Adama Science and Technology University

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN SOIL CONSERVATION

PRACTICES: THE CASE OF DALE SEDI WOREDA, OROMIA,

WESTERN ETHIOPIA

BY Oluma Benti

August, 2018

Adama, Ethiopia

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

A THESIS PREPARED ON

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES:

A CASE OF DALE SEDI WOREDA, WESTERN ETHIOPIA

OLUMA BENTI

THESIS ADVISOR

TSETADIRGACHEW LEGESSE (PhD)

August, 2018

Adama, Ethiopia

Declaration

I declare that the thesis entitled “community participation in soil conservation practices : A case study of Dale Sedi Woreda, Western Ethiopia” has been carried out by me under the supervision of Dr Tsetadirgachew Legesse at Adama Science and Technology University Department of Geography and Environmental Studies as part of Master program in geography. I also declare that it is my original work and is not submitted to any other University or institution for the award of any academic degree.

Name __Oluma Benti Gutema______

Signature ______

Date 18 / 08 /2017

Approval sheet 1

As thesis research advisor, I hereby certify that I have read and evaluated the thesis prepared under my guidance by Oluma Benti Gutema entitled “Community Participation in Soil Conservation Practices in Dale Sedi Woreda Western Ethiopia”. There I recommend that it is accepted as fulfilling the thesis requirement and defended in public.

Approved by Tsetadirgachew Legesse (PhD) ______

Thesis Advisor Signature Date

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW

This is to certify that the thesis prepared by Oluma Benti Gutema entitled: Community Participation in Soil Conservation Practices: Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Degree of Master of Art in Geography and Environmental Studies Compliances with the regulation of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality.

Approved by Board of Examiners Signature Date

1. Advisor ______

2. Internal Examiner ______

3. External Examiner ______

4. Chairperson ______

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Above all, I would like to thank the almighty God for helping me all the time to overcome Challenges I faced throughout the period of my study and realize my dream. First and foremost, I would like to express my deep gratitude for my thesis advisor Dr Tsetadirgachew Legesse for his continuous guidance, invaluable comments, and introducing me to many techniques and methodologies that helps to finalize the paper.

Special thanks go to Arsi University for financial support to conduct the research, staff members of Adama Science and Technology University for their material support, Dale Sedi Woreda Educational office, Dale Sedi Woreda Agricultural and Natural Resource Development Office, DAs and Kebele Administrative bodies, and farmers who participated in the research for their cooperation during data gathering.

My heartfelt thanks also go to my father Ato Benti Gutema, my wife Wakete Gudeta my two sons Dagaga Oluma and Masara Oluma my only daughter Simera Oluma ,my brothers and my sisters, Yonas Telila, Dinsa Regassa,Tamiru Bekele, Kasa Doja and Waklate Amante for their material support throughout my study. I am indebted to my friend Ato Bulti Hambisa for his constructive comments for the accomplishment of this thesis.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ...... i

Table of Contents ...... ii

List of Tables ...... v

List of Figures ...... vii

Acronyms ...... viii

ABSTRACT...... ix

CHAPTER ONE ...... 1

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 ...... 4

1.3.2. Specific objective...... 4

1.4 Research Questions ...... 4

1.5 Significance of the study ...... 4

1.6 Limitation of the study ...... 5

1.7 Scope of the study ...... 5

1.8. Organization of the Study ...... 5

CHAPTER TWO ...... 7

REVIEW RELATED LITERATURES ...... 7

2.1. Concepts of community participation ...... 7

2.2 Approaches of community participation ...... 9

2.3. Factors Affecting Community Participation ...... 11 2.4 Principles of Natural Resource Management...... 12

2.5. Land management Practices in Other Countries ...... 13

2.6 Soil conservation Practices in Ethiopia ...... 14

2.7. Soil conservation practices ...... 15

2.7.1. Biological Soil conservation Practices ...... 16

2.7.2. Physical soil management practices ...... 18

CHAPTER THREE ...... 19

STUDY AREA, RESEARCH METHOD AND MATERIAL ...... 19

3.1 Physical back ground ...... 19

3.1.1 Location ...... 19

3.2. Demographic and Socio Economic feature ...... 20

3.2.1 Population and settlement pattern...... 20

3.2.2 Physical relief ...... 20

3.2.3 Soil ...... 20

3.2.4 Natural Vegetation ...... 20

3.2.5 Climate...... 21

3.2.6 Economic activity ...... 21

3.3 Research methods and materials ...... 22

3.3.1 Research design ...... 22

3.3.2. Study Population and Sampling techniques ...... 23

3.3.3 Sampling size ...... 24

3.3.4. Sampling Techniques...... 31

3.3.5 Data Sources ...... 31

3.3.6. Instruments of data collection...... 32

3.4. Method of Data Analysis and Interpretation ...... 32

3 5.Research validity and reliability...... 33

3.6. Ethical issues ...... 33

CHAPTER FOUR...... 34

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ...... 34

4.1 General Socio-Economic Condition of the Sample Households ...... 34

4.2 The ongoing method of soil conservation practices...... 38

4.3 The perception of the local community regarding community based SCP...... 46

4.4 The major factors affecting community participation ...... 53

CHAPTER FIVE ...... 58

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ...... 58

5.1 Summary ...... 58

5.2 CONCLUSIONS ...... 59

5.3 Recommendation...... 59

References ...... 61

Appendix ...... 67

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2. 1 Typology of participation ...... 10

Table 3. 1 Sample household ...... 25

Table 4. 1 Sex and Age composition of the HHs respondents ...... 35

Table 4. 2 Family size and educational status of the sampled HHs ...... 35

Table 4. 3 Food crop and cash crop production per ha ...... 36

Table 4. 4 Total estimation of crop production quintals per hectare ...... 36

Table 4. 5 Cattle population of the sampled HHs ...... 37

Table 4. 6 Method of community participation in soil conservation ...... 38

Table 4. 7 Community perception ...... 48

Table 4. 8 Changes due to soil conservation ...... 50

Table 4. 9 The capability and commitment of DAs and natural resource sector .... 53

Table 4. 10 Factors negatively affect the community participation ...... 54

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2. 1 General problem of soil degradation ...... 15

Figure 3. 1 Map of Dale Sedi woreda ...... 19

Figure 4. 1 Cattle keeping area in the night for their manure ...... 38

Figure 4. 2 Farmers preserve trees in the farm ...... 41

Figure 4. 3 Cows keeping area during the night ...... 42

Figure 4. 4 Making terrace in Dale Sedi woreda ...... 44

Figure 4. 5 Distribution of coffee seedling on nursery...... 45

ACRONYMS

BoFEd Bureeu of Finance and Economic Development

CAADP Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program

CP Community Participation

CPSC Community Participation in Soil Conservation

DA Developmental agent

DSWED Dale Sedi Woreda Educational Office

DSWLFO Dale Sedi Woreda Live stock and Fisheries Office.

DSWRLM Dale Sedi Woreda Rural Land Management

DSWSVERA Dale Sedi Woreda Social Vital Events Registration Agency

FTC Farmers Training Center

GDP Gross Domestic Product

NAP National Action Plans

PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Program

SLM Sustainable land management

UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

ABSTRACT

This thesis is about the level of community participation on soil conservation in Dale Sedi woreda. As it is observed by the researcher the practices of community participation in soil conservation is low. In order to investigate this fact the researcher formulated three specific objectives which were identifying the ongoing method of soil conservation being implanted by community participation, examining the perception of local community regarding soil conservation, and assessing the main factors affecting the community from participation. For this 269 respondents were randomly selected from two purposively selected kebeles and the questionnaire was distributed and its response was analyzed with the result of the focal group discussion and observations of the investigator. The participation of the community in soil conservation practices is low that couldn’t realize food security of the study area. Thus 67% of the respondents evaluated their participation and they found that it is not satisfactory and 86% were not effective with their performance of soil conservation participation. The challenges to the farmers to adopt soil conservation measures include labor availability, limited capital limited technology, lack of technical support, lack of motivation and voluntariness of the communities are the majors. For this it is recommended that the community should have farther awareness for better soil conservation, the DAs should get training, attention should be given for the indigenous soil conservation practices and motivation and reward for the farmers those performed better in soil conservation and each farmer should practice different conservation activities on their plot of land.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

People can damage the environment and they are able to create better settlement area and .they can also form better life, and can increase their life expectancy by managing their environment in collective and organized way .Soil loss is a common problem that need better management to support the life of the present and the future generation. Bentham D (2000) says through participation people learn .Then we can say that the major school in local community is participation. People can share their experiences and knowledge for the next generation by the method of participation. The soil conservation practices can be transmitted from generation to generation by community participation. Local institutions should be strengthened to enable rural communities to improve their land use and land tenure arrangements through participatory processes (FAO, 2000).

Soil erosion is process acting over tens and hundreds of years. Its effects are normally only obvious, if they become disastrous. The study revealed that the lack of adoption of new conservation practices was a major reason for project failure even though technically sound practices were used (Hudson, 1991). Today, it has largely been agreed upon that soil conservation will not be successful in many countries even by using the best available practices if man and the social, economic and political context are not considered. Decreasing soil fertility leads to the extension of the cropping area, soil minimizing and finally migration of the farmers. It is estimated that deforestation proceeds three times faster than reforestation (FAO, 1991).

With population growth about 150,000 ha per a year wood land is cleared (Berry, 2004). Thus the soil resource would be under high population pressure with inappropriate farming and management practices .This brings about the decline of agricultural productivity (Bililign, 2010). 27 million ha of highland is significantly eroded; 14 million ha is seriously eroded. (Haile Fissaha 2007). From the factor of climatic variation and human activities soil is the most affected natural resource which results the decline of agricultural productivity .Therefore the genuine community participation in soil conservation practices is a vital solution to correct the situation. In Ethiopia, efforts towards soil conservation were started since the 1970s and 1980s( Hurni, 1993). Since then a huge amount of money has been invested in an attempt to introduce soil and water conservation measures particularly in the areas where the problem of soil erosion is threatening and food deficit is wide spread( Mitchel ,1991). The conservation measures were in most cases physical measures and undertaken through campaign using Food- for-Work or Cash-for-Work as an instrument to motivate farmers to putting up the conservation structures both on communal holdings as well as on their own plots (Eshatu ,2004). Sustainability in agriculture and more specifically in land use has been on the top priority list of natural management issues in developing countries. Sustainable soil conservation means cropping, pastoral and forestry use of the limited and only partially renewable resources soil, water and plant nutrients to safeguard soil productivity also for future generations and prevent or reverse degradation process (Senait, 2002).

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Though CP / community participation/ is considered as a key element of the development strategy, the argument is that the programs carried out so far did not ensure or develop effective participation. The participatory programs undertaken up to now are not sufficient and consistent. Although efforts were made for decades to enhance community based sustainable soil erosion and termite management in Dale-Sedi wereda, the sustainability in this case is still questionable.

To replenish what is lost and sustain what is restored needs more effort and long time. Food security is still chronic problem and continuing and the communities are not yet self-reliant. Until CP is widely recognized as a key element of any developmental strategy, including soil erosion management, no change will come.

The major problem is that, there is a gap between the participatory concepts, principles policies and the actual practice of CP in soil conservation practices. In particular, this includes; Problems of implementing CP programs , Population pressure , Lack of awareness among the community, lack of encouragement, irregularity of community participation, giving more attention for inorganic fertilizers and undermining the indigenous soil conservation practices of the community and the others .Thus, the researcher intended to show how much the community in Dale Sedi wereda is participating in both modern and traditional method of soil conservation practices and benefited from their activities

It is difficult to promote development without participation of people. Development plans will not be effective if the community is unwilling to participate and is not the beneficiary of the development outputs. The community knows best about its own economic and social needs and problems and has insights and ideas about what might be done to solve those (Long, 2001). Therefore, one would expect that CP would be an integral element of the work of all development activities. Thus, this research shows the practical relationship between CP and sustainable soil conservation practices. Nampila (2005) agrees that community participation in rural development has been negatively affected. Sustainable soil management technologies and practices, which have been supported by research finding, were not yet transferred to the farming communities in the study area. Thus, it is important to conduct a research to assess how cropland productivity has been improved through traditional biological and physical land management

practices in the study area. Hundreds of thousands of kilometers of structural types have been constructed over croplands in Ethiopia. However, reports indicate that these conservation structures have not been as successful as they could be, because the farmers were not enthusiastic enough in accepting and maintaining the technology (Wood, 1990). The failure of conservation programs partly emerge from the fact that planners and implementing agencies ignore or fail to consider socio-cultural factors as key determinants of the success or failure of conservation programs( Belay ,1992). Tesfaye(2003) points out that our understanding of farmers' knowledge.

and their perception of factors that influence their land management practice is of paramount importance for promoting sustainable land management. This research can fulfill the research paper written by Tolera Megersa (2011) which directly focused on the comparison of modern and traditional land management practices. The other person Gebremedhin Yehadego (2004) wrote his research paper on community participation on sustainable soil and water conservation. Both didn‟t touch the level and the degree of community participation

1.3 Objectives of the Study

1.3 .1 GENERAL OBJECTIVES

The general objective of the study is to assess the level of Community Participation in soil conservation practices in Dale Sedi Woreda.

1.3.2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE The specific objectives of the study are to:

1 Identify the ongoing method of soil conservation practices being implemented by community Participation in Dale Sedi Woreda 2 Examine the perception of local community regarding community based soil conservation activities in dale Sedi woreda 3 Assess the major factors affecting the level of community participation in soil Conservation practices in Dale Sedi Woreda

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The overall process of this research is guided by the following research questions

 What are the major factors affecting the level of community participation in soil conservation practices in Dale Sedi woreda?

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Governmental and non government organizations want to know the level of the community participation to perform their objectives. The NGOs use the study to mobilize the society to participate in soil management. The research can also use as the initial point for the researchers. Recommendation of the study can be used as alternative to increase the participation of the community in the soil erosion management of the local woreda. The policy makers can use the research to enhance the community based participatory method to ensure food security.

1.6 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

It is already known that any research would be with certain limitations throughout its working span. One of the limitations that the researcher faced during this study includes lack of internet access to acquire required information that made researcher travel to where the internet access was there. Besides to this, transportation difficulty faced the researcher to go on foot to the two selected kebele administrations. The other limitation was lack of punctuality in returning the questionnaire by data enumerators Moreover, shortage of adequate secondary data at the study area was also another limitation of this study. Due to shortage of time the researcher did not conduct pre-test or pilot. The researcher solved the problems by using on foot and horse to collect data, used part-time, weekend and holidays to contact the stakeholders and manipulate the study. Some offices were not well genuine to give data when it is asked and lack of well recorded data were some of the limitations. Lastly, methodological limitation of the researcher to apply advanced statistical models through data analysis was appeared

1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Spatially, the geographical site of the study area was delimited to make it well managed. Even though the topic would be better to be studied in a wide area, this investigation was only

delimited to Dale Sedi Woreda, West Oromia. Dale Sedi Woreda has 27 rural and 3 urban kebele administrations which were 30 totally. Among these, the study was specifically conducted on two rural kebele administrations of Arere Leku and Warawale Suchi. Thematically, the study was delimited to community participation on soil conservation practices in Dale Sedi Woreda in terms of the two kebele administrations‟ household (HH) head farmers.

1.8. ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY

The thesis is organized in to five chapters. In the first chapter introduction of the paper is presented. This section covers background of the study, statement of the problem, objectives of study, research questions, and significance of the study, scope and limitation of the research. Chapter two presents review of related literature, which encompasses definition of concepts, empirical literature related to community participation, consequences of land degradation and land management practices and analytical frame work. The Chapter three provides physical and socio-economic features of the study area and the research methodology and procedures of the study. Chapter four presents and deals with the discussion and analysis of the survey data and interpretation of ongoing method, perception of community on community based soil conservation and factors affecting community participation. Chapter five dedicated to summary, conclusion and policy implications and recommendation based on the results of the findings.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW RELATED LITERATURES

2.1. CONCEPTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

According to Rogers et al. (2008) Participation is a process through which stakeholders can influence and share control over development initiatives and the resources used to fund them through engagement in decision making. In line with this Borrini-Feyerabend(2000) stated that it is a pluralistic approach to natural resource management through the involvement of partners with the end goals of sustainable use and conservation of the resource and equitable sharing of benefits and responsibilities related to it. Thus it is considered as a voluntary contribution by the people in one or another of the public programs supposed to contribute to national development. From the alternative development point of view participation is seen as a right of citizenship initially focused on community and civic society and latterly on the state through inclusive governance (Hickey et al, 2004). In other words, community participation is a way of harnessing the existing physical, economic and social resources of rural people in order to achieve the objectives of development programs and projects (Gebremedhin,2004). It basically arose as a top-down development planning approaches which sought to devise antipoverty program at the top for implementation downward through a compliant bureaucracy. Hickey et al, ( 2004)observes, that people take the time and energy to engage in establishing the basis for; planning, carrying out and/or evaluating some activity or activities that will bring about the change in their own lives. It is thus focused on the local level and depends upon local interests and capacity to engage in action for change. Chopra et al, (1990) refers to participatory development as an conventional approach requiring the evolution of non-market, non- governmental people‟s organizations in the management of common property resources. These further add that participatory development therefore, is a new socio-economic force aiming for sustained development at the village level. Chambers (2005) adds that among the objectives and

functions of participation is seeking to increase the capability of communities to handle their affairs and to control and exploit their environment. The term “people‟s participation ”Chopra et al, ( (1990), is therefore very popular among most development agents involved in programs which target the community or those that do development at the local level or better still “among NGOs, and practitioners working with special targeted groups such as women and children. Most such development agents view people‟s participation in development activities as an essential and good thing for materializing development objectives. Mengesha,( 2000), defines participation as an active process by which beneficiaries/client group influence the direction and execution of development projects with a view to enhancing their well being in terms of income, personal growth, self reliance or other values they cherish.‟ In this definition it is clear that participation is directed at making it possible for the people targeted by development projects to decide project priorities based on their needs. It means therefore that in this sense, participation carries according to Lund Michelson (1995) a „normative assumption that the poor masses ought to get the kind of development decided by themselves. The poor must take part in provisioning of their own needs rather than relying on the state to solve their problems. Hickey et al , (2004) states that the participation of those at whom an intervention is aimed is meant to ensure that the change will be more appropriate to their needs. It is also assumed to have the effect of empowering them so that they continue to direct future changes and put pressure on the outside forces to support these changes.

