MADDA WALABU UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL

STUDIES

PROPOSAL ASSESEMNT OF FARMERS' IN AGRO FORESTRY

PRACTICES AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY: THE
CASE OF MAKISGNIT WOREDA LAYEY KEBELE, IN
AMHARA REGION

BY: ALEMU ABUHAY

ID NO 8711/11

ADVISOR: BAHAIYLU (MBA)

MAY, 2013

BALE ROBE ETHIOPIA

0
ACKRONUMS
BoA…………………………… Berau of Agriculture

MWAO…………………………Maksegnit Woreda Agricultural office

SSA…………………………....sub-Saharan Africa

FDRE………………………… Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

SWC………………………….. Soil and Water Conservation

NGZ………………………. North Gondar zone

I
Table content

Table of Contents
ACKRONUMS.............................................................................................................................I

Table content...........................................................................................................................II

LIST OF TABLE..........................................................................................................................IV

LIST OF FIGUR..........................................................................................................................IV

CHAPTER ONE...........................................................................................................................1

1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................1

1.1 Back ground of the study................................................................................................1

1.2. Statement of the Problem.............................................................................................2

1.3 Objectives of the study.................................................................................................4

1.3.1 General Objective....................................................................................................4

1.3.2 Specific Objectives...................................................................................................4

1.4 Research Questionnaire..................................................................................................4

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

1.6 Scope of the study..........................................................................................................5

1.7 Organization of the paper...............................................................................................5

CHPTER TWO............................................................................................................................6

2. REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE..............................................................................................6

2.1 Definition of Agro-forestry and Agro-forestry practices.................................................6

2.2 Types of agro-forestry practices.....................................................................................6

2.3 Importance’s of Agro-forestry.......................................................................................7

2.4 The effect of Agro forestry on Agricultural productivity.................................................9

II
 2.5, Adoption of Agro forestry............................................................................................10

2.6 Factors affecting Agro forestry Adoption......................................................................10

CHPTER THREE........................................................................................................................14

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY................................................................................................14

3.1 General Description of the study area..........................................................................14

3.1.1 Location.................................................................................................................14

3.1.2 Topography and Area size......................................................................................14

3.1.3 Land form...............................................................................................................15

3.1.4. Vegetation............................................................................................................15

3.1.5. Soil........................................................................................................................15

3.1.6 Climate...................................................................................................................15

3.1.7 Population of the study area..................................................................................15

3.1.8 Economic Activity of the study area.......................................................................15

3.2 Research methods........................................................................................................16

3.2.1. Source of data Collection method........................................................................16

3.2.2 Sample size and Sample techniques......................................................................17

3.2.3 Sample size determination....................................................................................17

3.2.4 Instruments of Data collection..............................................................................18

3.4 Methods of Data Analysis.............................................................................................18

3.5 TIME AND BUDGET SCHEDULE......................................................................................21

3.5.1 Time schedule Table..............................................................................................21

3.5.1 Time Schedule........................................................................................................21

References..............................................................................................................................24

III
LIST OF TABLE

3.5.1 TIME SCHEDULE TABLE.......................................................................................................................21

Table 3.5.2 Budget Schedule...................................................................................................................22
LIST OF FIGUR
Figure 3.1: map of study area (GIS Lab 2021).........................................................................................14

IV
CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Back ground of the study

Over the last decades, agro forestry has emerged from long historical roots to become
a recognized modern land use practices in some parts of the world. We will first
review some common agro forestry practices in China, Europe, Argentina, Australia,
Newzeland and other different countries of the globe. As adopted agro forestry
practices in different region of the world, they play an important role in modifying
micro climatic conditions, preventing soil erosion, desertification and increase
agricultural productivity and resources supplies for basic family needs
(Andrews.2008)

Lack of marketing knowledge among farmers limits its wide spread development, in
1980s Paulo wnia winter wheat intercropping system that showed much promise are
established over 2million hectares. However, the domestic market for Paulo wine
timber is insufficient, and many farmers are reluctant to replant new Paulo wnia crop
system (Dewess1999).

Little coordinated research of accounting of the systems. The farming community

fearing the loss of additional agricultural land .Many developing countries will need
to double their food production by 2020 if they are to successfully feed their
burgeoning population. This will require maintaining, if not increasing, current rate of
growth in national food production in sustainable ways that do not degraded the
natural resources base. While agriculture in Sub Saharan Africans characterized by
slash-and-burn systems where in farmers use fallow to restore soil fertility, but under
slash and burn system facing decline in land productivity, negative environmental
effects, reduce nutrients cycle, and loss of above and below ground biodiversity,
increase in pests and weed infection and decline in soil fertility and as the same time
decline in agricultural productivity for rural land use in many developing countries
(Gockowshi et al, 2000).

