on natural resources such as depletion and pollution of water resourceslose of vegetation and biodiversity, land disturbances, sever soil erosion and the like.The taking of stone and sand from a quarry through quarrying activity for construction works lead to fragmentation of forest and land that result from diminishing the vegetation surrounded and the construction of
12 new roads to mining area, all causes the loss of fertile top soil, and forest, and leads to land degradation (Singhet al.,2003).
According to the information that publicized by the Ministry of Mines(2015), the traditional construction material production and gold mining along several river banks and residue soil developed on primary gold deposit occupy more than 500,000 people. It is also reported that in Ethiopia, extraction of industrial minerals and rocks and the artisanal mining activities have some socio-economical and environmental effects like human death, erosion of arable land etc. These activities andtheir associated techniques of production or practices cause different levels of land degradation. Even though both activities have adverse effect on the environment, it is recognized that in the country, the environmental problem associated with the traditional mining activities are more severe than in the modern mines which have legal entities.
2.3 Effects of Land Degradation.
Land degradation is said to be a serious problem with a considerable impact on the economies of many countries like Ethiopia. It is clear that, the productivity of agricultural economy in rural areas of such countries where the population are directly supported by the agricultural economy is being seriously eroded by the problem of land degradation. This is because of unsustainable land management practices in both farmlands and grazing lands that tire out the pattern of national economic growth (Dominic, et al., 2004). Many of the poorest members of the world‟s population and those people depend on agriculture for their livelihoods are directly affected by land degradation. The degradation of agricultural land that in turn threatens the sustainability of growth and the welfare of these people, and the world wide problems such as climate change, loss of biodiversity and problem related to international waters are among harmful effects of land degradation (Tatek, 2014).
Berry (2003), divided the costs of land degradation into the direct cost and the indirect costs. Accordingly, the direct costs include costs of nutrients resulted from the top soil erosion, the loss of agricultural production due to the decline in productive performance
13 of the land which is the result of nutrient and soil loss, costs of forest removal, and loss of livestock carrying capacity due to overgrazing. The indirect costs of land degradations are loss of environmental services, siltation, fluctuation of the nature of water bodies and decline in water table, the malnutrition, poverty and migration born losses. These are generally termed as costs related to social and community loss. According to Assemu and Shigdaf (2014), land degradation has adverse effect on both livestock production and values of land uses. It is due to the fact that land degradation makes smaller the grazing land, the posture lands become infertile due to erosion and produce valueless pastures and grasses for livestock and crop production system.
According to Getachew (2005), land degradation (soil erosion) has both on-site and off- site effects. The on-site effects are direct effects of soil degradation caused due to loss in soil ability to give sufficient production that lead to decline crop yield and livestock yields. Off-site effects are the indirect effect of soil degradation generated from the adverse effect of agricultural run-off and downstream water users. Its costs can be indicated on the effect of silt and eroded soil into surface water or leached into water bodies by rainfall and irrigation or run-off. Soil erosion causes economic loss, ecological loss, great flood frequency and water pollution particularly in populated areas. According to Abera, 2003,in Ethiopia, the problem of land degradation is prevalent at a tragic rate estimating the average annual rate of soil loss to be 12 tons per hectare per year. It can be even higher on steep slopes and on places where the vegetation cover is low. This loss of topsoil is substantially increasing each year the amount of yield reduction.
Maria Christinat, et al.,(2012), suggested that soil erosion as a form of land degradation can be affected by the topography, rainfall and wind, soil properties, vegetation and land cover, land-use and managements among the others. These interrelated processes could be caused by nature but human-induced factors such as deforestation, over-cultivation, over grazing, inappropriate institutional and policy applications are the most factors that cause accelerated erosion. Woldeamlak (2003), reported that if the rate of deforestation increased, the amount and degree of the size of the forest cover of an area become small and could lead to be bare land. If so, the area is subjected to high surface run-off and low water retention and exposed to intensified sheet and rills erosion and the gullies become
14 widen and deepen.
2.4 Consequences of Land Degradation
Land degradation results in: the reduction of productivity of land, loss of livestock carrying capacity, desertification, landslides, drying up of springs and water bodies, shortage of fire woods and other woods, climate change, increased sediment deposits, floods, increased incidence of water-born diseases, , poverty, siltation of dams, shortage of non-timber forest products, loss of biodiversity, population displacement, reduced livestock and crop production, occurrence of sheet and gully erosion all together leads to social and community losses (Dominic, et al.,2004). Forinstance, it is believed that in Ethiopia, the continued population growth and very high density of population causes the loss of land resource productivity and maximized land degradation in the country including reduction of agricultural productivity, continuing food insecurity and rural poverty besides the direct effects of land degradations such as reduced availability of potable water, decline in the volumes of underground water, depletion of aquifers, loss of biodiversity and also has a direct effect on the type of plant grown on the area.
2.5 Empirical Literature
2.5.1 Previous Studies Concerning Causes of Land Degradation
Land degradation is acommon problem in different countries and limiting the productivity of land and negatively affects its ability to provide ecosystem goods and services(Braun et al., 2013). The problem is manifested in many forms such as soil erosion, overgrazing, desertification, water logging, and secondary salinization. According to Oliver and Alisher,(2014), land degradation is the result of different factors that can be classified as the proximate causes and the underlying causes. Accordingly, theproximate causes are those that have a direct impact on terrestrial ecosystems inclue deforestation, agricultural mismanagement and land use change while the underlying causes are those that stimulate the proximate causes include population pressure, inadecuate environmental policy, land mismanagement, unsuitable landuses, insecure land tenure and tenure fragmentation.
15
According to Debtanu, et al.,(2013), land degradation has occurred in various regions of the world due to natural factors, and human made causes. However the one that caused by human activities has been a major global issue during the 20th century and will remain high on the international agenda in the 21st century. It is a serious problem in worldwide with its most severe negative implication on the rural communities. Annually, about $42 billion income and 6 million hectare of land are lost globally due to land degradation and decline in agricultural production (Eswaran et al., (2001).
2.5.2 Previous Studies and Causes of LDin Context of Ethiopia
Several studies have been conducted concerning the responsible factors of land degradation in Ethiopia. According to Oliver(2014), the substantial economic loss estimated at about 3% GDPin Ethiopia and about 9.5-11% of GDPin Malawi annually is resulted from land degradation caused by both proximate causes and underlying causes. It also reporte that the proximate causes are non-sustainable agricultural practices, overgrazingand overexplotetion of forest and woodland resources and topography, while the major underlying causes are belived to be population pressure, poverty and market and institutional failures.
According to Berry(2003), the natural ecosystem and the human social system that determine the success or failure of resource management are the two interlocking complex systems of cause of land degradation. These main causes involve land use for the purpose that exploit the natural resources in the manner that unsuited for sustainable use(biophysical factors), and factors such as poor land management practices, land tenure, marketing, institutional support , income and human health (socio-economic factor), and lack of incentive and political instability(political factors).
According to Getachew(2005), the determinant factors of land degradation in Ethiopia, particulary Angereb and Gish-Abay watersheds includefamily size, market distance, slopeof the plot, distance of the plot from the residence, population pressure, land tenure, livestock holding and labor ratio.Different studies conducted by different scholarsconcerning the determinants of land degradation showed result variation from
16 area to area.Therefore, the determinants of land degradation in Nejo woreda need investigation to design appropriate policies and strategies to use land sustainability.
2.6 Literature Gap
Concerning causes of land degradation, different researches have been conducted in different countries in the world. In the case of Ethiopia for instance, several studies have been conducted concerning determinants of land degradation. Such studies focused on thecauses, impacts, and rehabilitation techniques in Ethiopia(Temesgen, et al.,2014), Determinants of Land Degradation in the lake Tana basin and its implications for sustainable land management: The case of Angereb and Gish-Abbay Watershed (Getachew, 2005). Adaptation to Climate Change in Oromia National Regional State (Ahmed Hussein, et al.,2011). According to these researchs‟ findings: Rapid population increase, severe soil loss, deforestation, low vegetation cover and unbalanced crop and livestock production process influenced by man, poor crop and soil management practices in the watersheds, topography, soil types, land tenure, labor ratio and market distance from the residence are factors affecting land degradation.
However, these and othere different studies conducted concerning land degradation in many high lands of the country showed different results spatialy. This study is therefore, to assess the major responsible factors for land degradation at plot level particularly Nejo Woreda by giving emphasis to population pressure, deforestation influenced by man and termite, traditional gold mining and sand quarrying and overgrazing. In addition, there is no research conducted on the issue for the study area. Therefore, this study conducted with the objective to address these gaps of information.
2.7 Conceptual Framework
The causes of land degradation are too large, interlinked, and complex that can be seen from different angles. Several studies stated that there are multiple interacting forces which have caused and are causing land degradation particularlr in Ethiopia. According to Fitsum, et al., (1999) cited in Temesgen(2014), the major causes of land degradation in the country are the proximate causes and interacting or root causes. Berry(2003), classified the cause of land degradation in two interlinking complex systems such as the
17 natural factors and the human made factors (human social system). While, the Oromia National Regional State, program of plan on adaptation to climate change(2011), reported that the major cause of land degradation in Oromia National Regional State isextensive deforestation, overgrazing and poor crop and soil management practices in watersheds. This shows that different scholars identified different causes of land degradation (Ahmed Hussien, 2011).
In spite of the fact that degradation at all land degradation processes are significant in declining the productivity of land, this study consider only some of the most important determinant factors of land degradations such as population pressure, deforestation, over grazing and mining and quarrying activities.Thus, based on the review of literature, the researcheradopted a conceptual framework that links the determinants of land degradation, (Temesgen, et al., 2014).The diagram that represent the relation ships between the determinants of land degradation such as the proximate causes, the underlying causes and the policy related factors is given below.
18
Determinants of Land Degrationda
Policy Area Proximate causes Underlying causes
Infrastructure dev`nt Population growth Expanded productiion of
Market development steep slopes Shorter fallow
periods Commodity policies More ploughing In adequate land cover during Input supply policies Feeding of crop residue erosive period Land tenure policies Over grazing Deforestation Lack of adoption Forest use regulation Soil burning of soil Nutrient depletion
conservation Technical assistance Lack of farmer knowledge measures Low returns in near term Infrastructure
High costs /market development Risks/water logging
Technical research Tenure in security Short-term perspective of L and tenure policies farmers
Credit policies Poverty
Figure 1:Determinants of Land Degradation (adopted from Temesgen,et.al.,2014).
19
CHAPTER THREE: DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA AND THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this part of the paper, both the physical and human aspect of the study area as well as the research methods and materials were discussed. Therefore, readers can get a clear picture about the background of the study area and methods and materials employed in the study.
3.1 Description of the Study Area
3.1.1 Physical Background of the Study Area
Nejo woreda is a woreda in Western Ethiopia. This woreda is located in western Wollega zone of Oromia Regional State at about 499km from Addis Ababa. It is relatively, bounded by Boji Dirmaji woreda on the East, Boji Chokorsa woreda on the South East, Kiltu Kara woreda on the West, Jarso woredaon the south and Kamashi Zone of Benishangul Gumuz Regional State on the north. Astronomicaly, the district is located between 9024‟N-9044‟N latitude and 35015‟E-35036‟E longitude. According to NWLEPO and NWSLMPO report,the woreda covers an Area of 95800 ha, which consist of about 43934.4 ha cultivated land, about 29289.6 ha cultivable land, 17157 ha forest land, 852.5 ha grass land and other lands accounts about 4566.52ha (See Figure2).
Figure 2: Location of Nejo Woreda in its national and regional settings. (source: Delinated and constructed based on topography map obtained from EMA, 2010).
20
In the study area, the land is used for farm, grazing, forestry, bush shrubs, plantation, settlement, and some portion remain as gorge, gullies, and degraded land (See Table 3.1).
Table 3.5Major land use types and proportion share for Agar Genasi watershed. Type of land use Total /hectare/ Percent of total Degraded land 3130 42 Farm land 1807 24.5 Homestead 402 5.4 Grazing land 1 0.1 Plantation 339 4.6 Town /Nejo/settlement 397 5.4 Bush shrub 277 3.7 Forest land 837 11.5 Total 7400 100 Source: Nejo woreda SLM office, march 2017 The woreda has a diversified relief structure such as hills, dissected plateaus, plains, and valleys. The altitude of the woreda varies between 1600m to 2250m above mean sea level. Most of its areas‟ could be classified as a highland with a highest altitude at „Chochi‟ mountain, and small portion of its area is lowland. The major mountains of the area are Tullu Chochi, Tullu Aba Boji, Tullu Korbessa, Tullu Kote, Tullu Boor, Tullu Ofate, and Tullu Aba Antale.
There are two major soil units in the woreda. The dominant soil types of the area is red soil which cover about 95% of the surface area of the woreda, and the remaining 5% surface area is covered by clay and other soils. This implies that a significant amount of the study areas land is degraded and more or less characterized by similar soil units (See Table 3.2).
21
Table Table 3.6Major soil types in Nejo Woreda No. Major Soil Soil depth Soil texture Soil Color unit 1 Loam 25-50cm Sandy loam Red 2 Loam 25cm Silt loam Red 3 Sand 22.5cm Sandy loam Red 4 Clay 50-100cm Clay loam Black Source: Nejo Woreda Agricultural & Rural Development Office(2017)
The study area consist many permanent and seasonal rivers. The permanent rivers of the woredainclude Alaltu, Aghar, Dila, Kujur, Komis and Gennasi and all these rivers are found in Abay drainage basin. Alaltu is the river that cross the Nejo town dividing into two and currently used as one of the sources of drinking water for the population of the town. Nejo town is the capital town of the woreda as well as a town administrative woreda. Very large area of Nejo woreda was once covered by dense forests. Currently, due to deforestation, it is hardly possible to see the original dense forests in most places of the area. However, as the woreda‟s SLMP report, the ruminates are found scattered on small areas of few kebelessuch as Agalo Bassi, Obora Komis, Lomicha Dulo, and Amuma Dila among the other, and all together covering only about 12010ha which is not more than 12.5% of the total surface area of the woreda.
The agroclimatic type of Nejo woreda is almost „Woina Dega‟ and only about 6% of the area is „Dega‟ climate. Temperature and rainfall distribution of the study area shows variation at different altitude and season within a woreda. According to the National Metrological Agency Western brunch report, the annual temperature ranges from 180C to 280C and therefore has an average annual temperature of 230C. The rainfall pattern is generally categorized into „summer‟ maximum rainy season and the „autumn‟ short rainy season. The summer maxima extend from June to August and the short rainy season (autumn) extend from September to November. The summer rainfall ranges from 1350mm to 2300mm. This implies that there is little forest coverage in the study area and intense rainfall that could aggravate soil erosion (See Figure: 3).
22
Average Temperature (oC) Average Rainfall (mm) 3500
3000
2500 25 2000 20 1500 15 10 1000
5 500
0 0
2014 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015
Figure 3:Mean annual temperature and mean annual rainfall of Nejo Woreda. (Source: own computation on data from NMA, May, 2015)
3.1.2 Demographic and Socioeconomic Condition of the Study Area
Based on the information obtained from CSA(2016), the total population of Nejo woreda is 152,741 which consists 74,874 male and 77,867 female populations. This total population is composed of 145,625 and 7,116 rural and urban dwellers respectively. There are 31,994 male households and 1,792 female households, totally 33,786 households in the woreda. The study area is characterized by rapid population growth similar to other parts of the country with annual growth rate of 2.9% and the household grows by 4.8% per year and the woreda’s crude population density is about 159/km2(See figure: 4).