As Gebremedhin (2004), stated in his study, two forms of evaluation/indicators can be used to measure the impact of community participation. These are; Quantitative indicators are tangible, readily visible and susceptible to statistical measurement. These include; an increase in agricultural production, financial income and public services, the productivity of land, constructed soil and water conservation techniques. They are relevant dimensions of participation and could be evaluated by using quantitative techniques. . Qualitative indicators are less visible and less tangible. These are more concerned with describing the characteristics and properties of a process like the degree of community„s environmental awareness, attitude and skill and the degree of community mobilization and

solidarity over a period of time. However, both indicators of participation must be used in the evaluation in order for the outcome to be fully understood.

2.2 APPROACHES OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

Community participation encourages community self-reliance. The top-down approach was pursued where government officials tell peasant association (Kebeles) what to do. This approach gave local people little opportunity for discussion and participation on the initiative (Wood,1990). To the contrary the Down –Top approach is using the indigenous knowledge in the community rather than depending on the government. Many development interventions have been seen to create a kind of dependence syndrome. For instance, in India, there is a widespread government development programs, people have started looking to the government for solutions to every problem that they face (Kumar, 2002). Self-reliance demolishes their over-dependency attitudes, enhances awareness, confidence and self-initiative. It also increases people's control over resources and development efforts, enables them to plan and implement and also to participate in development efforts at levels beyond their community .Community participation teaches communities how to resolve conflict and allows for different perspectives to be heard. In this way, learning is promoted and people will be able to help themselves (Habtamu Eritro, 2006). Communities will be able to assess their own situation, organize themselves as a powerful group and work creatively towards changing society and building up a new world. This increased capacity of individuals, allow communities to mobilize and help themselves to minimize dependence on the state and leads to a bottom-up approach (Nampila, 2005). People-centered development seeks to return control over resources to the people and their communities to be used in meeting their own needs. It further calls for active mutual self-help among people, working together in their common struggle to deal with their common problems .The common belief is that involving citizens in rural programs and empowering them have the potential to boost their livelihoods and foster development (Kakumba and Nsingo 2008) . Oaky and Marsden (1994) state that the participation is concerned to be voluntary by the people to one of or another of the public program supposed to contribute for development. As indicated above, participation should be implemented voluntarily. All the activities implemented in a community should be community based. Socio cultural background of the community should have given attention to get volunteer participation

s/n Typology Characteristics 1 Manipulative Participation is simply a pretence, with ‗people„s„ representatives on participation official boards who are unelected and have no power 2 Passive People participate by being told what is going to happen or what has Participation already happened. This involves unilateral announcement by an administration or by project management without listening to people's responses 3 3.Participation People participate by being consulted, or by answering questions. by consultation External agents define both problems and information- gathering processes, and so control analysis. Such a consultative process does not concede any share in decision making 4 Participation People participate by providing resources, for example labor, in return for material for food cash or other material incentives. Farmers may provide the incentives fields and labor, but are involved in neither experimentation nor the process of learning. 5 Functional Participation seen by external agencies as a means to achieve project participation goals, especially reduced costs. People may participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives related to the project. Such involvement may be interactive and involve shared decision making, but tends to arise only after major decisions have already been made by external agents 6 Interactive People participate in joint analysis, development of action plans and participation formation or strengthening of local institutions. Participation is seen as a right, not just the means to achieve projects goals. The process involves interdisciplinary methodologies that seek multiple perspectives and make use of systematic and structured learning processes. As groups take control over local decisions and determine how available resources are used, so they have a stake in maintaining structures or practices

7 Self- People participate by taking initiatives to change systems independently mobilization of external institutions. They develop contacts with external institutions for the resources and technical advice they need, but retain control over how resources are used. Self-mobilization can spread if governments and NGOs provide an enabling framework of support. Such self-initiated mobilization may or may not challenge existing distributions of wealth and power

Table 2. 1 Typology of participation Pretty and Shah, 1997.

From the above Table we can understand that the first four participation typologies do not have lasting effects on development programs or project and can be even considered as non- participation. This is because they involve no more than telling what is going to happen or requiring responses to some questions where the local people respond and contribution of resources like labor in return for food or cash to put to practice what has been already decided by outsiders. On the other hand, the last three participation typologies are genuine participation where local people actively involved in decision-making, implementation activities affecting their lives and also sharing the benefits. As one moves from the fifth down to the last typology the effects are more sustainable though the three tend to bring positive lasting effects. Thus one has to be cautious in using and interpreting participation and reference must be made to the type of participation because most of them threaten the goals of projects or programs rather than promoting (Pretty and Shah ,1997).

2.3. FACTORS AFFECTING COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

The major factors that affect (either positively or negatively) community participation on soil and water conservation are lack of awareness, capital (economic factor), availability of grants and subsidies, discrimination against women, interference by politician, factionalism and heterogeneity of population and difference in wealth and social status (Singh, 1992).In line with these internal socioeconomic characteristics of community households like, level of education, skill and income influences/determines the intensity/degree of community participation towards natural resource management practices (Awortwi, 2000). When the level of education, health condition and occupational and income situation of the community members is low people feel that they have no economic power and knowledge and skill to organize themselves and run development activities and manage the same. When people have low economic power, they commit less time and resources to community work. As Gebremedhin (2004) and Bililign (2010) organizational leadership and educated people are more likely to be receptive to new ideas, more communication and human relation skills and more understanding. The level of community participation is also affected by the effect of past-experience of individual households and the community as a whole. Where in the past a community has been able to safeguard common interests through collective action, community members tend to be more willing to devote their time and energy to promote community activities (Awortwi,

1999).Thus, positive past experience condition suggests that there is likely to be effective and genuine community participation. According to Tworg (2006) the amount of benefit the community and its members receives is the fundamental determinants of community participation on sustainable soil and conservation activities. The community's social and economic benefit refers to the social services and economic outputs such as products, financial income or an increase in the productivity of land or labor that the community tangibly gains. People engage in development activities only when they see clear preferably tangible net benefit in terms of production, income and services. In order to ensure genuine community's participation the degree of empowerment plays a significant role (Gebremedhin, 2004). Empowerment involves participation in decision making on matters important to the empowered subject/s. The empowerment of a community includes issues such as increased level of awareness, increased decision-making and improved access to resources and institutions. Empowering the community's participation and giving power to decision making on matters important to them such as over resources and benefits, enhances the degree of participation. Empowerment strategies use group-based actions in order to achieve access to decision making (Wils, 2001).

The power to make decisions thus has a positive impact on sustainable natural resource management. The subjects of the empowerment are the ultimate beneficiaries of the resources both the groups and individuals. In addition to this policy environment is another factor that determines the community participation and long-term investment on natural resources. Tenure insecurity decreases the concern of farmers for the future well-being of the land and makes them to maximize their short term gain (Adugnaw Berhanu 2014)

2.4 PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

According to Tola Gemechu, (2005), the following sets of principles are significant in order to achieve sustainable natural resource management. Priority based approach; Natural resource management actions are to be undertaken according to priorities that are based on the best available science and information, and relevant experience, as well as on assessment of the relative cost-effectiveness of various options.

Balanced decisions; Natural resource management decisions should take proper account of the range of environmental, social and economic benefits, values and costs. Prevention is better than Cure; It is often more efficient to prevent damage rather than repair it. Therefore, where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason. Ecosystem approach; Natural resource management should be based on an understanding of the relationship between natural resources and the ecosystems they support, and upon careful monitoring of change over time. Integrated management; The management of natural resources should be integrated within regions and catchments, as well as across industry sectors, government agencies and specific issues. Partnership; To be effective, natural resource management requires the establishment of partnerships between all levels of government and the community, including the native people. Responsibility and accountability; All community members should receive benefits from the use, development and conservation of natural resources; they share responsibility for managing natural resources sustainably, and for providing economic resources to do so.

2.5 CONCEPT OF SOIL CONSERVATION

Soil conservation is an activity which maintains or enhances the productive capacity of soil in erosion prone areas through prevention or reduction of erosion, conservation of soil moisture and improvement of soil fertility. According to David (2004), soil conservation is about solving the problem of soil degradation, particularly soil erosion. Land degradation has been a problem since humans settled the land and started to cultivate the soil and grazed domesticated animals. Over many years, farmers devised indigenous practices and systems of land use to protect and rehabilitate their lands. Soil conservation is a combination of the appropriate land use and management practices that promotes the productive and sustainable use of soil, and in the process minimizes soil erosion and other forms of land degradation.

Despite soil conservation activities have been practiced before more than two decades ago, adoption of its intervention in Ethiopia was considerably low. Several approaches to extension delivery systems were exercised in different countries of Africa. But in most cases, these

approaches were mainly focused on either crop production or livestock husbandry. This means that extension on the issue of natural resources management was neglected at most, even, if addressed; it was marginalized highly as it is noted by EARO (2002). As it is also revealed by Heinrich (2004), soil conservation technologies can be grouped in to two categories. These technologies include mechanical or physical and biological measures. The most common physical soil conservation structures include cut-off drains, waterways, tie ridges, terraces, retention ditches, graded and non graded channels or drains (Kabambe, 2006). Besides, structures for soil conservation on crop land are permanent features formed from earth, stones or masonry that are designed to protect the soil from run-off water and erosion to retain water where it is needed (Manyatsi and Vilane, 2001). Another measure of soil conservation is biological. This one type of soil conservation includes cover crops, agro-forestry, mulching, contour plowing, crop rotation, strip-cropping, reforestation, mixed crops and crop rotation that they are effective method of soil conservation.

2.6 SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES IN ETHIOPIA

different agro ecological regions (Aklilu,2006).Traditionally through time, farmers have developed different soil conservation and land management practices of their own. With these practices, farmers have been able to sustain their production for centuries. Even up to now, it has been acknowledged that these technologies, which include plowing of narrow ditches on sloping fields to control run-off, farmland terraces, traditional ditches and furrows, contour plowing, fallowing, crop rotation, farmyard manure and agro forestry continue to play a significant role in the production of subsistence agriculture (Betru,2003). The major elements of the soil conservation activities were a range of physical structures such as farmland and hillside terracing, cut-off drains and waterways, micro-basins, check dams, water harvesting structures like ponds and farm dams, spring development, reforestation, area closure and management and gully rehabilitation. Betru et al (2003) however efforts made up to the early 2000 were considered inadequate as they covered only 7%of the total land area that needed treatment, and at that rate, it was estimated that treating all the remaining land could take seven decades.

Figure 2. 1 General problem of soil degradation

Source developed from Annisa Gara (2011)

Continued land degradation has had severe environmental and social-economic consequences resulting in poor agricultural productivity, perpetuating food insecurity and poverty among the concerned communities.

2.7.TYPES OF SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES

so forth that may also contribute to maintenance of soil fertility (Grohs, 1994) Biological or agronomic measures refer to farming practices to minimize erosion, improve fertility and soil structure. Physical or Mechanical measures include earth works aimed at controlling and directing the run off in the arable areas. It maximizes infiltration and retains moisture in the soil. However this study is concerned with the biological and physical conservation measures as farming practices that have evolved through the course of time without any known outside institutional interventions and which has some soil conservation effects.

The choice of adequate conservation measures will need to base on assessment of the form and intensity of degradation process and the choice of the management practices adapted to the environmental conditions economic feasibility and the social acceptability of the proposed controlled techniques. It is realized that farmers will do so only when they are given the motivation and the means to do so (Tiffen et al, 1987).There are various technical solutions for land toward sustainability. Techniques aimed at erosion control include contour farming, construction of physical conservation measures…etc. Soil nutrient replenishment has to be achieved through organic and inorganic fertilizer application. Traditional erosion control practices include cattle manure, crop rotation, mixed farming, fallowing, and other forms of agro-forestry measures like coffee planting and management of trees are some widely spread practiced in the study area. Studies indicate that for the successful rehabilitation of degraded lands in developing countries local concerns about immediate tangible benefits must be integrated into global concerns about the environment. This can be accomplished by building on indigenous knowledge and traditions and by involving the whole village community in decision making or representing them through traditional organization. Local management by those who are familiar with the ecosystem and have a personal interest in the well being of the natural resources appears to be the most effective procedure for conservation and sustainable development in developing countries (Saxena, 2001).

terrain slope and to socio-economic circumstances of the largest population. This study mainly focuses on the role of socio-economic circumstances of farmers‟ perception in soil conservation.

2.7.1. BIOLOGICAL SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES

Biological soil conservation measures include vegetative barriers, agronomic and soil fertility improvement practices that help in controlling surface run off, reduce soil losses and improve productivity. Agronomic measures are primary control measures and are often considered as reinforcement measures.

Strip Cropping Strip cropping is a cropping practice where strips of two or more crops are alternatively placed on the contour for erosion control. The practice is useful for controlling soil erosion in areas where cropping system is dominated by sparsely cropped areas. If the first strip of crop is row crop or a crop which is susceptible to erosion, the second crop should be the crops that effectively control soil erosion. Hence, in the first strip is maize or sorghum, the second should be forage /food legume that forms dense ground covers.

Crop rotation is the practice of growing different crops one after the other on the same piece of land season after season or year after year. It is valuable traditional practice which plays an important role in maintaining ecological stability and improving agricultural productivity. When different crops are rotated the depletion of soil nutrient and the decline in crop yield minimized. When one depletes the nutrient the other restore the depleted nutrient. Different crops vary in their response to different pests and diseases. When some crop has the capacity to resist disease the others are susceptible.

Intercropping is a practice of growing two or more crops at the same time on the same piece of land. The principle and objective of inter cropping and mixed cropping is the same. However in intercropping it is not difficult to distinguish the rows of the main crops from that of companion. In mixed cropping one cannot identify the rows of the main crop from the other. The inclusion of forage legumes in intercropping increases the level of atmospheric nitrogen utilization. Nitrogen would be available to the main crop from root and nodule decay of intercropped leguminous crops (Tolera Megersa, 2011).

Vegetation cover Soil is subjected to erosion if it is not covered by vegetation or if it is bare. If the soil is kept under permanent or near permanent cover of vegetation, little or no erosion will occur. It is justified that when the energy dissipated by a 50mm rain storm it is theoretically capable of lifting 18g of soil 1m in the air. The vegetation covers allows the movement of water to sink in to the soil and percolating down to the water table. The decay of vegetations become part of the soil and improves the physical and chemical property of the soil.

Agro forestry Trees and field crops can be grown together in the same field. The trees grown narrow strips, often in the contour and are usually cut at different times so that they do not provide shade that would affect the crops. The trees may be either fruit trees or trees which have the ability to trap nitrogen from the atmosphere and return it to the soil where it can be used by another plants. Trees are used as wind breaks and are frequently used to control erosion. A good ground cover of grasses, shrubs, and/or leaf litter is needed if the trees are to effectively control water erosion, (Berry L. Town shed ,2004).

2.7.2. PHYSICAL SOIL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

Contour Cultivation Contour cultivation and practice is a practice of plowing land and planting crops on contour line. Contour cultivation reduces soil erosion from slope. It can be adjusted to standard ridge and furrow system to make it effective in controlling soil erosion and moisture conservation in dry areas it is the most effective way to reduce soil erosion and conserve soil moisture by minimizing the rate of runoff.

Mulching is the covering of the soil with crop residue such as straw, maize and sorghum stalks or standing stubble. The cover protects the soil from rain drop impact and reduces the velocity of runoff. It has also considerable potential for the restoration and maintenance of soil fertility. Mulching is one of the most effective methods in minimizing erosion. A crop residue covering the ground intercept rain drop impact, prevent splash erosion, slow down the water flow and increase the infiltration and percolation rate. It encourages insects and worms to take hole in to the reground, thus increasing the permeability of the soil.

Green manure and animal dung or plants that have soil nutrient value to in reach the soil and cattle dung as a fertilizer. The green manure plants are cultivated on the land and the ploughed

under to mix them with the soil .The animal dung especially cow dung is collected, dried up and then distributed in the farm when planting or sowing .The animal dung has the highest capacity to increase soil fertility and it can also stay in the soil for at least 3 years.

CHAPTER THREE

STUDY AREA, RESEARCH METHOD AND MATERIAL

3.1 PHYSICAL BACK GROUND AND LOCATION OF THE STUDY AREA

Figure 3. 1 Map of Dale Sedi Woreda

Source Manipulated by the researcher

3.1.1 LOCATION

Sadi Chanka to the west and Dale Wabara Woreda to the North West. The absolute location of Dale Sedi Woreda is at 8041‟40”N to 9 o 5 „25” N latitude and 35006‟45”E to 35‟18E”.

3.1.2 PHYSICAL RELIEF

The Woreda covers an area of 57,650 hectares of total land of which 28,259ha is farm land, 6419 ha is mountainous areas 165000 ha is coffee and forest land 1600 ha is protected area 2000 ha is covered by grass and about 900 ha occupied by settlement. Dale Sedi Woreda has a diversified land feature. About 60% of its land is high land and hilly which is called baddaa locally and about 40% of the southern part is low land locally called gammoojjii.The highest altitude in the wereda is the hill of Emo which has an altitude of 1800 m asl found in the northern and the lowest area is at Hine area of Chamo kebele at Birbir river at which has an altitude of 1200m asl and found at south western part of the study area, (DSWRLM ,2017)

3.1.3 SOIL

The dominant soil color of the area is brown in the middle altitude that is highly eroded and black in the low land area that is more fertile than the highland soil. It is a Nitosols type with Precambrian basement complex rock underlying the region.

3.1.4 NATURAL VEGETATION

The extent of the natural vegetation in the area has been much reduced. Cutting for fuel wood and arable land expansion and settlement disturbed most of the woodland. However small amount of forests, bushes, grasses, coffee and exotic plants like Eucalyptus trees are found in abundant. The study area is one of the most coffee growing region that has forest land and very huge trees in itself .Some trees may grow up to 30 meter high and uses as a shadow for coffee in the winter dry season and timber production .The forest land of that area is also serving as the home of the wild animals. Monkeys and apes are found everywhere in the study area .Large animals like buffalo, lion, and tigers are found in the Hine Birbir wild animal reserve around Birbir river in Chamo kebele in south western part of the study area. The people of the study area look after their crops in order not to be destroyed by wild animals like pigs, monkeys and apes.

3.1.5 CLIMATE

Its agro climate varies depending on the relief of the wereda. The woinadega area is suitable for agricultural type like teff, maize, beans, peas and the like. The kola area is favorable for maze, millet, sorghum, coffee and other crops. Temperature and rainfall distribution also varies accordingly. March and April are the months at which the highest temperature reached the surface due to the lack of cloud cover and relatively December and January are the coldest months. In average the study area has range of temperature from 260c-150c. Therefore the average annual temperature is 200c.The Woinadega area the highest rainfall and duration while its temperature is lower relatively. The kola part of the study area has the lower rainfall in amount and duration but has highest amount of temperature than the Woinadega area .The rainfall pattern is categorized in the summer maximum rainy season. The rain extends from April or May to October (autumn) season. The summer maximum rainfall ranges from 1000mm _1500mm.(DSWARD, 2017)

The study area is drained by small rivers like Wayu, Kile, Ogiyo, Mardafo, Diba, Jajaba and other smaller streams drains to Birbir river which is the boundary of the study area and llubabor zone of oromia regional state and then to western direction to the Baro river of Gambella and joining the Nile river to reach Mediterranean sea.