1
The major challenges of agricultural development in Ethiopia, where more than 75%
of the population is agrarian include how to life up agricultural productivity, enhance
long term investment on farm lands, and to guarantee the sustainable development of
the sector. On the other hand, opponents have argued that planting eucalyptus tree
species on their farms results in depletion of soil nutrients via its long roots and high
water consumption (Hazell, 1995).

The study area now a days farm house holds are adopting eucalyptus tree plantation
on their farm plots to cope up with the vulnerable and volatile nature of agriculture.
However, there are ongoing debates about the adoption course of fast growing
encalyptus tree species such as Eucalyptus globules, Eucalyptus comaldacensis and
Eucalyptus saligna on food crop farm land. The proponents argue that, land
degradation , population growth and drought threaten food security, and thus planting
of eucalyptus trees on land which is un sustainable for food crop production may
substantively help farmers to raise house hold income and ultimately to improve food
security (Genene and Wegayehu , 2010).

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Agro forestry is hybrid land use system and it usually involves the addition of an
agricultural system (agronomic or pastoral) in to forest land scape, the incorporation
of trees in to agricultural land scape. In either case, successes hinges upon the ability
of the new system to meet the end user’s needs (Hazell, 1995).

Historically, Ethiopia has be affected by soil erosion, deforestation, degradation of

soil and natural resources. Similarly the potential of current deforestation to
undermine the country's agricultural product, economic and environmental
deterioration is huge. These changes provide soil erosion and different environmental
hazards. Like drought in the country, beyond the capacity of local institutions to
migrate these problems. By the case of deforestation it exists soil erosion. It can be
most problematic in Ethiopia where farmers are highly dependent on intrinsic land
ownership and unable to improve soil fertility through applications of purchased
inputs. It is rent less process that is usually difficult to control and easily accelerated
by human activity and causes massive soil erosion, loose of soil nutrients, reduce
agricultural products and provide massive destructive results (Sanchez et al, 1998).

2
Ethiopia is affected by soil erosion as a result, the decline of crop yields and animal
production per unit area from year to year. By the case of deforestation and other
determinant factors, soil erosion is the major socio economic and agricultural problem
in the Ethiopia. Trees and shrubs are disappearing fast in anthropogenic land scopes
of many countries. Research undertaken in Ethiopia showed that although farmers
knew which agro forestry tree species are considered important for integration in crop
fields, very few farmers are observed planting these species on their farm (Endris,
2006).

In my study area, most of rural households are practiced extensive agriculture

particularly crop farming and livestock production. During the decades has been
stricken by drought, unreliable rain fall and consequently to miserable poverty and
acute food shortage. This problem is also the current serious destructive for farm land
and non- farm lands, even if some soil conservation practices such as contour
ploughing, terracing, avoiding water, water way activities through the application of
farmers' indigenous knowledge and little involvement of stakeholders, it is not enough
to reduce the problem and it's destructiveness. Population pressure influences
adoption of agro forestry practice activities and physical measures on a small farm
plots as increases requires additional land for food that leads to fragmentation of land
and costs are spent on short- term requirements rather than long-term practices. Argue
that population pressure has resulted in land scarcity, fragmentation of land holdings,
reduction of fallow periods, shifting crop patterns, accelerated conflicts, and
competition over land use. Concludes that population pressure has a significant
negative influence on farmers: decision to use and adopt effective agro forestry
practices. Moreover, there is no any kind of research conducted on farmers' practices
in agroforestry and to assess and recommend their agricultural productivity (filed
observation 2018).

3
1.3 Objectives of the study
1.3.1 General Objective
The overall aim of this study is to assess the farmers' in agro forestry practices and
agricultural productivity in case of layey kebele.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

This study has the following specific objectives:

 To assess agro forestry practices in the study area.

 To evaluate the role of agro forestry practices and agricultural productivity in

the study area.

 To identify the determinant factors that can influence the adoption of agro
forestry Practices.

1.4 Research Questionnaire

 How agro forestry practices are exercised in the study area?

 What are the roles of agro forestry practices and how agricultural productivity
carried out in the study area?

 What are the determinant factors that influence the adoption of agro forestry
practices?

1.5 Significance of the study

Small scale farmers have limited capital and from land suffer from seasonal shortage
of water and other problems. We needs using the small land holding sufficient
through agro forestry practices for producing single food and row materials in order to
satisfy the diverse need of increasing communities and enhance their food security
even though agro forestry have many socio economic importance. It is constrained by
many factors. Assessing and mitigating those problems can be very important for
small scale farmers, development agent’s extension works and decision makers,
which will be concerned with natural resources management etc. This study will
4
facilitate further researchers on this issue and may address policy implementation to
faster economic growth and it creates nice opportunity in order to introduce the study
area for the people, who have not information about this study area before, and the
study shares experiences and improve mechanisms of farming systems.