23
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Both sex 121463 124985 128609 132338 136175 140124 144256 148437 152741 105274 % 50.3 50.3 46.7 48.1 50.9 50.9 51 51 51 51 Female 61143 62916 60014 63623 69376 71390 73550 75681 77867 53656 % 49.7 49.7 53.3 51.9 49.1 49.1 49 49 49 49 Male 60320 62069 68595 68715 66799 68734 70706 72756 74874 51618 Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Figure 4: The ten years population size of Nejo Woreda (2008-2017). Source-CSA, (2008-2017).
The settlement pattern in the woreda is both nucleated type and dispersed one. The urban dwellers (Gori town and Warajiru town) form a nucleated type of settlement and few villages form a nearly elongated settlement pattern along roads and most of the rural dwellers settled establishing a dispersed village on relatively higher grounds. The most common socio-economic and environmental problems of the woreda are food insecurity, land degradation, termite infestation, unemployment of the youths, shortage of farmlands and grazing, low utilization of modern agricultural inputs, and the problem of transportation and health facilities among others.
Crop farming and livestock raising (agriculture) is the backbone of Ethiopian economy. It supports about 85 percent of the country‟s GDP, 85 percent foreign exchange earnings and supports, though insufficiently, 85% of the work force (Berry, 2003). Agriculture is also an important economic sector in Oromia region hence over 90% of the people of the region live in the rural area and engaged in agriculture as the source of livelihood (BoFED, 2008). The information gained from NWARDO indicated that, almost all the rural population of Nejo woreda engaged in agricultural activities and therefore it remains by far the most important sector in the woreda. Maize, Sorghums, Teff, Barley and Wheat
24 are the most dominant cereal crops produce in the woreda, while Kocho isthe common root crop. In addition to these, cash crops like coffee, „chat‟, „nug‟ and others are also produced. Besides agriculture, few people of the woreda, but considerable amount, engaged in charcoal production, sand quarrying and traditional gold mining activities along a river courses and river valleys as a source of income for themselves and to survive their families.
Livestock as one type of agriculture play a significant role in the economy and livelihood for it provides food (milk , meat, egg, etc.), hides, skins, and serve as a means of transportation, draught power for cultivation, and kept for prestige as a sign of social status and wealthy in the society. But, due to the traditional animal husbandry practices, poor genetic potential of the local breeds, prevalence of diseases, insufficient veterinary services, and poor nutrition, the productivity of the livestock have remained lowin the woreda. However, there are large numbers of livestock population in the area (NWARDO).
According to theNWLFRDA report, the current livestock population size of private peasant holdings of Nejo woredais 275786 while before 2016 when the district consist about 49 kebeles it was estimated at 386616 heads. The major types of reared livestock in the study area are Cattle,Sheep, Goat, Donkey, Mule, and Hourse. Cattle constitute 75%, Sheep 12.3%, Goat 8.2%, Donkey 4.3, Mule 0.2%, and Horse 0.01%. In contrast, because of the areas diverse relief and diverse climate the majority of the land is used for variety of crop cultivation the livestock raising in the area is restricted to limited land available for grazing hence there is no relatively extensive communal grazing area in the study area. As a result the inhabitants of Nejo woreda are forced to use the limited land available for grazing including theruminate and fragmented forests found on few places. The livestock population size of private peasant holdings of rural areas is summarized in the following Figure: 3.5
25
300000
250000
Cattle 200000 Sheep
150000 Goat Donkey
100000 Horse Mule 50000
0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Figure 5: The ten years livestock population size of Nejo Woreda (2008-2017).Source: Nejo Woreda Livestock and Fish Rural Development Agency, (2017)
The information obtained from NWHO indicated that there are about 13 clinics which composed of one governmental clinic and 12 privately owned clinics and there are about 5 health centers in the woreda. However, there is no hospital in the woreda except in the capital town (Nejo) which is not considered as the woreda‟s administrative part hence according to the current administration structure, it is the town administrative woredaby itself.Accordingto educational statistics obtained from NWEO,at present, there are only two KG schools ( one governmental and one NGO school), about 77 governmental schools which composes one preparatory school, 5 high school and 71 primary school( about 26 first cycle and 45 second cycle schools). This implies that there is large livestock population and relatively scarcity of social servieses in the study area and could contribute to land resource degradation.
26
3.2 The Research Methods(Methodology)
3.2.1 Research Design
Based on the predetermined objective of the research, this study is designed to apply amixed design and therefore both primary and secondary data were generated by employing qualitative and quantitative approaches. In this design, quantitative and qualitative phases occur one after the other, with the quantitative phase being given higher priority and mixing occurring at the data interpretation stage. The using of mixed approach allows the investigator to obtain clear information about the case under study of the study. Thus, the quantitative results were verified by qualitative results. On the other hand, the qualitative and quantitative data were gathered through questionnaire, interview, field observation, and from published and unpublished documents and analyzed by using Computer Excel and SPSS version 20 Software and the qualitative data was also described with brief descriptions.
3.2.2 Study Population
Nejo woredaconsist of 49 and 4 rural kebeles and urban kebelesrespectively with a total population of 152,741. This total population composed of 145,625 rural dwellers and 7,116 urban dwellers.The total population of the target population is 7369; which consists 3585 male population and 3784 female population of which 1650 are household heads(CAS, 2016).
3.2.3 Sampling Techniques
The study will be sounder, if it includes all kebeles of the woreda. However due to shortage of time and financial resources it was difficult to manage the data gathered from all kebeles of the woreda and to conduct a research with in the given time and available resources. As a result, the study was delimited to few kebeles only. Therefore, to conduct the study, 3 kebeles, namely Bushane Aleltu, Muchucho Gorgis and Gute Weni were selected as sample kebeles using purposive sampling method(non-probability sampling technique) in order to select the sample kebeles based on the severity of land degradation problem. Because, the researcher believed that these selected kebeles are relatively the most degraded, and therefore could obtain important information. The research sample
27 size was determined from these sample kebeles by applying Population Proportional to Size (PPS) technique based on Gelnni D Israel(2012) which provides a simplified N formula to calculate sample sizes. n= where; 1 N(e) 2 n -Refers to sample size, N-Refers to sample frame and e -Refers to margin of error at 5% (0.05). The total number of the households of the sample study area is 1650.Therefore, accordingto the formula, the total sample size for the study area was 321.Based on the number of the households of the kebeles, the sample size from each sample kebeles was proportionally determined from the total households of the three kebeles using Startefied randomsampling technique. The total household of the three kebeles (Bushane Aleltu, Muchucho Gorgis and Gute Weni)is 563, 534, and 553 respectively. Therefore, the sample size from Bushane Aleltu, Muchucho Gorgis and fom Gute Weni was 109, 104 and 108 respectively. Thus, the researchsample (321) composed 109 household samples from Bushane Aleltu, 104 samples from Muchucho Gorgis and 108 samples from Gute Weni total households.
To select respondents, the list of the households of each sample kebeles was used as a target population for the study. In order to select the sample respondents from each kebeles, Systematic random sampling method (probability sampling method) was used. To select a sample of size “n” from eachkebeles, the interval (K) was determined by dividing the total households (N) of the kebele to the number of the sample size ( n)by using the formula K=N/n = 5 .This wasapplied for the three sample kebelesseparately. The starting point (the first household) was selected randomlyby using Day-Coding method of sample selection technique = 6.
In order to get the key informant for interview, the non-probability sampling( purposive sampling) was used .The sample size for the qualitative data collection (interview) consist ten sample respondents includingthree community elders (one each from the three kebeles), three DAs (one each from the three sites), one respondent from the woreda‟sSLM workers , one respondent from the woreda’s Forest and Natural Resource
28
Conservation workers(FNRC), the head of the woreda‟s Land and Environmental protection office and the woreda Agriculture and Rural Development Office leader. The following table (Table 3.3) shows the sample kebelespopulation and numbers of households and the proportionality of the sample size for each sample kebeles.
Table 7.3 Number of sample households from sample kebeles N Sample Population size by sex Noof Noof Responden who o Study HH sample t didn‟t Kebeles HH respond Male Female Total No % No % 1 Bushane 1179 1260 2439 563 109 104 95.4 5 4.6 Aleltu 2 Muchucho 1191 1273 2464 534 104 97 93.3 7 6.7 Gorgis 3 Gute Weni 1215 1251 2466 553 108 102 94.4 6 5.6 Total 3585 3784 7369 1650 321 303 94.4 18 5.6 Source: household survey, 2017
3.2.4 Data Type and Data Source
The study was based on both primary and secondary data source. The primary data of this study are the first-hand information that obtained from the sample households, key informants, field observation and from the photography of the study area, while the secondary data are those information gathered from published or unpublished data from the district such as books, journals, and different reports on human and livestock population, land use pattern, soil type, topography, agro-ecology and clmate. The primary data from the household respondent was used to get the socio-economic information of the household respondents and bio-physical of the study area. The information that obtained from the key informants helped to get additional information (qualitative information) about the socio-economic of the respondents and the bio-physical of the study area. The information from observation and photograph wereused to gain supplementary data about the physical setting of the study area and to verify the data obtained from the questionnaire survey and from the interview. The secondary data wasused to evaluate the data in relation with related information to the issue.
29
3.2.5Data Gathering (Collection)Tools
For collecting the data, appropriate tools and techniques were used based on the nature of the data. The data gathering tools and instrument for the study weresurvey questionnaire, Key informant interview, and field observation.
Questionnaire- It was one of the vital data acquisition techniques in this study. Hence the main objective of this research is to assess the major bio-physical and socio-economic factors that determine land degradation in the study area. The questions were designed as to fit the objective of the study included information regarding socio-economic characteristics of the households,factorscontributing to land degradation in the area, the consiquences of land degradation and its mitigation measures.The HHs questioner survey was developed in English language and translated to local language of the study area/Afan Oromo/ inorder to creat common understanding between the respondents and the researcher himself. The questionnaire was pre-tested before administration by thirtyof the farmers(ten from each sample kebeles) to check the validity of the tool prior to the distribution of final form, and some re-arrangements and reframing in accordance with respondent level of understanding were done. Thequestionnaire was distributed to the sample households and administered by the researcher and sample kebeles’ DA workers and then collected, analysed and interpreted.
Interview- In order to obtain relevant and necessary information for the study semi- structured interview was presented to the key informants who included the community elders, Developmental Agent workers (DA) at the sample site, theworeda‟s SLM worker, head of the woreda‟s LEPO, the woreda‟s FNRC workers and the woreda‟s ARDO leader while face-to-face discussion.
Field observation- the researcher have made the observation of the sample study kebeles inorder to gain information concerning the visible socio-economic and bio-physical nature of the study area inorder to support and verify the research data. The photograph of different parts of the study area was captured by using a digital camera, inorder to obtain the physical setting of the study area that verify the results and used for further interpritation. In order to measure the coordinate and elevation of the specific area
30 photographed from the study area while field observation, the hand GPS model 60 was used.
3.2.6Method of Data Analysis
In order to address the specified objective and to answer the research questions, the studyanalyzed both the quantitative and qualitative data.The quantitative data wereobtained from the primary and the secondary data sources.The data were analyzed by using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics such as chi-square and logistic regression and presented by using percentage, mean, frequency tables and graphs. The computer Excel and SPSS Version 20 Software was employed in order to organize, analyze and describe the data. Inaddition, the qualitative data obtained through interview and observation were described, and narrated.
The descriptive method of data analysis was employed to analyze data concerning the households‟demographic and socio-economic characteristics, the prevalence, extent, causes, and effect of land degradation, and its mitigation measures while the inferential statics methods were employed to determine the association andrelationship betweenthe dependent variable and the independent variables. Those variables estimated to have positive effects on land degradation were hypothesised positive (+ve), while those estimated to have negative effects on land degradation were hypothesised negative (-ve). A positiveestimated coefficient in the model implies as the value of explanatory variable increase the degree of severity of land degradation increase. While, negative estimated coefficient in the model implies as the value of explanatory variable increase the degree of severity of land degradation derease.
3.3 Data Validity and Reliability
Hence validity refers to the credibility of research, in order to assure the validity of the finding, the researcher tried to review different literatures related the problem under investigation. Concerning the reliability, which refers to the extent of the study to yield the same result if the study were to be done for a second time/the researcher undertook a pilot survey prior to the actual implementation of the questionnaire and some re- arrangement were done. This enabled the researcher to prove the legibility of the
31 questionnaire for the actual survey.
3.4 Ethical Consideration
Ethical considerations for the research samples respondents in research are critical.By taking this idea in to consideration, the researcher wasplanned to get the consent of the households‟ questionnaire survey respondents, and key informants. Therefore, before starting to conduct the study the researcher tried to be ethical in a manner that not disappoints the respondents. First of all, the researcher had a formal letter from the concerned bodies in order to assure permission for primary and secondary data collection before going ahead with his research. Then after, the researcher contacted the sample respondent inorder to introduce himself and to tell the purpose of the study that he would use the information that would be obtained from them for educational purposes (Master Thesis). The participants were fully informed that their personal information wouldkeep confidentiality and that the researcher would never mention theirname in the paper and that the study process involves no situation to be put them in any risk of harm. The participant‟s willingness and consent to participate was considered and they were participatedwith their full willingness.
32
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULT AND DISCUSSION
This chapter deals with the analysis of the survey data and interpretation of major findings. As already noted, a structured questionnaire was administered to 303 sample household heads. Among these, 104 (34.3%) were from Bushane Aleltu, 102 (33.7%) were from Gute Weni and the remaining 97 (32%) were from Muchucho Gorgis kebele. In addition, key informant interview and field observation was carried out. Therefore, the analysis is made on the basis of data obtained through questionnaire, key informant interview and field observation.
4.1 Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics of the Respondents
4.1.1 Demographic Characteristics of the SHHs
Table 8.1 The Sex and Age Charecteristics of the SHHs. Sample Kebeles Bushane Gute Weni Muchuch Total Aleltu o Gorgis N % N % N % N % Sex of the Male 68 65.4 77 75.5 76 78.4 221 72.9 Household Female 36 34.6 25 24.5 21 21.6 82 27.1 Heads Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Age of the < 30 7 6.7 7 6.9 4 4.1 18 5.9 House 30-40 41 39.4 29 28.4 52 53.6 122 40.3 Hold 41-50 41 38.4 59 57.8 32 33.0 132 43.6 Heads 51-60 9 8.7 6 5.9 9 9.3 24 7.9 > 60 6 5.8 1 1.0 0 0.0 7 2.3 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: Field Survey, 2017
As it can be seen from Table 4.1 about 221(72.9%) of the SHHs were male households, while 82 (27.1%) were female households. The result indicates that the sex structure of the sample household composition is not equal and majority of the respondents were male households. Considering the age of the respondents, the above table (Table 4.1) shows that 122(40.3%) and 132(43.6%) of the respondents are between the age range 30 to 40 and 41 to 50 years respectively.This shows that majority (83.9%) of the respondents were between the age of 30 and 50 years. It also indicates that only 18(5.9%)householdwere in the age category below 30 years. About 31(10.2%) of them
33 are in the age category above 50 years. The remaining (2.3%) respondents are above 60 years old. This result indicates that, majority of the respondents are in the economically productive age group. It is stated that as the age of the farmer increased, the farmer become experienced and are likely to cultivate their land wisely and use traditional and modern ways of soil conservation. On the other hand, as the age of the household increase, the size of land holding increases, while the ablity of applying agricultural inputs and some conservation measures decrease(Ftsum and Holden, 2003 cited in Getachew, 2005). This indicates that age could contribute to land degradation positively.