3.2. DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO ECONOMIC FEATURE

3.2.1 POPULATION AND SETTLEMENT PATTERN.

The study area a total population of 45960 Male and 54368 Female a total of 100328 are found in Dale Sedi Woreda from which 80% are rural population and 20% of the total are urban dwellers. There are 11419 male household and 782 female household, totally 12201 household in the Woreda and in the sampled two kebele there are 764 male households and 59 female households. The population growth of the Woreda is 2.5%. (DSWSVRO 2017)

3.2.6 ECONOMIC ACTIVITY

Agriculture is the back bone of the economy of our country. It supports about 85% of the Ethiopia‟s GDP 85% foreign exchange earnings and supports 85% of the work force Berry, (2003). If so then agriculture is an important economic sector in Oromia regional state which accounts about 90% of its people living in the rural area are engaged in the agriculture as the source of livelihood (BOFED, 2008). Almost the population of Dale Sedi wereda have direct or in direct contact with agricultural activity and it‟s the most important sector on the Wereda. The cereal crops produced in the Worada are maize, sorghum, millet, teff. Coffee is produced in almost 75% of the kebeles of the Woreda and it is the main cash crop in the study area. Industrial crops like „Nug’, salit,’ papper and ginger are produced mostly in low land area of the Woreda. Khat is also becoming one of the most important incomes generating production especially among the Harar settlers. Honey is produced by few farmers.

Animal rearing also plays significant role on the life of the woreda‟s population. They obtain meat, milk, butter, from the cattle. Goats Horse, Mules and Donkey serve for transportations in addition to their income generation. There are also thousand of hens 28600 sheep, 19699 goats, 181 Horses, 470 Mules,3839 d0nkeys in the wereda in 2017.(Dale Sedi Wereda live stock and fishing office, 2017).

3.3 RESEARCH METHODS AND MATERIALS

3.3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

A research design is a framework or general guide regarding how to structure studies concerned to answer certain types of research questions. The researcher primarily used the longitudinal research design. It was complimented by the use of the mixed research approach.. This involves the combination of both quantitative and qualitative research method. The mixed research method permits innovations in research design, compensates for the weaknesses in individual instrumentation and thus guarantees the strengths, validity and reliability of findings Creswell (2003) defines quantitative research as the inquiry into social or human problem based on testing a theory composed of variables measured with numbers, analyzed using statistical procedures. While on the other side, qualitative research, according to Creswell (2003) deals with subjective

data, which are generated by minds of the respondent Neumann (2006) states that qualitative study is an inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem based on building a complex, holistic picture ,formed with words and conducted in a natural setting. The researcher was in the position of assessing the factors that influence the participation of community members in soil conservation practices, with a specific reference to community development.

In this research the researcher used frequency and percentage in the form of table to find the level of the community participation. The main purpose of research is to find out the truth which is hidden and which has not been discovered as yet. Thus this study was also used a purpose of research particularly a descriptive research design which concerned with describing and portraying accurately the characteristics, specific predictions, with explanation of facts concerning soil conservation practices in Dale Sedi wereda.

3.3.2. STUDY POPULATION AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

Neuman, (2006) defines, target population as a specific pool of cases that the researcher wants to study. This project targeted community members who are permanent residents that area; especially those staying in rural areas of .Dale Sedi Wereda consists of 27 rural kebeles and 3 urban kebeles. The study was very vast and time consuming if it would have include all kebeles of the wereda. However due to the shortage of time and financial problem and other resources the study area was determined to few kebeles. Therefore to conduct the study two kebeles namely Warawale Suchi and Arere was selected as sample kebele using purposive sampling.

According to Collins, the way to learn about a large group of entire population is by looking only at small part of its sample. The population referred by Collins not necessary the total population of an area but the totality of the target group from which the sample needs to be drawn cited in (Naidoo 2004).However the total population of Dale Sedi wereda was large as expressed in the above. Based on this point of view the target population of the study was the total house holders of the WaraWale Suchi and Arere Leku kebele. They were 764 male and 59 female, total 823 house holds. The reason why these two kebele were taken as the target population was hoping that the two kebeles were selected as one from the high land area and the other from low land area purposely where there was high erosion and soil degradation for that matter those people

were expected to have better understanding about soil erosion and conservation practices and also a part of parcel of the total population were either affected by water erosion and soil degradation or benefited from soil conservation activities performed individually and communally.

3.3.3 SAMPLING SIZE

The Sample unit of the study includes all the households of the selected two kebeles, for the reason that of soil erosion affects all the community of that area. Therefore, teams organized for the development activities in those farmers association, NGOs and religious institutions were taken in to consideration in this study.

The size of sample refers to the items to be selected from the universe to constitute a sample (Kothari,1998).To determine the sample size for the specific scientific study a researcher determined the desired precision and an acceptable confidence level. As a result the study was be delimitated to few kebeles. Then to conduct the study the researcher selected two kebele using purposive sampling method. The sample size from each kebele were determined proportionally from the households of the two kebele using the formula

n where

n=sample size

N=sample frame

e=the level of precision (0.05)

To select the respondent house hold the list of the sample kebeles was used as the target population and the respondents were identified using a random sampling method and the questionnaire was distributed.

823÷1+823x0.0025=269 is the sample size

269÷823=0.3270646

Then multiply 0.3270646 with house holders of each kebele to get the sample size of each kebele

That is 261x0.3270646=85 for Arere leku kebele

562x0.3270646= 184 for Wara Wele Suchi kebele

85+184=269 is the total sample size of both kebeles

Table 4 sample house hold from sample kebele

The totals of 269 sample household were addressed and the questionnaire was distributed for the sampled household and they responded accordingly. DAs and the researcher participated in collecting the questionnaire.

Table 3. 1 Sample household

Kebele Population size House holders Sample house Male Female Total Male Femal Tot hold e al Arere Leku 695 644 1339 232 29 261 85 War Wale 1380 1415 2795 532 30 562 184 Suchi Total 2075 2059 4134 764 59 823 269 Table 3. 2 Sample household

Source : researcher‟s field survey

3.3.4. SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

The appropriate sampling technique of this research is based on purposive sampling. This is because of the identified two kebeles were selected from the high land and low land area of the Dale Sedi wereda one each and the two kebeles were the highly affected area of erosion and the most benefitted from soil conservation practices. Due to this fact all of the identified sample households actively participated in responding. 2 Das and 2 kebele managers were trained and administered the questionnaires under close supervision of the investigator.

3.3.5 DATA SOURCES

The researcher used both primary and secondary data sources to achieve the intended goal. Primary data was collected from sampled household‟s representatives based on questionnaire, FGD based on organized and unorganized question and observation based on checklist. The secondary data sources include the titled and untitled documents books; downloaded researches and text books were used as a literature review and support the primary data. Published documents such as wereda and local government‟s reports and books, including reports from woreda agricultural and rural development office and from Keble administrative and Developmental Agents (DA) at local level were also incorporated.

3.3.6. INSTRUMENTS OF DATA COLLECTION

3.3.6 1 Questionnaire.

Both open ended & closed ended questionnaire were prepared and distributed to 269 households. The questionnaire distributed for sample respondent was translated to the local language to be understood easily as much as possible.

3 .3.6.2 Focus group discussion

Focus group discussion was held with respondents who were purposively selected. These were 2 elders ,2 religious leaders (one from Muslim one from Christian) ,2 DAs ,2 youngsters and 1 wereda natural resource worker a total of 9 participants those having direct contact with soil conservation participated in semi-structured way . The discussion was held for three hours and the summary of their discussion was taken using summary sheet

3.3.6.3 Observation

The researcher prepared observation checklist related to the stated objectives of the study in order to strengthen the reliability and validity of the data gathered and to observe both the actual community participation and on-farm and off-farm practical conservation works done by the people like terracing, area closures and ways of farming.

3.4. METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Data which was collected from both primary and secondary source was analyzed, summarized and presented via quantitative and qualitative method of data analysis. Questionnaire which was gathered from respondents was quantitatively analyzed, summarized and presented in table, graph, ratio and percentage. Data which is gathered through observation, interview and focus group discussion was qualitatively analyzed.

3 5.RESEARCH VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY

Validity refers to the appropriateness, meaningfulness, usefulness, of the specific inferences made from a given measurements (Chaltu, 2016) .As a statements of Knapp and Mueller(2010) Validity is the usefulness of research instrument in addressing research objective and research questions. Validity can also be related to research methodology on which the study is frame worked (Marczyk ,2005 ) Reliability refers to the degree to which observed are free from errors of measurements, It is the extent to which our measuring instruments measure and yield a consistent output ( Guar ,2007).Based on this the researcher data triangulation method to maintain the research validity .The researcher has consulted methodological aspects on the previous research works and scholarly articles undertaken to select accurate data generation techniques. In addition the researcher tried to reviewed adequate conceptual and empirical literature related to the problem under investigation. In order to convince the reliability and validity of data, so many activities were conducted. The questionnaire was prepared and its grammar was checked by professionals and its arrangement by the assigned advisor. In this way, the researcher re-corrected the necessary errors and editions in order to make more clear and understandable. After this, the questionnaire was distributed to the required study population in order to gather data. In order to ratify the validity of data, the researcher has tried to review adequate related literatures to this study. The researcher also used data triangulation methods such as questionnaire, focus group discussion and observation as well as used secondary sources of data. Additionally, discussion on the issue was made by DSWAO. Lastly, the comments that flow from the advisor and the peers were carefully attended.

3.6. ETHICAL ISSUES

In social and behavioral research ethical consideration is the main concern of the researcher. In the process of this investigation, the researcher ought to recognize the ethical principles of social and behavioral research Taking this in to account the researcher requested kindly to participate voluntarily and confidentially by informing the objective and outcomes of the research .The researcher have also informed the respondents as their personal information would not be publicized and not given to third party. The research process did not involve any deception and the study did not infringe up on their dignity and life.

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 GENERAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITION OF THE SAMPLE HOUSEHOLDS

This chapter analyzed and discussed the major findings based on the field survey. It attempted to give a response to the research questions by analyzing the indicators of CP in SCP. It showed the relationship between the concepts of CP in SCP and the actual practices in the real world. It presented the analyses of the findings in terms of tables (see appendices), figures and percentages. The analyses and discussion helped to reach major conclusions and possible recommendations. Thus a total of 823 households were surveyed out of which 269 were sampled.

Age group Sex Total Percentage Cumulative Male Female 20-30 45 3 48 17.8 17.8 31-40 91 7 98 36.4 36.4 41-50 71 8 79 29.3 29.3 51-60 16 7 23 8.5 8.5 61_70 18 3 21 7.8 7.8 Total 241 28 269 100 100 Table 4. 1 Sex and Age composition of the HHs respondents Source: HH survey,2018

The minimum value is 61_70 years.

The maximum value is 31_40 years.

The average value is 31_40 years.

The age range is 50 years.

The sex composition of the households of the sample area was 764 of male and 59 households were women. Out of this 269 of the respondents were randomly selected to respond of which 241(89.5 %) male and 28(10.5 %) of female were participated in two sampled kebeles. The age composition of the HHs respondents were between 20-30 accounts for17.8%, the age between 31-40 accounts for 36.4% ,the age between 41-50 accounts for 29.3%, the age from 51-60 accounts 8.5% and 61and above were only 7.8% of the total respondents(see table 4.1).

Family size Number Percentage

1_3 48 17.8

4_6 170 63

7_9 51 19

Total 269 100

Table 4. 2 Family size and educational status of the sampled HHs

Source: organized from questionnaire

Educational status Number Percentage 1_4 134 49.8 5_8 104 38.6 9_12 31 11.5 Total 269 100

Table 4.3educational status of the respodents

Source organized from the respondents

The family size of the respondents is categorized in to three. In this case 48(17.8%) of the respondents have 1-3 family size,170(63%) of the respondents have 4-6 family size and 51(19%) of them were having 7 and more. The response of the household indicated that the size of the family have a positive impact on soil conservation practices since it is a labor consuming activity .The educational status of the sampled household revealed 49(18.2%) of them are unable to read and write,85(31.6%) of them completed first cycle primary school,104(38.6%) of them were between 5-8 or second cycle primary school and 31(11.5%) of them were between 9-12 grade. (see table 4.2 above)

Food crop Cash crop(coffee) 10 15 20 Less Between5-10 Between 10- quintals quintals quintals than 5 quintals 15 quintals quintals Frequency 24 141 104 191 60 18 percentage 9 52.5 38.5 71 22.3 6.7 Table 4. 4 Food crop and cash crop production per ha Source: HH survey (2018)

In case of food crop, from the total of 269about 24 (9%)produce 10 quintal,141(52.5%) 15 quintals, 104 (38.5%) produce 20 quintals and above per ha of their plot. The main cash crop of the study area is coffee. About 191(71%) produce less than 5 quintals, 60(22.3%) produce between 5-10 quintals and 18 (6.7) of them produce between 10-15 quintals of coffee(look table 4.3 above).

Crop type Selected seed with Local seed with Local seed with chemical fertilizer chemical local fertilizer Fertilize(manure) Maize 85 46 26 Sorghum - 46 25 Millet - 46 24 Table 4. 5 Total estimation of crop production quintals per hectare

Source: Dale Sedi Wereda Agricultural & development office (2018)

Most of the crop grown in the area was mainly food crop and cash crop. Maize, sorghum, millet, teff and barley are the main food crop of the community. The yield production of the food crop grown in the area was very less compared to the size of farm land and with the average estimation of the woreda‟s agricultural office and extension team. The average estimation of food cop like maize of local seed without chemical fertilizer is 26 Quintal per hectare, that of sorghum is 25 Quintal per hectare and millet yields 24 quintal per hectare of farm land according to Dale Sedi extension team. From the total farmland of the HHs the average food crop production is about 10 quintal per hectare. (See table 4.3 and 4.4 above).This indicates the top soil is highly damaged that could not fulfill the need of the inhabitants in supplying food. The main cash crop grown in the study area is coffee, pepper and salit. The average of the production is less than the woreda’s standard. However most of the people in the study area are consuming food crop with the income they achieve from coffee.

Farmland size in ha Number Percentage 0.5 ha 26 9.6 1 ha 30 11.1 1.5 ha 36 13.4 2 ha 42 15.6 2.5 ha 70 26 3 ha 65 24.2

Table 4.6 farmland size of the respondents

Farmland size in hectare

Farm land size in the household respondents range between 0.5 ha to 3ha. About .26(9.6%) of the respondents holds only 0.5 hectare, 30(11.1%) of them hold1 hectares of farm land and 36(13.4%) of the respondents hold 1.5 hectares, 42(15.6%) of the farmers hold 2 ha of farmland, 70(26%) of the farmers hold 2.5 ha and 65(24%) of them holds 3 ha of farmland each. This indicates there is a great variation in holding farm land that hinders the large land holders to manage their land properly and limited soil conservation.

Has no 1 cattle 2-4 cattle 5_10 cattle cattle

FREQUENCY 13 108 108 40 percentage 4.8 40.1 40.1 15 Table 4. 7 Cattle population of the sampled HHs

Source investigator‟s field observation

The cattle population of the study area was large. They comprise cattle, goat, sheep, mule, horse donkey and poultry. Having large size of population of domesticated animals play a great role in soil conservation practices.

Figure 4. 1 Cattle keeping area in the night for their manure Source Field work photo by researcher (2018)

4.2 THE ONGOING METHOD OF SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES

All of the sampled households are participating either in one or more of soil managing activities.

S/N Method of soil conservation Frequency Percentage

1 Contour plowing 269 100 2 Crop rotation 205 76 3 Mixed farming 192 71.4 4 agro forestry 88 32.7 5 Animal dung distribution 246 91.4 6 Fallowing 140 52 7 Terracing 46 17

Table 4. 8 Method of community participation in soil conservation

Source own field survey (2018)

The people of the study area were practicing different method of soil conservation practices in group and in individual. The response of the sampled households revealed 269(100%) of them were participating in one or the other soil conservation types. The method in which they participate were contour plowing, crop rotation, intercropping agro forestry, animal dung distribution, fallowing, in terracing.

Contour plowing is a side way farming occurred during cultivation. Almost all the farmers in the study area uses contour plowing. 269 (100%) of the respondents participated in contour plowing .As I observed on their farmland no farmer is farming downward.

Contour farming, which is an oldest method useful in areas with low and high rainfall, is the preparation of the field with alternate furrows and ridges. Farming along the lines of equal contour is one of the most simple and efficient practices for the control of erosion. It consists of planting the crops according to the curved lines which follow the land surface at equal heights above sea level (Gemechu Yigezu, 2016)

Contour plowing is used separately or in combination with other conservation structures such as plantation of trees and cut- off drains. In the study area, a contour plowing has been carried out using the ox-drawn plough. Hence, it is part of the normal farming activity; it needs no extra labor and time for construction and unlike other methods such as cut-off drain and terracing, it

doesn‟t take large areas. Probably, it is the reason why the largest percentage of farmers uses the method since it does not require resource and time in addition to cultivating land. Gemechu Yigezu Ofgeha, (2016)

Crop rotation the community of the study area is practicing crop rotation. 205(76%) of the community uses this method.(see table 4.6 above). Crop rotation, decreases soil loss and preserves the productivity of land. The same crop year after year depletes the soil mineral. This is overcome by cultivating legumes. 26% of the community is not practicing crop rotation due to small farm size. Crop rotation is the practice of growing different crops one after the other on the same piece of land season after season or year after year. Mostly cereals and legumes plants are rotated. It is valuable traditional practice which plays an important role in maintaining ecological stability and improving agricultural productivity. When different crops are rotated the depletion of soil nutrient and the decline in crop yield minimized. When one depletes the nutrient the other restore the depleted nutrient. Different crops vary in their response to different pests and diseases. When some crop has the capacity to resist disease the others are susceptible. Tolera Megersa (2011). The FGD showed that those farmers who do not have large farm size do not have the opportunity to crop different crop alternatively.