1.6 Scope of the study

Since it is not possible to cover the whole North Gondar zone in maksegnit woreda
with the available time and resources (labor, capital or money) the research is limited
the study size and the scope of the problem to be manageable. Hence, the study focus
on representative site in layey kebele, the study considers farmers’ in agro forestry
practices and agricultural productivity.

1.7 Organization of the paper

This paper organized in to three chapters. The first chapter is an
introductory part Which mainly focus on the back ground of the study
Statement of the problem Objectives of the study Research question
Significance scope and limitation. The second chapter deals with
literature review where different views. Concepts and thoughts related to
agro forestry practices and farmers division to use agro forestry practices
the third chapter is about research methodology which consists of
description of the study area research design .source of data Simple size
and sampling techniques of data analysis.

5
 CHPTER TWO

2. REVIEW RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Definition of Agro-forestry and Agro-forestry practices

Agro-forestry is a long - established farming practice in many parts of the world.it
refers to a land use system in which trees are grown either simultaneously
sequentially in conjunction with annual crops or live stocks. The trees are cultivated
primarily for agricultural use, for example, to protect or enrich top soils for the benefit
of crops or to provide browse and fodde for livestock. Agro forestry is a collective
Name for land use systems and technologies where woody perennials (eg,trees,shrubs,
palms, bamboos) are deliberately used on the same land management units as
agricultural crops or animal either in some form of arrangement or temporal
sequence(www.unl.edu/nac/order.htm).

Agro forestry practice: include field, farmstead and livestock windbreaks; riparian
forest buffers along water ways; silvopasture system with trees and forage growing
together for livestock grazing; alley cropping annual crops with high-value trees;
forest farming populations where high-value specialty crops are grown under the
protection of arranged forest canopy; and a variety of special applications to help and
manage agricultural productivity and natural resources related issues (Kelietal,2005).

2.2 Types of agro-forestry practices

There are six agro forestry practices: alley cropping pasture, salvo e, windbreak,
forested riparian buffer and farming and also it includes special applications. Alley
cropping: in an alley cropping system, an agricultural crop is grown in the alleys
between widely spaced rows of trees. The agricultural crop provides for an annual
Income while the tree produces a long-term Income. Fine hard woods like oak,
walnut, ash and pecan are favored species in alley cropping system and are managed
for high-value lumber or veneer logs.Nut crop can be another intermediate tree
product. Salvo pasture: salvo pasture system combine trees with forage and livestock
production .in conifer stands the trees are managed for long-term, high-value saw
logs, while the under story is managed for forage production to support livestock
6
grazing. In Christmas tree plantations, carefully managed grazing provides an
alternative to mowing. Some nut and fruit orchards may also be grazed (Andrews,
2008).

Windbreaks: windbreaks are rows of vegetation used to reduce and redirected wind
field wind breaks improve crop yields and water use efficiency and reduce wind
erosion. Livestock windbreaks help to reduce climate stress and animal’s feeds
consumption and visual impacts. Farmstead windbreaks enhance living and working
environments, add value to your home and help and conserve energy. Forest farming:
In forest farming, high-value specialty crops are cultivated under the production of a
forest canopy that has been modified to provide a desired amount of shade crops like
ginseng, shiitake mushrooms and decorative ferns are sold for medical, culinary or
ornamental uses. Forest farming provides an added income while trees are being
grown for high-value wood products (Goldet al, 2006).

Riparian forest buffer: Trees, shrubs and grasses in riparian zones (those lands
adjacent to streams, ponds and wet lands) buffer water bodies from negative impacts
from adjacent agricultural lands. Natural or re-established stream side forests provide
ecological functions and reduce non-point source pollution of water ways, reduce
bank erosion and increase bio-diversity. Special applications: Trees and shrub
plantings may be used to help and solve special resource concerns. Some special
applications include the utilization of iste water or irrigation tail water to reduce a
short rotation woody crop and plantings to help stabilize stream banks and flood
plains. Any agro-forestry practices can be designed to enhance wild life habitat and to
optimize Carbone storage. Working trees in to the land scape will increase
agricultural productivity, protect natural resources, provide new source of income and
enhance environment for people and wildlife (www.unl.edu/nac/order.htm).