Table 4.2The Marital Status and the Family Size of the SHHs Sample Kebeles Bushane Gute Muchucho Total Aleltu Weni Gorgis N % N % N % N % Marital Single 5 4.8 2 2.0 0 0.0 7 2.3 status of Married 88 84.6 93 91.2 92 94.8 273 90.1 the Divorced 3 2.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 1.0 respondent Widowed 8 7.7 7 6.9 5 5.2 20 6.6 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Size of the 1-3 9 8.7 13 12.7 4 4.1 26 8.6 household 4-6 78 75.0 71 69.6 68 70.1 217 71.6 7-10 15 14.4 15 14.7 24 24.7 54 17.8 > 10 2 1.9 3 2.9 1 1.0 6 2.0 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: Household Survey, 2017
As indicated in Table 4.2 about 273(90.1%) of the sample household respondent were married. The reaming 7 (2.3%), 3(1%) and 20 (6.6%) of them were single, divorced and widowed respectively. From this, one can understand that majority of the respondents were married. It should be noted that being married has a significant influence on population size of any area in general and on family size in particular. Because, it is the major means through which the family size could extended.
Furthermore, one can understandfrom the table (Table 4.2), that 217(71.6%) respondents have 4-6 family members and 54(17.8%) of the respondents havea family size between 7- 10, while respondents with family size between1-3 constitute 26(8.6%) and only 6(2%)
34 respondents reported that their family membersareabove 10. The result indicates that majority of the sample household heads had relatively large family size. It should be noted that as number of population increases, the demand for farm land increase. Inturn, it could lead to over cultivation, farming of fragile soils and fragementation of farm lands in to insignificant size of plot for newly emerging household heads through inheritance of land for children which could cause deforestation and its resultant effect soil erosion. Population growth increases the intensive and continous cultivation of land without fallowing due to decreased land-to-man ratio. From this, one can conclude that majority of the respondents have family size ranging 4-10 per household size.
4.1.2 Socioeconomic Characteristics of the SHHs
In this study, the major socio-economic characterestics used to describe the population in the sample kebeles were educational level, occupational status and land size (See Table 4.3) Table 4.3 Socioeconomic characteristics of the SHH respondents Sample Kebeles BushaneAleltu GuteWeni Muchucho Total Gorgis N % N % N % N % Educationa No schooling 49 47.1 38 37.3 35 36.1 122 40.3 l Level of Primary school 47 45.2 49 48.0 56 57.7 152 50.2 the Highschool edu 8 7.7 10 9.8 4 4.1 22 7.3 Household head College 0 0.0 5 4.9 2 2.1 7 2.3 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Major Croping produc 19 18.3 3 2.9 22 23.2 44 14.5 occupation Animal rearing 3 2.9 1 1.0 0 0.0 4 1.3 al status of Mixed farming 81 77.9 97 95.1 70 71.6 248 81.8 the Gold mining 0 0.0 1 1.0 4 4.2 5 1.7 respondent Gov‟temployed 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.1 2 .7 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: household survey, 2017
Table 4.3indicates that 122 (40.3%) of the respondents of the households in the study area are no schooling while about 152 (50.2%) of them didn‟t get access to education beyond elementary school education.The result shows that, about 40.3% of them unable to read
35 and write. From this, it is possible to conclude that many of the respondents are not educated. This inturn could have its own negative effect in relation to sustainable land use. According to Eyasu,2007(cited in Mulatu, 2014), as educational status of household heads increase, it is assumed that farmerswould beinvolved to sustainable land management and has to know more about causes and consiquences of land degradation and conservation practices. Because, an educated person be able to use natural resources in a sustainable manner and education enables farmers to tackle land degradation using various methods ofsoil fertility improving practices of both traditional and introduced soil and forest resources conservation techniques. It is believed that farmers with basic education are more likely to use natural resources in sustainable way, engaged in conservation practices and become more productive.
As one can see from Table 4.3 the majority of the SHHs are involved in mixied farming. Accordingly, 248(81.8%) of the sample household heads areinvolved in mixed farming, while 44(14.5%), 4(1.3%), and 5(1.7%) involved in crop production, animal rearing and, gold mining and sand quarry respectively. The remaining 2(0.7%) of them depend on income from Government or NGO. From the result, one can conclude that the livelihood of the community in the study area is highly dependent on land resources and therefore land is the basic resource for the local community.
2.3 1.7 0.3
<1 32.3 1-2hectar 2.01-3 63.4 >3 no land
Figure 6: Land size currently owned by the household heads. Source:household survey , 2017
As it can be seen from Figure 6:about 32.3% of the farmers own land sized <1 hectare, while 63.4%, 2.3%, and 1.7% of them possess1-2 hectares, 2.01-3 hectares and has no
36 farmland respectively. But, only 0.3%respondent respondedthat they own land more than 3 hectares. From this, one can infer that there is shortage of farmland per house hold. This could lead to deforestation and over cultivation and expose the soil to erosion.
Soil is animportant natural resource mainly for farmers. This is due to the reson their livelihood is directly dependent on cultivation of land resource. In the study areathe soil color of the majority of the farmland is similar (See Table 4.4).
Table 4.4 Soil types and the major uses of the land possessed by the SHHs. Sample Kebeles Bushane Gute Weni Muchuch Total Aleltu Gorgis N % N % N % N % Major soil Redish 99 95.2 97 95.1 92 95 288 95 color of the Gray 0 0.0 1 1.0 2 2.1 3 1.0 land ownd Brown black 3 2.9 3 2.9 2 2.1 8 2.7 by the SHH Other color 2 1.9 1 1.0 1 1.0 4 1.3 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Major uses Crop growing 98 94.2 99 97.1 94 96.9 291 96.0 of the land Grazing 3 2.9 0 0.0 2 2.1 5 1.7 occupied by Forestry 3 2.9 1 0.9 0 0.0 4 1.3 the SHH Useless 0 0.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 3 1.0 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: household survey result, February, 2017
As it can be seen from Table 4.4 about 288 (95%) of the household heads respondents responded that the color of their farmland soil is red. The remaining 3(1%), 8(2.7%) and 4(1.3%), responded that the color of their farmland soil is gray, brown black and other color respectively. It is ovious that soil with different color may different in texture, mineral content, profile and pH that affect the overall features of the soils, hence soil color is the function of these different soil properties. The result of the organized data indicates that, of the major land use categories of the study area, the largest proportion is shared for the agricultural use (see table4.4). Accordingly, 291(96%) of the household head respondents responded that majority of their land is used for crop production, while 5(1.7%) and 4(1.3%) of the respondents reported that they use majority of their land for grazing and forestry respectively. The remaining 3(1%) of the respondents responded that
37 their land is currently not giving any uses. From the result, one can conclud that majority of the land in the area is used for agriculture, which inturn can affect the land resourses unless properly used.The written documents (mainly obtained from the woreda‟s SLMO), the key informant interview and observation of the study area indicate that some of the study area became useless due to soil degradation. According to the wretten document obtained from the woreda‟s SLMO, from the Agar Genasi watershed alone (the watershed in which the study area is geographically located), about 3130 hectares (42%) is identified as degraded area, and 202 hectares (2.7%) as gorge, while 8 hectares (0.27%) is gullies.
In the study area, different crops mainly cereal and root crops are cultivable. The major crop items that commonly cultivated in the area include: Teff, Sorghum, Maize, Kocho, Barely, Millet and Pulse (See Table 4.5).
Table 4.5The major cultivable crops of the study area Sample Kebeles Bushane Gute Muchuch Total Aleltu Weni o Gorgis N % N % N % N % Major Teff 59 56.7 91 89 63 65 213 70.3 cultivated Sorghum 3 2.9 0 0.0 1 1.0 4 1.3 crop Maize 9 8.7 0 0.0 12 12 21 6.9 Kocho 21 20.2 5 4.9 18 19 44 14.6 Wheat 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 .3 Barely 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 .3 Millet 8 7.7 0 0.0 2 2.1 10 3.3 Pulse 4 3.8 5 4.9 0 0.0 9 3.0 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: household survey, 2017 Table 4.5shows that teff is the major crop item cultivated in the study area followed by kocho(Dioscorea preahensini Benth). It indicate that 213(70.3%) of the sample households cultivate teff as the major crop while 44 (14.6%) of the respondents cultivate kocho. It also show that 21(6.9%) of the respondents cultivate maize as their major crop. Millet is cultivated as a major crop by 10 (3.3%) of the SHH while pulse is the crop cultivated by 9 (3%) of the respondents as a major crop. Sorghum is also the major crop
38 for 4(1.3%) of the sample households, while wheat and Barleyhave equal share (account for 0.3 percent each). This shows that teff and kocho are the major crops grown by majority of the farmers. From this data, one can conclude that the two major crops item namely, teff and kocho grown in the area need large farmland size and destroy many trees. Hence teff byits nature needs relatively extensive farm land size while kocho consume too many trees as a holding stick.
This indicates that the current farming practices within the study area could accelerate erosion. Hence the cultivation of cereal crops like teff requires the preparation of a fine- tilt seedbed, a single cropping of fields and the down slope final plough to facilitate drainage which inturn facilitates soil erosion by water. Therefore, in the study area, the farm land under cultivation of teff and formerly cultivated is characterized as eroded and unproductive due to soil erosion. The cultivation of kocho(Dioscorea PreahensinisBenth) has indirect contribution to land degradation. Hence, a single kocho needs one holding stick alone, hundreds to thousands of emerging and young trees could be cut for only one farm land. For kocho is one of the common diet in the study area, the involvement of the community in the distruction of natural forests for the purposeis becoming common, and one can imagin howmuch trees could be removed by all the farmers of the study area involved in cultivation of the crop.
4.2 Prevalence, Extent, Causes, Effects, and Measures Against LD in Nejo Woreda
4.2.1 Prevalence and Forms of Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda
As indicated in table 4.6: almost all of the respondents (97.4%), perceived that there is land degradation problem in the study area. They reported that, the most common forms of land degradation in the study area are soil erosion, deforestation, development of gullies, and landslides.
39
Figure 7: Developments of huge gullies and bare lands in Bushane Aleltu andMuchucho Gorgis study area on farm land.Photo by researcher. Source: field survey(March 2017). Specific name:Keladi Kome Miko(the top photo)andNanno Barkume(the bottom photos). Coordination:36P0773201, UTM:1060885 at an elevation of 1988m,and 36P0775612, UTM:1061670at an elevation 1925m respectively.
Figure 8: Development of landslides In Gute Weni study area. Photo by the researcher.Source: Field survey, March, 2017. Specific name Ilu Gute Weni.Coordination- 36P0773147,UTM106226.Elevation 2000m.
40
Table 4.6 Prevalence of land degradation and its major forms in Nejo Woreda
Sample Kebeles Bushane Gute Weni Muchuch Total Aleltu Gorgis No % No % No % No % land Yes 99 95.2 100 98.0 96 99 295 97.4 degradation No 5 4.8 2 2.0 1 1 8 2.6 occur Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 forms of land Soil erosion 7 6.7 3 2.9 3 3.1 13 4.3 degradation Deforestation 25 24.0 21 20.6 7 7.2 53 17.5 Land Slides 35 33.7 34 33.3 34 35 103 34.0 Overgrazing 1 1.0 3 2.9 4 4.1 8 2.6
Gullies 36 34.6 41 40.2 49 50 126 41.6 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: own household survey, (2017)
The above table (table4.6),shows that 41.6%, 34%, 17.5% and 4.3% of the respondents responded thedevelopment of gullies, landslides, deforestation and soil erosion respectively as the major forms of land degradation in their locality. The remaining 2.6% responded that overgrazing could be the major forms by which land degradation is manifested.
This indecats that the respondents perceive gullies, landslides, deforestation and soil erosion as the major indicators of existance of land degradation in the study area. From this, it is possible to conclude that in the study area soil erosion is very severe and developed into gullies, and then led to landslieds that could resulted in to the physical deformation of the area. This might be due to a long-term loss of natural vegetation. The result of key informant interview and field observation of the study area also indicate that the locality is degraded and wider areas were physically deformed due to the development and expansion of huge gullies and the landslides.
41
Figure 9:Development of Landslide and physical deformation of the land in Gute Weni study area. Specific name Ilu Gute Weni.Coordination 36P0773147.UTM 1062226.Elevation 2000m.Source, field survey, 2017
Table 4.7The most degraded topography of the study area
Sample Kebeles
Bushane Gute Weni Muchuch Total Aleltu Gorgis No % No % No % No % The most High 71 68.3 75 73.5 57 58.8 203 67 degraded grounds topography River 23 22.1 23 22.5 37 38.2 83 27.4 valleys Plain areas 5 4.8 2 2.0 2 2.1 9 3.0 Others 5 4.8 2 2.0 1 1.0 8 2.6 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: survey result, 2017
As one can see from Table4.7about 203(67%) of the sample household respondents were responded that the high grounds of the area are the most degraded topography in the area. About 83 (27.4%) of them responded that the river valleys arethe most degraded one. The
42 plain areas and the other relief types were considered as the most degraded landform only by 9(3%) and 8(2.6%) respectively. This result shows that the nature and characteristics of the terrain has contribution to the problem among the others. The key informants‟ interview result also indicates similar result. Inaddition, the observationof the sample study kebeles justified that the high grounds and the river valleys as more degraded landscape.These results indicate that the natural factors have contribution to the land degradation in the locality. To identify the degree of association between prevalence of land degradation and location, demographic characteristics, and socioeconomic characteristics of farmers was computed and tabulated as follows. Table 4.8Theassociation between degrees of land degradation problemandlocation, demographic andsocioeconomic characteristics of the SHHs
Dependent variable Independent variables X2 P-value Observed land degradation Kebele 29.812 0.000 (Severly degraded, Slightly Sex 00.015 0.903 degraded), on the basis of soil Age 27.687 0.000 and forest degradation. Marital Status 12.602 0.006 Household size 26.341 0.000 Education 34.677 0.000 Occupation 13.248 0.011 Land size 4.886 0.298 Soil type 22.712 0.000 Land use 0.886 0.829 Major crop 24.270 0.001
Source: household survey result, 2017
As it can be seen from the conclusion table, except sex, land size and land use the land degradation observed on farmers‟ farm land is significantly associated with the independent variables (in this study; with location, age, marital status, household size, education, occupation, soil type and major cultivable crop type). From this one can conclude that location, age, marital status, household size, education, occupation, soil type and major cultivable crop type have a significant association with land degradation in the study area. As it has been discussed in table 4.1, 4.2 & table 4.3 these socio- economic factors could affect the severity of soil and forest degradation.