Agro forestry the number of respondents who participate agro forestry is very less. Only 88 (38%) of them participate. The rest 62% do not have awareness of agro forestry The FGD replied that some farmers relate it with arboreal animals that destroy the crops and it is limited among the community. Agro-forestry is being encouraged in many countries as a way of modifying existing farming systems to promote soil fertility, erosion control and a diversified source of

income Furthermore, agro-forestry systems require carefully selected of both crops and tree species of beneficial interactions to be obtained Trees can be incorporated within a farming system by planting them on land. Where trees are deliberately integrated with crops or animals or both to exploit expected positive interactions between the trees and other land uses, the practices is defined as agro-forestry. Trees help to preserve the fertility of the soil through the return of organic matter and the fixation of nitrogen. They improve the soil‟s structure and help to maintain high infiltration rates and greater water holding capacity. As a result less runoff is generated and erosion is better controlled. Trees are also attractive to the farmer where they provide additional needs; especially fuel, fodder and fruits multipurpose trees and shrubs are thus fundamental to agro forestry(Lee D.R.,2005). Trees are used as wind breaks and are frequently used to control erosion. A good ground cover of grasses, shrubs, and/or leaf litter is needed if the trees are to effectively control water erosion, Berry L. Town shed (2004)

Figure 4.2Farmers preserve trees in the farm Source photo by researcher (2018)

Manure is the faeces of the cattle that the farmers of the study area use to keep the fertility of the soil. This practice is highly adopted in almost all family members of the community of the study area. 246 of the respondents meaning (91%)have been participating that they inherit from their ancestors .Cattle manure is used only for The community of the study area used cow dung as a main fertilizer from generation to generation to keep soil fertility. The farmers settled in the area

before hundreds of years and practiced a sedentary type of farming that make the soil of the area to be inherited and the indigenous soil fertility keeping is also transferred from generation to generation. The cattle manure is the widely accepted organic fertilizer. The urban dwellers share their cattle to the rural farmers to make them keep the fertility of soil while the cattle grown up for the owner. Even up to now, it has been acknowledged that these technologies, which include plowing of narrow ditches on sloping fields to control run-off, farmland terraces, traditional ditches and furrows, contour plowing, fallowing, crop rotation, farmyard manure and agro forestry continue to play a significant role in the production of subsistence agriculture (Betru, 2003)

Figure 4. 2 Cows keeping area during the night

Source photo by researcher (2018)

Fallowing is leaving the farm land idle for a while until the soil regains its fertility (Geography text book grade 11page 182). This method is practiced mostly in the low land area where the farmers have excess farm land. The farm land that is Left idle regains its nutrient content, then after three or four years it can be tilled again for five or six consecutive years. 140 (52%) of the respondents use fallowing. The rest 42% are not using because of small farm size. Even most of them believe that it is an indigenous soil conservation method. However, only 42% of the respondents were practices due to shortage of land. Leaving crop residues on the field after harvest is another traditional practice used by the farmers in the area. However, this method is no

longer applied because the importance of crop residues is increasing from time to time due to shrinking in size of grazing land and shortage of fuel wood. Thus, farmers are intended to use the residues for fodder of livestock and source of energy .Gemechu Yigezu, (2016)

Terracing involves building level surfaces at right angles to the slope to retain water and reduce the amount of erosion. It is an expensive method of controlling erosion since it requires moving of soil and stones to construct the level areas. This method of soil and water conservation has been commonly practiced by the Konso people of Ethiopia. It is also used in other steep-slope areas of Ethiopia (cited in grade 10 geography text book)

In the study area only 46 respondents or 17%of the community have terrace on their farm. The rest 83% do not have terrace on their farm because they believed that the construction of modern soil conservation measure locally known as “daagaa” took place by the government through campaign. According to woreda‟s Agriculture and Rural Development, the farmers are resistant of adopting Terrace on their plot of land because it consume large areas of their farm lands. Mainly, the farmers of steep slope area highly resist the design of terraces constructions. As the steepness of the slope increase, the gap between the structures is expected to close to one another which result in the occupying of their land by the structures.

Contour terracing, is to construct a channel along the slope to intercept and divert the runoff water. Channel terrace is to dig channels at suitable intervals and the excavated soil deposited as a wide, low ridge along the lower edge of the channel. Broad based ridge terrace is to construct ridge along both the sides of the channel. Bench terrace is to construct a number of platforms along contours or suitable graded lines across the slope (Gemechu Yigezu ,2016).

Figure 4.4 Terrace making in Dale Sedi Woreda

Source photo by researcher (2018)

According to the participants of FGD there are two types of terracing practicing in the study area through community mobilization. First, level-bund which is used to retain water in relatively dry areas. The second is graded band which is commonly practiced in areas of excess run-off and accessibility of river outlet. The DA‟s realized that the farmers clearly know where to establish which structure based on the condition of their farmland.

Regularity of participation the participants were asked some activities they perform regularly to conserve soil and they responded according to their own participation. Thus, they were asked that as they were regularly participating in soil conservation and most of the respondents 222 of them (82.5%) do not participate daily in soil conservation. The rest 47 respondents (17.5%) participate daily in soil conservation by distributing cattle manure waste

materials swept from the house like ash on the farm land. Regularly the farmers were using animal dung. This activity is done in two ways these are by drying up the dung near their home and distributing over the farm land which is performed by women and children, The other one is preparing fence like structure in the farm land and keeping the cattle in it throughout the night and reversing that fence at its regular time to balance the distribution of that dung. This activity is called “Dallaa Diddiiruu” in the language of the area 90(33.5%) of the respondents were practicing this method

Participation of family In case of women participation 25 of them were actively participating as their daily activities of 47 respondents. They were also asked as the family members involved in community participation and they revealed that the participation of the youth was very low. In 149(55.4%) HHs there was no involvement of youth in soil conservation. In120 HHs (44.6%) there were little participation .The FGD said that the laborious activities of farming were going to be left for the old age group of the community which threatens the future food price.

Tree or coffee planting the participants also asked whether they plant coffee each year and responded 94 of them (35%) plant coffee each farming year.175 (65%) of do not have coffee land to plant each year. Coffee plantation is one mechanism by which the community forests the land. . Local management by those who are familiar with the ecosystem and have a personal interest in the well being of the natural resources appears to be the most effective procedure for conservation and sustainable development in developing countries (Saxena, et al.2001)

Figure 4. 3 Distribution of coffee seedling on nursery

Source photo by researcher during field work (2018)

Productivity of farm land shortage of farm land and grazing lands are observed as a matter. Farmland have been fragmented in to insignificant size of plot for newly emerging house hold heads through inheritance of land for children. Finding of new land is impossible since all land available for cultivation is occupied, even the land along the steep slope are taken for the settlements they said. Therefore, intensive cultivation exposed their land for erosion. . Almost all respondent 215 (80%) reported that crop yield has been decreasing from time to time. And 54 respondents (20%) perceive that their production is increasing or remain constant from year to year. They indicate as their living condition is deteriorating from time to time due to decrease in production resulting from soil erosion and termite action.

Compost The respondents were asked how far they use compost on the farm land and it is found that only 15(5.5%)of the respondents prepare compost at their home and use on their farm to keep the soil fertility. The rest 254(94.5%) were not using compost on their plot of land. The FGD replied that there were no as such awareness of compost preparation.

4.3 THE PERCEPTION OF THE LOCAL COMMUNITY REGARDING COMMUNITY BASED SCP

The household respondents evaluated their management in general and responded insufficient and not satisfactory thus they were not self sufficient in food crop.

Follow up The household respondents were requested if they have ever observed soil loss on their own farm and responded 269(100%)of them observed soil loss at different time in different way.106 (39%) of them observed the soil nutrient loss on their own farm land and expressed its symptom as the crop yield decline in quality and quantity, 66 (24%) the colour of the plant change from green to yellowish, the rest 97(36%) observed the slow growth of the crop on the field The FGD revealed recognized the cause of the soil loss as the intensity and duration of rainfall in the study area, topography of the land that accelerates erosion ,overgrazing and unwise farming practices are the major soil problems in Dale Sedi woreda. Soil is conserved for the purpose of the community and it should also be conserved by the community. For them soil is home soil is shelter, soil is the source of food , and generally soil the beginning and end of the life Soil loss and soil conservation are un everlasting process .the life of the communities is

directly or indirectly tied with the soil .the collaboration of the human being is the main factor for soil conservation.

Responsibility The respondents conclude in high percentage 205(76.2%) that the responsible body to conserve the soil is the community and 64(23.8)gave the responsibility for the government has the responsibility to agitate aware organize monitor and evaluate the activity of the community in soil conservation, The role of the community is actively participating in cash and labor.

220(81.8%)of the respondents knew that they have individual role to participate in the community activities, While 49(28.2%) of the respondents did not accept their individual role in soil conservation role in the community.

How participation The household respondents were asked if they participated voluntarily and responded that terraces is the labor consuming activity performed in the very hot season. Since then the community refused to participate As a result the majority of the farmers even do not dig terrace on their own farm land. 140(52.1%) of the respondents voluntarily participate on terracing last year 129 (48%)do not have terrace on their plot of land participating . Oaky and Marsden (1994) state that the participation is concerned to be voluntary by the people to one of or another of the public program supposed to contribute for development.

Participation in planning The participants were requested whether they participate in discussion held at kebele level where the main issue is soil conservation and the respondents responded 180(67%) of the respondents participated in the discussion in which the issue of soil conservation is appeared and 89(23%) haven‟t heard about soil conservation in the meeting. The FGD agreed on that by saying the method of participation begins from discussion Decision making process should incorporate the marginalized group. None of the respondents participated in training and experience sharing held at kebele level. Community learns from their each other. Training and experience sharing are the basic methods of developing skills.

Participating in cash Chemical fertilizer is the recent soil fertility replacement in the study area. The respondents were asked how far they used and responded 202(75.1%) of the respondents annually use and 67(25%) of them used intermittently because of expensiveness of

its price .But the government„s more attention is for chemical fertilizer. That is why the DAs and other workers regularly mobilize the community. Among these the most commonly cited factors include failure to consider indigenous land management practices, high initial costs which are not affordable to poor farmers and also trying to apply uniform techniques in different agro ecological regions(Aklilu, 2006).

Agree Disagree Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Is it possible to combat soil erosion 236 87.7 33 12.3 Termite can also destroy the soil 252 93.7 17 6.3 The participation of the community in 233 86.6 36 13.4 SCP is effective The farmers are the most affected social 245 91 24 9 class by soil loss Active CP of SCP can influence the 256 95 13 5 livelihood of the community Farmers are the main agent for soil 172 64 97 36 rehabilitation Elders and religious leaders can 191 71 78 29 influence community participation Table 4. 9 Community perception

Source fieldwork by researcher

Reducing soil loss The perception of the community on possibility of reducing and combating the soil loss by community pressure is responded as 236 (87.7%) of the respondents agreed .From this point of view we can conclude that most of the communities perceive that the soil loss can be reduced by community . The others 33(13%) disagree to combat the soil loss by community labor. The FGD pointed out that soil erosion cannot be totally stopped but reduced and controlled by human activity.

Problem of termite Can termite destroy the soil was the next question and they responded as 252 of the respondents (93.7%) agreed that termite destroy the top soil and vegetations. 17

(6.3)did not agree. As I observed from their farm land termite is another soil problem not less than that of rainwater runoff.

Effectiveness On the effectiveness of their participation the households responded 233(86.6%) have agreed on not effective of their participation. The rest 36 (13.4%) were effective From this idea we can conclude that most of the farmers were able to evaluate the results of their activity on soil conservation. On the question the most affected social class by soil erosion. 245(91%) of the respondents agreed that it is a farmer who is primarily and mostly affected The other 24 (9%) disagreed. Although the loss of soil affects everybody since the life of the farmers depends directly on the soil fertility they are the most affected social group. Whatever activity they perform has a direct relationship with the soil.

Soil and livelihood Active community participation in soil conservation practices can change the livelihood of the community. On this idea 256 of the respondents (95%) agreed and 13(5%) disagreed .From this we can understand that most of the community perceive the livelihoods of the farming community is the direct result of the soil protection. The socio economic development of the people is determined by the availability of the natural resources.

Farmers with soil change The farmers are the agents of change for soil rehabilitation. On this issue 172(64%) of the household agreed and 97(36%) did not agree. Farmers are the owners and the users of land. In addition to that about 80% of the labor power is in the farming community. Thus since land is said to be the industry of farmers , they are the main agent to solve the soil problem with in collaboration of the others.

Influential people Can religious leaders and elders can influence community participation? On this basic idea 191(71%)of the household agreed that religious leaders and elders are the most accepted social structures to organize and lead the community rather than the others. The communities enthusiastically follow their way and believe that their word has a power that is to be respected. The rest 78 (29%) disagreed with the influential position of the elders and religious leaders. The FGD strongly discussed on this point and realized the position of religious leaders and elders in the community and said that the highest responsibility should be given for them.

They can divert the wrong idea in the community to positive and thus soil conservation can be properly practiced and implemented

Increased No change

Frequency percentage Frequency Percentage Forest cover 226 84 43 16 Grass supply 233 87 36 13 Crop yield 157 58 112 42

Water supply 148 55 121 45 Soil fertility 241 90 28 10 Table 4. 10 Changes due to soil conservation

Source :Household response

From the properly conserved soil ( area enclosure) the respondents observed the changes as the following.

Forest cover 226(84%) of the respondents observed the forest cover increased at conserved area. While 43(16%) of the respondents did not observe a change of forest cover. From this idea we can conclude that there is a change of forest cover especially at the enclosure area and the community started to use as a fuel wood.

Grass supply At the study area 233 (87%) households observed grass supply at the enclosure area and 36(13%) observed no grass supply at properly conserved area. This notice that there is an increment of grass supply at the study area where there is good soil conservation practices. As I observed at one of the sampled kebele the community started to use the grass as a fodder for their cattle. This is generalized only for enclosure area while the other bare land has no grass due to termite action.

Crop yield is the main point that would be changed by active community participation of keeping soil fertility. Depending on this for the question presented the household responded 157( 58%) as a crop yield is increased because of soil conservation and 112 (42%) observe no change on crop yield. This indicates that the change of crop yield at the study area is low. The little

change on food crop is the result of the poor soil management at the study area. The FGD revealed that about half of the community is consuming cereal crop from the market for not less than half a year.

Water supply From the total sampled households 148(55%) observed water supply increment at the study area while 121(45%) observed no increment of water supply at their local area. Then we can summarize that the change observed on water supply is significant. The FGD revealed that there is no water problem in the study area except its quality. There are abundant amount of streams, head waters and small rivers that drain to the neighbor woredas. Thus the change of water supply cannot easily be observed at the study area.

Soil fertility From the total 269 respondents 146(54.3) observed the increment of soil fertility on the properly conserved places. 123 or (45.5%) of them did not realize their observation of soil change. Thus we can generalize that there is less soil change occurred by soil management in the study area. The FGD stated that there were no regular soil conservation practices. The farmers participate as an obligatory activity and not in voluntary action that they could not achieve good yield from their participation

Meeting :The households responded for participation in discussion at meeting and 180(67%) of the respondents participated the meeting held at kebele level on the issue of soil management. 89(33%) of the community at study area did not participate meeting on the issue of soil conservation. From this point of view most of the people do not have the habit of participation of meeting and discussions that concerns their problem. Communities are not only the implementers but also the decision makers in any developmental activities.

Motivation : is there motivation for better soil conservation at kebele or woreda level for this question the HH responded that 269(100%) by saying there is no motivation or reward. It is realized that farmers will do so only when they are given the motivation and the means to do so Tiffen et. al (1987) The FGD realized there were no motivation given for farmers on soil conservation The motivated farmers are the farmers who produced much quintals of crop yield.

Why conserve :They tried to response for why they conserve soil by specifying that 148(55%) responded they manage soil to have better life for themselves. The other 121 (45%) tried to

answer by saying to keep it for the next generation .It is concluded that half of the people are participating to fulfill their own needs while the other thinks for the next generation too. Soil is a natural resource that we use in a proper way and also preserve it for the next generation. Sustainable soil conservation means cropping, pastoral and forestry use of the limited and only partially renewable resources soil, water and plant nutrients to safeguard soil productivity also for future generations and prevent or reverse degradation process (Senait, 2002).

Major problem of agriculture They were also asked the major problem facing agriculture of the study area and 232 of the respondents (86%) responded soil degradation as the major soil problem and 37 (14%) said climatic change. Thus we can conclude that soil loss is the major problem of food security and agricultural progress in the study area. In case of climate sometimes there are winds that blow over the crop and shed the crops The discussion of the FGD revealed that most of the crops at the hill sides are eroded and taken away to the river each year.

How much participate For the question that says how much is the community participate 88(32.7%) of the sampled households responded that it is satisfactory and 181(67.3%) said not satisfactory. Depending on this we can conclude that as the majority of the respondents replied the participation is not satisfactory. All the practices they perform is the traditional and indigenous that was transferred from generation to generation except the chemical fertilizer supplied by the government and the area enclosure and protected

4.4 THE MAJOR FACTORS AFFECTING COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

Capability Commitment

apable

rate Highly capable Capable Less capable Very less capable Not c Highly committed Committed Less committed Very less committed Not committed

0 165 94 10 0 6 80 140 40 3 Frequency

0 61.3 35 3.7 0 2.2 29.7 52 14.8 1.1

Percent ae Table 4. 11 The capability and commitment of DAs and natural resource sector

Source researcher‟s fieldwork (2018)

DAs and kebele managers agitate and coordinate the community in the activities the farmers perform on agricultural activities. For this purpose their capability and commitment of

The DAs capability as 165 households (61%) capable or moderate in their capability and 94 (35%) responded less capable and 10 (3.7) said very les capable in their performance that they couldn‟t organize the community for better soil management. Thus the capability of the DAs is moderate

Commitment In case of their commitment 6 (2%) said highly committed, 80 (30%) said, committed, 140(52%) said les committed, 40 (15%) very less committed and 1% said not committed. From this point of view the general commitment of DA is low. The FGD said the capacity and commitment of DAs is medium their follow up is low mainly they focus on chemical fertilizer instead of soil protection.

NGO There is an NGO to coordinate the community participation in one of the two sample kebele. This NGO is called DSSCCAE. It encourages the community participation by providing different kinds of plants to be planted on the field to keep the fertility of soil. This NGO also

works on termites actively .Because termite is another soil problem of the study area. This NGO coordinate the community to dig out and then destroys termite .Out of 184 respondents of that kebele 32 (17.4%) are trained, 50 (27.7%) were participated meeting, and 10(5.5%) have got direct consultation of that NGO. Governmental and non governmental organization positively affect the participation of the community through .training ,meeting, experience sharing, rewarding and mobilizations.