2.3 Importance’s of Agro-forestry

Agro forestry practices have the following advantages; these are: Conserve energy:
Agroforestry practices can significantly reduce energy use throughout the year .In
areas where hot winds are common windbreaks can reduce air conditioning demands
and field windbreaks improve crop water use efficiency thereby reducing irrigation
crops(Aklilu,2006).

7
Economic benefit of agro forestry practices .Enhance productivity: Farm productivity
and product quality can be increased substantially when agro forestry practices are
utilized. Windbreaks protect crops, livestock, soil and water resources. In cold
weather, live stocks protected by trees exhibit improved weight gains of as much as
10% and require up take 50% less feed. Milk production has been shown to increase
by eight to 20%. Windbreaks can greatly reduce or eliminate disastrous losses of new
born Lanbs and calves from blizzards. In dry climates, tree windbreaks can increase
row crop productivity from 10 to25 percent. This is due to their ability to moderate
the effect of hot, drying winds, which increase evaporation and plant transportation by
crops (Desta, 2012).

Diversify income: Fluctuating markets, unpredictable weather patterns and

international competition are all parts of today's modern agricultural world,
Diversification reduces risks and can make the differences between success and
failure for farming or ranching enterprises. Agro forestry can diversify farm and ranch
income, increase crop yield and conserve natural resources. Valuable products
harvested from agro forestry practices include: wood for energy generation ,paper
production and land scraping chips; fruit and nut; wood shavings for animal bedding
material; charismas trees ; saw logs for dimension lumber; high- value timber
products such as furniture-quality wood and veneer logs; and specialty crops like
decorative floral ,mushrooms, herbs, medical plants and craft materials(Endirs,2006).

Agro forestry has the following benefits with in environment. Air quality: The level
and the branches of the trees and shrubs canopy help filter and absorbed air pollutants,
including dust particles and moisture droplets. Tree canopies also create cooler
temperatures resulting in reduced smog level. Ongoing researches suggest that trees
and shrubs may help mitigate air quality impacts of livestock and industrial odors.
Windbreaks can improve chemical spray efficiencies and reduce off-site spray drift. A
key consideration for rebalancing the global carbon cycle is to find ways to promote
the increased growth of trees and shrubs. Trees store carbon in their wood as they
grown and can contribute greatly to reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide levels
(Genene, and Wegayehu, 2010).

Water quality: Working trees protect water quality and safe guard clean water
supplies for fish, wild life and people. Agro forestry practices. Combined with other

8
appropriate practices, create conservation buffer systems to control both point and
non- point source run off from agricultural operations. Trees and shrubs in riparian
zones filter surface run off laden with sediment, nutrient, chemical and biological
contaminants. Trees also help to stabilize stream banks by armoring banks against the
force of flood waters. Trees and shrubs roots absorb contaminants in shallow ground
water and also protect stream banks by holding soil particles together (Aklilu, 2006).

Soil quality: Sediments eroded from crop yields and construction sites carries
unwanted pesticides and excess nutrients in to ditches, stream and water supply
reservoirs. Eroded soils are less productive due to loose of organic matters, nutrients
and soil structure. Trees shrubs and other permanent vegetation in the land scape
create stable areas that reduce or eliminate soil erosion by wind and water.
Windbreaks or alley cropping systems placed on contours with in afield limit the
distance water can move downhill, thereby reducing its velocity and erosive power.
When these practices are placed perpendicular to erosive winds the reduced wind
energy results in less erosion (Keilet al, 2005).

Plant quality: The quality of plants grown in association with working trees is often
improved. In orchards, vineyards and vegetable fields sheltered by trees, they produce
has less bruising, scarring and premature drop normally caused by wind. Enhanced
habitat and reduced winds can increase insect pollination. Trees and shrubs grown
near crops and garden can harbor birds and beneficial insects that feed on pest insects
and mammals. Wild life habitat: Agro forestry practices can improve both terrestrial
and aquatic habitat. Extensive agricultural activities often lead to a reduction in
amount of quality of wild life habitat. Agro forestry offers a unique opportunity for
improving habitat in agricultural landscapes. Population of many wild life species
often increase with the addition of trees and shrubs in to agricultural areas. This
increase provides opportunities for both legal hunting and recreational uses, such as
watching birds and others (www.unl.edu/nac/order.htm).

2.4 The effect of Agro forestry on Agricultural productivity

Agro forestry practices and agricultural productivity have direct relationships. when
agro forestry exists in specific geographical area, there should the existence of the
benefits of agro forestry are manifold, for example, mitigation of soil erosion ,
preservation of soil moisture, replenishment of soil fertility by providing organic

9
fertilizers and alleviation crop failure risks. The advantage of agro forestry is that it
relies mainly on locally available natural resources, and this is suitable to local agro
systems. But if some geographical area lacks the activity of agro forestry, it may
result in risks like degradation of the existing cultivated land due to soil erosion and
decline in soil fertility and as a result of these existing factors, the agricultural
productivity is becoming decline or decrease (ww.unl.edu.nac /order.htm).