43
4.2.2 Extent of Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda
Table 4.9 Extent of land degradation on farm lands of the study area
Sample Kebeles BushaneAl GuteWeni Muchuch Total eltu Gorgis N % N % N % N % Extent of V. severely 20 19.2 23 22.5 34 35.1 77 25.4 land Severely 52 50 68 66.7 59 60.8 179 59.1 degraded Moderately 27 26 9 8.8 4 4.1 40 13.2 (soil and Low 5 4.8 2 2.0 0 0.0 7 2.3 forest) Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source; household survey result, 2017
The table indicate that majority of respondents perceive severe land degradation on theire land.It shows that about 35.1%, 22.5%, and 19.2% of farmers in Muchucho Gorgis, GuteWeni, and BushaneAleltukebeles respectively feel that their farms are very severely degraded, while 60.8%, 66.7%, and 50%of the same kebeles‟ farmers respectively responded that their farm land severely degraded. But, none of the Muchucho Gorgis study area farmer respondents reported the severity as low, and only 2% and 4.8% of the Gute Weni and Bushane Aleltu respondents responded the severity is low respectively. From this one can conclude that the extent of land degradation in the locality is severed and there is difference in degree of the severity of the problem from one location to the other location.
4.2.3 Causes of Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda 4.2.3.1 Proximate and Underlying Causes of Land Degradation
Table 4.10shows that deforestation, overgrazing, overcultivation, ploughing steep slopes, limited uses of conservation structures, and river valleys activities as the possible immediate root causes of land degradation (those factors that directly causes land degradation ) in the study area. It also shows that steep topography, heavy rainfall, soil type, population pressure and the impact of termite as the factors that could be termed as underlying root causes of land degradation (those factors that causes the proximate causes) of the study area (See Annex C).The proportion of responses for both the
44 immediate and underlying causes of land degradation is significantly different. As it can be seen from the table, 134(44.2%), 97(32%), and 56(18.5%) of the respondents responded that deforestation, over cultivation, and river vally activities as the major immediate root causes of land degradation in their locality. Regarding the underlying root causes, 155(51.3%), 102(33.4%), and 32(10.6%) of them reported the impact of termite, population pressure, and steep topography as the major underlying root causes of land degradation in the study area. In addition, farming on steep slopes and fragile soils along river banks were commonly observed as factors that exacerbate soil erosion in the study area. 1. Economic Activities, Termites and Land Degradation Relationship Table 4.11The relationship between economic activities, termites and land degradation
Maior determinants of land degradation in the study area N % Yes 259 85.5 No 44 14.5 Total 303 100 Traditional Gold mining Yes 262 86.5 No 41 13.5 Total 303 100 Sand Quarrying Yes 107 35.3 No 196 64.7 Total 303 100 Impact of Termite Yes 277 91.4 No 26 8.6 Total 303 100 Source: household survey result, 2017
The above table (Table 4.11) shows that, about 259(85.5%) of the respondents responded agricultural activities along the river valleys are the factor that determines land degradation in the area. The same table also shows that about 262(86.5%), 107(35.3%) and 277(91.4%) of the SHHs reported that the traditional gold mining,sand quarrying and termites are the major factors for land degradation in their locality. From this one can conclude that termites, the activity of traditional gold mining and the farming along the river valleys are among the factors that determine land degradation in the study area.
45
2. Mean Degree of Agreement and Ranks of Determinant Variables As it can be seen from Table 4.12 mean degree of agreement was computed for the ten possible determinants of land degradation at different sample Kebeles in NejoWoreda(See Annex D). Deforestation was ranked to first determinant factor with a mean level of agreement 1.236 (close to strongly agree) followed by soil erosion and the impact of termite with a mean level of agreement 1.278 and 1.31 respectively. The remaining factors such as over cultivation, population pressure, rugged topography and traditional gold mining and sand quarry, overgrazing, and river valley activities ranked from 4th-9th respectively.Whereas poor farming practice as a determinant to land degradation was ranked to 10th with a mean level of agreement 3.142 (very close to undecided and somewhat close to disagree). From the result one can conclude that deforestation, soil erosion, the impact of termite, over cultivation and population pressure are the top five determining factors of land degradation in the study area.
3. Population Growth and Agricultural Land Size Relationship As shown in Table 4.13 the chi-square statistics is calculated to see if there is association between population growth and the farm land size (see Annex E). The result shows that there is association between the two variables. Look at the chi-square statistics (X2=15.07, P=0.005). From this, one can conclude that the association between the two variables is strong actually to the error less than 1%. The table also indicates that about 190(62.7%) of the respondents reported that there is rapid population growth rate in the area while 80(26.4%) reported that there is very rapid population growth rate and about 263(86.8%) responded that the size of the agricultural land is decreasing. According to the sample kebeles‟ DAs, and the community elders,population pressure increased the demand for land and led to farm on steep slopes and the fragile soils along the river banks. Moreover, they reported that population pressure results into land fragmentation, shifting cultivation and intensive cultivation that exposed the land for erosion.
4. Causes of Deforestation As it can be seen from Table 4.14, there is forests resources degradation in the area (see Annex F). The table shows that about 188(61.5%) of the respondents responded that they
46 utilized the forest resources as a source of energy while about 63(21.1%) responded they utilize it for kocho cultivation as a holding stick. Furthermore, the result also indicates that about 269(88.7) of the respondents perceive that there is changes in vegetation cover and about 134(43.9%) and about 145(48.2%) reported that deforestation is caused by population pressure and termites in the study area respectively.
The result shows that about half of the SHHs respondents agree on that termite contribut to land degradation indirectly through deforestation. The report of all the key informants also supported the response of the SHHs. One of the respondent community elders expressed the factor saying “Today termite is killing plants; tomorrow it will kill our children!” The word of the other community elder is “Not for myself, I feared that enemy for the next generation!” This shows how far termite is attacking the area. The researcher observation of the study area also justified that plants are hardly grown on many areas and some of the trees available on few areas are drying up due to the impact of termite. Therefore, the result indicates that termite as the major factor behind forest degradation in the study area. Inline to this, the data obtained from NARDO (2017) indicates that only from2012 to 2016 about 315 hectares of forest has been deforested due to both human activities and the impact of termites.This shows that the rate of deforestation is high in the study area.
Figure 10: Bare land developed due to the impact of termite in Muchucho Gorgis study area. Source: Field survey, 2017.
47
5. Deforestation and Land Degradation Relationship Table 4.15Deforestation and soil/environmental degradation relationship in the study area Sample Kebeles Bushane Gute Weni Muchuch Total Aleltu Gorgis N % N % N % N % Negative r/p b/n Yes 90 86.5 89 87.3 79 81.4 258 85.1 forest and soil No 14 13.5 13 12.7 18 18.6 45 14.9 degradation Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Role of Very high 29 27.9 19 18.6 20 20.6 68 22.4 deforestation High 54 51.9 80 78.4 56 57.7 190 62.7 on soil erosion ( Medium 18 17.3 2 2.0 9 9.3 29 9.6 based on dev‟nt Low 3 2.9 1 1.0 12 12.4 16 5.3 of gullies) Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Impact of soil infertility 43 41.3 44 43.1 14 14.4 101 33.3 deforestation on Huge Gullies 47 45.2 49 48.1 57 58.8 153 40.5 environment Land slides 7 6.7 9 8.8 6 6.2 22 7.3 Loss biod‟sty 7 6.7 0 0.0 15 15.4 22 7.3 Rising temp. 0 0.0 0 0.0 5 5.2 5 1.7 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: household survey result, 2017.
As it can be seen from Table 4.15 about 258(85.1%) of the respondents reported that there is adverse effect of forest degradation on soil resources, and 190(62.7) reported that the effect of deforestation on soil is high while 68(22.4%) perceive it as very high. The Table also indicates that 101(33.3%)and 153(40.5%) respondents responded that the decline in soil fertility and the development of huge gullies are the result of deforestation respectively. In addition, the key informants reported that, the distruction of forest resources in the area results the decline in soil fertility, formation of gullies, land slids, loss of fauna and flora. From this one can conclude that in the study area deforestation led into land degradation that can be manifested in different forms and has advers effects on the fertility of the soil.
48
6. Overgrazing and Land Degradation Relationship
Table 4.16Types of grazing lands and location relationship
Sample Kebeles Bushane Gute Weni Muchuch Total Aleltu Gorgis N % N % N % N % common Commonly owned 12 11.5 5 4.9 8 8.2 25 8.3 ways of Separately owned 28 26.9 10 9.8 17 17.5 55 18 grazing Commonly/separately 55 52.8 69 67.6 66 68.0 190 62.6 land abandoned land 9 8.8 18 17.6 6 6.2 33 11.9 owning Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: field survey result, 2017
Table 4.16 shows that about 52.8% of the Bushane Aleltu, 67.6%of the Gute Weni and 68% of the Muchucho Gorgis study area obtain the communal and separately owned grazing land for their livestock.The remaining percents obtain communally owned, separately owned or any abandond land. From this variation it is possible to conclude that the form of grazing land is different from place to place in the study area.
7. Activities along River Valley and Land Degradation Relationship As it can seen from Table 4.17, there is association between the variables measuring the consiquences of traditional gold mining and sand quarrying and land degrandtion. Look at the chi-square statistics result (X2 =23, P-value=0.001). From this, one can conclude that there is strong association between the variables measuring the consiquences of the traditional gold mining and sand quarrying and land degradation. The table also shows that, about 75.2% of the SHHs responded that the trend of the population involved in the activity is increasing, and about 88.4% of them percieved that it has a negative effect on the land resource.
49
Table 4.17Gold mining and sand quarrying and their effects on land resources in Nejo Woreda Sample Kebeles X2 P- Val Bushane GuteWeni Muchucho Total ue Aleltu Gorgis N % N % N % N % Trend of Increasing 81 77.9 89 87.2 58 59.8 228 75.2 population Decreasing 7 6.7 6 5.9 20 20.6 33 10.9 number involved in I can't decide 16 15.4 7 6.9 19 19.6 42 13.9 gold mining Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 consequence of huge gullies 27 25.2 43 42.2 16 16.5 86 28.4 gold mining Land slides 38 36.9 38 37.3 46 47.4 122 40.3
river banks expantion 22 21.4 5 4.9 17 17.5 44 14.5 Decline in farm land 17 16.5 16 16.7 18 18.6 51 16.8
Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 23 .001 Negative Yes 84 80.8 99 97.1 85 87.6 268 88.4 contribution to No 20 19.2 3 2.9 12 12.4 35 11.6 land Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100
Source: survey result, 2017
Regarding its consiquences, about 40.3%, 28.4%, 14.5% and 16.8% were reported landslids, development of huge gulies, expantion of river banks and decline in farm land respectively. Inaddition, the researcher observed that the participants of traditional gold mining uses very traditional equipments and arbitrary approaches and scratching the ground mainly the fragile soils of the river banks. It was also observed that the loss of vegetation and biodiversity, land disturbances, and gullieson the areas adjacent to the area of gold mining due to the activity.From this one can conclude that the traditional gold mining has contribution to land degradation in the study area.
50
Figure 11: People involved in traditional gold mining in Bushane Aleltu study area, alongAgar Aleltu river valley.Photo by research. Source: Field Survey, 2017.
4.2.4 Effects of Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda Table 4.18Land degradation and its effect in the study area
Effects of Land Degradation Yes % No % Total % Affect Crop Yields 291 96.6 12 4 303 100 Decrease Farm Land Size 286 94.1 18 5.9 303 100 Increase the Need For Fertilizers 112 37 191 63 303 100 Change in Crop Type 81 26.7 222 73.3 303 100 Landlessness 272 89.8 31 10.2 303 100 Displacement of the Farmers 82 27.1 221 72.9 303 100 Loss of Biodiversity 276 91.1 27 8.9 303 100 Physical deformation of the Land 270 89.1 33 10.9 303 100 Source: household survey result, 2017
Land degradation affects human beings bothglobaly and at plot level. The rural communities those closely related to land resources and whose livelihoods directly based on land resources is more vulnerable. The sample household heads reported that the livelihood of the community in the study area is affected by land degradation(see Table 4.18). Almost all the respondents291(96.6%) of the SHHs were reportede that crop yield has been decreasing from time to time. About 286(94.1%)of them responded that it
51 causes decline in farm land size while 272(89.8%) responded that land degradation leads the farmers to be landlesst. About 276(91.1%) of the SHHs responded that land degradation causes loss of flora and fauna in the study area, while about 270(89.1%) of them responded that it led to the physical deformation of the topography of the area.
From the result one can understand that in the study area land degradation affects the crop yield, the farm land size, the requirement of fertilizers, the type of cultivable crop, and causes land lessness, displacement of the farmers, loss of biodiversity and the physical deformation of the land. In addition to these, the woreda’s land and natural resource experts reported that there is food insecurity in the area due to soil degradation.Key informants also described that the agricultural land of the locality is degraded and as a result it requires more chemical fertilizers inorder to obtain yields from such eroded land. The community elders further noted that, many people have been displacedfrom their home due to land degradation and many are on the verge to migrate from some villages of the localiy. From the result, one can understand that in the area land degradation has economic, social and environmental impacts and that the problem is very critical.
Figure 12: Deformed land in Gute Weni study area.Photo by researcher. Source: Field survey,2017.
52
4.2.5 Measures Against Land Degradation in Nejo Woreda.
Identification of the situationof land conservation has paramount importances for sustainable land management.The conservation of land degradation helps to reduce the rate of physical damage of the land and its nutrient depletion and important for the rehabilitation of the natural resources. Thus, this section mainly deals with land resource management and restoration practices undertakenby the local community and the concerned bodies in the study area. In the study area, the community and the concerned bodies attempt to emplement different land management and restoration practices such as the application of hybrid seeds,manurinng, chemical fertilizers, crop residus, contour ploughing, closure of grazing land, terracing work, afforestation, reforestation and agro- forestry(see table 4.19). Table 4.19 Action Taken by the Community to Mitigate the Problems of LD in Nejo Woreda How often do you use Very Often Rarely Never Total much N % N % N % N % N % hybrid seeds 60 19.8 211 69.6 25 8.3 7 2.3 303 100 contour ploughing 52 17.2 201 66.3 37 12.2 13 4.3 303 100 Manuring 57 18.8 181 59.7 46 15.2 19 6.3 303 100 chemical fertilizers 71 23.4 60 19.8 158 52.1 14 4.6 303 100 pesticides & herbicides 55 18.2 64 21.1 167 55.1 17 5.6 303 100 crop residues 36 11.9 52 17.2 88 29 127 41.9 303 100 Source: household survey,2017
The result of the SHHs response shows that 211(69.6%), 201(66.3%) and 181(59.7%) of them often used hybrid seeds, control ploughing and manuring as sustainable land management methods respectively. However, 158(52.1%) and 167(55.1%) reported that they use rarely chemical fertilizers, and herbicides and pesticides respectively. While 127(41.9%) of them responded that they never use crop residues as soil fertility management.Therefore, this shows that in the study area, there is relatively some what better application of hybrid seeds, manuring and contour ploughing practice. But, the application of chemical fertilizers, herbisids, pesticidesand crop residues is very low. Regarding this issue, the sample community elders and DAs stated that the reason
53 behindnot to use these inputsis increament in the price of these agricultural inputs, while the application of crop residues is difficult due to the impact of termites hence termites consum vegetations that lie in their path, Table 4.20 Solution taken by the Government and NGOs to mitigate the problems of landdegradation in Nejo Woreda
High Medium Low Never Total Conservation methods N % N % N % N % N % Closure of grazing land 33 10.9 87 28.7 179 59.1 4 1.3 303 100 Terracing work 66 21.8 206 68 29 9.6 2 0.7 303 100 Afforestation/reforestation 30 9.9 88 29 185 61.1 0 0 303 100 Agro-forestry 30 9.9 90 29.7 179 59.1 4 1.3 303 100 Source: household survey,2017
As indicated in table 4.20 in the study area, 33(10.9%), 87(28.7%), 179(59.1%), and 4(1.3%) of the SHHs reported that the practice of closure of grazing land is high, medium, low and never practicingrespectively. Concerning terracing work, 66(21.8%), 206(68%), 29(9.6), and 2(0.7%) respondents responded as high, medium, low and never practiced respectively.The practice of afforestation and reforestation is perceived as high,medium, and low by 30(9.9%), 88(29%), and 185(61.1%) of the farmers respectively.However, none of the respondent respondedthat they never practiced. The table also indicates that 30(9.9%), 90(29.7%), 179(59.1%), and 4(1.3%) of the respondents percived that the practice of agro-forestry is high, medium, low and never practiced respectively.This result shows that, in the study area, terracing work is relatively well practiced, but closures of grazing land, afforestation; reforestation and agro-forestry arelimited. From this one can conclude that soil and forest resource conservation practices are limited when compared with the problem of land degradation of the area.