Rate Affect highly Do not affect Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Low income 198 74 71 26 Low education 180 67 89 33 Health problem 202 75 67 25 Age 211 78 58 22 Large family size 44 16 225 84 Farm land distance from home 122 45 147 55

Less information 140 52 129 48 Table 4. 12 Factors negatively affect the community participation Source own field survey

There are so many factors that affect the community from actively participating on soil conservation practices. In relating with the study area I requested few of them and analyzed as the following

Low income –From the total household 198(74%)responded high affection of low income and the rest 71 HH (28%) responded it has no affection. Income in this idea is the amount of capital that a family owns and able to invest to keep soil fertility. From this we can conclude that people with low income are not powerful to manage and use soil properly. , level of education, skill and income influences/determines the intensity/degree of community participation towards natural resource management practices (Awortwi 1999). The FGD explained soil conservation is a

labor and capital consuming activity. Communities with lower income are suffering from the lack of cereal food crop even though they have large size of land.

Low education About 180 respondents (67%) responded low education affects community from participation of soil management practices and 89 (33%) of the respondents said low education do not affect. From the majority of the respondents‟ response we can say that low education is the main obstacle for soil conservation. The highly developed and educated countries of the world are more capable to participate in any community problems than the less developed countries of Sub Saharan countries. As Gebremedhin (2004) and Bililign (2010) stated on their study, Participation increases with better education because it enhances better organizational leadership and educated people are more likely to be receptive to new ideas, more communication and human relation skills and more understanding.

Health problem is a major factor to limit the community from participation .From the total respondents 202(75%) responded as it affects highly and 67(25%) responded that the health problem does not affect the community from participation. As it is indicated above soil conservation in the rural area is a physical activity that can only be performed by healthy community. Illness can hinder the participation of the community in higher rate.

Age is another factor that that positively or negatively affect the community participation. 211(78%) of the respondents accepted as age affects community participation and the rests 58 (22%) ignore the age to be the major factor to makes not to participate. As a result the low age group or the young and the old age group are the economically dependent group of the community. The communities of the old age group are not participating in community activities and also their farmland is not properly managed and they need help from the other class.

Large family size is the total number of family members that live together and participate in different soil conservation activities. As 225(84%) of the HH respondents revealed having large family size by itself does not affect the participation. On the contrary 44 of the respondents said it affects the community participation. From this point of view we can conclude that large family size is a major factor that positively affects community participation. A working community is a resource if it is used properly. Land conservation activity is a laborious activity that needs large

human power in less developed countries like Ethiopia. 51 (19%) of the sampled household have a family size of more than 7 members. , from a Boserupian, perspective the scarcity of land induced by population pressure would increase the drive to invest in land quality Boserup. (1965)

Farmland distance from the home from the total sampled HHs 122(45%) of them responded farm distance is a major factor to hinder a community from participation. 147(55%) did not accept this idea and said farm distance does not affect participation. From this we can conclude that distance is not a barrier by itself if no another factor is added. However the soil that are near to the house or adjacent to the village are more managed than the farthest soil.

Less information In this study information is the way the local community share the idea concerning soil conservation. 140 of the respondents (52%) responded less information affects community from participation. 129(48%) of the respondents responded lack of information does not affect community participation on soil conservation practices. From this idea we can conclude that information has less power to affect the community participation. However new technologies are essential for farmers to be transferred on time. The study revealed that the lack of adoption of new conservation practices was a major reason for project failure even though technically sound practices were used (Hudson, 1991).

The major factors that affect (either positively or negatively) community participation on soil and water conservation are lack of awareness, capital (economic factor), availability of grants and subsidies, discrimination against women, interference by politician, factionalism and heterogeneity of population and difference in wealth and social status (Singh 1992).In line with these internal socioeconomic characteristics of community households like, level of education, skill and income influences/determines the intensity/degree of community participation towards natural resource management practices (Awortwi, 1999). When the level of education, health condition and occupational and income situation of the community members is low people feel that they have no economic power and knowledge and skill to organize themselves and run development activities and manage the same. When people have low economic power, they commit less time and resources to community work. As Gebremedhin (2004) and Bililign (2010) stated on their study, Participation increases with better education because it enhances better

organizational leadership and educated people are more likely to be receptive to new ideas, more communication and human relation skills and more understanding.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 SUMMARY

The study was conducted in Dale Sedi wereda, Oromia, Ethiopia with the emphasis of assessment of community participation on soil conservation practices. The general objective of the study is to assess the level of community participation in soil conservation practices in Dale Sedi wereda. From the 27 rural kebele of the wereda two were selected by purposive sampling. The focal group members were the wereda agricultural office experts, DAs, kebele managers, elders, religious leaders, health extensions and farmers. To gather the relevant data primary and secondary types of data collection were used. From the primary questionnaire observation and focal group discussion and from secondary published and unpublished documents were used. The data are analyzed, interpreted and presented by table and figure.

Based on the analysis we can summarize that all sampled farmers in the study area perceived about the causes and consequences of soil loss. They agreed high rainfall and topography of the land is the major causes of soil loss. They also perceived that decline in agricultural product, poverty drought, are some of the consequences of soil loss. They are aware of the different practices of the soil protection and means of replenishing soil fertility like mixed cropping, organic manure, terracing, crop rotation, forestations and reforestations, fallowing, and contour plowing. The perception of the local community on soil conservation practices is low .They need additional training, experience sharing and mobilization for the local community.

When soil is wisely conserved crop production is increased, water supply is increased, and grass supply is increased socio economic condition improved. There are many factors that affect community participation in soil conservations. Some of these are level of education, age, health, technology level, cultural values, and land holding system. In addition, lack of initiatives and support, are other factors that affect Community participation on soil conservation. The participation of women in soil conservation is high while that of the young are very less.

5.2 CONCLUSIONS

In the study area the level of the participation of the community in soil conservation is less due to low understanding, low socio economic development and less mobilization.. The participation of community on soil loss by erosion and termite is a key factor in deciding the soil loss. Community‟s perception and identifying the factors that influence their participation of soil conservation practices are of paramount importance for promoting community participation in the study area. Communities of the study area are participating in few of soil conservation methods and have low perception of community based soil conservation practices. There are factors like age, health, education, income, labor and the others that hinder community from participation. However the way of their perception seems wrong. Because they perceive that if soil conservation is only performed through campaign by government follow-up rather than communities‟ regular activity which is performed on individual plot of land. Thus the communities are not well adapted to prepare terrace on their own farm land and do not perform daily activity of soil conservation. .Therefore the current trend of land degradation by soil erosion and termite is a threat to soi productiviy in Dale Sedi woreda.

5.3 RECOMMENDATION

Based on the analysis and conclusion the following recommendations are forwarded.

 The integration of DAs and wereda natural resource agents with the local community should be improved to enhance the community participation on soil conservation .The institution like FTC(farmers training center) that is found in kebele level should perform the duty for which they are established. There should be training and experience sharing for farmers and the communities on soil conservation practices.  There should be motivation for better performance of soil conservation practices at kebele and wereda level to initiate and mobilize the others .The model farmers should be evaluated to be the hero of the year in soil conservation and preparing posters with that individual and rewarded.  In addition to chemical fertilizer it is necessary to give attention to compost and other organic fertilizers to replenish the soil. The traditional keeping of cattle fence like

structure and distributing cow dung in that way is an indigenous method and it should be kept and transferred for the next generation.  The policy makers should consider the soil conservation techniques appeared for the community that it should consider the general characteristics of the specific region such as topography of the land, soil texture, rainfall duration and intensity and the labor supplying community.  The redistribution of the farm land among the farmers is necessary. The land holding system in our country is the one that was in the feudal regime. The farmland is in the hands of few that hinder the young farmers from participating in soil conservation because they are landless farmers‟ .the farmers having large farm land are unable to dig terraces, and participate in laborious soil conservation practices.  Improving the price of coffee is the other mechanism by which the government improves forestation and re forestation. The study area is a the coffee growing zone .If the price of is increased, the farmers are willingly planting coffee on their land which has multipurpose for the community.

REFERENCES

Adugnaw Berhanu (2014). Environmental Degradation and Management in Ethiopia Highlands: Debra Tabor University, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, DebreTabor, Ethiopia

Aklilu Dalelo (2006) A. Natural Resource Degradation and Famine: Assessment of Students„ Awareness and Views. Flensburg, Germany

Annisa Gara (2011) Assessment of soil Conservation Impact on Rural Development in Central Ethiopia;Addis Ababa University

Awortwi, Nicholas(,2000). The Riddle of Community Development: Factors Influencing

Organization, Participation and Self-Management. ISS Working Paper No. 287

The Hague: Institute of Social Studies Publication Office.

Bililign Derese (2010). The impact of community participation on natural resource management; The case of Borena District, South Wollo, Ethiopia (Un published M.Sc. Thesis on file at the department of Geography & Environmental Studies) Addis Ababa University: Addis Ababa.

Belay ,T.(1992)Farmers Perception hazard and towards soil conservation in Grunion Welayita ,Ethiopia journal of development Research Biot,y.(1995)Rethinking research to land degradation in developing countries

Bentham, (1992) liberal Democracy and The Limits of Democratization in D, Held prospects for democracy, North, South, East, West‟s Cambridge; polity

Betru Nedessa (2003). Principles and Techniques for Biological Soil Conservation, Soil Water Conservation Division: Guideline No.3,MoA.ETH/2488/III.

Berry (2004) Land Degradation in Ethiopia, its extent and Impact Commissioned by the GM with WB support

Boserup, E. (1965). The conditions of agricultural growth: The economics of agrarian change under population pressure. Allen Unwin. London CAB International, (1997).Crop residues in sustainable mixed crop/livestock farming system, New York, USA

Chaltu Tuffa (2016) Spatio Temporal Analysis of Urban Sprawl and its Impacts on the Livelihoods of Surrounding Residents: A case study of Dire Dawa city Eastern Ethiopia Master‟s Thesis ASTU

Chambers, R. (2005): Ideas for Development. Earthscan, London.

Chopra, K, Kadekodi, K. G & Murty, M. N. (1990): Participatory Development: people and common property resources. Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

Community Participation(2009).On line available http;/www; scr/doc/7019124/

community participation (August 2009)

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches (2nd. Ed.). California: Sage Publications

David, S. (2004). Soil conservation, in Land Use ,Land Cover and Soil Sciences, [Ed. Willy H. Verheye], in Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), Developed under the Auspices of the UNESCO, Eolss Publishers, Oxford ,UK, [http://www.eolss.net].

EARO (Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization). (2002). Soil and Water Research Program Annual Research Report. EARO, Addis Abeba, Ethiopia.

Eshatu, Z.( 2004). Natural in soils under young-growth forests in Ethiopia. Forest

Eyasu Elias (2002).Farmers Perception of Soil Fertility Change and

Management, Institute for Development and SOS Sahel International (UK)

FA0 (1991): Network on erosion-induced loss in soil productivity. Report ofa Workshop, Centre for Soil & Agro climate Research Bogor, Indonesia,

FAO. (2000): Towards sustainable agriculture and rural development in the Ethiopian highlands Proceedings of the Technical Workshop on Improving t he Natural Resources Base and Rural Well -being. November 25-27, 2003 Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.

FAO (2008). Towards Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development in the Ethiopian

Feldman, Roberta M. & Westphal, Lynne M. (2000).Sustaining human settlement: A challenge for the new millennium. Great Britain: Urban International Press.

Feldman, Roberta M. & Westphal, Lynne M. 2000. Sustaining human settlement: A challenge for the new millennium. Great Britain: Urban International Press.)

Gebremedin Hadigou (2004) Assessing community participation for sustainable development the Galanethi water supply project .un published master‟s thesis Stellenbosch; University of Stellenbosch

Gemechu Yigezu Ofgeha (2016) Community Perception on Soil Erosion and their Participation in Soil conservation Practices: a Case Study of Alaltu Watershed of Najo District ,Ethiopia-Wollega University Ethiopia

Gete Zeleke, (2000). Landscape dynamics and soil erosion process modeling in the Northwestern Ethiopia highlands. African Studies Series. University of Berne Switzerland

Groans,(1994),Physical Soil Conservations Practice

Guar S.A. and Guar S. S. (2007) Statistical Method for Practice & Research: A Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS (2nd Ed), London: SAGE Publications Inc

Haile Fissaha (2007). Land Degradation Assessment

Heinrich, G. (2004). Improving productivity and incomes for small scale farmers in the semi-arid areas of Zimbabwe: On-farm Participatory Research in Gwanda. Participatory Experimentation in Risky Environment. Printed by International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT). Bulawayo, Zimbabwe

. Hurni H,( 1996) Degradation and conservation of the soil recourses in the Ethiopian highlands. A paper presented at the first international workshop in Africa Mountain and highlands Addis Ababa, October,

Hickey, S & Mohan, G. eds. (2004): Participation: from tyranny to transformation? Exploring new approaches to participation in development. Zed Books, London

Habtamu Eritro (2006). Adoption of Physical Soil and Water Conservation Structures in Anna Water.

Hudson, N.W. (1991): A study of the reasons for success or failure of' soil conservation projects. FA0 Soils Bull.

Kabambe, V.H. (2006). Review and analysis of research and development of soil fertility and water management technologies, in Malawi. In: Proceedings of the Inaugural Scientific Symposium of the SADC Land and Water Management. (Edited by Nhira, C., Mapiki, A. and Rankhumise, P). 14–16 February 2006,Lilongwe, Malawi. pp. 162 – 169.

Kakumba, U. & Nsingo, S. (2008). Citizen Participation in Local Government and the Process of Rural Development: The Rhetoric and Reality of Uganda. Journal of Public Administration. Vol. 43.

Katsuyu, M. (2009). Soil and humanity: Culture, civilization, livelihood and health, Soil Sci. Plant Nutr., 55, 603–615, doi:10.1111/j.1747-0765.2009.00401.

Knapp T. and Mueller, R. (2010).Reliability and Validity of Instruments: in Hancock, G .R ..&Muller R.O..(Eds),the reviewer guide to qualitative methods in the social science(397_411)New York, Routedge

Kothari C.R.(1998) Research methodology, methods and techniques, 2nd edition. New Delhi; wishwa prakashan.

Kumar‟s (2002) method for community participation: Complete guide for practitioners, London, ITOG, publisher.

Lee, D.R. ( 2005). “Agricultural Sustainability and Technology Adoption: Issues and Policies for Developing Countries,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics

Long Carolyn M).Participation of the poor in development initiatives taking their rightful place. London; Earths can Publication Ltd.

Long,Carolyn,(2001)Participating of the Poor in Development Initiatives Taking Their Right Full Place ,London :Earth Scan Publications Ltd.

Manyatsi, A.M., & Vilane, B.R.T. (2001). An inventory of technologies to strengthen agriculture and rural development in Swaziland. Research Journal of Agriculture, Science and Technology 5:42-49.

Marczyk, De Matteo, D. and Festinger (2005), Hoboken,John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Mengesha, A (2000) The Role of NGO in Grass Root community Development; The case of CCF Ethiopia, NNC Trondheim

Michel, B. 1991. Resource Management and Development. Canada. Oxford University Press

MoARD (2007). Community Based Participatory Watershed Development: A Guideline. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Morgan, R.P.C (2005). Soil Erosion and Conservation 2nd edition. Longman Group. U limited.

Nampila. (2005).Assessing Community Participation: The Humidor informal settlement.

Neumann, W.L (2006) social research method qualitative and quantitative approach (6th edition) Boston; Alan and Bacon.

Oakley, P and Marsden, D (2008), Approaches to participation in rural development Geneva, International Labor office Publication.

Rogers, P. Jalal F. and Boyd A.(2008). An introduction to sustainable development. Glen educational foundation Inc

Senait R. (2002). The economics of managing land resources towards sustainability in the High lands of Ethiopia.Ph D Dissertation. University of Hohenhelm, Germany.

Saxena (2001) Integrated natural resource management: approaches and lessons from the Himalaya Conservation Ecology

Singh, B. Squire T. Strauss, J. (1986). Agricultural household models. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

Tworg (2006).Organic Agriculture: “A Trade and Sustainable Development Opportunity for Developing Countries.” In Trade and Environment Review2006 New York and Geneva: UN/UNCTAD.

Tesfaye Faye (2013). Determinants Of Sustainable Land Management Practices In Kuyu Woreda, Central Ethiopia. Unpublished Master‟s Thesis Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Tiffen et al (1995) more people less erosion Environmental recovery in Kenya, new York

Tola Gemechu.(2005). Prospects of sustainable natural resource management and livelihood development in Wondo genet area, southern Ethiopia.(Un published M.Sc. Thesis on file at the department of Geography & Environmental Studies) Addis Ababa University: Addis Ababa

Tolera Megersa (2011) Thesis on traditional land Management practices in improving crop land productivity. Planning community level Action and National Development, New York: United nation

Wils Frits( 2001. Empowerment and its evaluation: a framework for analysis and

application. ISS working papers No. 340. Hague: ISS.

Wood (1990).Natural Resource Management and Rural Development in Ethiopia In Siegfried Pausewang, FantuCheru, Stefan Brune and EshetuChole (eds.) Ethiopia: Rural Development Options. Zed Books Ltd. London and New Jersey

Woldeamlak Bewket (2003). Land Degradation and Farmers„ Acceptance and Adoption of Conservation Technologies in the Digil Watershed, Northwestern Highlands Ethiopia. Social Science Research Report Series –no 29. OSSERA.Addis Ababa.

Worku Yohannes, (2016) challenges of Land Degradation and its Management: The case of Misirak WadaWacho AAU

APPENDIX

Appendix I

Questionnaire

Adama Science and Technology

Department of Geography and Environmental Studies

Household Survey Questionnaire

The purpose of this questionnaire is to assess the Participation of community in soil conservation Practices in Oromia regional state Kellem Wollega zone in Dale Sedi wereda. All items aimed to be presented only for academic purpose. Your individual response will be kept strictly confidential. The response from all respondents will be anonymously organized in the research analysis and no reference will be made to you in particular. Therefore be free to respond to the best of your knowledge So as to realize the objectives of the study which will not be successful without your whole hearted cooperation.

Thank you in advance for your collaboration

General instruction

1. Put a tick mark in front of the appropriate response for all multiple questions. 2. It is possible to choose multiple answers for the question that need such answers. 3. Write on the space provided with complete sentences on the space given.