Generally, the emergence of agro forestry may leads an increment in agricultural

productivity and as well as the availability of sustainable environment surrounding
which has the consequences or effects like the sufficient supply of food security for
the livelihoods, increase in economic level that leads to the quality standard of living
and other related consequences. In addition to this, regarding to the animal rearing
agro forestry has its own crucial role in the activities like the way in which the
animals could get sufficient supply of grass for their feed, and in return the can give
the expected products that we get from them like milk and milk
products(Wegayehu,2006).

2.5, Adoption of Agro forestry

Studies have be conducted on the adoption of agro forestry in different areas.

Mercer and Miller (1998), report the economists have dominated agro forestry
adoption research. These economists are involved in two separate and distinct
lines, which include ex- ante and ex-post studies. Ex- ante studies rely primarily
on social and financial analysis of on- farm trials of agro forestry innovations to
assess the adoption potential and to improve the effective and efficiency of
developing, modifying and disseminating new agro forestry technologies. In sub
Saharan African case studies, Franzel and scherr (2002) have demonstrated the
potential of agro forestry to increase agricultural productivity and solve difficult
environmental problems. Pattanayanket al,(2003),state that ex- post - studies of
agro forestry have focused primarily on explaining how characteristics of
farmers, project and other demographic and socio- economic variables are
correlated with the past adoption behavior(Miller, and Mercer,1998).

2.6 Factors affecting Agro forestry Adoption

In the real world, there are numerous challenging factors determining the adoption
and implementation of agro forestry practices. Recent researches have explored the
10
role of various cultural, environmental, political and socio economic factors that
affect the adoption of agro forestry techniques with the aim of understanding the bio
physical and socio economic factors that influence farmer adoption. These studies
have Lead to a greater understanding of farmer decision making and have allowed
research and extension personnel to evaluate dissemination efforts to better facilitate
farmers and increase the number of adopters (Keilet al, 2005).

Available literature, particularly in recent reviews of panel (2003) and DE wee

s(1999), indicates that several factors are mostly to affect adoption of agro forestry
practices. These include: risks and uncertainty, households preferences, resources
endowments, land tenure, market constraints, inadequate extension work, and policy
constraints (www.unl.nac./order.htm).

Risk and Uncertainty: Although risks and uncertainties have long be recognized as
important in reducing adoption of agro forestry practices, relatively little empirical
research has addressed adequately the issue House hold preferences and sizes: Mercer
and Pattanayake t(2003) state that, assuming that farm house holds are
heterogeneous , farmers will exhibit different adoption patterns depending on their
attitudes and the preferences for a number of factors including risk tolerance,
conservation priorities, and intra- house hold homogeneity among different
households. The size of family member can be seen from different Angeles, in the
first place if the house hold size is larger with many mouths to eat rather than to work,
will have negative effect in general. In relation to this, the study conducted by
(wogayehu, 2006) indicated that in the large families with greater number of mouth to
feed, immediate food need is given priority and labor is diverted to off-farm activities
that generate food items (Dewess, 1999).

Resource Endowments: The assets and resources available to farmers for investing
in new agro forestry practices such as labor, land, livestock, savings and credit are
critical to adoption decision. Both the theoretical and empirical literatures that, early
adopters tend to the better-off households (pannell, 2003).

Land tenure and security: Land tenure has been considered as a critical factor in
determining the adoption and long-term maintenance of agro forestry technologies.
The effects of land tenure on the adoption of agro forestry practices are related mainly
to the transferability of proper rights, which in turn affects the reversibility of land
11
investments and the ability to use land as collateral. The current land policy in
Ethiopia is based on the nation that land is both a factor of production, contributing to
growth, and an essential element in providing for the welfare of the population. Under
the 1995 constitution of FDRE land is, state property and farmers have use rights over
the plots they has given them insufficient incentives for sustainable land husbandry on
their fields. Farmers have higher tenure security will increase investment and
agricultural growth (Greene and Wegayehu, 2010).

Marketing of Agro forestry products and constraints: Social marketing research

identifies perceptions of the barriers and benefits necessary to change behavior among
individuals in relation to the marketing of agro forestry products .Access to
agricultural extension and training services: Access to extension service is assumed
to improve farmers' attitudes towards the improvement of agricultural production.
This is because farmers with access to extension services are expected to have better
access to information, which could play a significant role. In Ethiopia high lands
agriculture extension has strongly promoted increased use of external inputs such as
fertilizers, and improved seeds and has provide credit to obtain these inputs, access to
extension services and training are more important variables to improve awareness of
farmers and agricultural production, and credit obtained from the BoA is positively
associated with tree planting (Miler, and Mercer, 1998).