54
Table 4.21 The effort of government/NGO in restoration of degraded lands in Nejo Woreda Effort made by the Sample Kebeles government/NGO in BushaneAle GuteWeni MuchuchGor Total restoration of the land ltu gis N % N % N % N % Sufficient Yes 25 24.8 4 4.0 22 23.4 51 16.8 No 79 75.2 98 96 75 76.6 252 83.2 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: household survey, 2017.
As it can be seen from Table 4.21, about252(83.2%) of the respondents reported that the efforts made by the government and NGO in restoration of degraded land is insufficient while only 51(16.8%) of them reported as sufficient.This result indicates that the attention given by the government and NGOs towards the problem of land degradation in the study area was not adequate. However, sample community elders stated that eventhough the measure taken against the problem is insufficient,nowadays in the locality the issue of land resource degradation has gotthe attention of the community, government and some NGOs such as the World Vision and the SLM projects,
Concerning the solution for land degradation problem of the locality, majority of theSHH respondents and the key informants suggested that the problem of land degradation can be minimized in the study area if there is better cooperation between and among government and the community members in the field of land rehabilitation, the prevailing deforestation activities checked, the problem related to termite solved, the government design better strategies that could halt the acceleration of the problem and the intervention of NGOs through financial and logestic aids enhanced. However, they stressed that the problem is deep-rooted and therefore needs due attention of every body. Furthermore, they warned that unless the existing rate of land degradation tackeled through mitigation campaign and termite infestation controlled, the result would be irreversible.
55
4.3 Summary of Regresion Result
Table4.22Parameter Estimates of land degradation in Nejo Woreda Dependent Variable: Observed Land degradation on own farm land based on huge gully development(1= Severly degraded, 2 = Slightly Degraded)
B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B) Kebele 2.205 1.02 13.115 2 .001 Soilcolortype 18.52 -19138 10.169 3 .017 Traditional Gold Mining 1.877 1.127 10.346 3 .016 Over cultivation - 0.58 0.983 6.018 2 .049 Constant 1.27 4.75 0.07 1.00 0.79 3.57
Variable(s) entered on step 1: Kebele, HHAge, HH size, HH Educational status,Occupationstatus, Soilcolor/type, Cultivable majorcrop, Impact of termite, Traditional goldmining, Over cultivation, and Overgrazing problem.Source: household survey, 2017
To determine the effect of demographic, socioeconomic and bio-physical factors that determine the prevalence of land degradationthe mean value of the dependent variable regressed against location (kebeles), demographic and socio-economic factors, and the bio-physical factors (household age, household size, household educational status, occupational status, soil type, major cultivable crop, the impact of termite, traditional gold minng, overgrazing and over cultivation).Initially, the model has been found to be significant to the error level less than 5% and with a coefficient of determination (R2) of about 0.659. A total of, 11 explanatory variables were included in the model of which four (location, soil color,traditional gold mining, and overcultivation)were found to be significant at less than 5% probability level. Therefore, the logistic model result shows that these variables have significant effects on land degradation. Location(Kebele):As shown in the above table (Table 4.22),location has beenfound to significantly influence the probability of the land to be severly degraded or slightly degraded to the error level less than 1%. This indicates that location and land degradation have strong relationship and the changes in location affect the observation of land degradation to be severly degraded or slightly degraded.
56
Traditional gold mining: Table 4.22 also shows that the traditional gold mining is significant at less than 5%significant level. This indicates that there is strong relationship between the traditional gold mining and land degradation. This implies that whether or not traditional gold mining takes place significantly influence the prevalence of sever or slight land degradation. Therefore, thechanges in trends of the traditional gold mining affect the degree of the land degradation. Soil Color (type):As it can be seen from Table 4.22 the analysis result indicates that the soil is significant to determine land degradation at less than 5% significant level. This implies that the chang in soil color or type affects the extent of land degradation.In highy lands of Ethiopia, soil type is one of the major factors that aggravate the problem of land degradation(Mulatu, 2014). This means that, soil type could affect the degree of severity of land degradation. Overcultivation: As shown in Table 4.22, overcultivation is statistically significant at less than 5% significant level. That means, there is relationship between over cultivation and extent of land degradation.Therefore, the variable is strongly significant to determine the prevalency of land degradation.This implies that as the value of overcultivation increase or decrease, there is a significance change on the degree of prevalence of the land degradation. Among the many factors regressed against prevalence of land degradation to sever or slight extent, location (Kebeles), soil type (red, gray, brown black or other color), presence of the effect of traditional gold mining on their farms and overcultivation of the farms were found to be significant to the error level less than 5%. This implies that farmers in the different kebeles, with different soil types of their farms, whether or not tradition gold mining takes place near their farms, and wthether or not their land is overcultivated are factors which significantly influence the degradation extetnt of their farms. However this does not mean that there are no other factors which contribute to the degradation of their farms. For instance, infestation of termites is one of the significant factors which cause degradation of farms owned by most farmers in the area indifferently. Presence of deforestation which normally prevails on communal and uncultivated land resources in the area are not direct factors to cause a varied degree of degradation on lands possessed by farmers.
57
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Summary
This study has attempted to assess the determinants of land degradation at plot level. The study was conducted in Nejo woreda, west wollega Zone, Oromia Rigion which is about 499km west of Addis Abeba. Astronomically, the woredais located at 9024‟ N-9045‟N latitude and 35015‟E-35036‟E longitude. The woreda has a total area of 95800 hectare and about 152741 total populations. From about 49kebeles of the woreda, three sample kebeles were purposively selected for the study. About 321 SHHs were selected randomly using systematic random sampling techniques. The sample size from each sample kebeles was proportionally determined from the total household of the three kebeles using stratified random sampling techniques.
In order to achieve the objective of the study, different techniques were employed for data collection, presentation and analysis. For data collection questionnaire, field observation and key informant interview were utilized. The researcher used questionnaire to gather quantitative information from 303 eligible sample household residing in the three kebeles at the study area. In order to gather the qualitative data, interview was used for ten purposively selected personsthat inclue the community elders, DAs, and the agricultural experts of the district. The community elders were interviewed inorder to describe the communities perception towards land degradation and the elder farmers‟ critical view of past and present situation offorest cover, population number, soil erosion, and other cases related to land degradation and relatedsocio-economic and environmental problems of the study area. Field observation was also used to check the extent and the existing reality of the environment of the study area.
The collected data was organized and analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics employing the computer Excel andSPSS Version 20. The statistical data that came from the sample household survey was analysed using descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentage, graphs and mean value, to describe the sample households in terms of location, demographic and socioeconomic factors. Besids, chi-square statics was
58 used to determine the degree of association of the factors with the prevalence of land degradation. The logistic regression model was also employed to examinethe relationship between the dependent variable and independent variables.The model analysis showed that location, the soil type, traditional gold mining and overcultivation determine the land degradation in the study area.
The analysis results of quantitative and qualitative data indicate: the demographic and socio-economic characterestics and the bio-physical of the area contribute to land degradation. In addition, termites have been found one of the major causes of land degradation in the area.The result also shows that land degradation causes economical, social and environmental problems in the study area and manifested in soil erosion, deforestation, overcultivation, development of huge gullies and landslids. The result of the study also indicates that soil nutrient and organic matter management and vegetation management is limted. The solution taken by the concerned bodies was not sufficient. Theresult of the study indicates that there is a need to appropriate soil and vegetation management in order to mitigate the problem and to rehabilitate the degraded land.
5.2 Conclusion
The descriptive statistics and the qualitative data analysis result show that the main causes of land degradation in the study area are both natural and human made factors. The major immediate root causes of land degradation are deforestation, lack of fallowing, steep slope cultivation and economic activities practiced along river valleys. Population pressure, the impact of termite and nature of the soil of the area are identified by the study as the underlying causes of land degradation. It is also identified that deforestation is caused mainly due to population pressure and the impact of termite andthat termite is one of the responsible factors for land degradation.
The result of the regression model have shown that location, the soil type, overcultivation and traditional gold mining activity of the area are responsible for the prevalence of land degradation. Although the activity of traditional gold mining generates income for the unemployed youths and subsidizing the livelihood of poor farmers of the locality, it has been found as one of the occupation that determine land degradation. Soil is the physical
59 factor that determin the current status of land degradation in the area. Overcultivation and deforestation have been found as the resultant effect of population pressure and contribute to land degradation.
The findings of the study indicate that the study area has serious land degradation problems and appeared to be one of the main problems that affect the livelihood of the local community. Gullies are very common in communal lands, river valleys, edges of farm lands and expanding in to the heart of farm lands. Landslides are also common along the edges of river valleys and in some places it covers extensive areas including farm lands. The major effects of land degradation identified in the study include: Shirinkage of farm land, decline in land productivity, land lessness, displacement of the farmers, landslides, physical deformation of the landscape and loss of biodiversity.The study result also indicates that in the study area, the solution taken against land degradation was not sufficient and therefore, inorder to mitigate the problem and for the restoration of the degraded landthe appropriate soil and vegetation management actions should be conducted and implemented by the community, government and the NGOs.
5.3 Recommendations
Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendationsare forwarded. The recommendations are to be implemented by the responsible government bodies, NGOs and local community. Controlling the increase in the family size should be of priority to address problems of resource degradation problems. Therefore, farmers should be encouraged to use better family planning to repeal the problems of over cultivation and excessive utilization of forest for fuel and kocho cultivation. The seriously degraded areas should be fallowed and the local community should protecte the area from livestock, in order to allow vegetation cover to be reestablished There is a need to develop alternative source of energy to checkthe prevailing deforestation activity and to preserve the existing vegetation in the area.
60
Afforestation, reforestation and agroforestry program should be encouraged more at the local levels in the area to preserve the existing vegetation in the area. Both the community and government should control land degradation due to soil erosion through physical soil managements such as terracing, revegetation of degraded and eroded lands, tree protection, and improved tillage methods. The land management practices like organic manure application, closure of grazing land, terracing, making water ways and tree planting should enhanced. Off-farm activities such as petty teade and cottage industries should be encouraged by the community and government, so as allevate the problems of land shortage. The government should enhance and promote development interventions that aimed at diversifying live hoods of the farming communities. The regional and woreda‟s development plans must develop effective strategies that provide alternative means of income such as petty teade and cottage industries in order to address the problem of traditional gold mining in the area. Termites have both positive and negative impacts on land resources, mainly on forest resources. Therefore, the environmentalists and experts around the study area require a special attention to allevate the negative impacts of termite on forest resources. The government and non government organizations should consider the effect of termite on forest resources and soil in the area, and should promote termite eradication campaign. Adequate financial and skilled human labor resources are required to combat the risk of termite and therefore, more financial resources should be provided by government and aided by NGOs, and related experts should be placed by the government. There is need for further research work in the woreda to assess the history and nature of termites in the area and why termites more occupied and survived in the locality than the surrounding areas. Finally, research in the land degradation and the determining factors need to be expanded at the plot,mainly concerning the nature of the soil of the study area.