Part one

Personal Information of the respondents

1. Respondent‟s Kebele name ______2. Age ______3. Sex male Female 4. Marital status A .married B .single C .widowed D .divorce 5. Family size male______female ______total ______6. Level of Education A .Cannot read and write B .1-4 C . 5-8 D .9-12

7. Religion A Muslim B .Christian C. Wakefate D .others 8. Cereal crop production in quintals in 2017 9. maize ____-B) sorghum ____C) millet _____D) “teff” ______Others specify ____ 10. Cash crop production in quintals A) Coffee _____ B ) Pepper ____ C) “Selit”_____ D Other(specify)____ 11. Live stock husbandry in number A ) Cow _____ B )Goat___ C )Sheep______D) A) Donkey______12. Size of farm land in ha ______

Part two

The ongoing method of soil conservation practices

1 Do you participate in soil conservation Yes No

2 In which of the following activities do you participate?

A, contour plowing Yes No

B crop rotation Yes No

C Mixed farming Yes No

D Agro forestry Yes No

E Animal dung Yes No

F Following Yes No

G Terracing Yes No

H Mulching Yes No

3 Do you regularly participate? Yes No

4 In question number 4 above Why Specify ______

5 The women are actively participating Yes No

6 The youth are actively participating participate in soil conservation?

Yes No

7 Do you plant coffee and other plants each year? Ye s No

8 How is the productivity of your land? A. Increasing B. Decreasing

9 Do you use compost? Yes No

Part Three

The perception of the local community on community based SCP

1. Have you ever observed soil loss? Yes No 2. What are the indicators of soil loss on your farm? ______3. Who is responsible to conserve the soil? A. Government B. Community 4. Do you think that you have a role in the community? Yes No 5. Do you participate in terracing voluntarily? Yes No 6. Do you participate in the planning of soil conservation? Yes No 7. Do you use chemical fertilizer? Yes No 8. How often you use? A regularly B intermittently 9. What do you say for the following?

Factors Agree Disagree It is possible to combat soil loss Termites can destroy the soil You are effective in your activities of all soil conservation The farmers are the most affected social class by soil loss Active participation of SC can influence the livelihood of the family Farmers are the main agents of change for soil problem Religious leaders and elders are the influential body of the community for community participation

10. What do you observe from the enclosure area found at your village?

No Factors Rating

Highly Increased To some extent Decreased Highly increased decreased A Forest cover B Grass supply C Crop yield D Water supply E soil fertility

Part Four

Factors affecting community participation

1. How much do the communities participate in SCP? A. Satisfactory B. not satisfactory B. If not why? Specify 2. How much DA‟s & Kebele leaders and Wereda soil and natural Resource protection able to coordinate community for soil management? A. Highly capable B. Capable C. Less capable D. Very less capable E. not capable 3. What is the commitment of DAs and wereda employee in soil conservation? a. A. Highly committed B. committed C. Less committed b. D. Very less committed E. Not committed 4. Is there any NGO‟s to coordinate the communities SCP at kebele level? Yes No 5. If yes in question 14 above, in what way?

A. training B. meeting C. consulting D. if other specify______

6. How much the following factors negatively affect the community participation of soil conservation?

No Rating Affect Does not affect 1 Low in come 2 Low education .level 3 Healthy problem 4 Age level 5 Size of house hold 6 Farm land distance from home 7 Less information

Appendix II

Questions for Focus group discussions

1 Discuss some of the activities that farmers perform for soil conservation?

For how long the people inhabited in this area and participate in soil conservation?

2 Do the farmers of this local area produce sufficient food crop consumption for their family? 3 Do all community members participate in soil conservation activities in local area? 4 What is soil for farmers? Do they give time to discuss about the soil problem? 5 Is there any organized body in the local area that mobilize community for soil conservation?

6 Do the local communities have any reward for better soil conservation? 7 Is the protection and management that is done for the soil is sufficient and consistent? 8 What are the major factors affecting the community negatively from the soil conservation participation? 9 What do you think that, How can the level of the community participation increase?

Appendix III

Checklist of Observation

1. How severe is soil erosion? 2. What are the practices of the community to conserve the soil? 3. What are some of the differences between the protected area and the non protected 4. area in regard of the soil rehabilitation? 5. How is the livelihood of the community? 6. Is the indigenous soil conserving method fruitful? 7. Are the communities highly organized to perform common activities? 8. Are the government employee those working with community empower the community the farmers to conserve soil

Thank You

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN SOIL CONSERVATION

PRACTICES: THE CASE OF DALE SEDI WOREDA, OROMIA,

WESTERN ETHIOPIA

BY Oluma Benti

August, 2018

Adama, Ethiopia

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

A THESIS PREPARED ON

COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES:

A CASE OF DALE SEDI WOREDA, WESTERN ETHIOPIA

OLUMA BENTI

THESIS ADVISOR

TSETADIRGACHEW LEGESSE (PhD)

August, 2018

Adama, Ethiopia

Declaration

and Technology University Department of Geography and Environmental Studies as part of Master program in geography. I also declare that it is my original work and is not submitted to any other University or institution for the award of any academic degree.

Name ______

Signature ______

Date ______

Approval sheet 1

As thesis research advisor, I hereby certify that I have read and evaluated the thesis prepared under my guidance by Oluma Benti Gutema entitled “Community Participation in Soil

Conservation Practices in Dale Sedi Woreda Western Ethiopia”. There I recommend that it is accepted as fulfilling the thesis requirement and defended in public.

Approved by Tsetadirgachew Legesse (PhD) ______

Thesis Advisor Signature Date

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND LAW

Approved by Board of Examiners Signature Date

1. Advisor ______

2. Internal Examiner ______

3. External Examiner ______

4. Chairperson ______

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ...... i

Table of Contents ...... ii

List of Tables ...... v

List of Figures ...... vii

Acronyms ...... viii

ABSTRACT...... ix

CHAPTER ONE ...... 1

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 ...... 4

1.3.2. Specific objective...... 4

1.4 Research Questions ...... 4

1.5 Significance of the study ...... 4

1.6 Limitation of the study ...... 5

1.7 Scope of the study ...... 5

1.8. Organization of the Study ...... 5

CHAPTER TWO ...... 7

REVIEW RELATED LITERATURES ...... 7

2.1. Concepts of community participation ...... 7

2.2 Approaches of community participation ...... 9

2.3. Factors Affecting Community Participation ...... 11

2.4 Principles of Natural Resource Management...... 12

2.5. Land management Practices in Other Countries ...... 13

2.6 Soil conservation Practices in Ethiopia ...... 14

2.7. Soil conservation practices ...... 15

2.7.1. Biological Soil conservation Practices ...... 16

2.7.2. Physical soil management practices ...... 18

CHAPTER THREE ...... 19

STUDY AREA, RESEARCH METHOD AND MATERIAL ...... 19

3.1 Physical back ground ...... 19

3.1.1 Location ...... 19

3.2. Demographic and Socio Economic feature ...... 20

3.2.1 Population and settlement pattern...... 20

3.2.2 Physical relief ...... 20

3.2.3 Soil ...... 20

3.2.4 Natural Vegetation ...... 20

3.2.5 Climate...... 21

3.2.6 Economic activity ...... 21

3.3 Research methods and materials ...... 22

3.3.1 Research design ...... 22

3.3.2. Study Population and Sampling techniques ...... 23

3.3.3 Sampling size ...... 24

3.3.4. Sampling Techniques...... 31

3.3.5 Data Sources ...... 31

3.3.6. Instruments of data collection...... 32

3.4. Method of Data Analysis and Interpretation ...... 32

3 5.Research validity and reliability...... 33

3.6. Ethical issues ...... 33

CHAPTER FOUR...... 34

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ...... 34

4.1 General Socio-Economic Condition of the Sample Households ...... 34

4.2 The ongoing method of soil conservation practices...... 38

4.3 The perception of the local community regarding community based SCP...... 46

4.4 The major factors affecting community participation ...... 53

CHAPTER FIVE ...... 58

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ...... 58

5.1 Summary ...... 58

5.2 CONCLUSIONS ...... 59

5.3 Recommendation...... 59

References ...... 61

Appendix ...... 67

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2. 1 Typology of participation ...... 10

Table 3. 1 Sample household ...... 25

Table 4. 1 Sex and Age composition of the HHs respondents ...... 35

Table 4. 2 Family size and educational status of the sampled HHs ...... 35

Table 4. 3 Food crop and cash crop production per ha ...... 36

Table 4. 4 Total estimation of crop production quintals per hectare ...... 36

Table 4. 5 Cattle population of the sampled HHs ...... 37

Table 4. 6 Method of community participation in soil conservation ...... 38

Table 4. 7 Community perception ...... 48

Table 4. 8 Changes due to soil conservation ...... 50

Table 4. 9 The capability and commitment of DAs and natural resource sector .... 53

Table 4. 10 Factors negatively affect the community participation ...... 54

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2. 1 General problem of soil degradation ...... 15

Figure 3. 1 Map of Dale Sedi woreda ...... 19

Figure 4. 1 Cattle keeping area in the night for their manure ...... 38

Figure 4. 2 Farmers preserve trees in the farm ...... 41

Figure 4. 3 Cows keeping area during the night ...... 42

Figure 4. 4 Making terrace in Dale Sedi woreda ...... 44

Figure 4. 5 Distribution of coffee seedling on nursery...... 45

ACRONYMS

CAADP Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program

CP Community Participation

CPSC Community Participation in Soil Conservation

DA Developmental agent

DSWED Dale Sedi Woreda Educational Office

DSWLFO Dale Sedi Woreda Live stock and Fisheries Office.

DSWRLM Dale Sedi Woreda Rural Land Management

DSWSVERA Dale Sedi Woreda Social Vital Events Registration Agency

GDP Gross Domestic Product

NAP National Action Plans

NEPAD New Partnership for African Development

PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Program

SLM Sustainable land management

UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

ABSTRACT

The participation of the community in soil conservation practices is low that couldn’t realize food security of the study area. Thus 67% of the respondents evaluated their participation and they found that it is not satisfactory and 86% were not effective with their performance of soil conservation participation. The challenges to the farmers to adopt soil conservation measures include labor availability, limited capital limited technology, lack of technical support, lack of motivation and voluntariness of the communities are the majors. For this it is recommended that the community should have farther awareness for better soil conservation, the DAs should get training, attention should be given for the indigenous soil conservation practices and motivation and reward for the farmers those performed better in soil conservation and each farmer should practice different conservation activities on their plot of land.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Where in the past a community has been able to safeguard common interest through collective action, community members tend to be more willing devote their time and energy to promote community activities (Awortwi, 1999).Thus positive past experience condition suggests that there is likely to be effective community participation. The most important point is that community participation is the main prerequisites for securing effective sustainable development. Participation provides a collaborative process by which community inhabitants r0each common goals, engage in collective decision and create places in turn serve as material expression of their collective efforts (Feldman, Roberta M. &Westphal Lynne M. 2000) .In order to recover the damaged environment and bring about sustainable development it again needs the structured and organized participation of the community (FAO, 2008) On the other hand, from a Boserupian, perspective the scarcity of land induced by population pressure would increase the drive to invest in land quality (Boserup 1965). Population growth may induce farmers to make labor-intensive investments in land improvement and soil conservation, such as constructing terraces, composting or mulching Tiffen et al. (1994)Oakley et al.(2008)says participation provides a collective process by which community inhabitants reach common goals, engage in collective decision and create better places ,and these places in turn serve as material expression of their collective effort .From this idea we can understand that people can damage the environment and on the other hand they are able to create better settlement area ,they can form better life and can increase their life expectancy by managing their environment in collective and organized way. Soil loss is a common problem that need better management to support the life of the present generation without compromising the need of the future generation. Bentham D (1999) says through participation people learn .Then we can say that the major school in local community is participation. People can share their experiences for the next generation by the method of participation. The soil conservation practices can be transmitted from generation to generation by community participation. Local institutions should be strengthened to enable rural communities and shall improve their land use and land tenure arrangements through participatory processes (FAO, 2000).

Sustainability in agriculture and more specifically in land use has been on the top of priority list of natural management issues in developing countries. Sustainable soil conservation means cropping, pastoral and forestry use of the limited and only partially renewable resources soil, water and plant nutrients to safeguard soil productivity also for future generations and prevent or reverse degradation process (Senait,2002).The objective of sustainable land conservation is to harmonize the complementary goals of providing environmental, economic and social opportunities for the benefit of present and future generations, while maintaining and enhancing the quality of the land resource.

With population growth about 150,000 ha per a year wood land is cleared.(Berry, 2003). Thus the soil resource would be under high population pressure with inappropriate farming and management practices .This brings about the decline of agricultural productivity (Bililign, 2010). 27 million ha of highland is significantly eroded; 14 million ha is seriously eroded. From the factor of climatic variation and human activities soil is the most affected natural resource which results the decline of agricultural productivity (Haile Fissaha .2007).Therefore the genuine community participation in soil conservation practices is a vital solution to correct the situation.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

practices in the study area. Hundreds of thousands of kilometers of structural types have been constructed over croplands in Ethiopia. However, reports indicate that these conservation structures have not been as successful as they could be, because the farmers were not enthusiastic enough in accepting and maintaining the technology (Wood, 1990). The failure of conservation programs partly emerge from the fact that planners and implementing agencies ignore or fail to consider socio-cultural factors as key determinants of the success or failure of conservation programs Belay (1992) Tesfaye (2003) points out that our understanding of farmers' knowledge

and their perception of factors that influence their land management practice is of paramount importance for promoting sustainable land management.

1.3. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

1.3.1. GENERAL OBJECTIVE The general objective of the study is to assess the level of Community Participation in soil conservation practices in Dale Sedi Woreda.

1.3.2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE The specific objective of the study is to:

4 Identify the ongoing method of soil conservation practices being implemented by community participation in Dale-Sedi Woreda. 5 Examine the perception of local community regarding community based soil conservation activities in dale Sedi woreda 6 Assess the major factors affecting the level of community participation in soil 7 conservation practice in Dale Sedi Woreda

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The overall process of this research is guided by the following research question

 What are the ongoing methods of soil conservation practices by community participation in Dale Sedi woreda?  How the perception of local community regarding communities is based soil conservation practices in Dale Sedi woreda?  What are the major factors affecting the level of community participation in soil conservation practices in Dale Sedi woreda?

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Governmental and non government organization wants to know the level of the community participation to perform their objectives. The NGOs use the study to mobilize the society to

participate in soil management. The research can also use as the initial point for the researchers. Recommendation of the study can be used as alternative to increase the participation of the community in the soil erosion management of the local woreda. The policy makers will use the research to enhance the community based participatory method to ensure food security.

1.6 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

In the course of this study the most challenges and problems faced include:  There was a problem of transportation to distribute and collect the questionnaire due to political unrest in the study area.  Few households delayed to return back the questionnaire  Shortage of time during data collection.  Shortage of access and knowledge gap for using different soft ware to analyze collected data. Moreover, shortage of adequate secondary data at the study area was also another limitation of this study. Due to shortage of time the researcher did not conduct pre-test or pilot. The researcher solved the problems by using on foot and horse to collect data, used part-time, weekend and holidays to contact the stakeholders and manipulate the study.

1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The principal objective of the study is to identify the level the participation of the community on soil conservation in both tradition and modern ways. The geographical scope of the study will be delimited to Dale Sedi Wereda of Oromia Regional State.

1.8. ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY

empirical literature related to community participation, consequences of land degradation and land management practices and analytical frame work. Chapter three provides the physical and socio-economic features of the study area and the research methodology and procedures of the study. Chapter four presents and deals with the discussion and analysis of the survey data and interpretation of ongoing method, perception of community on community based soil conservation and factors affecting community participation. Chapter five dedicated to summary, conclusion and policy implications and recommendation based on the results of the findings.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW RELATED LITERATURES

2.1. CONCEPTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

According to Rogers et al. (2008) Participation is a process through which stakeholders can influence and share control over development initiatives and the resources used to fund them through engagement in decision making. He stated that it is a pluralistic approach to natural resource management through the involvement of partners with the end goals of sustainable use and conservation of the resource and equitable sharing of benefits and responsibilities related to it. Thus it is considered as a voluntary contribution by the people in one or another of the public programs supposed to contribute to national development. From the alternative development point of view participation is seen as a right of citizenship initially focused on community and civic society and latterly on the state through inclusive governance (Hickey et al, 2004) In other words, community participation is a way of harnessing the existing physical, economic and social resources of rural people in order to achieve the objectives of development programs and projects (Gebremedhin,2004). It basically arose as a top-down development planning approaches which sought to devise antipoverty program at the top for implementation downward through a compliant bureaucracy. Hickey et al ( 2004)observes, that people take the time and energy to engage in establishing the basis for; planning, carrying out and/or evaluating some activity or activities that will bring about the change in their own lives. It is thus focused on the local level and depends upon local interests and capacity to engage in action for change. Chopra et al (1990) refers to participatory development as an conventional approach requiring the evolution of non-market, non- governmental people‟s organizations in the management of common property resources. These further add that participatory development therefore, is a new socio-economic force aiming for sustained development at the village level. Chambers (2005) adds that among the objectives and functions of participation is seeking to increase the capability of communities to handle their affairs and to control and exploit their environment.

The term “people‟s participation ”Chopra et al( (1990) is therefore very popular among most development agents involved in programs which target the community or those that do development at the local level or better still “among NGOs, and practitioners working with special targeted groups such as women and children. Most such development agents view people‟s participation in development activities as an essential and good thing for materializing development objectives Participation as understood in development. Mengesha,( 2000) defines participation as an active process by which beneficiaries/client group influence the direction and execution of development projects with a view to enhancing their well being in terms of income, personal growth, self reliance or other values they cherish.‟ In this definition it is clear that participation is directed at making it possible for the people targeted by development projects to decide project priorities based on their needs. It means therefore that in this sense, participation carries according to Lund Michelson (1995) a „normative assumption that the poor masses ought to get the kind of development decided by themselves. The poor must take part in provisioning of their own needs rather than relying on the state to solve their problems. Hickey et al ed. (2004) states that the participation of those at whom an intervention is aimed is meant to ensure that the change will be more appropriate to their needs. It is also assumed to have the effect of empowering them so that they continue to direct future changes and put pressure on the outside forces to support these changes.

As Gebremedhin (2004) stated in his study, two forms of evaluation/indicators can be used to measure the impact of community participation. These are; Quantitative indicators are tangible, readily visible and susceptible to statistical measurement. These include; an increase in agricultural production, financial income and public services, the productivity of land, constructed soil and water conservation techniques. They are relevant dimensions of participation and could be evaluated by using quantitative techniques. . Qualitative indicators are less visible and less tangible. These are more concerned with describing the characteristics and properties of a process like the degree of community„s environmental awareness, attitude and skill and the degree of community mobilization and solidarity over a period of time. However, both indicators of participation must be used in the evaluation in order for the outcome to be fully understood.