Farm size: Farmers with larger farm sizes are expected to practice better agro forestry
practices. This is because when farmers have large farm sizes; they can plan different
tree plantings and grown due to the large land holding size, farm size to have positive
and significant influence on adoption agro forestry practices. Age: The effect of age
of farmers on agro forestry practices decision of farming experience could positively
influence the agro forestry practices. In contrast, younger farmers with longer
planning horizons are likely to invest more in conservation. According to the study
conducted by (Desta, 2012,) age of the households affects decisions on agro forestry
practices strategies negatively. Another study conducted by (Senait,2002, )also shows
that age has negative and significant influence on agro forestry practices, indicating
the reluctance of the older farmers to change their farming techniques(Desta,2012).

Educational status: The literacy status of farmers has a great impact on awareness of
the agro forestry practices and farming system. Education increases a person's

12
understanding his/her environment and one's ability to identify alternatives and to
assess and compare the benefits cost associated with each of the possible alternatives
under different states of nature. The effect of farmers' educational attainment on
practicing agro forestry is significant. In fact, higher literacy level of farmers could
have brought differences among farmers in practicing agro forestry on their land
Gender: Most of the agro forestry practices require more labor forces. Hence, male-
headed households are expected to undertake the agro forestry practices as a better
endowed with labor. Women are often faced with more labor constraints than male
farmers. They are also inhabited from making decision about agro forestry practices
while their husbands are away. In addition, women are commonly busy in house hold
activities and their prime activity is usually child rearing (Paulos, 2004).

Access to information: access to information and media is an important variable that

shape farmers' decision on agro forestry practices and farming systems. Farmers who
are access to media are more aware of agro forestry practices and farming activities
than those who did not. Information provision through extension channels increases
farmers' awareness on the agro forestry practices and farming systems (Pender et al,
2006).

13
CHPTER THREE

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 General Description of the study area

3.1.1 Location
Makisgnt wareda is found in amahra region in north Gondar Zone layey kebeles is
found in makisgnt woreda. makisgnt woreda is located in the plain area .makisgnt is
borderd on the south by Efraze special sub woreda,on the west by the lake tana which
separates it from the north gonder zone, on the north by the Gondar town, on the northeast by
gonder mountain, and on the east by arebaia special woreda. The administrative center of
makisgnt is Gondar. Absolute location of this area is 5°20'0''-5°55'0'' North latitude,
and 37°0'0"-37°35'0" east longitude (MWAO, 2013E.C).

Figure 3.1: map of study area (GIS Lab 2021)

14
 3.1.2 Topography and Area size
The topography of the study area has different topographic landscape features such as
mountain 55%, plateau 30.5%, and flat 14.5%. From these mountainous features is
the dominant one, As a result of this physical setting it is difficult for construction of
social infrastructures but has good experienced for forest products (MWAO, 2010
E.C).

3.1.3 Land form

The state has diverse topography and climate. The later includes the familiar
traditional zones – woyina dega types of climate. About 75% of the State is
classified as "woyina dega" (law lands) which is below 1500 meters above sea
level. The altitude ranges from 1500 to 2,500 meters above sea level. The average
annual temperature reaches from 20-250 degree calicos. During the hottest
months (January - May) it reaches a 28 – 340 degree delicious. (MOS, 2018)

3.1.4. Vegetation
The dominant vegetation types found in Maksegnit woreda, tide, wanzaeucalyptus
trees, weyra; baharezaf this vegetation are used for the purpose of construction, fire
wood and charcoal (MWAO, 2019).

3.1.5. Soil
The dominant soil type found in the study will nitosol, sand and verti soil. It is
suitable of the production of barely, wheat, tiff and bean production for Maksegnit
woreda (MWAO, 2019).

3.1.6 Climate
The study area is highly dominated in woyina dega climatic conditions about65% and
the remains 35% is dega. In this area the average maximum and minimum
temperature is 13°c and 26°c respectively. The rain fall regime in the woreda is
bimodal. The First round of rain occurs from March to April and the second round of
rain occurs from June to August .The rain fall distribution is varies from year to year
and across seasons .The rainfall distribution varies between 900mm and 1200mm
(MWAO,2010).

3.1.7 Population of the study area

According to the central statistical Agency, 2007 the total population of the study area
has 7088 from these 3523 are males and 3565 are females.