61
References
Abera Birhanu, 2003. Factors Influencing the Adoption of Soil Conservation Practices in North-western Ethiopia, Discussion Papers No. 37.Institute of Rural Development. University of Gottingen, Germany Adams, CR. Eswaran, H. (2000). “Global Land Resources in the Context of Food and EnvironmentalSecurity.” In S.P. Gwande et al., eds.”Advances in land resources management for the 20th century.”Pp.35-50.New Delhi. Soil Concervation Socity of India. Addise Ermias (2014). The Challenges and Prospects of Land Restoration Practices: Case of Misirak Bada Wacho Woreda of Hadiya Zone, SNNPR, Ethiopia.MA Thesis, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies. Addis Ababa. Adugnaw Birhanu (2014). Environmental Degradation and Management in EthiopianHighlands: Review of Lesson Learned. International Journal of Environmental Protection and policy, Vol.2, No.1, 2014,PP 2434. Ahmed Hussein, Dejene Biru, Bona Yadesa, Alemayeu Geleta, Hussein Bekele, Birihanu Indeti, Abera Asefa, Gemechis Leggese, Debela Olani, Tamiru Beyene and Getachew Mengistu(2011). Program of Plan on Adaption to Climate Change.Oromia National Regional State.ONRS.A Regional Task Force Document. Finfinne, Ethiopia. Alemneh Dejene (2003) .Integrated Natural Resource Management to Enhance Food Security; The Case of Community Based Approaches in Ethiopia, Environmentand Natural Resources Working Paper No. 16, FAO, Rome. Anteneh Gebremariam (2010). Farmers‟ Awareness about Land Degradation andtheir Attitude towards Land Management Practices: A Case of Sidama Zone; Aleta Wondo Woreda, Southern Ethiopia.A Thesis Submited to Geography and Environmental Education. Addis Ababa. Asrat Tesfaye (2014). Assessment of Farmers Awareness about Land Degradation and their Attitude towards Land Management Practice: A Case of Ezha Woreda in Gurage Zone, SNNPR.MA Thesis, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies. Haramaya University, Ethiopia. Assemu Tesfa and Shigdof Mekuriaw (2014). The Effects of Land Degradation on Farm
62
Size Dynamics and Crop-Livestock Farming System in Ethiopia: A Review, Open Journal of Soil Science. Andassa Livestock Research Center, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. Bai, ZG. Dent, DL.Olsson, L. and Schaepman, ME, (2008).Global Assessment of LandDegradation and Improvement1.Identification by remote sensing.Report 2008/01, ISRIC, Wageningen. Bezuayehu Tefera, Gezahegn ayele, Yigezu Atnafe, Jabbar M.A. and Paulos Dubal (2002). Nature and Cases of Land Degradation in the Oromia Region: A Review Socioeconomics and Policy Research Working Paper 36. ILRI (International Livestock Research Inistitute), Nirobi, Kenya. 82 pp. Berry (2003). LandDegradation in Ethiopia: Its Extent and Impact, Commissioned by the GM with WB Support. Central Statistical Authority. (2017). Population Projection of Ethiopia for AllRegions at Woreda Level from 2008-2017. Ethiopia, Addis Ababa. Debtanu Barman, Sangar, C.Mandal, Pampa Bhattacharjee, Nandita and Ray (2013).LandDegradation: Its Control, Management and Environmental Benefits of Management in to Agriculture and Aquaculture. Environment and Ecology 31(2C): 1095-1103, 2013. Dominic Blay, S.A.O.,Chamshama, and Benchikamoi (2004).Rehabilitation of Degraded Lands in Sub-Saharan Africa: Lessons Learned from Selected Case Studies, FORNESSA,and UFRD-SPDC. Ephram Nkonya, Andrew Barkley, Steve Hamilton, and Daniel Bernardo (vironmen2011).Environmental and Economic Impacts of Soil Erosion and Fertility Mining in Northern Tanzania.Department of Agricultural Economics, Kanasas State University.342 Waters Hall, Manhattan Kansas 66506-4011. Eshetu, S. (2015).Awareness and Views of Farming Households Regarding Land Resource Degradation andConservation: The Case of Bule Hora, Ethiopia.InternationalJournal of Scientific Research in Education 8(3), //4/24. Retrieved [DATE] from http: //www; ijsre.com. Eswaran, H.R.Lal and P.F.Reich (2001). “Land Degradation: An Overview.” In Respon to Land Degradation. Proc.2nd International Conference on Land Degradationand and Desertification, Thailland, New Delhi: Oxford Press. Ethiopian Mapping
63
Authority (2010). National Atlas of Ethiopia: Addis Ababa. Ethiopia Research Institute (2000). Nature and Causes of Land Degradationin the Oromia Region: A Review of Literature, Policy for Sustainable Land Management in theHighlands of Ethiopia. Summary of Papers and Proceeding of a Seminary Held at the International Livestock P.c.22-23. Food and Agricultural Organization(2000). Land Degradation Assessment inDry lands (LADA).United Nations Environment Programme. Global Environment Facility (GEF).Project Development and Preparation Facility Block Grant (PDF-B).Land Degradation Assessment in Dry Lands (LADA).Proceeding of a Regional Workshop, Bangkok, Thailand 10-14 November 2003. FAO, Internet Food and Agricultural Organization (2005). Agro-ecological Zoning and GIS Application in Asia with Special Emphasis on website:ftp://ftp.fao.org/agl/agll/docs misc 38e.pdf, accessed July 1,2008. Getachew Adugna (2005). Determinants of Land Degradation in the Lake Tana Basin andImplications for Sustainable Land Management: The Case of Angreb andGlsh- Abay Watersheds. MSc Thesis.Department of Agricultural Economics.Alemaya University, Ethiopia. GirmaTadesse (2001). Land Degradation: A Challenge of Ethiopia Environmental Management. Journal Springer Publisher.0364.52x (print) 143-1009/on line vol.27, No.61. Hailemariam and Guner (2010). Risk Preferences as Determinants of Soil Conservation 10-19.Decisions in Ethiopia; Environments for Development,DiscussionPaperSeries. EfD DP Israel. D.G.2012. Determiningsample size.University of Florida. USA. Joachim Von Braun, Nicolas Gerber, Alisher Mirazabare and Ephraim Nkonya (2013).The Economics of Land Degradation, Zentrum fur Entwicklngsforschung Cente for Development Research. Germany. Keijiro Otsuka (2001). Population pressure, Land Tenure, and Natural ResourceManagement in Selected Areas of Africa and Asia. Manh Quyet, Vu. (2014). Multi-Level Assessment of Land Degradation:The case of Vietnam. DISS.ETH No. 21980. Bonn University, Germany.
64
Marria Christina, Jolejole-Foreman and Lesie Lipper (2012). Land Degradation‟s ImplicationsonAgricultural value of Production in Ethiopia: A Look inside the Bowl. Selected Paper Prepared for Presentation at the International Association ofAgricultural Economists (IAAE) Trienial Conference, Foziguacu, Brazil, 18-24,2012. Mengistu Asmamaw Mengesha and Mekkuria Argaw Denoboba(2015).Assessing Farmers‟ Perception of Enclosures, Kewot District, and Northeastern Ethiopia.International Journal of Environmental Protection and Policy.Vol.3.no.6, 2015.pp. 181_187.doi 10. 11648/J.IJpp, 20150306.11 Ministry of Mines (2015). Mines Legal Frame Works in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Mmom, Prince Chinedu, Mbee and Daniel mbee (2013).Population Pressure and ForestResource Depletion in Gelegele Forest Reserve of Edostate, Nigeria. University of International Journal of Physical and Human Geography, December 2013. Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Mosayeb Heshmati, Arifin Abdu, Nik Muhamad Majid and J. Shamshuddin (2013). Land Degradation and Preventive Measures from the Perspectiveof the Stakeholders.American Journal of Applied Sciences 10(9) 2013: 1061_1076, 2013. ISSN: 1546_9239. 2013 Science Publication.doi: 10.3844/ajassp. 2013.1061.107 published online 10(9) 2013 (http:// ww.thesec: pub. Com/ajas.toc). Mulatu AlemayehuMerga (2014). Assessment of the Status of Farmers Induced Land Degradation and their Response to Conservation Practices: A case study of Jima Arjo Woreda, East Wollega Zone of Oromia RegtonalState.MA Thesis, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies. Haramaya Yuniversity, Ethiopia. Mulugeta Lemenih (2004). Effects of Land Use Changes on Soil Quality and Native Flora Degradation and Restoration in the Highlands of Ethiopia.Implications for Sustainable Land Management.A PhD Thesis Submited to University of Swedish.Agricultural Science. Uppsala. Nejo Woreda Agricultural and Rural Development Office (2017). NWARDO, Annual Report. WesternWolloga Zone, Ethiopia.
65
Oliver Kiptoo Kirul and Alisher Mirzabaew (2014).Economics of Land Degradation in Eastern Africa. Zentrun fur Entwick Lungs for Schung Center for Development Research. Working Paper 128.Germany. Oromia National Regional State: ONRS (2011). Program of Plan on Adaptation to Climate Change.A Regional Task Force Document.Finfinne, Ethiopia. Out, Judith, E., Joseph, Kinuabeye, U. Eja and Eja. I. (2011).Impact of Population Growth on Forest Resource Degradation in Ikom Local Government Area.Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences vol. 1 No. 1: December 2011, Nigeria. Pearce, M.J. (2004). Termites.Biology and Pest Management.Formely of the Natural Resources Institute Chatham, Kent, UK.Cambridge University. Raphael W.W.(2012). Impact of Human Population on Land Degradation in Former Lugari District, Kakamega County, Kenya. MA Thesis, Department of Environmental Science.Kenyata University. Singh, AN. Raghubanishi, AS.and Singh, JS. (2003). Mining and Quarrying.State of theEnvironment Report. http:// parisara.Kar.nic.in/PDF/Mining.pdf. Snel, M. and Bot, A. (2003). Draft paper: Suggested indicators for Land Degradation Assessment of Dry lands. FAO, Rome. Taffa Tulu, 2002. Soil and Water Conservation for Sustainable Agriculture.Mega Publishing Enterprise. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. TatekTegene Belay (2014).Perception of Farmers on Soil Erosion and Conservation Practices in Dejen District, Ethiopia.International Journal of Environmental Protection and Policy.Vol.2.6, 2014. pp.224.229.doi:10.648/J.iJepp, 20140206.15 Tegegn Samuel (2014), An Assessment of the Current Land Management System of NonoWoreda, Oromia Regipn.MA Thesis, Department of Geography and Environmental Syudies. Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia. Temesgen Gashaw, Amare Bantider and Hagos G/Silassie (2014). Land Degradation inEthiopia: Causes, Impacts and RehabilitationTechniques. Journal at Environment and Earth Science ISSN 2224-3216 (paper) ISSN 2225-0948 (online) vol.4, No.9,2014. Tesfahun and Temesgen Gashaw (2014). Population Growth and Land Resources
66
Degrada in Bantneka Watershed, Southern Ethiopia, Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Health care ISSN 2224-3208 (paper) ISSN 2225-093x (online) Vol. 4, No 15, 2014. Tilahun Bayou (2010). Impact of Deforestation on Rural Livelihoods: The Case of Kuyu Woreda, Central Ethiopia.MA Thesis, College of Development Studies.Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia. Vagholikar, N. Moghe, KA. (2003). Underlying India: Impacts of Mining on Ecologically Sensitive Areas. Kalpavriksh.Pune.pp 35. Vivian Schuler, Tobias Kuemmerle and Hilmar Schroder (2011).Impacts of Surface Gold Mining on Land Use Systems in Western Ghana. AMBIO (2011) 40:528539. Woldeamlak, Bewuketu.(2003). Towards Integrated Watershed Management in Highlan Ethiopia:TheChemoga Watershed Case Study.Tropical ResourceManagement Paper, No.44/2003. Wollega University Faculty of Social Science (WUFSS, 2010), Geography of Natural Resource Analysis and Management.Modulefor Summer Program Students.Department of Geography and Environmental studies. Nekemte, Ethiopia
67
APPENDICES Annex A: Questionnaire to be filled by head of households of Nejo Woreda Dear respondent: My name is Waketola Getachew. I am a MA student at Adama Science and Technology UniversityDepartment of Geography and Environmental Studies. The principal objective of this Questionnaire is to gather information on land degradation, to access the determining factors of land degradation in Nejo Woreda. It is also designed to prepare thesis for the partial fulfillment of the requirements for Master of Arts in Geography and Environmental Studies. I hope that the outcomes of this study are useful to give adequate information to local and regional government for better uses of their environment and the recommendation of this study can be used as alternative for rehabilitation of the degraded land in theworeda. You have been selected randomly from the settlers for this important issue. Thus, your cooperation is very necessary to achieve the desired goal of the study. Hence, taking the above objectives into consideration, you are kindly requested to give the appropriate answers for the following questions freely and openly. NB: -No need of writing your name on the questionnaire. -Any information you give is to be kept confidential. Thank you in advance! Part 1: Demographic and Socio-Economic Characteristics of Household Head 1.1.Age of the head of household 1.<30 2. 30-40 3. 41-50 4. 51-60 5.>60 1.2.Sex of the household head: 1. Male 2. Female 1.3. Educational level of the household head: 1. Illiterate2. Primary school education 3. Secondary school education 4. Preparatory/College 1.4. Marital status of the respondent: 1. Single 2. Married 3. Divorced 4. Widowed 1.5. Size of the household: 1. 1-3 2. 4-6 3. 7-10 4. >10 1.6.Occupationalstatus of the respondent: 1. Crop production 2. Animal rearing 3. Mixed farming 4. Gold mining and/or sand quarrying 5, Income from government/NGO
68
1.7. The estimated total size of the land currently you own/occupy: 1. <1ha 2. 1-2ha 3. 2.01-3ha 4.>3ha 5. No land 1.8. What is soil color of the majority of your cultivation field? 1. Redish 2. Gray 3. Brown black 4. Other color 1.9. The major part of your land is used for: 1. Crop growing 2. Grazing 3. Forestry 4. Useless 1.10.What is the major crop that you cultivate? 1. Teff 2. Sorghum 3. Maize 4. Kocho 5. Wheat 6. Barely 7. Millet 8. Pulse Part 2. Questionnaire pertaining Land Degradation A. Questions Pertaining Extent of Land Degradation 2.1. Do you observe land degradation problem in your area? 1. Yes 2. No 2.2. What is the major form of physical land degradation in your area? 1. Soil erosion 2. Deforestation 3. Landslides 4. Overgrazing of range lands 5. Development of gullies 2.3. Which topography of the land did you observe most degraded in Nejo woreda? 1. High grounds 2. River valleys 3. Plain areas 4. Others 2.4. To what extent do you perceive in your locality the land is degraded? 1. Very severely 2. Severely 3. Moderately 4. Low 5. There is no land degradation risk 2.5. How do you observe your farm land is degraded? 1. Severly degraded 2. Slightly degraded B. Questions Pertaining Causes of Land Degradation 2.6. In your opinion, the major reason for land degradation in your locality is: 1. Natural factors 2. Human impacts 2.7. What do you think the most immediate root cause of land degradation in your area? 1. Deforestation 2. Overgrazing 3.Over cultivation 4. Ploughing steep slopes 5. Limited use of conservation structures 6. River valleys activities 2.8. In your opinion, the major underlying root cause for land degradation in your area is 1. Steep topography 2. Heavy rainfall 3. Soil typ 4. Population pressure 5. Impact of Termite
69
2.9. Do you think the following factor/s could be among the determinant factors of land degradation in Nejo Woreda? -Please indicate your answer by placing a tick ( ) in the appropriate box Factors Yes No 2.9A Farming activities along the river valleys 2.9B Traditional gold mining 2.9C Sand quarrying 2.9D Impact of termites 2.10. Do you agree/disagree with the following factors as the causes of land degradation in Nejo woreda? -Please indicate your answer by placing a tick ( ) in the appropriate box Factors Strongly Agree Disagree Undecided agree 2.10A Deforestation 2.10B Over cultivation 2.10C Population pressure 2.10D Over grazing 2.10E Soil erosion 2.10F Poor farming practices 2.10G Rugged topography 2.10H Farming activities along river valleys 2.10I Impact of Termites 2.10J Traditional gold mining and sand quarry
C. Questions on Population Pressure as Causes of Land Degradation 2.11. In your stay, do you observe number of population increase in your locality? 1. Yes 2. No 2.12. How do you think the rate of the population growth? 1. Very rapid 2. Rapid 3. Slow 4. Very slow
70
2.13. How is the size of agricultural land from year to year in your locality? 1. Decreasing 2. Increasing 3. No change 2.14. Do you think that agricultural land size has relationship with population growth? 1. Yes 2. No 2.15 Did you observe excessive exploitation of forest resources as a result of population growth in your locality? 1. Yes 2. No 2.16. Do you believe that over cultivation is the resultant effect of population pressure in your locality? 1. Yes 2. No 3. I can‟t decide 2.17. Do you think that the number of years you cultivate land had contribution for the soildegradation in your kebele? 1. Yes 2. No D. Questions on Deforestation as Cause of Land Degradation 2.18. For what purpose do you utilize the natural forest? 1. for market 2. as source of energy 3. for making furniture 4. For construction 5. as holding stick for kocho cultivation 2.19. When you compare that of the past to the present, do you observe significant change in vegetation cover in your area? 1. Yes 2. No 2.20. How was the forest cover compared to the present? 1. It is decreasing 2. It is increasing 3. No change 2.21. What do you believe the major causes for degradation of the forest? 1. Deforestation 2. Wild fire3. I can‟t decide 2.22. In your knowledge, do you think that population growth is a cause to the decline of the forest resource? 1. Yes 2. No 2.23. To your knowledge of the area, is there a negative relationship between a forest degradation and soil degradation? 1. Yes 2. No 2.24. What do you perceive the impact /degree/ of forest reduction on soil erosion? 1. Very High 2. High 3. Medium4. Low 2.25. In general, what did you observe as the major impact of forest reduction on the environment in your locality? 1. Decline in soil fertility 2. Huge gullies 3. Land slides 4. Loss of fauna and flora 5. Increase of temperature
71
E. Questions on Overgrazing as Cause of Land degradation 2.26. How do you obtain grazing land for cattle? 1. Commonly owned 2. Separately owned 3. Both commonly owned and separately owned 4. Any abandoned land 5. No livestock 2.27. Do you believe that there is overgrazing problem in your woreda? 1. Yes 2.No 2.28. As to your knowledge, what is the extent of overgrazing in your locality? 1. High 2. Medium 3.Low 4. Has no impact5. I can‟t decide F. Questions on Traditional Gold Mining and Sand Quarry as causes of Land Degradation 2.29. What is the most known activity practiced along river valleys in your locality? 1. Crop cultivation 2. Gold Mining 3. Sand Quarrying 2.30. Are there any people involved in traditional gold mining and/or sand quarry in your Community? 1. Yes 2. No 2.31. What is the trend of population number involved in the activities from year to year? 1. Increasing 2. Decreasing 3. I can‟t decide 2.32. Do you think the activities have negative impacts on the land resource in your locality? 1. Yes 2. No 2.33. What are the main consequences of the problem? 1. Development of huge gullies 2. Landslides3. Expanding of the river course size 4. Decline in farm lands 2.34. Do you think the concequence has contribution on land degradation in your woreda? 1. Yes 2. No Part 3: Questionnaires Pertaining the Effect of Land Degradation 3.1. The amount of your crop yield over time you owned the land is: 1. Decreasing 2. Increasing 3. No change 3.2. Do you believe that the decline in crop yield is associated to land degradation problem? 1. Yes 2. No
72
3.3. Do you believe that land degradation hav the following effects on the productivity of landsand the local environment in Nejo woreda? -Please indicate your answer by placing a tick ( ) in the appropriate box
Effects Yes No 3.3A Crop yield decline 3.3B Decrease in farm land size 3.3C Increase in the requirement for fertilizers 3.3D Change in type of crop grown 3.3E Landlessness 3.3F Displacement of farmers 3.3G Loss of flora and fauna 3.3H Physical deformation of the land
Part 4: Questios Pertaining Land Resource Conservation Methods 4.1. How often the following sustainable land management practices do you use? /Please indicate your answer by placing a tick ( ) in the appropriate box/ Conservation Methods Very Often Rarely Never much 4.1A Using of Hybrid Seeds 4.1B Contour Ploughing 4.1C Manuring 4.1D Chemical fertilizers 4.1E Pesticides and Herbicides 4.1F Crop residue
73
4.2. How the following sustainable land management practices are exercising in your kebele? Conservation Methods High Medium Low Never 4.2A Closure of grazing land 4.2B Terracing work 4.2C Afforestation /Reforestation 4.2D Agro-forestry
4.3. Do you think the effort made by the government and the NGOs in restoration of practice inyour plot is sufficient enough?/if any/ 1. Yes 2. No Part 5: Questions Pertaining Possible Measures for Land Degradation Problems. 5.1. What do you suggest to minimize Land Degradation in your locality? 5.2. What should be government, NGOs and rural societies do to minimizethe land degradation?