2.2 APPROACHES OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

This research can fulfill the research paper written by Tolera Megersa (2011) which directly focused on the comparison of modern and traditional land management practices. The other

person Gebremedhin Yehadego (2004) wrote his research paper on community participation on sustainable soil and water conservation. Both didn‟t touch the level and the degree of community participation Table 2. 1 Typology of participation s/n Typology Characteristics 1 Manipulative Participation is simply a pretence, with ‗people„s„ representatives on participation official boards who are unelected and have no power 2 Passive People participate by being told what is going to happen or what has Participation already happened. This involves unilateral announcement by an administration or by project management without listening to people's responses 3 3.Participation People participate by being consulted, or by answering questions. by consultation External agents define both problems and information- gathering processes, and so control analysis. Such a consultative process does not concede any share in decision making 4 Participation People participate by providing resources, for example labor, in return for material for food cash or other material incentives. Farmers may provide the incentives fields and labor, but are involved in neither experimentation nor the process of learning. 5 Functional Participation seen by external agencies as a means to achieve project participation goals, especially reduced costs. People may participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives related to the project. Such involvement may be interactive and involve shared decision making, but tends to arise only after major decisions have already been made by external agents 6 Interactive People participate in joint analysis, development of action plans and participation formation or strengthening of local institutions. Participation is seen as a right, not just the means to achieve projects goals. The process involves interdisciplinary methodologies that seek multiple perspectives and make use of systematic and structured learning processes. As groups take control over local decisions and determine how available resources are used, so they have a stake in maintaining structures or practices

2.3. FACTORS AFFECTING COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

The major factors that affect (either positively or negatively) community participation on soil and water conservation are lack of awareness, capital (economic factor), availability of grants and subsidies, discrimination against women, interference by politician, factionalism and heterogeneity of population and difference in wealth and social status (Singh, 1992).In line with these internal socioeconomic characteristics of community households like, level of education, skill and income influences/determines the intensity/degree of community participation towards natural resource management practices (Awortwi, 1999). When the level of education, health condition and occupational and income situation of the community members is low people feel that they have no economic power and knowledge and skill to organize themselves and run development activities and manage the same. When people have low economic power, they commit less time and resources to community work. As Gebremedhin (2004) and Bililign (2010) stated on their study, Participation increases with better education because it enhances better organizational leadership and educated people are more likely to be receptive to new ideas, more communication and human relation skills and more understanding. The level of community participation is also affected by the effect of past-experience of individual households and the community as a whole. Where in the past a community has been

able to safeguard common interests through collective action, community members tend to be more willing to devote their time and energy to promote community activities (Awortwi, 1999).Thus, positive past experience condition suggests that there is likely to be effective and genuine community participation. According to Tworg (2006), the amount of benefit the community and its members receives is the fundamental determinants of community participation on sustainable soil and conservation activities. The community's social and economic benefit refers to the social services and economic outputs such as products, financial income or an increase in the productivity of land or labor that the community tangibly gains. People engage in development activities only when they see clear preferably tangible net benefit in terms of production, income and services. In order to ensure genuine community's participation the degree of empowerment plays a significant role (Gebremedhin, 2004). Empowerment involves participation in decision making on matters important to the empowered subject/s. The empowerment of a community includes issues such as increased level of awareness, increased decision-making and improved access to resources and institutions. Empowering the community's participation and giving power to decision making on matters important to them such as over resources and benefits, enhances the degree of participation. Empowerment strategies use group-based actions in order to achieve access to decision making (Wils, 2001).

2.4 PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

According to Tola Gemechu (2005), the following sets of principles are significant in order to achieve sustainable natural resource management.

Priority based approach; Natural resource management actions are to be undertaken according to priorities that are based on the best available science and information, and relevant experience, as well as on assessment of the relative cost-effectiveness of various options. Balanced decisions; Natural resource management decisions should take proper account of the range of environmental, social and economic benefits, values and costs. Prevention is better than Cure; It is often more efficient to prevent damage rather than repair it. Therefore, where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason. Ecosystem approach; Natural resource management should be based on an understanding of the relationship between natural resources and the ecosystems they support, and upon careful monitoring of change over time. Integrated management; The management of natural resources should be integrated within regions and catchments, as well as across industry sectors, government agencies and specific issues. Partnership; To be effective, natural resource management requires the establishment of partnerships between all levels of government and the community, including the native people. Responsibility and accountability; All community members should receive benefits from the use, development and conservation of natural resources; they share responsibility for managing natural resources sustainably, and for providing economic resources to do so.

2.5. LAND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN OTHER COUNTRIES

At the regional and country levels, several strategies have been formulated to reduce poverty and land degradation .Of all African countries, 38 have developed National Action Plans (NAPs)under the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), and 18 countries have incorporated the NAPs into their Poverty Reduction Strategy Program (PRSPs) The Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program (CAADP) of the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD), in collaboration with African governments and donors, places high priority on promoting sustainable land management (SLM) in its investment plans. CAADP has emerged as one of the important programs for coordinating country and regional level agricultural and SLM investments in collaboration with international donors who

are currently seeking to harmonize their support through the Paris Declaration. A global partnership to scale up, mainstream, and finance country-driven SLM approaches in Africa, is currently working in partnership with CAADP to coordinate country- and regional-level SLM investments (Worku Yohannes,2016).

2.6 SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES IN ETHIOPIA

In Ethiopia there is limited experience in traditional community based natural resource management including rangelands, forests/woodlands and water resources. Recently government as well as non-governmental organizations is in the process of institutionalizing innovative community based natural resource management practices (Gete Zeleke, 2000).Several efforts have been made to promote sustainable land management in Ethiopia. For example, in most places where soil conservation was implemented in the1970s, farmers either totally or partially destroyed the conservation structures. Of the total conservation measures implemented between 1976 and 1990, only 30 percent of soil bunds, 60 percent of hillside terraces, 22 percent of the planted trees of the reserve areas were still in place of 1994( Gete Zeleke, 2000). In Ethiopia, since the 1970s, considerable efforts have been made to reverse the problem of land degradation. However, the impact of those efforts did not improve the impact of land degradation in a meaningful and sustainable manner. Evaluations of efforts made concluded that the interventions were ineffective, insufficient and unsustainable (Woldeamlak, 2003). Various reasons are often given for the lack of success. Among these the most commonly cited factors include failure to consider indigenous land management practices, high cost chemical fertilizer which are not affordable to poor farmers and also trying to apply uniform techniques in different agro ecological regions (Aklilu,2006).Traditionally through time, farmers have developed different soil conservation and land management practices of their own. With these practices, farmers have been able to sustain their production for centuries. Even up to now, it has been acknowledged that these technologies, which include plowing of narrow ditches on sloping fields to control run-off, farmland terraces, traditional ditches and furrows, contour plowing, fallowing, crop rotation, farmyard manure and agro forestry continue to play a significant role in the production of subsistence agriculture (Betru,2003). The major elements of the soil conservation activities were a range of physical structures such as farmland and hillside

terracing, cut-off drains and waterways, micro-basins, check dams, water harvesting structures like ponds and farm dams, spring development, reforestation, area closure and management and gully rehabilitation. Betru et al (2003) however efforts made up to the early 2000 were considered inadequate as they covered only 7%of the total land area that needed treatment, and at that rate, it was estimated that treating all the remaining land could take seven decades. Figure 2. 2 General problem of soil degradation

Source developed from Annisa Gara (2011)

2.7. SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES

Soil conservation practices consists biological, mechanical measures and institutional arrangements. The first category refers to use of organic skills and biological materials. Mechanical practices on the other hand refers to practices involve physical structures, often with barrier function. Institutional arrangements refers to land tenure arrangement to labor sharing and so forth that may also contribute to maintenance of soil fertility (Grohs, 1994) Biological or agronomic measures refer to farming practices to minimize erosion, improve fertility and soil structure. Physical or Mechanical measures include earth works aimed at controlling and directing the run off in the arable areas. It maximizes infiltration and retains moisture in the soil. However this study is concerned with the biological and physical conservation measures as farming practices that have evolved through the course of time without any known outside institutional interventions and which has some soil conservation effects.

The choice of adequate conservation measures will need to base on assessment of the form and intensity of degradation process and the choice of the management practices adapted to the environmental conditions economic feasibility and the social acceptability of the proposed controlled techniques. It is realized that farmers will do so only when they are given the motivation and the means to do so (Tiffen et. al 1987).There are various technical solutions for land toward sustainability. Techniques aimed at erosion control include contour farming, construction of physical conservation measures…etc. Soil nutrient replenishment has to be achieved through organic and inorganic fertilizer application. Traditional erosion control practices include cattle manure, crop rotation, mixed farming, fallowing, and other forms of agro-forestry measures like coffee planting and management of trees are some widely spread practiced in the study area. Studies indicate that for the successful rehabilitation of degraded lands in developing countries local concerns about immediate tangible benefits must be integrated into global concerns about the environment. This can be accomplished by building on indigenous knowledge and traditions and by involving the whole village community in decision making or representing them through traditional organization. Local management by those who are familiar with the ecosystem and have a personal interest in the well being of the natural resources appears to be the most effective procedure for conservation and sustainable development in developing countries (Saxena, et al. 2001).

The technical solutions alone are not the remedy for the problem (Senait, 2002). To understand soil erosion we must be aware of the political and economic factors affecting land users‟ and preventing soil erosion requires political, economic and technical changes .Soil conservation measures need to be adapted to specific soil and landscape characteristics such as soil texture or terrain slope and to socio-economic circumstances of the largest population. This study mainly focuses on the role of socio-economic circumstances of farmers‟ perception in soil conservation.

2.7.1. BIOLOGICAL SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES

Agro forestry Trees and field crops can be grown together in the same field. The trees grown narrow strips, often in the contour and are usually cut at different times so that they do not

provide shade that would affect the crops. The trees may be either fruit trees or trees which have the ability to trap nitrogen from the atmosphere and return it to the soil where it can be used by another plants. Trees are used as wind breaks and are frequently used to control erosion. A good ground cover of grasses, shrubs, and/or leaf litter is needed if the trees are to effectively control water erosion, (Berry L. Town shed (2004).

2.7.2. PHYSICAL SOIL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

Green manure and animal dung or plants that have soil nutrient value to in reach the soil and cattle dung as a fertilizer. The green manure plants are cultivated on the land and the ploughed under to mix them with the soil .The animal dung especially cow dung is collected, dried up and then distributed in the farm when planting or sowing .The animal dung has the highest capacity to increase soil fertility and it can also stay in the soil for at least 3 years.

CHAPTER THREE STUDY AREA, RESEARCH METHOD AND MATERIAL

3.1 PHYSICAL BACK GROUND

Figure 3. 2 Map of Dale Sedi woreda

Source Manipulated by the researcher

3.1.1 LOCATION

Dalle Sedi wereda is found in western Ethiopia, Oromia regional state, kellem wollega zone of at about 550 km away from Addis Ababa to the west. Relatively the wereda is bounded by Lalo kile to the east and south east, by Aira Wereda to the north east, Illubabor zone to the south and Sadi Chanka to the west and Dale Wabara Woreda to the north west. The absolute location of Dale Sedi wereda is at 8043‟5526”N to 9 o 5 „3454 „‟N” latitude and 35006‟4574”to 35‟18E”

3.2. DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO ECONOMIC FEATURE

3.2.1 POPULATION AND SETTLEMENT PATTERN.

The study area a total population of 45960 Male and 54368 Female a total of 100328 are found in Dale Sedi Woreda from which 80% are rural population and 20% of the total are urban dwellers. There are 11419 male household and 782 female household, totally 12201 household in the wereda and in the sampled two kebeles there are 764 male households and 59 female households. The population growth of the woreda is 2.5%. (DSWSVRO)

3.2.2 PHYSICAL RELIEF

The wereda covers an area of 57,650 hectares of total land of which 28,259ha is farm land, 6419 ha is mountainous areas 165000 ha is coffee and forest land 1600 ha is protected area 2000 ha is covered by grass and about 900 ha occupied by settlement. (DSWRLM)Dale Sedi wereda has a diversified land feature. About 60% of its land is high land and hilly which is called baddaa locally and about 40% of the southern part is low land locally called gammoojjii.The highest altitude in the wereda is the hill of Emo which has an altitude of 1800 m asl found in the northern and the lowest area is at Hine area of Chamo kebele at Birbir river at which has an altitude of 1200m asl and found at south western part of the study area,

3.2.3 SOIL

3.2.4 NATURAL VEGETATION

.Some trees may grow up to 30 meter high and uses as a shadow for coffee in the winter dry season and timber production .The forest land of that area is also serving as the home of the wild animals. Monkeys and apes are found everywhere in the study area .Large animals like buffalo, lion, and tigers are found in the Hine Birbir wild animal reserve around Birbir river in Chamo kebele in south western part of the study area. The people of the study area look after their crops in order not to be destroyed by wild animals like pigs, monkeys and apes.

3.2.5 CLIMATE

The woinadega area has the highest rainfall in amount and duration while its temperature is lower relatively. The kola part of the study area has the lower rain fall in amount and duration but has highest amount of temperature than the woinadega area. The rain fall pattern is categorized in the summer maximum rainy season. The rain extends from April or May (spring season) to October (autumn) season. The summer maximum rain fall ranges from 1000mm- 1500mm (DSWARD), metrology stallions. The study area is drained by small rivers like Wayu, Kile, Ogiyo, Mardafo, Diba, Jajaba and other smaller streams drains to Birbir river which is the boundary of the study area and Illubabor zone of Oromia regional state and then to western direction to the Baro river of Gambella and joining the Nile river to reach Mediterranean sea.

3.2.6 ECONOMIC ACTIVITY

accounts about 90% of its people living in the rural area are engaged in the agriculture as the source of livelihood BOFED (2008). Almost the population of Dale Sedi wereda have direct or in direct contact with agricultural activity and it‟s the most important sector on the Wereda. The cereal crops produced in the Worada are maize, sorghum, millet, teff. Coffee is produced in almost 75% of the kebeles of the Woreda and it is the main cash crop in the study area . Industrial crops like „Nug’, salit,’ papper and ginger are produced mostly in low land area of the Woreda. Khat is also becoming one of the most important incomes generating production especially among the Harar settlers. Honey is produced by few farmers.

Animal rearing also plays significant role on the life of the woreda‟s population. They obtain meat, milk, butter, from the cattle. Goats Horse, Mules and Donkey serve for transportations in addition to their income generation. There are also thousand of hens 28600 sheep,19699 goats,181 Horsres,470 Mules,3839 d0nkeys in the wereda in 2017.(Dale Sedi Wereda live stock and fishing office)

3.3 RESEARCH METHODS AND MATERIALS

3.3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

was in the position of assessing the factors that influence the participation of community members in soil conservation practices, with a specific reference to community development.

3.3.2. STUDY POPULATION AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

Neuman (2006) defines, target population as a specific pool of cases that the researcher wants to study. This project targeted community members who are permanent residents that area; especially those staying in rural areas of .Dale Sedi Wereda consists of 27 rural kebeles and 3 urban kebeles. The study was very vast and time consuming if it would have include all kebeles of the wereda. However due to the shortage of time and financial problem and other resources the study area was determined to few kebeles. Therefore to conduct the study two kebeles namely Warawale Suchi and Arere was selected as sample kebele using purposive sampling.

According to Collins, the way to learn about a large group of entire population is by looking only at small part of its sample. The population referred by Collins not necessary the total population of an area but the totality of the target group from which the sample needs to be drawn cited in (Naidoo 2004).However the total population of Dale Sedi wereda was large as expressed in the above. Based on this point of view the target population of the study was the total house holders of the WaraWale Suchi and Arere Leku kebele. They were 764 male and 59-female, total 823 house holders. The reason why these two kebele were taken as the target population was hoping that the two kebeles were selected as one from the high land area and the other from low land area purposely where there was high erosion and soil degradation for that matter those people were expected to have better understanding about soil erosion and conservation practices and also a part of parcel of the total population were either affected by water erosion and soil

degradation or benefited from soil conservation activities performed individually and communally.

3.3.3 SAMPLING SIZE

The size of sample refers to the items to be selected from the universe to constitute a sample Kothari,(1998).To determine the sample size for the specific scientific study a researcher determined the desired precision and an acceptable confidence level. As a result the study was be delimitated to few kebeles. Then to conduct the study the researcher selected two kebele using purposive sampling method. The sample size from each kebele were determined proportionally from the households of the two kebele using the formula

n where

n=sample size

N=sample frame

e=the level of precision (0.05)

823÷1+823x0.0025=269 is the sample size

269÷823=0.3270646

Then multiply 0.3270646 with house holders of each kebele to get the sample size of each kebele

That is 261x0.3270646=85 for Arere leku kebele

562x0.3270646= 184 for Wara Wele Suchi kebele

85+184=269 is the total sample size of both kebeles

Table 4 sample house hold from sample kebele

The totals of 269 sample household were addressed and the questionnaire was distributed for the sampled household and they responded accordingly. DAs and health extensions participated in collecting the questionnaire.

Table 3.1

Table 3. 3 Sample household

SOURCE …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………RESEARCHER FIELD SURVEY (2018)

3.3.4. SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

The appropriate sampling technique of this research is based on purposive sampling. This is because of the identified two kebeles were selected from the high land and low land area of the Dale Sedi wereda one each and the two kebeles were the highly affected area of erosion and the most benefitted from soil conservation practices. Due to this fact all of the identified sample households actively participated in responding except few. DAs kebele managers and health extension of the two kebeles were trained and administered the questionnaires under close supervision of the investigator.

3.3.5 DATA SOURCES

The researcher used both primary and secondary data sources to achieve the intended goal. Primary data was collected from selected household‟s representatives based on questionnaire, FGD and observation. The secondary data sources include the titled and untitled documents

books; downloaded researches and text books were used as a literature review and support the primary data. Published documents such as wereda and local government‟s reports and books, including reports from woreda agricultural and rural development office and from Keble administrative and Developmental Agents (DA) at local level were also incorporated.

3.3.6. INSTRUMENTS OF DATA COLLECTION

3.3.6 1 Questionnaire.

3 .3.6.2 Focus group discussion

3.3.6.3 Observation

3.4. METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

graph, ratio and percentage. Data which is gathered through observation, interview and focus group discussion was qualitatively analyzed.

3 5.RESEARCH VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY

Validity refers to the appropriateness, meaningfulness, usefulness, of the specific inferences made from a given measurements (Chaltu 2005) .As a statements of Knapp and Mueller(2010) Validity is the usefulness of research instrument in addressing research objective and research questions. Validity can also be related to research methodology on which the study is frame worked (Marczyk ,2005 ) Based on this the researcher data triangulation method to maintain the research validity .The researcher has consulted methodological aspects on the previous research works and scholarly articles undertaken to select accurate data generation techniques. In addition the researcher tried to reviewed adequate conceptual and empirical literature related to the problem under investigation.