15
 3.1.8 Economic Activity of the study area
The study area is reputed to have be centuries of sedentary ox plough and cereals
dominated agricultural activities. From the agricultural products, crop production is
one of the most important sub-sectors of the study area, which is mainly of rain fed
agriculture. According to the woreda planning report cereal crops are the dominant
crop types followed by pulses and the rest vegetables and root crops. In this area,
livestock production is an essential part of the farming system as nearly all land
preparation is done with ox- drowns ploughs. In small scale farming, livestock
generally serve multiple processes rather than pair Ely commercial function. It plays
significant role in source of Income, human dietary, maintaining soil fertility, source
of power and others. Cattle, sheep, goats, equine and others found in this study area
(MWAO, 2010).

3.2 Research methods

To achieve its objective, the study followed descriptive research design especially the
survey method is used. A descriptive research design is used to describe specific
behavior as it is occurs in the environment.

3.2.1. Source of data Collection method

The relevant data source for this study including primary and secondary data sources,
primary data source would generated through use of questionnaires, interviews,
observation and secondary data will collected from both
published(library,dictionary,litter,and book. and unpublished documents(raw
data,manuscriptspreparation,persenal communication and internet.

In this proposal the researcher use primary data source from household heads of
Maksegnit woreda , the primary data were gathered through questionnaires both close
and open ended question, interview and observation.

Questionnaires

Questionnaires will from 625 households to collect appropriate data to the study both
open and close ended question are prepared English and translated to the local
16
language of respondents (Amharic) for simplicity and precision purpose and also
translated back to English for analysis purpose.

Interview

Questionnaires will collect 5 experts in face to face situation to collect information

using unstructured interview in order to collect information using unstructured
interview in order to become free to arrange the form order and timing of questions as
well as to have flexibility.

Observation

It is also another data gathering tools for primary data. The researcher observes some
practices, actions and relevant people without asking questions, in order to get
information actions which people are normally unwilling and an able to provide.

3.2.2 Sample size and Sample techniques

The researchers’ employed both purposive and simple random sample methods.
According to makisgnt woreda Agricultural Office (MWAO), there is 44 kebeles in
makisgnt woreda, from these kebeles one kebele is purposively selected i.e. layey
kebele. Because

in this kebeles there is good agro forestry practices and agricultural productivity, and
nearness of the kebele. Encompassing all population in the study area is impossible
because of cost, time and measurement procedure limitations because of this 44 house
hold head respondents are selected from maksegnit woreda land Administration office
list of house hold heads by using simple random methods. I is used this method to
give equal chances for all house hold heads without any bias and I is selected key
informant interviewers such as agricultural experts, elders and others selected.

3.2.3 Sample size determination

The total house hold of the study area is 1788, from these house hold heads I have
taken 44 house hold heads by a representative sample size with known confidence and
risk levels using Stain’s / proportional formula, 1960.

17
 Proportional formula:

n=N÷1+N (e2 Where, n= sample size

N=number of house holds

e=error of limit

=1788÷1+1788(0.0225)

=1788÷41.23≈44

3.2.4 Instruments of Data collection

To obtain reliable information from the selected sources, I used the following data
collection instruments. These are the followings. Questionnaire, key informant
interview, focuses group discussion and field observation. Regarding the house hold
survey, structure questionnaires with both open ended and closed ended questions are
designed to get information from the respondents. Since farmers in the study area are
layey speakers, questionnaires are initially prepared in Amharic for them and translate
to English for analyses and interpretation. Close ended questionnaires enable them the
respondents to select one option that meet their reviews while, open ended questions
are designed to give opportunities to the respondents to express their feelings and
perceptions concerning the problem under the study and other data collection
instruments are key informant interview is obtaining more information to strengthen
the responses gain from the questionnaire. Semi structured interview will be
conducted due to its flexibility to rise new question based on the response of the
interviewee in the study area. To avoid language barriers the interview will be
conducted in Amharic and finally translated to English for analysis and interpretation
and also l have used focus group discussion. For the focus group discussion, I select
the respondents purposively based on the socially respected with the society and who
are known to have better knowledge on the present and past environmental, social and
economic status of the study area. The purpose of FGD is to get insights on and
understand the farmers' participation in agricultural productivity and agro forestry
practices. Finally observation is made as supportive and supplementary technique to
collect data to fully understand the realities on the ground, particularly farmers'
participation in agro forestry practices and agricultural productivities. Therefore the

18
observation is conducted in the study area by using check lists to support the data
collected by other methods.