74
Gaafannoo Abbootii warraa Aanaa Najjoo keessatti argamaniin guutamu. Jaallatamoo Hirmaattotaa: Maqaan Koo Waaqtolaa Geetaachoo jedhama.Yeroo ammaa barunsa Digrii lammaffaan Yuunversiitii Saayinsii fi Teeknooloojii Adaamaa Muummee Barnoota Ji‟oogiraafii fi Qo‟annoo Naannoo irraa barachaa jira. Kaayyoo guddaan waraqaan gaafii kun qophaa‟eef dhimma manca‟a lafa Aanaa Najjoo ilaalchisee odeeffannoo sassaabuu fi sababoota ka‟umsa rakkoo kanaa adda baasuufiidha. Akkasumas waraqaa qorannoo barnoota Digirii lammaffaa gosa barnoota Ji‟oogiraafii fi qo‟annoo naannoo irratti qopheessuuf Kan yaadameedha. Nan abdadha, firiin qorannoo kanaa hoggantoota aanaaleefis ta‟e kan naannoof odeeffannoo ga‟aa naannoo uumamaa isaanii haalaan itti fayyadamuuf isaan dandeessisu si‟a dhiyeessu, qeeqnii fi mala dhayinsi qorannichaas lafa manca‟e kana deebisanii haaromsuuf fala fooyya‟aa ni argamsiisa. Isin ammo gaafannoo barbaachisaa kana deebisuuf akka carraa filatamtaniittu.Kanaafuu, kaayyoo akeekame galmaan ga‟uuf tumsi isin gootan baay‟ee murteessaa waan ta‟eef, kaayyoo qorannoo kanaa ilaalcha keessa galchuudhaan deebii ni ta‟a jettanii amantan fedha guutuu fi iftoominaan akka laattaniif kabajaan hafeeramtaniittu. HUB. - Waraqaa gaaffii kana irratti maqaa kee barreessuun hin barbaachisu, -Odeeffannoon ati laattu kamiyyuu iccitiidhaan qabama. Durseen isin Galateeffadha! Kutaa 1: Ulaagaa uummataa fi hawaas-dinagdee abbaa warraa 1.1. Umuriin abbaa warraa A. waggaa 30 gadi B. waggaa 30 fi 40 gidduu C. waggaa 41 fi 50 gidduuD.waggaa 51 fi 60 gidduu E. waggaa 60 ol 1.2. Saala abbaa warraa: A. Dhiira B. Dhalaa 1.3. Sadarkaa barnootaa abbaa warraaA. Hin baranne B. Barnoota sadarkaa tokkooffaa C. Barnoota sadarkaa lammaffaa D. Barnoota Qophaa‟inaa ykn kolleejjii 1.4. Haala gaa‟ela abbaa warraaA. kan hin fuune ykn hin heerumne B. Kan fuudhe ykn heerumee jiru/jirtuC. kan gaa‟ela hiike D. Abbaan/haati warraa kan irraa du‟e/duute 1.5. Baay‟ina maatii abbaa warraa A. 1 fi 3 gidduu B. 4 fi 6 gidduu C. 7 fi 10 gidduu D. 10 ol
75
1.6. Gosa hojii abbaa warraa: A. midhaan qotuu B. horii horsiisuu C. midhaan qotuu fi horii horsiisuu D. warqee lommoxuu ykn cirracha baasuu E. Galii dhaabbata miti-mootummaa ykn mootummaa irraa 1.7. Bal‟inni lafa ati amma qabattee jirtuu tilmaamaan:A. hektaara 1gadi B. hektaara 1 fi 2 gidduu C. hektaara 2.01 fi 3 gidduu D. hektaara 3 ol E. cira iyyuu lafa hin qabu 1.8. Biyyoon lafa qonnaa keetii irra-jireessaan halluun isaa maal fakkaata? A. diimataa B. bifa talbaa C. sondii gurraacha D. bifa kan biraa 1.9. Irra-jireessi lafa ati qabattee jirtuu maaliif tajaajila kennaa jira? A. Omisha midhaaniif B. Lafa marga dheedichaaf C. misooma bosonaaf D. Faayidaa tokko iyyuu kennaa hin jiru 1.10. Irra-guddeessaan gosa midhaan isa kamii oomishta? A. Xaafii B.Bisingaa C. Boqqolloo D. Qoccoo E. Qamadii F. Garbuu G. Daagujjaa H. Midhaan dheedhii/gosa baaqilaa Kutaa 2: Gaafannoo waa’ee manca’a lafaa A. Gaaffilee hanga manca’a lafaa waliin hidhata qaban. 2.1. Rakkoo manca‟insa lafaa naannoo jiraachaa jirtu kana keessatti argaa jirtaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.2. Manca‟insi lafaa naannoo keetti irra caalaa bifa isa kamiin mul‟ata? A. Dhiqamuu biyyee B. Mnaca‟uu bosonaa C. Sigigaannaa/caccabuu lafaa D. Qorqamuu marga dheedichaa E. Uumamuu bowwaa fi hallayyaa 2.3. Aanaa Najjootti, teessuma lafaa isa kam irratti irra caalaatti manca‟uu lafaa hubatte? A. lafa ol ka‟aa B. sulula laggeenii C. lafa dirree D. kan biro 2.4. Lafti naannoo keetii, sadarkaan manca‟uu isaa hammam sitti fakkaata? A. baay‟ee olaanaa B. Olaanaa C. giddu galeessa D. xiqqoo miidhame E. manca‟i lafaa hin mudanne 2.5. Lafti qonnaa ati amma qabattee jirtu sadarkaa akkamiin kan manca‟e sitti fakkaata? 1. Baayyee manca‟e 2. Muraasa manca‟e
76
B. Gaaffilee sababa manca’a lafaa ilaalan 2.6. Akka ilaalcha keetti, sababni guddaan manca‟a lafa naannoo ati jiraattuu maali? A. sababoota uumamaati B. sababoota nam-tolchee dha 2.7. Sababoonni battalaa hundee manca‟a lafa naannoo keetii maal fa‟i? A. manca‟a bosonaa B. Dheedichaan qorqamuu lafa margaa C. Utuu hin boqochiisin/bajjeessuu malee/ waggaa hedduuf lafa oomisha Midhaaniif oolchuu D. Fududdee lafaa qotuu E. Hanqina fayyadama Kunuunsa lafaa F. Dalagaa namni sulula laggeeniitti raawwatu 2.8. Sababoonni hundee sababa battalaa manca‟insa lafaa maal fa‟i? A. Fududdee teessuma lafaa B. Yandoo cimaa C. Gosa biyyoo D. Dhiibbaa baay‟ina uummataa E. Dhiibbaa rirmaa 2.9. Wantootni armaan gadii manca‟a lafa aanaa Najjoof sababa ta‟uu ni danda‟u jettee Yaaddaa?-Deebiikee iddoo kenname keessatti mallattoo „ ‟ gochuun deebisi.
Sababa eyyee lakkii 2.9A Dalagaa qonnaa sulula laggeenii keessaa/cinaa 2.9B Karaa aadaa warqee lommoxuu 2.9C Cirracha baasuu 2.9D Dhiibbaa/gochaa rirmaa
77
2.10. Wantootni armaan gadii aanaa Najjoo keessatti sababa ka‟umsaa manca‟a lafaa ta‟uu isaanii irratti walii galta moo walii-hin galtu?/Iddoo kenname keessatti mallattoo “”gochuun deebisi.
Sababoota Jabeessee Ittan Itti Hin n itti walii walii murtees waliigala gala hin su galu 2.10A Manca‟a bosonaa 2.10B Bajjeessuu tokko malee lafa yeroo dheeraaf qotuu 2.10C Dhiibbaa baay‟ina uummataa 2.10D Dheedichaan qorqamuu lafa margaa 2.10E Lolaan dhiqamuu biyyee 2.10F Tooftaa qonnaa booddeetti hafaa 2.10G Bu‟aa ba‟ii teessuma lafaa 2.10H Dalagaa qonnaa naannoo sulula laggeenii 2.10I Dhiibbaa rirmaa 2.10J Karaa aadaa warqee lommoxuu fi cirracha baasuu
C. Gaaffilee dhiibbaan baay’ina uummataa manca’a lafaaf sababa ta’uu isaa ilaalan 2.11. Hamma naannoo kana keessa jiraattetti guddinni lakkoofsa uummataa naannoo kee keessatti dabalaa jiraa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.12. Baay‟inni uummataa naannoo ati jiraattu keessatti haala akkamiin guddachaa jira? A. baay‟ee saffisaan B. saffisaan C. suutaan D. baay‟ee suutaan 2.13. Naannoo ati jiraattu keessatti, bal‟inni lafa qonnaa waggaadhaa gara waggaatti maal fakkaata?A. xiqqaachaa deema B. dabalaa deema C. jijjiirama hin argisiisne
78
2.14. Hammi bal‟ina lafa qonnaa baayyina ummataa waliin horiiroo qaba jetee yaaddaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.15. Sababa guddina bay‟ina uummataa irraa kan ka‟e manca‟uu bosonaa naannoo jiraattu keessatti argiteettaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.16. Naannoo jiraattu keessatti lafa qonnaa yeroo dheeraaf bajjeessuu tokko malee irra deddeebi‟anii qotuun nuffisiisuun firii dhiibbaa baay‟ina uummataati jettee amantaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii C. murteessuu hin danda‟u 2.17. Yeroo dheeraadhaaf walitti fufiinsaan lafa tokko irra deddeebi‟anii qotuun manca‟a biyyee ganda keetiif sababa ta‟a jettee yaaddaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii D. Gaaffilee manca’insi bosonaa sababa manca’a lafaa ta’uu isaa ilaalan 2.18. Muka bosona uumamaa faayidaa maaliif itti gargaaramta? A. Gabaaf/gurgurtaaf B. Qoraaniif C. Mi‟a adda addaa hojjechuuf D. Ijaarsaaf E. Muka qoccoof 2.19. Yeroo uwwisa isa yeroo darbee isa yeroo ammaa waliin madaaltu, uwwisa biqiltootaa irratti jijjiirama mul‟ataa argaa jirtaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.20.Haalli uwwisa bosonaa akkami? A. Xiqqaachaa dhufe B. Dabalaa dhufe C. Jijjiirama hin argisiifne 2.21. Naannookeetti sababiin guddaan miidhamuu bosonaa maali jettee amanta? A. Bosona mancaasuu B. Dhiibbaa rirmaa C. abidda tasaa D. murteessuu hin danda‟u 2.22. Hamma beekumsa keetiitti, guddinni baay‟ina uummataa hir‟achuun uwwisa bosonaatiif sababa ta‟a jettee ni yaaddaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.23. Hamma hubannaa naannoo keetii ati qabduutti, daaqama bosonaa fi daaqama biyyee gidduu hariiroon fuggisoo jiraa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.24 Akka hubannaa keetti miidhaanhir‟achuun bosonaa dhiqamuu biyyee irratti qabu hammam ta‟a jetta?A. baay‟ee ol ka‟aa B. ol ka‟aa C.giddugaleessa D. xiqqaa 2.25. Dimshaashumatti, miidhamuun bosonaa naannoo uumamaa bakka ati jiraattu irratti miidhaa inni fide maal agarte? A. biyyoon gabbina dhabuu B. uumamuu hallayyaa baay‟ee gurguddaa C. sigigaachuu fi fofolloquu lafaa D. badiisa biqiltootaa fi bineensotaa E. ho‟i qilleensaa dabaluu
79
E. Gaaffilee dheedichi humnaa olii/qorqamuun lafa margaa/ sababa ka’umsaa manca’a lafaa ta’uu isaa ilaalan. 2.26. Bakka lafa margaa dheechisa horii akkamiin argatta? A. bakka dheedicha waliinii B. bakka deedicha dhuunfaa C. bakka dheedicha waliinii fi kan dhuunfaa D. lafa akkasumaan lafa taa‟u kamiyyuu 2.27. Aanaa kee keessa rakkoon dheedicha humnaan olii/qorqamuu marga lafa margaa/ jira jettee amantaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.28. Hamma hubannaa keetiitti, dheedicha horiin qorqamuun lafa margaa naannoo keetii dhiibbaan inni miidhamuu gabbina biyyee irratti qabu hammam ta‟a? A. guddaa B. giddu-galeessa C. xiqqaa D. miidhaa hin qabu E. murteessuu hin danda‟u F. Gaaffilee karaa aadaa warqee lommoxuu fi cirracha baasuun manca’a lafaaf sababa ta’uu isaa ilaalu. 2.29. Naannoo ati jiraattutti, dalagaaleen beekamoon naannoo sulula laggeenii irratti raawwataman maal fa‟i? A. midhaan oomishuu B. warqee lommoxuu C. cirracha baasuu 2.30. Hawaasa naannoo kee keessa namoonni warqee lommoxuu fi/ ykn cirracha baasuu irratti bobba‟an jiruu? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.31. Hammi baay‟ina namoota dalagaa kana irratti bobba‟anii waggaa gara waggaatti maal fakkaata? A. dabalaa jira B. xiqqaachaa jira C. murteessuu hin danda‟u 2.32. Dalagaaleen kanneen leecalloo lafaa naannoo kee irratti miidhaa qaba jettee yaaddaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 2.33. Firiin rakkoo kanaa maal fa‟a? A. uumamuu hallayyaa gurguddoo B. sigigaachuu fi fofolloquu lafaa C. babal‟achuu yaa‟a lagaa D. dhiphachuu lafa qonnaa 2.34.Taateewwan armaa olii manca‟a lafaaf shoora gumaachan qabu jettee yaaddaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii
80