Reliability refers to the degree to which observed are free from errors of measurements, It is the extent to which our measuring instruments measure and yield a consistent output ( Guar ,2007) , In order to keep the reliability the researcher prepared questionnaire for household respondents and for focal group side by side to prove the legibility. The questionnaire are also checked by pear groups and by advisor one after the other. Moreover the researcher to gather the data inaccurate and efficient way the researcher made good interpersonal relation with participants and extracts their actual perception and reliable data.

3.6. ETHICAL ISSUES

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 GENERAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITION OF THE SAMPLE HOUSEHOLDS

Table 4. 3 Sex and Age composition of the HHs respondents

Age group Sex Total Percentage Cumulative Male Female 20-30 45 3 48 17.8 17.8 31-40 91 7 98 36.4 36.4 41-50 71 8 79 29.3 29.3 51-60 16 7 23 8.5 8.5 61& above 18 3 21 7.8 7.8 Total 241 28 269 100 100 Source: Own field survey (2018)

Table 4. 4 Family size and educational status of the sampled HHs

family size Educational status 1-3 4-6 7 & < Total 0 1-4 5-8 9-12 Total

Frequenc 48 170 51 269 49 85 104 31 269 Source: y organize Percent 17.8 63 19 100 18.2 31.6 38.6 11.5 10 d from age question naire

The researcher categorized the family size of the respondents in to three. In this case 48(17.8%) of the respondents have 1-3 family size,170(63%) of the respondents have 4-6 family size and 51(19%) of them were having 7 and more. The response of the household indicated that the size of the family have a positive impact on soil conservation practices since it is a labor consuming activity .The educational status of the sampled household revealed 49(18.2%) of them are unable to read and write,85(31.6%) of them completed first cycle primary school,104(38.6%) of them were between 5-8 or second cycle primary school and 31(11.5%) of them were between 9- 12 grade. (see table 4.2 above)

Table 4. 5 Food crop and cash crop production per ha

Food crop Cash crop(coffee) About About About 20 Less Between5-10 Between 10- 10 15 quintals than 5 quintals 15 quintals quintals quintals quintals Frequency 24 141 104 191 60 18 percentage 9 52.5 38.5 71 22.3 6.7 Source: own field survey (2018)

Table 4. 6 Total estimation of crop production quintals per hectare

Crop type Selected seed with Local seed with Local seed with chemical fertilizer chemical local fertilizer Fertilize(manure) Maize 85 46 26 Sorghum - 46 25 Millet - 46 24 Source: Dale sedi wereda agricultural extension team(2018)

Most of the crop grown in the area was mainly food crop and cash crop . Maize, sorghum, millet, teff and barley are the main food crop of the community. The yield production of the food crop grown in the area was very less compared to the size of farm land and with the average estimation of the woreda‟s agricultural office and extension team. The average estimation of food cop like maize of local seed without chemical fertilizer is 26 Quintal per hectare ,that of sorghum is 25 Quintal per hectare and millet yields 24 quintal per hectare of farm land according to Dale Sedi extension team .The respondents revealed that 24(9%)of them produce only 10 of different crop, 141(52.2%) of them produce only 15 quintals of different food crop and 104(38.5%) of them produce 20 quintals of different food crop. From the total farmland of the HHs the average food crop production is about 10 quintal per hectare. (see table 4.3 and 4.4 above).This indicates the top soil is highly damaged that could not fulfill the need of the inhabitants in supplying food. The main cash crop grown in the study area is coffee, pepper and salit. The average of the production is less than the woreda‟s standard. However most of the people in the study area are consuming food crop with the income they achieve from coffee.

Farm land size in the household respondents range between 0.5 ha to 3haAbout .26(10%) of the respondents holds only 0.5 hectare , 177(66%) of them holds 2 hectares of farm land and 65(24%) of the respondents hold 3 hectares each. This indicates there is a great variation in holding farm land that hinders the large land holders to manage their land properly and limited soil conservation.

Table 4. 7 Cattle population of the sampled HHs

Has no 1-3 cattle 4-6 cattle 7 & above cattle cattle Frequency 13 108 108 40 percentage 4.8 40.1 40.1 15 Source investigator‟s field observation

Figure 4. 4 Cattle keeping area in the night for their manure

Source Field work photo by researcher(2018)

4.2 THE ONGOING METHOD OF SOIL CONSERVATION PRACTICES

All of the sampled households are participating either in one or more of soil managing activities.

Table 4. 8 Method of community participation in soil conservation

S/N Method of soil conservation Frequency Percentage

1 Contour plowing 269 100 2 Crop rotation 205 76 3 Mixed farming 192 71.4 4 agro forestry 88 32.7 5 Animal dung distribution 246 91.4 6 Fallowing 140 52 7 Terracing 46 17 8 Mulching 0 0 Source Field own survey (2018)

The people of the study area were practicing different method of soil conservation practices in group and in individual. The response of the sampled households revealed 269(100%) of them were participating in one or the other soil conservation types. The method in which they participate were contour plowing, crop rotation , intercropping agro forestry, animal dung distribution, fallowing, in terracing, in mulching and others.

Contour plowing is a side way farming occurred during cultivation . Almost all the farmers in the study area uses contour plowing. 269 (100%) of the respondents participated in contour plowing .As I observed on their farmland no farmer is farming downward.

Crop rotation The community of the study area is practicing crop rotation. 205(76%) of the community uses this method.(see table 4.6 above). Crop rotation, decreases soil loss and preserves the productivity of land. The same crop year after year depletes the soil mineral. This is overcome by cultivating legumes. 26% of the community is not practicing crop rotation due to small farm size. Crop rotation is the practice of growing different crops one after the other on the same piece of land season after season or year after year. Mostly cereals and legumes plants are rotated. It is valuable traditional practice which plays an important role in maintaining ecological stability and improving agricultural productivity. When different crops are rotated the depletion of soil nutrient and the decline in crop yield minimized. When one depletes the nutrient the other restore the depleted nutrient. Different crops vary in their response to different pests and diseases. When some crop has the capacity to resist disease the others are susceptible. Tolera Megersa (2011). The FGD showed that those farmers who do not have large farm size do not have the opportunity to crop different crop alternatively.

Mixed farming is a practice of cropping different varieties of cops on the same farm at the same season of cropping for restoration minerals in the soil. Most of the people in the study area mix different types of crops at the same farming season. Thus 192(71%) of the respondents mix crops or separately sow when cropping. The crops that are mixed together in the study area are maize and spinach seed, maize and beans, millet and linseed are an examples. The inclusion of forage legumes in intercropping increases the level of atmospheric nitrogen utilization. Nitrogen would be available to the main crop from root and nodule decay of intercropped leguminous crops .Cited by Tolera Megersa (2011) Agro forestry The number of respondents who participate agro forestry is very less . Only 88 (38%) of them participate. The rest 62% do not have awareness of agro forestry The FGD replied that some farmers relate it with arboreal animals that destroy the crops and it is limited among the community. Agro-forestry is being encouraged in many countries as a way of modifying existing farming systems to promote soil fertility, erosion control and a diversified source of income Furthermore, agro-forestry systems require carefully selected of both crops and tree species of beneficial interactions to be obtained Trees can be

incorporated within a farming system by planting them on land. Where trees are deliberately integrated with crops or animals or both to exploit expected positive interactions between the trees and other land uses, the practices is defined as agro-forestry. Trees help to preserve the fertility of the soil through the return of organic matter and the fixation of nitrogen. They improve the soil‟s structure and help to maintain high infiltration rates and greater water holding capacity. As a result less runoff is generated and erosion is better controlled. Trees are also attractive to the farmer where they provide additional needs; especially fuel, fodder and fruits multipurpose trees and shrubs are thus fundamental to agro forestry(Morgan, 1995). Trees are used as wind breaks and are frequently used to control erosion. A good ground cover of grasses, shrubs, and/or leaf litter is needed if the trees are to effectively control water erosion, Berry L. Town shed (2004)

Figure 4.2 Figure 4. 5 Farmers preserve trees in the farm

Source photo by researcher (2018)

to be inherited and the indigenous soil fertility keeping is also transferred from generation to generation. The cattle manure is the widely accepted organic fertilizer. The urban dwellers share their cattle to the rural farmers to make them keep the fertility of soil while the cattle grown up for the owner. Even up to now, it has been acknowledged that these technologies, which include plowing of narrow ditches on sloping fields to control run-off, farmland terraces, traditional ditches and furrows, contour plowing, fallowing, crop rotation, farmyard manure and agro forestry continue to play a significant role in the production of subsistence agriculture (Betru, 2003)..

Figure 4. 6 Cows keeping area during the night

Source photo by researcher (2018)

Figure 4. 7 Making terrace in Dale Sedi woreda

Source Dale Sedi Information and Communication bureau

Regularity of participation The participants were asked some activities they perform regularly to conserve soil and they responded according to their own participation. Thus, they were asked that as they were regularly participating in soil conservation and most of the respondents 222 of them (82.5%) do not participate daily in soil conservation. The rest 47 respondents (17.5%) participate daily in soil conservation by distributing cattle manure waste

materials swept from the house like ash on the farm land. Regularly the farmers were using animal dung. This activity is done in two ways these are by drying up the dung near their home and distributing over the farm land which is performed by women and children, The other one is preparing fence like structure in the farm land and keeping the cattle in it throughout the night and reversing that fence at its regular time to balance the distribution of that dung. This activity is called “Dallaa Diddiiruu” in the language of the area .90(33.5%) of the respondents were practicing this method

Figure 4. 8 Distribution of coffee seedling on nursery

Source photo by researcher during field work (2018)

4.3 THE PERCEPTION OF THE LOCAL COMMUNITY REGARDING COMMUNITY BASED SCP

The household respondents evaluated their management in general and responded insufficient and not satisfactory thus they were not self sufficient in food crop.

directly or indirectly tied with the soil .the collaboration of the human being is the main factor for soil conservation.

Participation in planning The participants were requested whether they participate in discussion held at kebele level where the main issue is soil conservation and the respondents responded 180(67%) of the respondents participated in the discussion in which the issue of soil conservation is appeared and 89(23%) haven‟t heard about soil conservation in the meeting. The FGD agreed on that by saying the method of participation begins from discussion Decision making process should incorporate the marginalized group. None of the respondents participated in training and experience sharing held at kebele level. Community learn from their each other. Training and experience sharing are the basic methods of developing skills.

Participating in cash Chemical fertilizer is the recent soil fertility replacement in the study area. The respondents were asked how far they used and responded 202(75.1%) of the

respondents annually use and 67(25%) of them used intermittently because of expensiveness of its price .But the government„s more attention is for chemical fertilizer. That is why the DAs and other workers regularly mobilize the community. Among these the most commonly cited factors include failure to consider indigenous land management practices, high initial costs which are not affordable to poor farmers and also trying to apply uniform techniques in different agro ecological regions(Aklilu, 2006).

Table 4. 9 Community perception

Agree Disagree Frequency percentage Frequency Percentage Is it possible to combat soil erosion 236 87.7 33 12.3 Termite can also destroy the soil 252 93.7 17 6.3 The participation of the community in 233 86.6 36 13.4 SCP is effective The farmers are the most affected social 245 91 24 9 class by soil loss Active CP of SCP can influence the 256 95 13 5 livelihood of the community Farmers are the main agent for soil 172 64 97 36 rehabilitation Elders and religious leaders can 191 71 78 29 influence community participation Source fieldwork by researcher

Problem of termite Can termite destroy the soil was the next question and they responded as 252 of the respondents (93.7%) agreed that termite destroy the top soil and vegetations. 17 (6.3)did not agree. As I observed from their farm land termite is another soil problem not less than that of rainwater runoff.

and elders in the community and said that the highest responsibility should be given for them. They can divert the wrong idea in the community to positive and thus soil conservation can be properly practiced and implemented

Table 4. 10 Changes due to soil conservation

Increased No change

Frequency percentage Frequency Percentage Forest cover 226 84 43 16 Grass supply 233 87 36 13 Crop yield 157 58 112 42

Water supply 148 55 121 45 Soil fertility 241 90 28 10 Source :Household response

From the properly conserved soil ( area enclosure) the respondents observed the changes as the following.

Crop yield is the main point that would be changed by active community participation of keeping soil fertility. Depending on this for the question presented the household responded 157(

58%) as a crop yield is increased because of soil conservation and 112 (42%) observe no change on crop yield. This indicates that the change of crop yield at the study area is low. The little change on food crop is the result of the poor soil management at the study area. The FGD revealed that about half of the community is consuming cereal crop from the market for not less than half a year.

Why conserve :They tried to response for why they conserve soil by specifying that 148(55%) responded they manage soil to have better life for themselves. The other 121 (45%) tried to answer by saying to keep it for the next generation .It is concluded that half of the people are participating to fulfill their own needs while the other thinks for the next generation too. Soil is a natural resource that we use in a proper way and also preserve it for the next generation. Sustainable soil conservation means cropping, pastoral and forestry use of the limited and only partially renewable resources soil, water and plant nutrients to safeguard soil productivity also for future generations and prevent or reverse degradation process (Senait, 2002).

4.4 THE MAJOR FACTORS AFFECTING COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

Table 4. 11 The capability and commitment of DAs and natural resource sector

Capability Commitment

apable ommitted

rate Highly capable C Less capable Very less capable Not capable Highly committed C Less committed Very less committed Not committed

0 165 94 10 0 6 80 140 40 3

requency F

0 61.3 35 3.7 0 2.2 29.7 52 14.8 1.1

ercent

P ae Source researcher‟s fieldwork (2018)

DAs and kebele managers agitate and coordinate the community in the activities the farmers perform on agricultural activities. For this purpose their capability and commitment of

coordinate the community to dig out and then destroys termite .Out of 184 respondents of that kebele 32 (17.4%) are trained, 50 (27.7%) were participated meeting, and 10(5.5%) have got direct consultation of that NGO. Governmental and non governmental organization positively affect the participation of the community through .training ,meeting, experience sharing, rewarding and mobilizations.

Table 4. 12 Factors negatively affect the community participation

Less information 140 52 129 48 Source own field survey

There are so many factors that affect the community from actively participating on soil conservation practices. In relating with the study area I requested few of them and analyzed as the following

labor and capital consuming activity. Communities with lower income are suffering from the lack of cereal food crop even though they have large size of land.

The major factors that affect (either positively or negatively) community participation on soil and water conservation are lack of awareness, capital (economic factor), availability of grants and subsidies, discrimination against women, interference by politician, factionalism and heterogeneity of population and difference in wealth and social status (Singh 1992).In line with these internal socioeconomic characteristics of community households like, level of education, skill and income influences/determines the intensity/degree of community participation towards natural resource management practices (Awortwi, 1999). When the level of education, health condition and occupational and income situation of the community members is low people feel that they have no economic power and knowledge and skill to organize themselves and run development activities and manage the same. When people have low economic power, they commit less time and resources to community work. As Gebremedhin (2004) and Bililign (2010) stated on their study, Participation increases with better education because it enhances better

organizational leadership and educated people are more likely to be receptive to new ideas, more communication and human relation skills and more understanding.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 SUMMARY

5.2 CONCLUSIONS

In the study area the level of the participation of the community in soil conservation is less due to low understanding, low socio economic development and less mobilization.. The participation of community on soil loss by erosion and termite is a key factor in deciding the soil loss. Community‟s perception and identifying the factors that influence their participation of soil conservation practices are of paramount importance for promoting community participation in the study area. Communities of the study area are participating in few of soil conservation methods and have good perception of community based soil conservation practices. There are factors like age, health, education, income, labor and the others that hinder community from participation. However the way of their perception seems wrong. Because they perceive that if soil conservation is only performed through campaign by government follow-up rather than communities‟ regular activity which is performed on individual plot of land. Thus the communities are not well adapted to prepare terrace on their own farm land and do not perform daily activity of soil conservation. .Therefore the current trend of land degradation by soil erosion and termite is a threat to food security in Dale Sedi woreda.

5.3 RECOMMENDATION

Based on the analysis and conclusion the following recommendations are forwarded.

 The integration of DAs and wereda natural resource agents with the local community should be improved to enhance the community participation on soil conservation .The institution like FTC that is found in kebele level should perform the duty for which they are established. There should be training and experience sharing for farmers and the communities on soil conservation practices.  There should be motivation for better performance of soil conservation practices at kebele and wereda level to initiate and mobilize the others .The model farmers should be evaluated to be the hero of the year in soil conservation and preparing posters with that individual and rewarded.  In addition to chemical fertilizer it is necessary to give attention to compost and other organic fertilizers to replenish the soil. The traditional keeping of cattle fence like

structure and distributing cow dung in that way is an indigenous method and it should be kept and transferred for the next generation.  The soil conservation techniques appeared for the community should consider the general characteristics of the specific region such as topography of the land, soil texture, rainfall duration and intensity and the labor supplying community.  The redistribution of the farm land among the farmers is necessary. The land holding system in our country is the one that was in the feudal regime. The farmland is in the hands of few that hinder the young farmers from participating in soil conservation because they are landless farmers‟ .the farmers having large farm land are unable to dig terraces, Improving the price of coffee is the other mechanism by which the government improves forestation and re forestation. The study are is a the coffee growing zone .If the price of is increased, the farmers willingly plant coffee on their land which has multipurpose for the community.

REFERENCES

Adugnaw Berhanu (2014). Environmental Degradation and Management in Ethiopia Highlands: Debra Tabor University, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, DebreTabor, Ethiopia

Aklilu Dalelo (2001) A. Natural Resource Degradation and Famine: Assessment of Students„ Awareness and Views. Flensburg, Germany

Annisa Gara (2011) Assessment of soil Conservation Impact on Rural Development in Central Ethiopia Addis Ababa University

Awortwi, Nicholas,( 2000). The Riddle of Community Development: Factors Influencing

Organization, Participation and Self-Management. ISS Working Paper No. 287

The Hague: Institute of Social Studies Publication Office.

Bentham, (1992) liberal Democracy and The Limits of Democratization in D, Held prospects for democracy, North, South, East, West‟s Cambridge; polity

Betru Nedessa (2003). Principles and Techniques for Biological Soil Conservation, Soil Water Conservation Division: Guideline No.3,MoA.ETH/2488/III.

Berry (2004) Land Degradation in Ethiopia, its extent and Impact Commissioned by the GM with WB support,