3.4 Methods of Data Analysis

In analysis the data obtain from primary and secondary sources, both qualitative and
quantitative techniques are applied. The qualitative data gathered through field
observation, focus group discussion, and interview are transcribe thematically and
present in the form of narration and use as supportive data to the main questionnaire ,
whereas quantitative data generated from the questionnaire table of summary by using
percentage and frequencies, count and percentage also used as a way of data
presentation in analyzing demographic and socio economic characteristics of
households, farmers' participation in agro forestry practices and agricultural
productivity employ in the study.

19
20
 3.5 TIME AND BUDGET SCHEDULE
3.5.1 Time Schedule
3.5.1 Time schedule Table

List of number Activities April May Jun July

1 Topic selection 

2 Topic acceptance 

3 Literature search 

4 Proposal first draft 

5 Comment by advisor  

6 Proposal final draft 

7 Submission of proposal  

8 Search literature for 

research

9 Data collection 

10 Data analysis 

11 Research first draft 

12 Correction by advisor 

13 Research final draft  

14 Research submission 

15 Defense 

3.5.2 Budget Schedule

Table 3.5.2 Budget Schedule

21
Number Items Quantity Unit Unit in Cent Unit in birr Total cost

1 Paper 1 Pocket - 200 200

2 Pen 6 - - 60 60

3 Flash 1 GB - 300 300

4 Mobile card 25 Birr - 250 250

5 Rulers 1 Cm - 10 10

6 Binder 1 - - 20 20

7 Printing 1 - - 200 200

8 Photocopy 2 - - 100 100

Total cost 34 - - 1,100 1,140

22
23
References
.Aklilu, 2006. Caring for the land best practices in soil and Beressa water shade, High
lands of Ethiopia, Tropical Resources management papers.

 Desta, 2012.Determinant of farmers land management practices of the District,

south west Shewa zone, oromia national state, Ethiopia. Journal of Sustainable
Development in Africa.

 .Dewess, 1999. Agro forestry systems source or sink Greenhouse gases, Agro
forestry system 31:99_116.

 .Endris, 2006 Comparative financial evaluation of soil conservation measures

in north wollo the case of Golo cotchment, Habru woreda M.Sc. Thesis
Haramaya University Haramaya.

 .Franzel and Schroth G. Sinclair f 2002 and 2003 tree crops and soil fertility:
Concepts and research methods. CABI. Willing ford, UK, p 646

 .Gocko white et al, 2000. Gonlaize villalobos JA; 2007 Agro

 Forestry system conserves species- rich but modified assemblages of

 Biodiversity conserve 16; 2257-2292.

 .Goldet al, 2006. Economic aspects of soil fertility

 Management and agro forestry practices. In: Schroth G- Sinclair F (ads)

 Trees crops and soil fertility: concepts and research methods. CABI. Walling
ford UK; P 464.

 .Genene, and Wegayehu, 2010 Farmers perceptions of land Degradation and

Determinants of food security at Bilate watershed, southern Ethiopia;

 South Agricultural Research Institute, Haissa, Ethiopia.

 .Hazell, 1995 and Nair VD. Nair PKp. Kalmbacher Rs. Ezenwa IU, 2007
reduce nutrient loss from farms through silvo pastoral practices in course-

 Textured soils of Florida. USA. E col Eng. 29: 192-199.

24
 .Internet, Http/: www. Google.com/web hp; /client-MS- world Agro forestry.

 .Keilet al; 2005; Allen’s Jose S.Nair. PKP. Break - Bs - Nkedi-Kizza p-R
anesey CL (2004) Safety net role of tree roots: experimental evidences from
an alley cropping system. For Ecol manage 192: 395-407.

 .Miller and Mercer, 1998 Adoption of agr

 Agro forestry practices in North American agro forestry an integrated science

and practiced.

 .Pender et al, 2006 and Pannell, 2003 Strategies for sustainable land

 Management lesson from the East African high lands, international food

 Policy Research Institute and World Bank.

 .Paulos, 2004 Soil and water resources Degradation affecting productivity in

 Ethiopian high lands Agro eco system- North East African studies Vol.8

 No.1 Special issue Natural Resources management, Human

 Development and micro economic performance in Ethiopia.

 .Sanchez et- al 1998 and Harvey CA, Gonzales JG. Somariba E(2006) Dung

 beetle and terrestrial mammals diversity in forest, indigenous agro

 Forestry systems and planting monocultures in Talamanca, costa Rica,

 Biodiversity conserve 15: 555-585.

 Wegayehu, 2006. Determinants of farmers’ Decision on soil and water

 Conservation practices in Dire Dawa Administration, M.Sc.

 WWW.unl.edu/nac/order.htm National agro forestry center

 Andrew M, February 1, 2008 World Agro forestry. Practices?

25