Kutaa 3: Gaafannoo miidhaa manca’uun lafaa geessisu ilaalan 3.1. Erga lafa amma qabdu qabattee asitti, hammi oomisha midhaan ati qottuu: A. dabalaa dhufe B. hir‟achaa dhufe C. jijjiirama hinq abu 3.2. Hir‟inni oomishaa manca‟a lafaa waliin kan wal qabatuudha jettee amantaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii 3.3. Aanaa Najjoo keessatti manca‟i lafaa oomishtummaa lafaa fi naannoo uumamaa irratti miidhaa armaan gadii qaba jettee amantaa? Deebii kee iddoo sirrii ta‟e keessatti mallattoo „ ‟ gochuun deebisi. Miidhaa Eyyee lakkii 3.3A Oomishni midhaanii hir‟achuu 3.3B Bali‟inni lafa qonnaa hir‟achuu 3.3C Fedhiin fayyadama xaa‟oo dabaluu 3.3D Gosi midhaan oomishamaa turee jijjiiramuu 3.3E Lafa qonnaa dhabuu 3.3F Bakka qonnaa irraa buqqa‟uu qonnaan bultootaa 3.3G Badiisa biqiltootaa fi bineensotaa 3.3H Boca uumamaa gadi-dhiisuu qaama irra lafaa
Kutaa 4: Gaafannoo kunuunsa Leecalloo lafaa waliin hidhata qaban 4.1. Dalagaa kunuunsaa fi to‟annoo lafaa kanneen armaa gadii yeroo hammamiif haala itti fufiinsa qabuun gargaaramta? Tooftaa kunuunsaa Irra Darbee Baay‟ee Tasa deddeebi‟ee darbee Muraasa iyyuu 4.1A Sanyii filatamaa fayyadamuu 4.1B Shaffaxa qotuu 4.1C Xaahoo aadaa fayyadamuu 4.1D Xaahoo ammayyaa fayyadamuu 4.1E Qoricha raammoo fi aramaa 4.1F Jirmaa fi baala midhaanii oyiruu irratti qusachuu
81
4.2. Dalagaan kunuunsaa fi to‟annoo lafaa kanneen armaa gadii ganda kee keessatti haala akkamiin raawwatamaa jira? Tooftaa kunuunsaa Olaanaa Giddu- Xiqqaa Hin galeessa dalagamne 4.2A Ittisa lafa margaa 4.2B Daagaa qotuu 4.2C Bosonoomsuu ykn deebisanii bosonoomsuu 4.2D Mukkeen firiin isaanii nyaatamu dhaabuu
4.3. Dhimma lafa manca‟e deebisanii fooyyessuu irratti hirmaannaan qaamota mootummaa fi dhaabbilee miti-mootummaa naannoo kee keessatti qaban (yoo qooda ni fudhatu ta‟e) ga‟aa dha jettee yaaddaa? A. eyyee B. lakkii Kutaa 5: Gaafannoo falaa fi furmaata manca’a lafaa ilaalan 5.1. Rakkoo manca‟a lafaa naannoo keetii hir‟isuuf furmaati /falli maali jetta? 5.2. Rakkoo manca‟a lafa naannoo keetii hir‟isuuf qaamonni akka mootummaa, dhaabbilee miti-mootummaa fi hawaasni baadiyyaa maal gochuu qabu?
82
Annex B Key informants Check List 1. How do you describe the status of land degradation in your kebele? 2. What do you think are the possible causes of land degradation in your area? 3. What factors are aggravating land degradation problem? 4. How was the forest cover compared to the present? 5. On your knowledge, do you think that population growth is a case to the deforestation? 6. In this area, did you observe any problem related to over cultivation? 7. Is there shortage of grazing land? 8. To your knowledge of the area, is there a problem of termite on land? Discuss. 9. Do you think that traditional gold mining and sand quarrying have contribution to degradation effects of land degradation in your locality? 10. What are the major socio-economic and environmental effects of land degradation in your area? 11. What attempts have been made by government and NGOs in the area to sustain land resources and to solve land degradation problem in the woreda? 12. What do you think the solution to minimize the problem of land degradation in the area?
Thank you!
83
Gaaffilee Qomaa Namoota Qorannoo kanaaf murteessoo ta’u jedhamaniif dhiyaatu 1. Naannoo jiraachaa jirtu kana keessatti, sadarkaa fi haala manca‟i lafaa irratti argamu akkamiin ibsita? 2. Wantootni manca‟a lafa naannoo keetiif sababa ka‟umsaa ta‟u jettee yaaddu maal fa‟a? 3. Sababoonni naannoo keetti manca‟a lafaa saffisiisan maal fa‟a? 4. Isa yeroo darbee isa yeroo ammaan si‟a wal bira qabdu, uwwisni bosona naannoo keetii maal fakkaata? 5. Akka beekumsa keetiitti, guddinni baay‟ina uummataa, sababa manca‟a bosonaa ti jettee yaaddaa? 6. Rakkoo hanqina lafa qonnaa irraa kan ka‟e waggoota hedduuf lafa qonnaa tokko irra deddeebi‟anii qotuu naannoo kee keessatti ni argitaa? 7. Naannoonkee rakkoo hanqina bakka dheedicha horii qabaa? 8. Hamma beekumsa ati waa‟ee naannoo keetii qabdutti, lafti naannoo keetii rakkoo rirmaa qabaa? Yoo jiraate ibsi. 9. Warqee karaa aadaa lommoxuu fi cirracha baasuun naannookee keessatti manca‟a lafaaf gahee qaba jettee yaaddaa? 10. Naannoo ati jiraattu keessatti rakkoowwan jajjaboon hawaas-dinagdee fi naannoo uumamaa irra sababa manca‟a lafaan mudatan maal fa‟a? 11. Aanaa Najjoo keessatti, lafa miidhame deebisanii bayyannachiisuu fi kunuunsuuf, akkasumas rakkoo manca‟a lafaa furuuf yaaliin karaa mootummaa fi dhaabbilee miti-mootummaa taasifaman maal fa‟i? 12. Rakkoo manca‟a lafa naannoo keetii hir‟isuuf maaltu furmaata jettee yaadda?
Galatoomaa!
84
Annex C Table 4.10 Causes of land degradation in the area as perceived by the respondents Sample Kebeles BushaneAleltu GuteWeni MuchuchGorgis Total
Count % Count % Count % Count % Major Natural 14 13.5 11 10.8 21 21.6 46 15.2 reason for factors land Human made 90 86.5 91 89.2 76 78.4 257 84.8 degradation factors in your Total 104 100.0 102 100.0 97 100.0 303 100.0 locality Immediate Deforestation 60 57.7 40 39.2 34 35.1 134 44.2 root causes Overgrazing 3 2.9 3 2.9 2 2.1 8 2.6 of land Over 19 18.3 41 40.2 37 38.1 97 32.0 degradation cultivation in your Ploughing 3 2.9 0 0.0 1 1.0 4 1.3 area steep slopes Limited 1 1.0 1 1.0 2 2.1 4 1.3 conservation structures River valleys 18 17.3 17 16.7 21 21.6 56 18.5 activities Total 104 100.0 102 100.0 97 100.0 303 100.0 Underlying Steep 26 25.2 6 5.9 0 0.0 32 10.6 root causes topography of land Heavy 2 1.9 2 2.0 1 1.0 5 1.7 degradation rainfall in your Soil type 5 4.9 3 2.9 1 1.0 9 3.0 area Population 28 26.2 25 24.5 49 50.5 102 33.4 pressure Impact of 43 41.7 66 64.7 46 47.4 155 51.3 termite Total 104 100.0 102 100.0 97 100.0 303 100.0
85
Annex D Table 4.12 Determinants of Land degradation in Nejo Woreda as Perceived by the Respondents Sample Kebeles Mea R Bushane Gute Weni Muchuch Total n a Aleltu Gorgis n N % N % N % N % k Deforestation St. agree 82 78.8 90 88.2 78 80.4 250 83.5 Agree 14 13.5 11 10.9 15 15.5 40 13.2 Disagree 6 5.8 1 0.9 4 4.1 11 3.6 Undecid 2 1.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 .7 ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 1.24 1 Over St. agree 60 57.7 80 78.4 58 59.8 198 65.3 cultivation Agree 24 23.1 17 16.7 29 29.9 70 23.1 Disagree 14 13.5 5 4.9 10 10.3 29 9.6 Undecid 6 5.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 6 2.0 ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 1.54 4 Population St. agree 15 14.4 22 21.6 34 35.1 71 23.4 pressure Agree 65 62.5 71 69.6 56 57.7 192 63.4 Disagree 13 12.5 6 5.9 7 7.2 26 8.6 Undecid 11 10.6 3 2.9 0 0.0 14 4.6 ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 1.98 5 Overgrazing St. agree 16 15.4 22 21.6 21 21.7 59 19.5 Agree 22 21.2 14 13.7 18 18.6 54 17.8 Disagree 59 56.7 66 64.7 58 59.8 183 60.4 Undecid 7 6.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 7 2.3 ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 3.07 8 Ssoil erosion St. agree 73 70.2 96 94.1 74 76.3 243 80.2 Agree 20 19.2 5 4.9 18 18.6 43 14.2 Disagree 8 7.7 0 0.0 5 5.2 13 4.3 Undecid 3 2.9 1 1.0 0 0.0 4 1.3 ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 1.28 2 Poor farming St. agree 21 20.2 20 19.6 11 11.3 52 17.2 ppractices Agree 20 19.2 14 13.7 19 19.6 53 17.5 Disagree 57 54.8 67 65.7 67 69.1 191 63.0 Undecid 6 5.8 1 1.0 0 0.0 7 2.3 ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 3.14 1 0
86
Rugged St. agree 22 21.2 17 16.7 19 19.6 58 19.1 topography Agree 58 55.8 77 75.5 68 70.1 203 67 Disagree 7 6.7 6 5.9 10 10.3 23 7.6 Undecid 17 16.3 2 2.0 0 0.0 19 6.3 ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 2.02 6 River valley St. agree 20 19.2 11 10.8 11 11.3 42 13.9 farming Agree 24 23.1 22 21.6 19 19.6 65 21.5 activity as Disagree 50 48.1 69 67.6 67 69.1 186 61.4 cause of land Undecid 10 9.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 10 3.3 degradation ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 3.16 9 Impact of St. agree 72 69.2 95 93.1 78 80.4 245 80.9 termite Agree 12 11.5 6 5.9 13 13.4 31 10.2 Disagree 9 8.7 1 1.0 5 5.2 15 5.0 Undecid 11 10.6 0 0.0 1 1.0 12 4.0 ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 1.31 3 Traditional St. agree 24 23.1 17 16.7 19 19.6 60 19.8 gold mining Agree 64 61.5 77 75.4 64 66.0 205 67.7 and sand Disagree 9 8.7 6 5.9 14 14.4 29 9.6 quarry Undecid 7 6.7 2 2.0 0 0.0 9 2.9 ed Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 2.02 6 Source Own household survey result, February, 2017
Annex E Table 4.13 Population growth - Agricultural land relationship in the area as perceived by the respondents Sample Kebeles X2 P- BushaneAleltu GuteWeni MuchuchGorgis Total Value
Count % Count % Count % Count % the rate of Very rapid 24 23.1 17 16.7 39 40.2 80 26.4 population Rapid 59 56.7 77 75.5 54 55.7 190 62.7 growth Slow 15 14.4 4 3.9 4 4.1 23 7.6 very slow 6 5.8 4 3.9 0 0.0 10 3.3 Total 104 100.0 102 100.0 97 100.0 303 100.0 The size of Decreasing 82 78.8 96 94.1 85 87.6 263 86.8 agricultural Increasing 18 17.3 4 3.9 6 6.2 28 9.2 land from year to year No change 4 3.8 2 2.0 6 6.2 12 4.0 Total 104 100.0 102 100.0 97 100.0 303 100.0 15.07 0.005
87
Annex F Table 4.14 The uses of forest and factors contribut for its degradation as perceived by the respondents. Sample Kebeles
BushaneAleltu GuteWeni MuchuchGorgis Total N % n % N % N % Forest For market 4 3.8 0 0.0 1 1.0 5 1.7 utilization energy source 61 58.7 79 77.5 48 49.5 188 61.5 For furniture 5 4.8 7 6.9 1 1.0 13 4.3 Forconstruction 14 13.5 6 5.9 14 14.4 34 11.4 For Kocho 20 19.2 10 9.8 33 34.1 63 21.1 cultivation Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 changes in Yes 92 88.5 97 95.1 80 82.5 269 88.7 vegetation No 12 11.5 5 4.9 17 17.5 34 11.3 cover Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 3033 100 Major Deforestation 39 37.5 49 48.0 46 47.4 134 43.9 causes for termite 41 39.4 53 52.0 51 52.6 145 48.2 degradation Wild fire 7 6.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 7 2.3 of forest I can't decide 17 16.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 17 5.6 Total 104 100 102 100 97 100 303 100 Source: own household survey result, 2017
88
Annex G Major tree species available in the study area. No Local Name Scientific Name 1 Azamir Bersama abyssinica 2 Bahir zaf Eucalyptus camaldulensis 3 Bisana Carton macrostachus 4 Bazira girar Acacia abyssinica 5 Cheba Acacia bussei 6 Dokima Strychnos spinosa 7 Embowai Solanum indcum 8 Girar Acacia bussei 9 Girawa Acacia lahai 10 Giravilia Grevilla robusta 11 Sosa Albizia gummifera 12 Shoal Ficus sycomrus 13 Tid Juniperus procera 14 Tikur Inchet Prunus africano 15 Wanza Cordina Africana 16 Weira Olea Africana 17 Yeferenj Tid Cupressus lusitanica 18 Zigba Podocarpus falcatus
89